David Stebbins v. Joshua Moon and Lolcow LLC. Case: 2:24-CV-00140, Southern District of West Virginia. - Acerthorn sues the Farms

Stebbins v. Moon 2:24-cv-00140 — District Court, S.D. West Virginia

  • Docket No.
    2:24-cv-00140
  • Court
    District Court, S.D. West Virginia
  • Filed
    Mar 20, 2024
  • Nature of Suit
    820 Copyright
  • Cause
    17:101 Copyright Infringement
  • Jurisdiction
    Federal Question
  • Jury Demand
    None
  • Last Filing
    May 3, 2026

Parties (3)

Parties
Joshua Moon, Lolcow LLC, David Stebbins

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 39)

# Date Description Filing
43 May 3, 2026 TRANSMITTAL OF NOTICE OF APPEAL TO 4CCA via APPEAL TRANSMITTAL SHEET re: 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA. (lca)
42 May 3, 2026 NOTICE OF APPEAL by David Stebbins as to 41 Memorandum Opinion and Order. (Attachment: # 1 Envelope) (lca). PDF
41 Apr 26, 2026 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The 29 Objections are OVERRULED; the 24 Proposed Findings & Recommendation is ADOPTED; the 1 APPLICATION by David Stebbins to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees or Costs is DENIED; this case is DISMISSED without prejudice unless the Plaintiff pays the filing fee within 30 days of this order; the 34 First Amended Complaint is STRICKEN from the record. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 4/27/2026. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kew)
40 Apr 7, 2026 CLERK'S ORDER. Pursuant to 39 Order, the referral of this civil action is transferred from Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley to Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn. Signed by Clerk of Court Rory L. Perry II on 4/8/2026. (cc: Magistrate Judge Tinsley; Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (klc) PDF
39 Apr 7, 2026 ORDER directing that this matter be transferred to Rory L. Perry, II, Clerk of the Court, for reassignment to another Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley on 4/8/2026. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (lca) PDF

In re: David Stebbins 26-1398 — Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

  • Docket No.
    26-1398
  • Court
    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • Filed
    Apr 6, 2026
  • Last Filing
    Apr 29, 2026

Parties (1)

Parties
In re: DAVID A. STEBBINS

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 16)

# Date Description Filing
16 Apr 29, 2026 RESPONSE/ANSWER by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon to Motion to strike [14]. Nature of response: in opposition. [1001971074] [26-1398] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 04/30/2026 09:12 PM]
15 Apr 28, 2026 MOTION by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon to dismiss appeal [15]. Date and method of service: 04/29/2026 ecf. [1001969770] [26-1398] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 04/29/2026 12:56 PM]
14 Apr 22, 2026 MOTION by David A. Stebbins to strike brief Motion to Strike Docket Entry #13, the Defendant's Reply to my Response to their Motion to Reconsider.. Date and method of service: 04/23/2026 ecf. [1001965881] [26-1398] David Stebbins [Entered: 04/23/2026 12:50 PM]
13 Apr 22, 2026 REPLY by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon to response [12].. [1001965846] [26-1398] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 04/23/2026 12:16 PM]
12 Apr 20, 2026 RESPONSE/ANSWER by David A. Stebbins to Motion [10]. Nature of response: in opposition. [1001964566] [26-1398] David Stebbins [Entered: 04/21/2026 05:14 PM]
I'm trying to remember the last time either Stabby or Greer actually got anything struck from a motion to strike. Seems to me the courts very very rarely do that and prefer just to declare the motion/document as moot.

Also, is he really trying to argue that the court case he lost and was labeled vexatious for is "never before seen" evidence.
 
I dunno here Mr Stabby, I think bringing up more evidence of your vexatious litigation to back up the first claim isn't really introducing anything "new". Harden is just adding more info for the judges to see your methodology for prosecuting your cases.

I doubt the judge will agree to strike this, it's not new information and it's relevant to the original statement.
 
