Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[Swole McPole]

So it is bewildering to the defendant and defendant's counsel why the plaintiff continues to bring up unsubstantiated claims of harassment, emails that could have been sent by anyone including the plaintiff himself, biased news articles, and accusations without any evidence.

My emotional response to these filings is invariably the same. The only explanation I've been able to come up with is that Hardin is behaving like a professional and treating everybody involved -- specifically, Greer and the judges -- as though they're also professionals.

And so he recognizes these assertions and claims as baseless and completely lacking in any legal merit and he assumes that the judges will react to them accordingly and ignore them as the pointless spergings of a slack mouthed retard. I think the moment the court showed any signs that they were treating this regarded nonsense as anything but the ramblings of a pussy-crazed sociopath, Hardin would be all over it like a nasty rash. But while the court seems inclined to ignore this pointless garbage, Hardin seems willing to do the same.

It's not very gratifying though. We want to see Greer get taken to task over every minor pointless lie. But I assume Hardin thinks it's not the most effective use of his limited resources, so he keeps his powder dry and fires his ammo when it'll have most impact?

 

[Probably An Autist]

ECF 346; Greer wants to sanction the defense

Was the word of the day on Dictionary.com "vexatious" or something? He really likes that new word that he thinks will win him some court ordered gibs.

Also give me rainbows, but the fact the filing states it was written July 1st doesn't mean he didn't tell Hardin he was gonna file for sanctions earlier. It just means that particular sentence was written on that date.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Also give me rainbows, but the fact the filing states it was written July 1st doesn't mean he didn't tell Hardin he was gonna file for sanctions earlier. It just means that particular sentence was written on that date.

The motion has to be served upon Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance. Given that the sentence was written on the 1st, it literally could not have been served on Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance.

 

[FamicomGorby]

Also give me rainbows, but the fact the filing states it was written July 1st doesn't mean he didn't tell Hardin he was gonna file for sanctions earlier. It just means that particular sentence was written on that date.

Doesn't matter what Greer told Hardin, he has to give him the sanctions motion 21 days ahead of filing it with the court. He can't make changes to it after giving it to him. All he had to do was email a pdf of the motion to Hardin and wait but that's not good enough for him which means he's either retarded or just wants to plightsperg to the court and filed it knowing it would be thrown out immediately.

 

[.iota.]

What kind of bingo card doesn't come with a "Greeeee Space" in the middle? Is this hard mode?

i thought that "bizarrely" would suffice.

He used 'bizarrely' twice on the first page.

greer did use the word 'bizarre' twice in his introduction, but without the 'ly'.

I would argue you can claim the "irrelevant" square based on the continued plightsperging that "Mr Hardin isn't even talking about copyright infringement anymore, even though I've effectively prohibited him from doing so"

both "irrelevant" and "this is a copyright case" are in quotations, so it has to be precisely those words.

I checked his citation, and as usual, it doesn't match up with how Russ wants to use it. The fact pattern matches up opposite of his situation (again, as usual).

Russ is just mimicking Hardin's own motions back at him

i think that this particular maneuver was inspired by the the court saying "lol, no" after the appellate decision when greee argued that because the federal government had absorbed the cost of his filing fee by allowing him to proceed ifp, he, as an ifp litigant, should be entitled to an award of those costs, which he never incurred. (ecf 48 of the first utah case):

the clerk of the court referred to this as "illogical" when it was denied (ecf 56):

while i agree that he's attempting to cancel out his own sanctions with sanctions against the defendants, i think that this $505 has been gnawing at greee. he's delusional and desperate enough, especially after losing his ifp status, to believe that any expense that anyone (except null) has incurred is money to which greee is entitled.

incidentally, the clerk of the court (gary p. serdar) who denied greee the $505 in appellate costs is the same clerk of the court who also recently invalidated the subpoenas that greee lied to the clerk to obtain.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

The motion has to be served upon Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance. Given that the sentence was written on the 1st, it literally could not have been served on Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance.

Greeee has no ability to understand the difference between rules and deadlines that are soft and flexible, like his whores, and those that are hard and strict, also like his whores.

So many deadlines and rules he's just been able to greeeetard his way through that he assumes all of them are like that (and to be fair, a good many things that are "hard and fast" aren't really - and as a non-lawyer it can be difficult to know which are which, because the language is often similar).

 

[Treasure Champs]

The motion has to be served upon Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance. Given that the sentence was written on the 1st, it literally could not have been served on Mr. Hardin 21 days in advance.

