Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

Bender

I bend stuff, usually the truth.
kiwifarms.net
It seems to me that it will be very difficult for him to prove that in this case his constitutional rights were violated because of TCPA, because judge Chupp simply violated the procedure.
He said that he thinks the TCPA goes against the Texas constitution and he was considering challenging it a month or two ago, I can't remember exactly when.
 

2lolis1cup

Made you imagine it
kiwifarms.net
I think the exact opposite and this judge is elected. He isn't a great example of the wonders waiting for us if we start electing judges across the board.
I think having the people no matter how apathetic and unintelligible having a say is better than no say. When judges act up enough to garner public derision they can be removed. When they are appointed they get a talking to for playing fast and loose with the law.

This judge was first appointed by Perry according to you. So is it worse that he was appointed or that he is continually elected? Which way in reality is worse?
 

AnOminous

FIST FUCK
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
This judge was first appointed by Perry according to you. So is it worse that he was appointed or that he is continually elected? Which way in reality is worse?
He'd probably have been elected, too. He certainly hasn't been un-elected. According to those ratings, he's about average as judges go. There are a couple real losers in there and they keep getting reelected too.

I honestly don't trust a majority of morons to pick who knows what the law is, and if Chupp has a problem, according to the ratings, it's not following the law.

And the democratically elected branch of the government is who decides what the law is. Leaving absolutely everything to democracy, though, is a disaster and that's why it isn't done and shouldn't be done.

It seems to me that it will be very difficult for him to prove that in this case his constitutional rights were violated because of TCPA, because judge Chupp simply violated the procedure.
Depends on why Chupp did it the way he did. If he did it because he believes the law actually requires it, and is right, then it is the TCPA that is the problem. That seems to be what Nick thinks and I think it looks like he disregarded the TCPA procedure as written.

Otherwise it's that the law itself is broken, or at least being misapplied, and is either unconstitutional on its face or, more likely, as applied in this case.

It's much, much more likely that they'll just find he did it wrong than that the law is unconstitutional, which would take the Texas Supreme Court. It's not really in an intermediate court's wheelhouse to find a law unconstitutional.
 

Harvey Danger

getting tired of this whole internet thing
kiwifarms.net
Is this guy a moron or is he pretending?

"If the parties do intend to contract orally, the mere intention to commit the agreement to writing does not prevent contract formation before execution of that writing, Winston v. Mediafare Entertainment Corp., 777 F.2d 78, 80 (2d Cir.1985), and even a failure to reduce their promises to writing is immaterial to whether they are bound. Schwartz v. Greenberg, 304 N.Y. 250, 107 N.E.2d 65 (1952)."

This is from a case involving an oral contract. It's called Texaco v. Pennzoil. It resulted in a jury verdict of $10.53 billion. On an oral contract. Jesus fucking Christ this is first year contracts.
It's even more basic than first year contracts. They teach this in regular old business school, to everyone from marketing majors to middle managers; no law school or pre-law track required to know this.

Are we sure LawTwitter wasn't replaced with AutomaticContrarianTwitter? Nick's been mocking the paralegals, but has anyone checked the existence of these people's undergraduate degrees?
 

AnOminous

FIST FUCK
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
It's even more basic than first year contracts. They teach this in regular old business school, to everyone from marketing majors to middle managers; no law school or pre-law track required to know this.

Are we sure LawTwitter wasn't replaced with AutomaticContrarianTwitter? Nick's been mocking the paralegals, but has anyone checked the existence of these people's undergraduate degrees?
Wolman isn't just a lawyer, he's in Randazza's firm, which makes it even more ridiculous that he's so triggered by the mere existence of Nick that he's willing to make an absolute fool of himself taking exception to completely innocuous statements of basic law.
 

2lolis1cup

Made you imagine it
kiwifarms.net
I honestly don't trust a majority of morons to pick who knows what the law is, and if Chupp has a problem, according to the ratings, it's not following the law.

And the democratically elected branch of the government is who decides what the law is. Leaving absolutely everything to democracy, though, is a disaster and that's why it isn't done and shouldn't be done.
I don't trust a majority of morons to pick who knows what the laws should be, but I still vote every election.

I understand most voters will be ill informed at best. I still feel even if it's through representatives, judges should be nominated for a seat and the populous should decide. You don't have to have direct democracy control the judiciary wing, but some form of direct countermand to it's authority should be available to the populous.

This is only a problem, since the judiciary is effectively a maker of laws. If the federal appeals and supreme courts didn't have profound affects on laws, it would be a moot issue. They often will "view" an interpretation of a law and apply it to something the legislative should have sole domain over. These are almost always key wedge issues as well. We have an appointed political office that pretends it's impartial.

