Jump to content

Alex Jones


Hornius Emeritus

Recommended Posts

Yeah, the thing is, though, I'm not sure how long counsel will want to go on contingency for collection stuff.

I think in this particular instance, Bankston's firm is in for the long haul and for the publicity.  I'm not so sure about the Connecticut plaintiffs' counsel, which might explain why they wanted Jones' case converted instead of dismissed.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, the thing is, though, I'm not sure how long counsel will want to go on contingency for collection stuff.

I think in this particular instance, Bankston's firm is in for the long haul and for the publicity.  I'm not so sure about the Connecticut plaintiffs' counsel, which might explain why they wanted Jones' case converted instead of dismissed.

It's been a while, but I remember a time when it was never too difficult to find a collection lawyer.  They might not be the "best lawyers," but some of them still can root through the garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dcbc said:

It's been a while, but I remember a time when it was never too difficult to find a collection lawyer.  They might not be the "best lawyers," but some of them still can root through the garbage.

Yeah, true, an interesting niche of our profession.  But I think most of them tend to assume there's not massive fraudulent transferring going on.  They just want to file petitions on sworn accounts, take default or summary judgment, and get some cents on the dollar.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, true, an interesting niche of our profession.  But I think most of them tend to assume there's not massive fraudulent transferring going on.  They just want to file petitions on sworn accounts, take default or summary judgment, and get some cents on the dollar.

Well, the bulk of my experience before changing the course on my career was in defending an entity in a multi-million dollar, post-judgment, fraudulent transfer case against an individual who allegedly controlled that entity.  So my  previous statement was based on limited, anecdotal experience.  It also formed my opinion of being a trial lawyer and made me appreciate every moment of every day that I no longer am a litigator.  Those were some wild, formative years to be a mid-20-something layer, working for a solo without much of a net.  Quite a crucible.  

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is what we all hoped Dominion would do to Fox News, but alas.

Other than the whole good versus evil angle, the cases aren't remotely similar in facts and emotions.  Jones went after their murdered children.  I don't think it's out of the question to suspect we've got a Fred Goldman-type among the plaintiff's who will make it his life's work to keep Jones flinching at shadows for the rest of his life.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dcbc said:

Other than the whole good versus evil angle, the cases aren't remotely similar in facts and emotions.  Jones went after their murdered children.  I don't think it's out of the question to suspect we've got a Fred Goldman-type among the plaintiff's who will make it his life's work to keep Jones flinching at shadows for the rest of his life.

He will make life a living hell for Alex for the rest of his life.  He's wiped his google search background completely.  Maybe a lifelock type of security.  The pics he has in the background when on TV are coursing through his veins. A Time to Kill.  

Edited by TDunk
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Even though Jones is a socio-psychopath, I can't imagine that it is much fun having to worry where every incoming dime goes in order to avoid seizure by the plaintiffs.

It would drive me nuts, but I'm not much of a psycho.

Have you ever had a daughter killed and then besmirched by some asshole?  If I had the means, then no psycho.  Fuck Alex and the legal system for allowing his propaganda to go on way too long.  

Edited by TDunk
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, this kind of sucks.  FSS/Infowars bankruptcy was dismissed, leaving collection efforts to be governed by state law.

The Texas plaintiffs, who are fewer in number and awarded less money,   The Texas plaintiffs also got their judgment first and filed a fraudulent transfer suit in Texas.

Upon the dismissal of the bankruptcy, the Texas plaintiffs moved to seize FSS' bank accounts.  The trustee? in FSS now-dismissed bankruptcy moved to halt that action so that the assets could be liquidated in an orderly fashion, which is kind of bizarre because the bankruptcy has been dismissed, so I don't know what jurisdiction a trustee or the bankruptcy court retains. @Chad Fuck?

Anyway, the Connecticut families wanted FSS to be liquidated in a Chapter 7, to give them a pro-rata share of any proceeds and avoid the creditor free-for-all that bankruptcy is designed to prevent.  So, they got their wish, at least as to some of the assets.