It doesn't say that the sentence was written on July 1st, all it says is that there were 345 filings on July 1st, which was the last time something was filed:

As of July 1st, 2025(the date of the last filing), the ECF file count is now at 345.

It's not an exact date but a terminus post quem, or, in other words, could have been written anytime on or AFTER July 1st but not before.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

or, in other words, could have been written anytime on or AFTER July 1st but not before.

That's pretty much my point.

 

[The Dude]

I surely hope the court gets off it's lazy ass and gets moving on aborting this defective mongoloid fetus of a case soon. Its long overdue.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

I surely hope the court gets off it's lazy ass and gets moving on aborting this defective mongoloid fetus of a case soon. Its long overdue.

There is not a rainbow big enough for this; I'd be surprised if the court says SHIT in July, maybe even into August. It's sleepytime now.

Hardin may have to respond to this batshitsanction request, even if it is a simple "nigger, I never received this".

 

[Useful_Mistake]

doesn't mean he didn't tell Hardin he was gonna file for sanctions earlier.

Just as an addendum, the 10th circuit had to resolve this exact question 19 years ago.

Roth v. Green, 466 F. 3d, 1179 (10th Cir. 2006)

 

[ScooterL]

It's not an exact date but a terminus post quem, or, in other words, could have been written anytime on or AFTER July 1st but not before.

Though it doesn't really matter when he wrote it, since Russell has already helpfully informed the court that he served it on Hardin yesterday.



Compare to Hardin's diligent effort to demonstrate following the rule.

 

[obsdj]

But while the court seems inclined to ignore this pointless garbage, Hardin seems willing to do the same.

What are you talking about? Hardin doesn't ignore shit. He's legendary for his responses, which often include barely-concealed disdain for Greer's fuckery, as well as skirting-the-edge-of-a-little-too-cute references including ouija boards, "empty head pure heart," time travel, and so on.

 

[The Un-Clit]

I wish just once His Royal Hardship would put into one of his responses something like "Mr. Greer is correct when he says that this is supposed to be a copyright case. So it is bewildering to the defendant and defendant's counsel why the plaintiff continues to bring up unsubstantiated claims of harassment, emails that could have been sent by anyone including the plaintiff himself, biased news articles, and accusations without any evidence. None of it having to do with copyright, yet Mr. Greer has time and time again attempted to enter this information that is irrelevant to this copyright case as if he is treating this case as his personal diary and the court as his personal therapist." It would really make my day to see something like that from Hardin.

It would be balm to the soul for all of us I am sure, however it would be very unprofessional and therefore unlikely to happen. Hardin will not sink to the Bamboon's level.

 

[The Dude]

Just as an addendum, the 10th circuit had to resolve this exact question 19 years ago.
View attachment 7650472
Roth v. Green, 466 F. 3d, 1179 (10th Cir. 2006)

Hmmm...Roth kinda sounds like "Josh" if spoken by a mushmouthed retard, and Green is only one letter off from "Greer". Its like poetry: it rhymes.

 

[Debbie Macomber]

Though it doesn't really matter when he wrote it, since Russell has already helpfully informed the court that he served it on Hardin yesterday.

Which actually means served today or tomorrow because as Hardin pointed out many times, Russell's certificates of service are always late by one or more days, but Russell just "explained" why it's always late and called it frivolous of Hardin to even bring up, and has referred to the whole thing as Hardin "complaining about documents having dates he doesn't like" as an example of HARDIN'S vexatiousness.

I don't think this issue was ever resolved, I think Hardin just stopped wasting his breath since the court refused to ever acknowledge it, just like Russell's fake addresses and many other issues

 

[mindlessobserver]

I don't think this issue was ever resolved, I think Hardin just stopped wasting his breath since the court refused to ever acknowledge it, just like Russell's fake addresses and many other issues

Nope. The court also has not dealt with Greers service dodging with his fake address. So much so an entirely different federal court also couldn't send him paperwork because the address he provided does not exist.

 

[YouTube Autist]

Russell's street address is confirmed on his website.

 

[Disgruntled Pupper]

Judge! Judge, come get your  dog retard, he's pissing on the docket aga- oh that's right you don't care.

I'm split on if Goofy Greee will submit a plightsperg once a month or if even be will give up after a couple months of the court just ignoring it.

 

[DSP's Tax Lawyer]

I surely hope the court gets off it's lazy ass and gets moving on aborting this defective mongoloid fetus of a case soon. Its long overdue.

The court doesn't care. Its trying to punish Jersh for daring to host a forum that makes fun of this retard