Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Lolcow & Lolcow LLP' started by RadicalCentrist, Dec 30, 2017.
How's Landau looking? I'm planning to attend tomorrow
From TDSFBG :
NUCLEAR LOLSUIT GOSS:
Dismissed with prejudice for Dick/Boser/Foundation digital
Dismissed with prejudice for WS
Dismissed without prejudice for Kokkinos, the judge wants to have a repleading after Landau amends the complaint.
Best part of the case is when Landau interrupted WS so much that the judge threatened to hold him in contempt if he did it one more time. He really didn’t like Landau.
Landau asked the judge if they can replead in California for Dick, the judge yes because it’s a different jurisdiction. Watch out for that Dick
(I’m using an alt so I don’t dox myself)
Also on the Dick Show reddit :
Sounds like Landui is gonna need a drink, and Maddox is gonna need a gun.
Can't think of a better way for the lawsuit to end
More info, according to the Reddit
-Landau tried to read, in earnest, Madcuck’s statement about how Dick and Asterios used their companies to create him. Was quickly shot down by WS’s attorney
-The judge mentioned multiple times how almost every statement was conclusory
-There were several awkward silences caused by Landau not knowing how to answer a question or rifle through his papers for an answer
-At some point, the judge berated Landau for repeatedly not answering the basic question “Was there a breach of contract?”
-Asterios brought the thing he printed at Kinko’s, left it covered, but since the judge unexpectedly dismissed with the expectation there will be a repleading, Asterios’s lawyer never got far enough into his argument to have a chance to use it. Still don’t know what it is
-The judge said that he could not make sense of most of the complaint, and cited that as a main reason for a repleading. The complaint was “beyond him”
One of Maddox's fuckbuddies in his Media Network posted this to reddit a week ago
Fuck I wish someone filmed this, was it a public hearing?
Sucks for Asterios, but glad it’s pretty much done. Now here’s hoping there’s a poetic ending for Maddox.
This idiot literally asked the court for legal advice? Even pro se dipshits know not to do this.
It was a dumb move, but at the same time, during oral arguments, it was probably rammed up his butt from all sides that New York was not the jurisdiction for most of the defendants. It would definitely be the angle Patreon would take.
More comprehensive coverage, straight from the Reddit
Spoiler: Full Account
In bullet point format, since it's easier:
Asterios's motion was first, since he's a NY resident and WS's motion would be dismissed if his was. Greenberger did an opening statement (reminiscent of the opening statements to one of his oppositions). He talked about how New York has a strong tradition of criticizing people, and that Maddox, as a public figure, is not exempt from that. He gave a brief overview about how the plaintiff and Herrera have competing podcasts now. Then the judge started going down the list of causes of action against Asterios one by one.
Invasion of privacy was first. Greenberger made it clear that the plantiff is a public figure. I think that helped a lot because the judge would respond to most of Landau's statements with it.
Landau basically parroted what he wrote in his documents. It was kind of painful listening to him talk. It felt a lot like listening to an unprepared student go up in front of the class to do a presentation. His word choice felt like he was trying to be vague because he didn't know enough of the details himself. You see people doing the same thing on Shark Tank, if that makes any sense.
I think Landau started by talking about how they're using his client's name and image for commercial purposes.
It was so satisfying to hear the judge say almost the same things about Landau's argument as Nick/other Youtube lawyers. The judge rebuked that "it's not like they're using your client's name in saying that they endorse a product; they're making fun of your client."
In fact, Ramos repeatedly emphasized how it's allowed to make fun of a public figure. He even said "I'm a public figure. You should see what they write about me on the internet"
A weird back-and-forth continued for a while with Landau saying how Asterios and Dick were releasing "addresses, birthday information, allegations of sexually transmitted diseases - which is not true".
Landau tried to explain why "cuck" is more than just an insult and is actually defamation. He tries to explain what a cuckold is but the judge kept interjecting with "But he's a public figure!"
The judge kept asking Landau to explain exactly how NY Civil Rights Laws 50/51 were broken. That's when (I think) Greenberger chimed in with how the plaintiff (Maddox) is not a NY citizen and thus isn't even entitled to it. The judge literally put his hands up to his head (he did this a few times throughout the hearing) and said "You're right. It doesn't even apply to them." Landau tried to argue that it should apply because Asterios is in NY and Maddox has business contacts in NY, but the judge didn't buy it. The claim was dismissed
I think the next one was misappropriation. Landau at some point said how his client lost out on "hundreds of thousands" of dollars because of the campaigns Dick/Asterios did against Maddox's sponsors. However, each time he would try to explain how, he would lump Dick in with it, causing the judge to repeatedly tell him something that Asterios specifically did.