I still stand that some form of democratic reproach to the branch is needed outside of congress.
 

DinkyCowSow

kiwifarms.net
I have a feeling Wolman and much of law twitter is probably a little drunk from doing victory laps, so they're trying to do some more dunking to keep the high going.
 

General Relativity QM

kiwifarms.net
It's not really in an intermediate court's wheelhouse to find a law unconstitutional.
What? I thought a judge can do whatever they want. I mean in the federal realm any district judge can enjoin the entire country and declare any law unconstitutional at the district level. That's straight from the Article 3 of the Constitution, right? It's not? You mean the Courts gave itself the power to overrule the other branches? Oh, well, good thing that at the state level intermediate courts don't find laws unconstitutional unlike the federal circuits, which a single judge on first review does semi-regularly.

Hey, that's an enumerated power in the Constitution, but I don't like your party or your presentation, you are enjoined. I am sure Chupp would never ignore the rules and law and substitute his preference on what the law should be rather than what is. He would NEVER do that. Texas judges have a higher standard than federal judges. I am sure Chupp says the US pledge of allegiance and the Texas pledge every morning when he starts his day.

Edit: /sarcasm
 
Last edited:

MCG_Raven

kiwifarms.net
What? I thought a judge can do whatever they want. I mean in the federal realm any district judge can enjoin the entire country and declare any law unconstitutional at the district level. That's straight from the Article 3 of the Constitution, right? It's not? You mean the Courts gave itself the power to overrule the other branches? Oh, well, good thing that at the state level intermediate courts don't find laws unconstitutional unlike the federal circuits, which a single judge on first review does semi-regularly.

Hey, that's an enumerated power in the Constitution, but I don't like your party or your presentation, you are enjoined. I am sure Chupp would never ignore the rules and law and substitute his preference on what the law should be rather than what is. He would NEVER do that. Texas judges have a higher standard than federal judges. I am sure Chupp says the US pledge of allegiance and the Texas pledge every morning when he starts his day.
sure a judge can do whatever he wants but that doesn't mean that a different judge can't also do "whatever he wants" and say fuck you to this first decision
 

General Relativity QM

kiwifarms.net
I still stand that some form of democratic reproach to the branch is needed outside of congress.
I read somewhere in some papers, written by some old dead white guy I am sure, that the federal system was exactly this. Congress was not supposed to have much power over the everyday lives of Americans, and it was their local elections that were supposed to be more important than some stupid person in the White House who twiddles his thumbs while waiting for Congress to pass a bill that was popular among the people (House of Representatives) and popular among the states (The Senate). I think there were a couple of Amendments that said something like that the people and the states have powers not enumerated. But, yeah, in the more interconnected world, doing things on the small scale to see if it works is too much trouble. I guess Americans just want to do everything on the national level or they aren't going to do it.

Democracy is the tyranny of the 51% vs 49% - being popular isn't synonymous with being right. In fact, the right thing sometimes is to swallow a bitter pill, and you don't become popular telling people to take their medicine.

Edit: /sarcasm
 

Long-time Lurker

kiwifarms.net
I’m wondering when he refused it though, I didn’t catch that exchange at the hearing.
I remember seeing it. I was expecting a three ring binder, because I am a pleb, so it stuck in my memory that this "binder" wasn't. I'm pretty sure it was one of these things, which I didn't know the name of until now: velo binding!



Velo Binding, "commonly used for legal documents that are not meant to be tampered with". Ty's had a plastic cover.

Alas, when it appeared was clearly less interesting to me at the time. Might have been right after Johnson's presentation, because that was the first time Ty thought he was going to get to give a speech.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: OneHandClapping

2lolis1cup

Made you imagine it
kiwifarms.net
I guess Americans just want to do everything on the national level or they aren't going to do it.

Democracy is the tyranny of the 51% vs 49% - being popular isn't synonymous with being right. In fact, the right thing sometimes is to swallow a bitter pill, and you don't become popular telling people to take their medicine.

Edit: /sarcasm
Your jokes are too close to reality please stop it. I want to have some optimism before I go to sleep tonight.
 

10SorrowfulObject

kiwifarms.net
I do hope these relatively minor setbacks means Ty and Nick start taking this a little more seriously. They are fighting an uphill battle and acting arrogant and flippantly about it on youtube and twitter is going to make it very easy to feed judges or jury bad impressions of you through subtle means. Making judges like this toss half your case when they think you're just wasting their time.
These are not "relatively minor setbacks". Having a cause dismissed from the bench is really bad. It's not just "You tried your best", it's "You didn't even show up for the game". I think Chupp is going to dismiss the rest of the causes as well, Ty certainly did a terrible job with his filings.

