Replies to post #7018 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[Scragapenny]

He sure seems to be a bloviating nincompoop at this point. I doubt he has the wherewithal to close his windows during a rainstorm let alone orchestrate a major lawsuit against a group of people across an ocean.

[janice shell]

I find it interesting that Eade apparently isn't even considering the possibility of dismissal. I think there's a good chance of that happening, temporarily or permanently.

First, we have the jurisdiction issue. Judge Anderson ordered him to show cause why the case should be heard in California; he has yet to rule on Eade's reply. What will he do? I don't know, but my guess is that he won't be happy that Eade went to some trouble to conceal his actual place of residence.

Will he find that the presence of Eade's law office in California is sufficient to establish jurisdiction? Maybe. On the other hand, this suit isn't really about Eade's law practice. Nor is what any of us said about him.

If Anderson finds that California has jurisdiction, Eade has other hurdles to jump. His complaint consists entirely of conclusory allegations. That makes it impossible for any of the Does to respond with affirmative defenses.

So I believe that one way or another, he'll at the very least have to amend the complaint.

[janice shell]

From a ruling by an appellate judge in the old "basher" suit Eade lost:

We determined Eade had no probability of prevailing because the alleged libelous statements were statements of opinion, and there is no substantial likelihood a reasonable person would take them as statements of fact.

What happened--very briefly--was that the defendants won the original suit. Then one of them sued for malicious prosecution, which is very hard to prove. He lost and appealed. Eade won the appeal.