Forum

ranran-001 wrote:

Beard has no experience in litigation. None. This is his first case.

I'm pretty sure Ty Beard has been a working attorney since 1996. I welcome you to google what the term "litigation" means.

DerekL1963 wrote:

It's neither. It's stone cold fact.

That he's a novice lawyer? I seriously doubt this, but if it's certainly true, then I don't care to argue otherwise.

DerekL1963 wrote:

The case in question here isn't business litigation, but defamation. That's an entirely different specialty. The law is a big field covering many specialties - and Beard has no experience in the relevant specialties. Zip. Zero. Nada

No professional with the sense $DIETY gave your average paramecium would take on a large, complex, important task outside his professional specialty without proper assistance. Neither Beard, nor the firm he works for, appears to have made any effort to consult or retain the appropriate specialists.

For all intents and purposes, this is business litigation. The matter of the suit is just defamation and tortious interference. T. Greg Doucette is a criminal litigator, yet a lot of you seem to trust his opinions and interpretations on matters of this case when he too is inexperienced in defamation. That, I don't seem to understand. Dealing with defamation does not have to be a specialty, but a matter of knowing what to argue. It certainly can be, if one has done multiple cases regarding defamation, but otherwise not exactly. Again, Ty Beard and his team are career lawyers. Telling them they have no idea what they're doing, or that they're out of their depth because they did something wrong, makes no sense and is, yes, a bit unwise and/or ignorant, in my opinion.

DerekL1963 wrote:

(And a lot of people have looked.)

Sure.

DerekL1963 wrote:

Beard didn't make "an" error. He made a freakin' trainload of errors - some of which would garner your average sixth grader a failing grade on a middle school research paper. (Others of which may rise to the level of lying to the Court and possibly outright fraud.)

(And it's kinda funny to watch people talk about biases while they repeat stan propoganda.)

Not sure what your analogy was supposed to convey, but anyway, no, it isn't that deep. It's clearly wrong, and I hope Ty Beard is properly sanctioned, but the fraudulent affidavits do not really matter since they've been withdrawn, so this mountain out of a mill hole is quite melodramatic, in all honesty. It's irrelevant to the TPCA. There is no time in the hearing to argue about affidavits that were thrown out by the plantiff's counsel. The subpoena has moved to quash until the defense feels the need to really act on it. The point right now is to see if Vic has made a prima facie case, and if the defense has made a predominance of the evidence showing their affirmative defenses. That's what matters right now.

JustinTaco wrote:

This is the exact same point I made before about why the Twitter lawyers are more reputable.

"Lawyer" is a general term the same way scientist or doctor is. A marine biologist doesn't have the expertise to design a solar panel, and you definitely don't go to a foot doctor if you have fluid in your lungs.

Ty Beard is unqualified for this type of case, as he's masterfully demonstrated.

I'm sorry, but I'm not exactly sure what this is meant to convey. Yes, there are different types of lawyers who deal in different concentrations, but it isn't as though there is such a thing as a "Defamation lawyer". No. The fact of the matter is that Ty has little experience dealing with TCPAs. Defamation isn't a concentration. It's a matter of argument. In this case: whether Mignogna had been defamed and financially affected by the alleged defamation, and whether if the defendants had tortiously interfered with Mignogna's business prospects by either directly doing so, or through defamation. Because Ty Beard messed up and didn't get a notary doesn't make him "unqualified for this type of case". It just makes him a malefactor. Again, people, we are talking about signatures. In earnest, it isn't that problematic. Yes, it's wrong, but I'm not sure why there's so much urgency and upset behind it.

gilgameshi wrote:

Breaking the law multiple times in one sitting is a bit more than an "error", don't you think?

I, personally, was under the impression that when practicing law, breaking the law is typically a pretty big no-no.

"Error. Mistake. Fault. Wrongdoing. Major unforced error." Pick your poison.

ranran-001 wrote:

Also, how is copy and pasting a signature an error? That's a pretty big deliberate act of forgery, and will not go unnoticed tomorrow.

Even if it did go noticed tomorrow, I highly doubt something will be done about it then and there. Ty Beard will probably be sanctioned on a different day. The point is not to underestimate the opponent. Period.

"proceedings initiated between two opposing parties to enforce or defend a legal right."

drawing up wills does not fit under that umbrella
most lawyers are not involved in litigation

JustinTaco wrote:

Falsely notarized those affidavits. The 3 people involved, Vic, Huber, and I forget the last guy, were all hundreds of miles away and could not have been present. One of them was even posting on Instagram about attending San Japan, which is a con very far away from Beard.

So the affidavits were withdrawn and resubmitted as "declarations."

Both are sworn testimony. The only difference is that one is done before a notary and the other isn't.

JustinTaco wrote:

Not only are they falsified, even Vic's signature is an exact copy paste from deposition, meaning that Beard photocopied the document, typed in extra letters to spell Vic's full first name, and combined them, which is, very illegal.

I gotta be honest. This strikes me as "Everybody knows it's wrong and everybody does it anyway."