I can barely tell what he's babbling about.

"Defendant instead concedes to the validity of one of them"... how? Which one? There's 2 sections in Hardin's response and neither of them is a concession.

"proceeds to offer brand new, never-before-seen evidence that was not included in the original motion" Is he complaining about the Boone County vexlit exhibit? Hardin explicitly says "there’s a factual issue with Mr. Stebbins’ claim" and corrects it. That's not conceding the validity of his underlying argument, or presenting evidence in support of his own motion.

"The Defendants have been reprimanded by the District Court for this behavior once already." - no they haven't. Here's the entirety of the "smackdown" from ECF 12 that Acerthorn thinks warrants sanction:

1777001007535.png

If a dismissive footnote explaining why a judge isn't bothering with an argument is a reprimand, then Stabby averages 2 reprimands per filing himself.
 
District Judge overrules Acer's objections and rules that the Magistrate was right
CALLED IT

My bet is a judge from the 4th makes a discreet phone call to the district judge, and asks him to just accept/reject the magistrate's recommendation already. That lets them moot the whole mess, and avoid the district judge getting poked with a Writ he really has earned.

Credit to Stabby for forcing this with a credible writ of mandamus complaint. Now the only question is if he will appeal this directly, or try to convert that existing writ request into an appeal so that he can coast off the already-granted IFP status.

(How can that work? No idea, but if anyone's retarded enough to explain how OBVIOUSLY it should be done, it's Stabby.)
 
This is probably the end of this case

Stabby knows he doesn't stand much of a chance and even with his recent windfalls 400 bucks is a lot of money to him. I don't think he will risk it, Stabby will let the case lapse.

Plus it will be dismissed without prejudice so he can always refile it after he "wins" the Sid Alpha case.
 
Last edited:
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases before the point of no return? There's a chance that if they don't read about it here, they might forget/overlook it on their own, thus sinking their own case.
 
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases before the point of no return? There's a chance that if they don't read about it here, they might forget/overlook it on their own, thus sinking their own case.
Because their cases can lose on the lack of merit, not for failing to respond.
Tracking your own case is not hard, only Greer has problems with it.
 
If anyone ever needs a soundbyte for why Null hates the court system so much, this quote is perfect:

As reflected in the PF&R, the Magistrate Judge determined that the action appeared to be brought for an improper purpose and was substantially similar to prior lawsuits filed by Plaintiff that had been dismissed as frivolous in other courts.[] Nevertheless, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the case could proceed so long as Plaintiff paid the appropriate filing fees.

Granted that the Magistrate wasn't being asked to dismiss, his restraint blunted Stabby's objection, the District judge could still dismiss, etc. But if you've already got a judge saying "I did the review and this suit is BS", then just recommend tossing it already! If Stabby does shell out the cash, it forces Hardin to go through the song and dance of an endlessly appealed Motion to Dismiss that everyone knows shouldn't be necessary.
 
One of these days I still hope to see a lunatic with a go pro rooting around in a lolcow's shit in search of valuables to pay lawyers fees after a bullshit lawsuit is thrown out. Of all of Null's ideas that was one of his finest. This may be a step in the right direction. Obviously Frank Hassle would be the best for the job as Ethan Ralph would just find a motel and do drugs in it.
 
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases
Cus users of the site, including casual readers not logged in, are bound by the Terms of Service of this site. Stebbins, as a user of the site, gives KF "You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content."

It does not in the ToS state that its limited to content you post to KF, but your content. Period. By reading his thread here, KF has a license to His Content. The wereturkey legal fucked by his own tactic. Enticing him to read content here makes him a user.

Anyone reading this post or so much as loading the page of this post electronically or via trained turkey hereby renders unto lol cow supreme, and the entire capital I Internet all copyrights owned or claimed as well as two fifths (or 40 percent) of all hot dog dinners.
 
Back
Top Bottom