Since the claim was tortious interference, the judge asked Landau "Was there a breach of contract?" Landau gave another weird long-winded answer which didn't even address the question. The judge was visibly annoyed and asked for a yes or no. So he said "yes". The point was then quickly made that the breach was not alleged in the complaint. Both Greenberger and Matz say how the complaint uses phrasing that the contract was "cancelled". This caused about ten seconds of silence from Landau while he went through his papers to find a response
The judge dismissed the second action as well. He tells Landau again how you can't group multiple defendants together the way he did. "The defendant has a right to know what specific accusation is against them" or something like that.
A little more back and forth happened before the judge said that we could spend all day going over the complaint, but it's hopeless. He said that he's going to dismiss them all so Landau has a chance to re-plead against the NY defendants.
At that point Greenberger jumped in and tried to argue against it, probably because it means that the case might not be over for him and Asterios. Unfortunately, the judge said that he sees how the complaint might be amended against the NY defendants to have legitimate causes of action.
Munoz convinced the judge to let Weber Shanwick's motion to dismiss, though, so they begin going over the claims stated against WS.
I'll never forget what happened next. Landau starts reading the Madcuck's paragraph and calls it an "admission" from one of the defendants. It was the one time during the hearing where it was almost impossible to keep a straight face. I honestly do not understand how someone can earnestly argue that that's serious in front of a judge.
The judge actually responded with "This is your basis for this claim?" Landau says "No, but it is an admission from one of the defendants"
Munoz went up right after and started arguing about how absurd that paragraph is and how it's clearly a joke. No PR firm has data about the "weight and body type" of a bunch of individuals which can be utilized by Dick's company. Moreover, he said that it was written by "Madcucks" which the plantiffs have said themselves is a parody character.
Landau tried to interrupt Munoz twice during the above, causing the judge to hit his gavel and loudly ask Landau if he wants to be kicked out of the court. After the world's longest silence, the judge continued by saying how he'll hold Landau in contempt, and have him "in handcuffs, in jail" for contempt of the court if he does that one more time.
About a minute later, Munoz and Landau went back to arguing points about the WS claims. The judge (I think) interrupted Landau to say that the WS claims are dismissed, with prejudice.
The judge was about to adjourn the hearing, saying that the rest would need to be re-plead by Landau and his client. However, Matz jumps in by saying that she has a jurisdictional argument which is different, and thus should be heard. The judge lets her proceed.
Landau tries to argue how Dick and his company have significant business contacts, to which Matz denies and affirms that neither Dick nor his company have anything of the sort in NY. The only tie Dick has to NY is his book contract from 2008, "which is irrelevant to this case". The judge says that he read over some of her argument earlier and agrees with her, and grants dismissal with prejudice to her too.
Lastly, Landau jumps in by asking if the case can still be brought in California. The judge responds "it's not in my jurisdiction, you can do whatever you want." After that, the hearing ended.
So is the nuclear death arbitration with Patreon still gonna happen?
Seems like it
The transcript from the hearing is up:
edit: lol, holy shit
I love this judge.
THE COURT: Are we talking here about public
figures or private individuals? That's the -- the cases
have to involve public figures.
MR. K. LANDAU: Your Honor, that does not matter.
THE COURT: Oh, yes, it does. Ask the Supreme
Court of the United States.
MR. K. LANDAU: Not given the statements that have
been asserted by the defendants.
THE COURT: Nonsense.
And here's where he's had it with Dogbite's bullshit and interrupting.
MR. K. LANDAU: Your Honor --
MR. MUNOZ: You asked the question --
MR. K. LANDAU: You interrupted me first.
MR. MUNOZ: You asked the question -- ',
THE COURT: You want to be thrown out of here?
MR. K. LANDAU: No.
THE COURT: One more time. In fact, I won't throw
you out, I'll hold you in contempt. I'm serious. Cuffs on,
You behave yourself in this courtroom. You're
suing a lot of people with some very questionable claims
And this gentleman is trying to defend his client.
And since some people have asked about the sanctions issue:
THE COURT: I'll schedule a sanctions hearing, all
right? So you'll let me know. Not with regard to you. But
with regard to Mr. Kaufman and the entity, we'll have to
have a hearing.
(This is regarding Weber Shandwick. The case isn't necessarily done with regard to Asterios Kokkinos, so the issue isn't ripe for adjudication yet.)
Bless that judge
I feel so bad for him. It's plain that getting something as simple as a "yes" or "no" out of Dogbite is like pulling crocodile teeth.
I know I'm not supposed to take this stuff seriously, but God, I wish my country had judges like this gentleman.
Thank God for tenured judges, and political appointment.
Trial court judges in New York are generally elected for 14 year terms. I think this guy's job is safe.