Funr (FUNR)

[samsamsamiam]

Lol I wonder if it’s the same guy that is/was suing Morgan because he didn’t remove a felony charge from his record?

I hope George isn’t planning to use that case against Morgan as his ammunition - pretty dumb. Did he even read what that case was about and it was a felon filing the lawsuit?



https://www.scribd.com/document/554662309/Scaglione-v-Morgan



God what a litigious society we live in!!!


How many of George’s fraud busting cases resulted in any benefits to shareholders rather than benefitting just him?

His fraud busting is pretty self serving.

The lawyers in Washoe where he lost those custodianships suggested that - questioning his true motives in those cases. They even mentioned asking for attorneys fees because of the frivolous nature of what he was doing.



Also George going after naysayers - that guy from Utah should get ready to slapp back and get attorneys fees if George proceeds with that case he tweeted about.
https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/responding-strategic-lawsuits-against-public-participation-slapps


Most SLAPPs ultimately would fail if litigated fully, but the SLAPP filer doesn't usually intend to do so. As previously mentioned, the point of a SLAPP is to intimidate and silence the target through the threat of an expensive lawsuit. Although the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech, the U.S. legal system generally gives the benefit of the doubt to a party bringing a lawsuit until the fact-finding stage, and a winning defendant is not usually entitled to recover attorneys' fees to cover the expense of legal defense (as in some other countries). This means that, even if the claim ultimately fails, the process of defending against a SLAPP through the legal system can be a daunting and expensive prospect for many individuals.

To guard against the chilling effect of SLAPPs, twenty-eight states, the District of Columbia, and one U.S. territory have enacted anti-SLAPP statutes. The U.S. jurisdictions with anti-SLAPP statutes are: Arizona; Arkansas; California; Delaware; District of Columbia; Florida; Guam; Georgia; Hawaii; Illinois; Indiana; Louisiana; Maine; Maryland; Massachusetts; Minnesota; Missouri; Nebraska; Nevada; New Mexico; New York; Oklahoma; Oregon; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; Tennessee; Texas; Utah; Vermont; and Washington.


Two other states, Colorado and West Virginia, do not have anti-SLAPP statutes, but their courts have recognized a defense to lawsuits that target activities aimed at petitioning the government for action on issues of public importance. These common law (i.e., judge-made) rules offer similar protections to those provided by some anti-SLAPP statutes.

If you get sued in a state with an anti-SLAPP law, you may be able to dismiss the lawsuit at an early stage of the proceeding and recover your costs and attorneys' fees. If you live in a state with an anti-SLAPP law but someone sues you in a state without one, you may be able to argue that the laws of your state should apply. For example, if you are a journalist in California (which has an anti-SLAPP statute) writing about the local community impact of the actions of a corporation based in Iowa (which does not have an anti-SLAPP law), you may be able to argue that California law should apply even if the corporation files a lawsuit in Iowa.