Steve Quest (p/k/a Montagraph) vs. Nicholas Robert Rekieta & Rekieta Law, LLC (2023)

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Marc Randazza proclaims he has been payed $386,282.65 to badly defend his client Nick Rekieta.

View attachment 7334532
Lawyers aren't miracle workers and Nick has set him an impossible task. Hell, he almost won the absolutely ridiculous SLAPP importation argument. There's only so much you can do when you have a gibbering shit-monkey for a client who can't stop tarding out for even a minute.

Nick would have done far better to get his own strip mall lawyer and settle this bullshit, or just man up and admit he fucked up in the first place before it even started.

But NOOO, Nick had to be Mr. Big Shot Millionaire and hire the big shot First Amendment lawyer for a cut-and-dried case where even if he wins, he loses huge amounts of money.
 
Could Mr. Randazza be paying attention to Nicky's latest legal slapfight regarding AI and parody?
I find it interesting that he started out his trolling with an AI pic...
I am hoping to see Melton's Supertips include an AI rendering of Marc Randazza with an AI rendering of his voice. Then people can send in money to have Marc's mouth say naughty words about little boys....

eta: In seriousness, Randazza is probably watching closely what is going on with AI and 1A. It is law waiting to be made.
 
Why is he defending Nick from what appears to be a goblin and watermelon? I assume Montgraph is suppose to be the goblin but whats with the melon?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pedophobe
Why is he defending Nick from what appears to be a goblin and watermelon? I assume Montgraph is suppose to be the goblin but whats with the melon?
He allegedly fucked a watermelon.

BUT (from his thread):

Wait is this the dude whose ex-wife allegedly caught him fucking a watermelon?
Seems to be the case, but I don't have any evidence for that.

There's been a lot of "Montagraph stories" over the years, but not a lot of them have panned out. Especially the more salacious ones.

As more time goes on, the more I become convinced people have been unfairly fucking with him to at least some degree because he possibly suffers from Schizophrenia and they saw him as an easy mark.
 
Last edited:
As more time goes on, the more I become convinced people have been unfairly fucking with him to at least some degree because he possibly suffers from Schizophrenia and they saw him as an easy mark.
I had a strong, negative, visceral reaction to Montagraph that I’ve rarely had about a person. This was long before he ever interacted with Rekieta. But he really seemed to me like a serial killer/rapist right out of central casting. The shit he said and the way he said it was just disturbing as hell.

Meanwhile my first impression of Nick was that he was a harmless normie.

Let’s just say this case has reminded me that I can’t always trust my gut.
 
It's looking like Nick is trying to retain Randazza. And to grift a GoGriftMe for it.

That said, the complaint is a complete joke. It states three claims, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

The last two are absolute idiocy and a complete joke. It's embarrassing the LanDUI-tier lawyer even made them.

The defamation is even worse, though, because it's the only conceivable claim that actually exists, considering Nick has called him a pedophile and other similar things. It's at least a colorable claim (even though the dude probably actually is a pedo). However, to plead defamation, you generally have to plead that specific statements by the defendant constitute defamation.

You can't just say "that mufugga deformationed muh character!" And that's exactly what this weak-ass complaint does.

It does not cite a single specific statement by Nick that would constitute defamation, instead just generally alleging that a list of hours-long streams somehow generally defamed him.

This is an absolute joke of a case. The only question is whether the dismissal will be with leave to amend, or will simply be with prejudice.

If it's with leave to amend, or the dipshit lawyer who filed it realizes what absolute garbage he filed and amends it on his own, there probably is actually a colorable claim.

It's just been done so incompetently even at the outset that the lawyer should be embarrassed, even though Monty is already a lolcow.

The fact that Nick is going to grift funding a lawyer on the level of Randazza for this, even though even Nick could do this on his own, is kind of funny.

Also ETA: you say two things that are kind of weird to me.


and

How could Rekieta have been served over a month before the lawsuit was even filed?
This didn't age so well

How fucked is Monty?
Monty is Winning

You are a nigger of the highest order. You quoted my post which said “That’s actually my bad. He said 40 grand, I just rewatched the video to make sure” and replied stating that Nick’s lawyer said there’s more, linking to the same video of yours that I commented on. When I said this wasn’t true; you moved a goal post to “lol, that video was a year ago”

So, Nigger, did Randazza say 40 grand, or did he not?
How's that Randazza bill looking now
 
I had a strong, negative, visceral reaction to Montagraph that I’ve rarely had about a person. This was long before he ever interacted with Rekieta. But he really seemed to me like a serial killer/rapist right out of central casting. The shit he said and the way he said it was just disturbing as hell.

Meanwhile my first impression of Nick was that he was a harmless normie.

Let’s just say this case has reminded me that I can’t always trust my gut.
You're not alone. I've done a complete 180 on Montagraph these past few years

I still think he's..."weird," but that ain't a crime.

Also, I find it funny that he has a thread (written by Null no less) and hardly anybody posts in it.

This didn't age so well
Nearly everybody in this thread got this thing wrong at first. It happens.

I got it wrong at first too.

My "penance" was asking @Useful_Mistake to take over the OP from Sten and rewrite it in such a way where it wasn't full of misleading dogshit, or written from such a blatant pro-Rekieta angle. They graciously did that.
 
This didn't age so well
I still don't like the opening complaint much, but Nick basically walked into it face first with everything he's subsequently done. Also NIED is still a never-won tort, but I think Nick's subsequent behavior may have made IIED at least viable.

So, not a huge fan of the complaint but it states a claim.

I was definitely out of line comparing the guy to Landau though. His subsequent handling of the case has been at the very least competent and he's not ripping off his client by overlitigating. So I would retract that. That was pure Balldoguarding.

(Also I have a dislike of defamation as a cause of action to the point I can get more than a bit Barnesian about it.)
You're not alone. I've done a complete 180 on Montagraph these past few years
I've definitely changed my opinion on Montagraph himself too. An examination of the OP when it was actually looked at critically showed much of its contents were completely fabricated or at best really poorly sourced.
 
I was definitely out of line comparing the guy to Landau though. His subsequent handling of the case has been at the very least competent and he's not ripping off his client by overlitigating. So I would retract that. That was pure Balldoguarding.
Tbf Randazza has gotten in trouble for some pretty scummy things. "At least used BMW Money".

This didn't age so well
Some of that did actually age somewhat well. He was right that Monty's initial lawsuit was shit. Which is why Monty's lawyer had to rewrite it.
 
I was definitely out of line comparing the guy to Landau though. His subsequent handling of the case has been at the very least competent and he's not ripping off his client by overlitigating. So I would retract that. That was pure Balldoguarding.
What happened here is that Montagraph pissed off some people the Farms kinda likes (namely Metokur, and formally Nick), and objectivity went out the window.

Complicating things further was that the former OP painted an very unflattering picture of what was actually going on, and who Monty is. It's shades of the Mitchell vs. Jobst suit. A lot of people fundamentally misunderstood what that was about (it wasn't about Billy cheating at Donkey Kong).

It happens. The important thing, IMO, is that people now accept they had the wrong read on this.
 
wR

Wrong about what? You are holding on to this for years
I hope you appreciate the irony of this statement considering you came back to literally reply to a post I made in 2023. I will not engage you further, except to state that my original comment still remains true (and so is my assessement of your perceptiveness, or lack thereof)
 
Back