2020-12-07 - Scott v. Moon Mk VI(?) -

[AnOminous]

What about this case:
Fourth Circuit Appeal Court case In re Burnley, 988 F.2d 1 (4th Cir. 1992). I especially like this part ("this Court expressly upheld a pre-filing review system that denied in forma pauperis status to a frequent filer of frivolous complaints except upon good cause shown) which would seriously deter Mel.



Originally when posting that in Mel's thread I meant the published district court ruling (Draper v. Muy Pizza Se. LLC, Case No. 4:18-cv-00013 (W.D. Va. Apr. 27, 2018 ) ), which I then noted that it was affirmed by the appeals court even if the appeals court ruling was unpublished. Sorry about the mix up, I should have made it clearer.

Only an appeals court ruling would be binding on other courts. Another judge on the same court could rule differently. That's why I looked to the 4th Circuit to see if it had been upheld in a published decision. In any event, relief like this is generally discretionary.

This also isn't terribly useful, because the appellant in this case had missed the deadline for a direct appeal, so the court was only addressing whether the denial of a motion to modify the injunction was an abuse of discretion, and because of fairly arcane deadline rules, only as a motion under FRCP 60(b). In short, the court couldn't consider the merits of the underlying pre-filing review order.

The short answer is courts can indeed impose such review, especially on i.f.p. frequent filers. Actually doing so is fairly uncommon, however.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

The short answer is courts can indeed impose such review, especially on i.f.p. frequent filers. Actually doing so is fairly uncommon, however.

Yes, that's the conclusion I came to as well. Oh well, we can hope

 

[MuuMuu Bunnylips]

Is there any legal recourse that would bar her from bringing suit in general?

A hitman.

In Minecraft, obviously.

 

[PomegranateKing]

New documents dropped. One, Melinda's crazy reply...


And two, her motion for the judge to recuse himself over GENDER BIAS. Lol!!!

 

[Slimy Time]

First fucking sentence and she has me laughing. Holy shit, this is some good stuff.

Guys, I am struggling to read this, I find it too funny...this is in a court archive.

 

[Kimchi4breakfast]

View attachment 1960721
First fucking sentence and she has me laughing. Holy shit, this is some good stuff.
View attachment 1960727
Guys, I am struggling to read this, I find it too funny...this is in a court archive.

I read through the word salad. Tries way too hard to copy lawyerese, fails miserably.

Also, according to Madame Batshit, Null went to the EU just to be a "fugitive from service". As if the crazy babblings is what drove him to another continent.

I am excited to see what Atty Hardin has in reply.

 

[UglyGremlin69]

Perhaps I am missing something in this crone's insane rambling; yet I can't find anything in her motion to recuse that makes a vaild claim of 'gender bias.'
I mean, it is clear she is just assmad about not getting a result in her favor. This just seems excidingly stupid on her part. She's only going to anger the poor judge who I am sure is already tired of her bullshit.

 

[DumbDude42]

But she doesn't because the government waives all this shit. She can file as quickly as she'd fucking like with the only expense being her time, which is worthless and government subsidized.

I truly cannot wait to renounce from this dead gay country.

you'll be disappointed to find that most other countries also have systems in place that allow destitute poorfags to essentially go to court for free

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Perhaps I am missing something in this crone's insane rambling; yet I can't find anything in her motion to recuse that makes a vaild claim of 'gender bias.'
I mean, it is clear she is just assmad about not getting a result in her favor. This just seems excidingly stupid on her part. She's only going to anger the poor judge who I am sure is already tired of her bullshit.

Her argument is pretty much "Null is winning and is male, therefore judge hate woman"

 

[talk talk talk]

After months of this, Smelly still doesn't know the difference between the Fourth Circuit (a thing that exists) and the Fourth District (a thing that does not).

And a motion to recuse a judge because you're ass-mad about a ruling is a classic lolsuit move.

 

[hundredpercent]

you'll be disappointed to find that most other countries also have systems in place that allow destitute poorfags to essentially go to court for free

Other countries have the English rule (loser pays), which means frivolous lawsuits are easier to handle.

 

[Shovel Mech Pilot]

"The Judge clearly doesn't buy my case. How should I convince him? Oh, I know! I'll accuse him of illegal discrimination. That'll work."

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Other countries have the English rule (loser pays), which means frivolous lawsuits are easier to handle.

That applies to USA too. Although that mostly applies to federal courts.