Next step appeals. If Vic feels he has too much money and wants to set his Botox funds on fire.
 

DinkyCowSow

kiwifarms.net
These are not "relatively minor setbacks". Having a cause dismissed from the bench is really bad. It's not just "You tried your best", it's "You didn't even show up for the game". I think Chupp is going to dismiss the rest of the causes as well, Ty certainly did a terrible job with his filings.

Next step appeals. If Vic feels he has too much money and wants to set his Botox funds on fire.
To add to this: even law twitter didn't think any bench dismissals were likely. The only people who mentioned it I remember seeing said 5% or less chance anything gets dismissed from the bench.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 10SorrowfulObject

DragoonSierra

kiwifarms.net
I feel like the laws do less of the “prevent people from silencing others through legal action” thing and more of the “allow people to commit torts and beat the rap without proper consideration of the evidence” thing.

There’s another case I’ve been following of an indie comic artist who was accused of rape that looks like it conceivably could be a SLAPP, where he’s suing his accuser; but if anything way more people know about the whole messy business than before. So the whole “chilling effect” of the lawsuit kind of backfired in this case, and it seems like it tends to in general.
Care to expound on this lawsuit?

Elections for local judges are a joke. On my local ballet it was just a list of every judge with a mark next to their name if you wanted to re-elect them.

I do however believe that there shouldn't be an unelected judge. I get the reasons claimed by appointed positions, but the core support for that reason is a lie. Judges and especially Supreme Court judges are political appointments. They alter our politics is dramatic ways and have more power than almost every elected officials.

The one thing you can always count on is that judicial reform will happen at such a slow pace, it will be mistaken as never occurring.
But then you get politicians as judges who are beholden to the special interests that give them money.

Prime bad example is Roy Moore

I prefer retention elections.
 

2lolis1cup

Made you imagine it
kiwifarms.net
But then you get politicians as judges who are beholden to the special interests that give them money.

Prime bad example is Roy Moore

I prefer retention elections.
All elections have way too much money involved. If any reform is done, monetary reform is needed first and foremost. People like to scream about "dark money" and Citizens United decision in politics. They act as if before that got applied money and favors never were traded. We are deluding ourselves if we think money is not already involved in appointing judges now.

For judge Chupp no real money is involved in all likely hood.

posting this since it was only stated and not posted here.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry appointed John P. Chupp of Arlington, Judge of the 141st Judicial District Court. The 141st District is in Tarrant County and exclusively holds civil court matters.

Chupp is board certified in personal injury trial law. He is a member of the Tarrant County Bar Association. Chupp received a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Texas and a law degree from St. Mary’s University. He replaces Judge Len Wade of Fort Worth.


  • 2009 Swearing of 141st District Judge John Chupp
3608945847_ee1178977c.jpg
 

Capsaicin Addict

Just a fellow who loves spicy food.
kiwifarms.net
All elections have way too much money involved. If any reform is done, monetary reform is needed first and foremost. People like to scream about "dark money" and Citizens United decision in politics. They act as if before that got applied money and favors never were traded. We are deluding ourselves if we think money is not already involved in appointing judges now.

For judge Chupp no real money is involved in all likely hood.

posting this since it was only stated and not posted here.


The problem is that the money will ALWAYS be there as long as the power is there. People will seek to have powerful interests intercede on their behalf, and will do whatever it takes to sway those interests' opinions in their favor.
 

Imperial Agent

kiwifarms.net
Everyone see the Sharon Grigsby interview linked in WW?

It’s really bizarre to me that a legal case with very few (news worthy) developments is getting this coverage.

It would make more sense if you at least had a better victim narrative for Monica/Jaime, but they’ve been the aggressors on social media, and aren’t particularly likable.

Makes it seem like Grigsby just really feels connected to the story.
 

AnOminous

FIST FUCK
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
Everyone see the Sharon Grigsby interview linked in WW?

It’s really bizarre to me that a legal case with very few (news worthy) developments is getting this coverage.

It would make more sense if you at least had a better victim narrative for Monica/Jaime, but they’ve been the aggressors on social media, and aren’t particularly likable.

Makes it seem like Grigsby just really feels connected to the story.
What determines what gets printed in these bullshit dead tree fake news outlets is the size of the number on the check the paper gets for printing these glorified press releases from one side of a lawsuit.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino