Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 5:40 PM, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

Expand  

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 5:40 PM, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

Expand  

I tried to read it but I gave up. I'd rather yank out all the hair from my armpits.

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 6:58 PM, Brisketexan said:

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Expand  

Yeah.... it's going to get in the way of Albright's patent rocket docket.  He won't be pleased. 

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 6:58 PM, Brisketexan said:

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Expand  

Actually, I have very little feel for what kind of judge Albright is despite actually knowing him as patent litigator.

He seems to be pretty transparently trying to turn Waco into a new Eastern District under the "new" patent venue rules.  But that's about as far as I can interpret it.

Pretty sure Walter Smith would hammer down on this.

I noticed from some of the PACER artifacts that no summons was requested here.  Given the difficulties of serving 550 someodd defendants, I wonder if they're even going to try.  Which on the one hand evidences the other than legitimate purposes of this litigation, and on the other hand may not sufficiently invoke the jurisdiction of the court to do anything but dismiss it after failure to serve all defendants.

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 5:40 PM, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

Expand  

How much does it cost to serve someone?

Posted (edited)
  On 1/19/2021 at 9:47 PM, Sawbonz said:

How much does it cost to serve someone?

Expand  

Oh, $200 or so.  Maybe more if they are hard to track down.  There's a process by which you can ask them to "waive service" and voluntarily appear.  That works fine for a small number of "cooperative defendants" but would be a real pain in the ass to keep track of for that many.  And there's no "enforcement mechanism."

And you can't serve legislators at the capitol, I don't believe.  You'd have to catch them off capitol grounds.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 5:40 PM, TwiceHorn said:

  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

Expand  

Just out of curiosity, what would something like this cost?

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 10:02 PM, Foosters said:

Just out of curiosity, what would something like this cost?

Expand  

Because the legislators can't be served at work, it would have to be at "home" after working hours and probably take more than one attempt, so let's guess $200 each.  DC is probably more.  $110k. Lmao.

Even if they all agreed to waive service, it would be a colossal pain in the ass, although little out of pocket cost.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 10:02 PM, Foosters said:

Just out of curiosity, what would something like this cost?

Expand  

I believe the correct answer, as always, is tree fiddy.

And, yeah, it would cost a shitload to serve them all.  Which is why they asked for a temporary restraining order without having to give notice to any defendant.

Albright is a smart, and very detail-oriented judge.  A rambling screed that doesn't actually state HOW the law was violated, provide any support for the requested remedy being appropriate, and dismisses the laches concern with an argument that is only - and I'm serious - "we couldn't know what was happening till we hired these lawyers"...is not likely to be well-received.

A general rule for practitioners: the more extraordinary and outrageous the remedy you request (and sometimes, such remedies are actually warranted), the more buttoned-up and unassailable your Complaint should be.  This...is not that.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 5:40 PM, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

Expand  

You're exactly right that it is sanctionable.  And it's hard for me to interpret that pleading as anything other than a cry for help. 

I mean, I don't think a sober person files a facially frivolous pleading in federal court with a signature block that says "I got fired for my last gig for participating in a violent insurrection against the United States."  I really think there's a TLAP referral that needs to happen here.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 6:36 PM, Ted Lange said:

R.I.P. Kracken

 

 

Expand  

I just noticed something gloriously stupid about that. After I found the full document.

That is styled IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Well, cert hasn't been granted, so there's nothing to dismiss. And FRAP and 11th Circuit rules are inapplicable in the Supreme Court.

Maybe it was filed both places.

Posted (edited)
  On 1/20/2021 at 12:21 PM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Fuck that asshole.

Expand  

Well, without a last second flight path change to Moscow, there's an outside chance somebody in the New York state penitentiary system just might do that. Provided they aren't allergic to Cheeto dust.

Edited by Walden Ponderer
Posted

I went to law school but am not an attorney.  But I know one thing, if you want to be taken seriously by the U.S. Supreme Court........don't list your "mfi.net" email address on the cover page.  Your 1995 rural dial-up Florida email address likely indicates you probably don't have access to the case precedent on Westlaw.  

Posted (edited)

I think that's the brand of cigarettes Eric Trump got caught smoking in 7th grade.  PaMala's 100's, hard-pack.  

 

actually, if you read that sentence in Borat's voice, it makes perfect sense.  

Edited by Lobo
Posted
  On 1/21/2021 at 3:50 PM, Brisketexan said:

Mispelling!  Automatically invalidates the lawsuit!  I bet his flag has gold fringe on it, rendering the whole thing a farce!

God, we have so much stupid.

Expand  

Good God, I had forgotten about the gold fringe on the flag thing.  QAnon before QAnon was a thing.

 

 

Posted
  On 1/21/2021 at 4:24 PM, Brisketexan said:

So, what you're saying is.....if Trump manages to work his way into the office again, this guy is our new AG?

Expand  

well yeah...except that he has the poors and isn't a lawyer (although...as an aside...being a licensed attorney is not a requirement for serving as Attorney General).

Posted
  On 1/19/2021 at 4:40 PM, TXSG8R said:

I need someone to connect the dots.  How would the 2020 election invalidate the congresspersons that weren't up for election exactly?  How would this lead to the entire congress being barred?

 

Expand  

Something something, something something, reasons and something something.  Does that help?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
  On 1/21/2021 at 3:43 PM, Lobo said:

I went to law school but am not an attorney.  But I know one thing, if you want to be taken seriously by the U.S. Supreme Court........don't list your "mfi.net" email address on the cover page.  Your 1995 rural dial-up Florida email address likely indicates you probably don't have access to the case precedent on Westlaw.  

Expand  

Holy shit, I was thinking "it's a 3-letter TLD, even if it's a .net, and a lot of people/businesses like short domain names since either you got it really early, or paid a lot", but that fucking website is straight out of the 1990s.

They could auction that domain name off for more than they probably pull in profit-wise in a year to two.

Posted
  On 1/22/2021 at 3:53 PM, Kyrie Eleison said:

that's one helluva prayer for relief they've got going...

Expand  

Shoot for the moon, I say!

I mean....you also need to have a functioning weapon.....and aim.....so, yeah, that could be a challenge for them.  But who am I to shit on people who dream big?  That's America!



×
×
  • Create New...