Spoiler: Citation

"Although the "American Rule" prohibits the shifting of attorney's fees in most cases, an exception allows federal courts to exercise their inherent power to assess such fees as a sanction when a party has acted in bad faith, vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons, when the party practices a fraud upon the court, or delays or disrupts the litigation or hampers a court order's enforcement", "Although a court ordinarily should rely on such rules when there is bad-faith conduct in the course of litigation that could be adequately sanctioned under the rules, the court may safely rely on its inherent power if, in its informed discretion, neither the statutes nor the rules are up to the task. The District Court did not abuse its discretion in resorting to the inherent power in the circumstances of this case."

-Chambers v. Nasco, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991)

"Certain implied powers must necessarily result to our courts of justice, from the nature of their institution. . . . To fine for contempt, imprison for contumacy, enforce the observance of order, &c., are powers which cannot be dispensed with in a court, because they are necessary to the exercise of all others: and so far our courts, no doubt, possess powers not immediately derived from statute"
-United States v. Hudson & Goodwin, 11 U.S. (7 Cr.) 32, 34 (1812)
See also GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. HAEGER ET AL.

Although, something to consider is that SCOTUS has held that sanctions only punishes them for the damage the other party has received due to the vexatious behavior(such as attorney's fees), and does not punish further.

"The Judge clearly doesn't buy my case. How should I convince him? Oh, I know! I'll accuse him of illegal discrimination. That'll work."

Not the first time she has done it, and not the last, I think.

 

[DumbDude42]

Other countries have the English rule (loser pays), which means frivolous lawsuits are easier to handle.

this doesn't change anything if the loser is broke. in nulls case, the judge could rule that melinda has to pay nulls attorneys fees in full, but then what? how is null gonna collect this judgment when melinda is destitute and penniless? he'd sit on this worthless judgment forever and never get a cent.

same would apply if the court ordered her to pay the court's expenses - now it'd be the state who ends up with a worthless judgment against melinda. can't collect any money where there's no money to collect, and debtor's prison isn't a thing anymore, so that's the end of it.

 

[Shaka Brah]

this doesn't change anything if the loser is broke. in nulls case, the judge could rule that melinda has to pay nulls attorneys fees in full, but then what? how is null gonna collect this judgment when melinda is destitute and penniless? he'd sit on this worthless judgment forever and never get a cent.

same would apply if the court ordered her to pay the court's expenses - now it'd be the state who ends up with a worthless judgment against melinda. can't collect any money where there's no money to collect, and debtor's prison isn't a thing anymore, so that's the end of it.

He can get liens on her property or sell to a collection company. She does own things with value. It's not a perfect remedy but it causes great inconvenience in the lives of even the dole bludgers.

 

[Narr Then]

Perhaps I am missing something in this crone's insane rambling; yet I can't find anything in her motion to recuse that makes a vaild claim of 'gender bias.'
I mean, it is clear she is just assmad about not getting a result in her favor. This just seems excidingly stupid on her part. She's only going to anger the poor judge who I am sure is already tired of her bullshit.

No, it's not just you.

Apparently he's a misogynist because something something Null's business address? Basically a condensed version of her response. I couldn't read the rest coz I was laughing too hard.

What a fucking spakker. Can't wait for Null's response, it's just shit that it costs him a silly amount of money to figuratively smack her about. Hopefully that money drain will be over sooner rather than later now she's attacking the judge.

GG you crazy bint.

 

[DumbDude42]

He can get liens on her property or sell to a collection company. She does own things with value.

like what? earlier in this thread it was mentioned that she is getting evicted from her home, so i assumed that she doesn't own anything of significant worth.

 

[hundredpercent]

this doesn't change anything if the loser is broke. in nulls case, the judge could rule that melinda has to pay nulls attorneys fees in full, but then what? how is null gonna collect this judgment when melinda is destitute and penniless? he'd sit on this worthless judgment forever and never get a cent.

same would apply if the court ordered her to pay the court's expenses - now it'd be the state who ends up with a worthless judgment against melinda. can't collect any money where there's no money to collect, and debtor's prison isn't a thing anymore, so that's the end of it.

Lighting money that should've gone to your debtors on fire is a criminal offense though. He'd have been able to collect on her stimulus checks, as well as whatever other welfare she gets.

like what? earlier in this thread it was mentioned that she is getting evicted from her home, so i assumed that she doesn't own anything of significant worth.

Her account can be garnished, etc. Government's problem.

 

[PomegranateKing]

Don't entertain the thought of fees being awarded too much. While I would love that particular bill to be shoved up Melinda's backside, it's unlikely to happen.

 

[MelloYello]

you'll be disappointed to find that most other countries also have systems in place that allow destitute poorfags to essentially go to court for free

Most potential candidates for frivolous lawsuits against Lolcow LLC are american idiots, though.
Melinda, for instance, has barely enough braincells to file this stuff in her own state. I don't see her successfully filing anything in a place she wouldn't be able to find on a map.