This looks like it is going to be quite a mess for the two sets of plaintiffs, who are now essentially at war with each other over FSS's corpse.  That's pretty sad, I think.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, this kind of sucks.  FSS/Infowars bankruptcy was dismissed, leaving collection efforts to be governed by state law.

The Texas plaintiffs, who are fewer in number and awarded less money,   The Texas plaintiffs also got their judgment first and filed a fraudulent transfer suit in Texas.

Upon the dismissal of the bankruptcy, the Texas plaintiffs moved to seize FSS' bank accounts.  The trustee? in FSS now-dismissed bankruptcy moved to halt that action so that the assets could be liquidated in an orderly fashion, which is kind of bizarre because the bankruptcy has been dismissed, so I don't know what jurisdiction a trustee or the bankruptcy court retains. @Chad Fuck?

Anyway, the Connecticut families wanted FSS to be liquidated in a Chapter 7, to give them a pro-rata share of any proceeds and avoid the creditor free-for-all that bankruptcy is designed to prevent.  So, they got their wish, at least as to some of the assets.

This looks like it is going to be quite a mess for the two sets of plaintiffs, who are now essentially at war with each other over FSS's corpse.  That's pretty sad, I think.

With the caveat that I have not been following this case too closely, it has the feel of the TX side being driven by trial lawyers and the CT side being driven by BK lawyers.

That is to say, the bankruptcy legal culture is to always be looking for a deal, while the plaintiffs law culture is always looking for an individual to get a trial on the merits.  There are pros/cons to both sides.   If I'm the TX Plaintiffs attorney, I want my judgment enforced.  The best way to do that is for a dismissal of the bankruptcy and then act to seize assets.  If I'm the CT bankruptcy attorney, I know everyone is getting a haircut, and since I have no enforceable judgment, it makes sense for my clients to all take something - anything -  distributed through a Trustee.  Because that's all they're ever likely to see.  Of course, once the bankruptcy is dismissed there's nothing to stop them from going directly after the various liable parties either.  

As to the extent of the Trustee's powers once a case is dismissed, I suspect he's trying to preserve assets of the estate on the expectation that the CT claimants (or some other interested party) will appeal the dismissal.  In turn, I think the TX plaintiffs attorneys may be getting bad bankruptcy advice to try and seize the FSS accounts so quickly.  "Dismissed", while seeming to convey finality, is not really the end of things.  You need the Super Really Truly Mega Dismissed as conferred by the District Court, or even Circuit or Supreme Court after appeals play out.  

I think you're correct that we now have CT v TX claimants at odds, and that's a shame, but not unexpected under the circumstances.    But maybe they make some deal as to how to go after Alex and his grifting crew?  The upside for the bystanders is that they can make Alex's life a long living hell.   And maybe that's an upside for some of the plaintiffs.  I have to believe, however, that the revenge party within the plaintiffs' constituency as a whole is probably not as large as the "lets fuck him as hard as we can and get on with our lives" constituency.  That'd be my guess having represented creditors/creditors committees for, well, a long time now.  

Edited by Chad Fuck
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

With the caveat that I have not been following this case too closely, it has the feel of the TX side being driven by trial lawyers and the CT side being driven by BK lawyers.

That is to say, the bankruptcy legal culture is to always be looking for a deal, while the plaintiffs law culture is always looking for an individual to get a trial on the merits.  There are pros/cons to both sides.   If I'm the TX Plaintiffs attorney, I want my judgment enforced.  The best way to do that is for a dismissal of the bankruptcy and then act to seize assets.  If I'm the CT bankruptcy attorney, I know everyone is getting a haircut, and since I have no enforceable judgment, it makes sense for my clients to all take something - anything -  distributed through a Trustee.  Because that's all they're ever likely to see.  Of course, once the bankruptcy is dismissed there's nothing to stop them from going directly after the various liable parties either.  

