Every so often, I get people asking me why I do my litigation disaster tours. And the truth is, the *reason* I do them is it's important for people to understand what the law is and how it can impact them.
But I *can* do them because they're also business development
I've gotten terrific clients - yes, including @legalminimum - who found me because they saw threads like these and went "huh ... this guy probably has the skills to do a damn good job in the courtroom"
So ... if you're an in-house counsel reading and enjoying these threads, please feel free to see if you've got a small matter to give us a test run on.
Or a large one, if you feel like jumping in feet first.
Obviously, you don't need to do that, we're not entitled to anyone's business and I'd keep doing these even if no other business ever came out of them. But if you choose to, I promise you won't regret it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So, today's episode of litigation nutbaggery is brought to you by "Children's Health Defense" - the RFK Jr. group who brought you such antivax hits as "VAXXED (2016)" and "VAXXED II (2019)". These aren't just covid vaccine mandate fighters. They are general purpose antivaxxers
But CHD isn't the only plaintiff here, and the caption tells the story - they wanted to be in the Western District of Texas, so they found a local plaintiff or two to anchor the case there
When we last left our pillow friend (apologies, #WoT fans, I had to), he was being sued for defamation by Dominion and appealing the District Court's denial of his motion to dismiss that lawsuit
A motion to dismiss, as most of you know, is basically a defendant saying to the Court "look, judge, even if I did everything their complaint plausibly says I did they wouldn't win their case, so just dismiss it now"
Until that got dealt with, he didn't have to file an answer
Under the Federal Rules, which govern Dominion's lawsuits because they're in federal court, parties can't start taking discovery until they've had what's known as a Rule 26(f) conference to discuss a joint discovery plan.
Hey, #LitigationDisasterTourists, it's worth spending some time thinking about how the lawyers for the employees should be approaching this upcoming hearing.
The easy path for an attorney faced with this situation is to focus on how wrong the Judge and hospital are on the law
And absent some information we don't know, they ARE completely wrong here. These are at-will employees. The hospital system can't keep them if they don't want to be there. And you have to say so, forcefully.
But somehow, the judge already rejected that argument. So ...
Were I representing these employees, I'd go a different route. I'd have each employee sign an affidavit declaring that given that their employer just went to court to hold them hostage, they will NEVER, under any circumstances, agree to continue working there.
Listening to Trump v. Thompson, and trump's lawyer is now arguing that Trump has a *duty* as president to try to pressure Raffensberger into reversing Georgia's election
Sorry, Thompson v Trump
"is there anything a president could say while President that would subject him to a civil suit in your view?"
Holy shit this Apothio litigation funding scam @KyleWRoche is running - and yes, Kyle, it IS a scam, that's what you call it when you take advantage of unsophisticated people who don't know any better - just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look at it.
See this?
There is no legitimate litigation funder in the world who will fund on these terms.
None.
Funders get paid first. That's how litigation funding works. Their initial investment is first money out. Then their litigation return. THEN the lawyers get paid.
In Kyle's version, the rubes who invest are not first money out.
Not even their initial capital outlay.
They come out AFTER the lawyers and AFTER unfunded litigation expenses.
Weird, because the anti-Jewish riots and massacres in the early 20th century and the insistence on preventing Jewish immigration, including during the holocaust, seems to say otherwise.
But maybe this is a new development. If so, a shame it came too late