I predict that Ty will get a slap on the wrist.

purpleloops wrote:

I'm pretty sure Ty Beard has been a working attorney since 1996. I welcome you to google what the term "litigation" means.

Name at least three civil court cases he has been council of. You won't be able to because Beard has no litigation experience. End of.

Here are a couple of things experienced lawyers do not do:
1. Submit their motions to strike four days late.
2. Waste their opportunities to use deposition time to excise as much information they can out of a defendant's testimony.
3. Submit affidavits with forged notary stamps.
4. Submit affidavits with forged signatures.
5. Submit items 3 and 4 four days late.
6. Argue in a blanket statement that everything is hearsay.
7. Refuse to show any evidence that would validate a notarized document
8. Resubmit the same forged notary documents as unsworn but keep a forged signature

Those are the many things a good lawyer would not do. None of the defendants' lawyers have done those things.

But guess who has done all of them? Ty.

Quote:

Even if it did go noticed tomorrow, I highly doubt something will be done about it then and there. Ty Beard will probably be sanctioned on a different day. The point is not to underestimate the opponent. Period.

Vic is being subpoenaed today, he will have to show up to court and he would either a.) perjure himself and lie about how his signature got on those documents, or b.) tell the truth which will implicate his lawyer in a notary fraud case.

Neither of those two options is going be good today.

@Purpleloops Just because someone is a Lawyer doesn't mean they can do any case. I wouldn't go to a lawyer who specializes in estate law and expect them to handle my disability claim.

This is why I think Nick is Ty Beard's case runner. He referred Vic to Ty Beard. Case running is frowned upon in the law community and in some states outright illegal. Because you have lawyers taking on cases they have no busy handling, robbing the client of a good attorney.

When I called Ty Beard a novice I meant in the field of defamation law, which requires a very good attorney to handle. Because its really hard to prove defamation. If Defamation was really that easy, people would be filing defamation lawsuits every time someone said something mean about them online, overwhelming the court system. So safeguards are put in place to prevent this.

Such experience. Much lawyer. Wow.

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169991626342768640?s=19

SyranoGravely wrote:

Such experience. Much lawyer. Wow.

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169991626342768640?s=19

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169981955275968512

Full livetweet thread of today's proceedings here

Marchi dismissed on everything!

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170007513875587072?s=19

JustinTaco wrote:

SyranoGravely wrote:

Such experience. Much lawyer. Wow.

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169991626342768640?s=19

https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169981955275968512

Full livetweet thread of today's proceedings here

This is -outstanding-.

And here's the full livetweet thread from law Twitter at present:

https://twitter.com/LizaGaines/lists/threadnought-hearing

I personally thought that this comment from the judge was golden:

Quote:

Judge: if I like a cat picture on Facebook, I’m not in a conspiracy. You are reading too much into liking a post.

For anyone who kept going "twitterlawyers or you don't get to decide on if Vic is at the very least a LPPF (Limited Purpose Public Figure)", well Judge Chupp just said he agrees he thinks Vic is a LPPF. Smile

Last edited by Redbeard 101 on Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:52 am; edited 1 time in total

Let's cease with all the links and gossipy discussion on the live tweets please. That's not the specific topic here and it's honestly tacky. Not to mention they're just the claims of the person doing it unless there is video/audio corroboration. Once an actual news/interest article comes up (which it no doubt will very soon) on today's proceedings, that verifies things, then everyone can comment on them.

According to the thread, the judge agreed Vic is a limited purpose public figure. That's devastating for his prospects against the remaining three defendants.

I think I'm beginning to see why a new Hetalia season hasn't come out for awhile. They already had to replace England's VA because he was arrested for child pornography,and now there's no one to voice Greece. Now Christoper Sabat,one of the other biggest names in the biz,has been implicated in all of this. Not to mention that FUNimation does not have policies on sexual harrasment.

If I can stick to it,I will not buy anything else dubbed by FUNimation,and I will therefore(unless it's by another dubbing company)watch anime in Japanese.(And I am not claiming that Japanese seiyuus are not doing the same thing,but you just don't hear of it like you do American VAs).

Forum - View topic
INTEREST: Law and Disorder: Mignogna's Counsel Files, Rescinds Affidavits in 3 Days

The ANN Aftershow - Will You Watch Solo Leveling Season 2?

Dark Moon: The Blood Altar Volumes 1-2 Manhwa Review

Interview: Voice Actors Rika Hayashi and Hiroki Tōchi Talk About Their New Golf Anime, Tonbo!

Japanese TV Special Ranks Top Anime Songs, as Chosen by Foreign Fans

This Week in Anime - So, Is Sound Euphonium Queerbaiting or Not?

Wonderful Precure! Episodes 1-12 Anime Review

That Time I Got Reincarnated as a Slime: The Ways of Monster Nation Manga Ends Due to Artist's Health

Dead Dead Demon's Dededede Destruction Part 1 Anime Film Review

Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes Game Review

Forum - View topicINTEREST: Law and Disorder: Mignogna's Counsel Files, Rescinds Affidavits in 3 Days

Forum

Forum - View topic
INTEREST: Law and Disorder: Mignogna's Counsel Files, Rescinds Affidavits in 3 Days