As to the extent of the Trustee's powers once a case is dismissed, I suspect he's trying to preserve assets of the estate on the expectation that the CT claimants (or some other interested party) will appeal the dismissal.  In turn, I think the TX plaintiffs attorneys may be getting bad bankruptcy advice to try and seize the FSS accounts so quickly.  "Dismissed", while seeming to convey finality, is not really the end of things.  You need the Super Really Truly Mega Dismissed as conferred by the District Court, or even Circuit or Supreme Court after appeals play out.  

I think you're correct that we now have CT v TX claimants at odds, and that's a shame, but not unexpected under the circumstances.    But maybe they make some deal as to how to go after Alex and his grifting crew?  The upside for the bystanders is that they can make Alex's life a long living hell.   And maybe that's an upside for some of the plaintiffs.  I have to believe, however, that the revenge party within the plaintiffs' constituency as a whole is probably not as large as the "lets fuck him as hard as we can and get on with our lives" constituency.  That'd be my guess having represented creditors/creditors committees for, well, a long time now.  

Thanks.  It was also pointed out that the assets of FSS have been held to be assets of Jones, too, and subject to orderly liquidation in his 7. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

This looks like it is going to be quite a mess for the two sets of plaintiffs, who are now essentially at war with each other over FSS's corpse.  That's pretty sad, I think.

Sandy Hook families get to desecrate Alex Jones/Infowards corpse?

community-ken-jeong.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2024 at 9:39 PM, Gatorubet said:

I have to admit, the fact that his wife and father and close associates (and him) will continue to be dogged with litigation - requiring them to pay millions in attorneys fees while plaintiffs give their financial records a deep colonoscopy is not altogether a bad thing.  

The trial lawyers going after improper transfers from Jones is what I was talking about in that post.   They probably think if they give a depo and say, “I did nothing wrong and the lawsuit against me is unfair”, then it will all go away.

<Narrator: It won’t>

They are also about to find out that decent defense counsel do not work for free.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a very brief consumer bankruptcy practice after Katrina, trying to keep the doors open and all.  Occasionally a smooth brain client would transfer assets to friends and family before retaining me, thinking that they were geniuses who could hide their assets from the bankruptcy estate.

The glorious thing about those fraudulent transfers is that the people who received them often immediately started spending the money.  The pain of a fraudulent transfer money claw-back is exponentially multiplied when you’ve already spent it (“ …but I don’t have it all now because I had to pay Jesuit tuition..”) - and now your own financial assets and salary are at risk.   And that was a trustee going after them, not a pack of rabid Texas Trial lawyers. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

I had a very brief consumer bankruptcy practice after Katrina, trying to keep the doors open and all.  Occasionally a smooth brain client would transfer assets to friends and family before retaining me, thinking that they were geniuses who could hide their assets from the bankruptcy estate.

The glorious thing about those fraudulent transfers is that the people who received them often immediately started spending the money.  The pain of a fraudulent transfer money claw-back is exponentially multiplied when you’ve already spent it (“ …but I don’t have it all now because I had to pay Jesuit tuition..”) - and now your own financial assets and salary are at risk.   And that was a trustee going after them, not a pack of rabid Texas Trial lawyers. 

But on the bottom of the check I wrote "services rendered".  Above board, clearly.  

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2024 at 3:09 PM, Gatorubet said:

I had a very brief consumer bankruptcy practice after Katrina, trying to keep the doors open and all.  Occasionally a smooth brain client would transfer assets to friends and family before retaining me, thinking that they were geniuses who could hide their assets from the bankruptcy estate.

The glorious thing about those fraudulent transfers is that the people who received them often immediately started spending the money.  The pain of a fraudulent transfer money claw-back is exponentially multiplied when you’ve already spent it (“ …but I don’t have it all now because I had to pay Jesuit tuition..”) - and now your own financial assets and salary are at risk.   And that was a trustee going after them, not a pack of rabid Texas Trial lawyers. 

"Well, I had a Harley, but I sold to to a buddy for $250."

 

B/R Lawyer: rubs temples

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...