Handwritten Lawsuit Against Google Tossed Out Again On Appeal

from the somehow-the-Supreme-Court-seems-unlikely-to-take-this-case dept

Fri, Feb 15th 2008 11:38am — Mike Masnick

Remember the infamous handwritten lawsuit against Google from last year? The one where the guy accused Google of revealing his social security number through a bizarre coded algorithm that involved the Philadelphia 76ers basketball team? Luckily, that lawsuit was quickly thrown out of court, but amazingly, the guy appealed. Eric Goldman now informs us that the appeal has now also been thrown out as the court notes: "Google and its founders are not state actors, and Jayne's allegation concerning his coded social security number does not constitute a violation of the Constitution or federal law." Indeed. While the lawsuits have been getting tossed rather quickly, lawsuits like these do still clog the court system and waste plenty of taxpayer dollars. In the meantime, in case you missed it the first time, here's one of the handwritten filings in the lawsuit.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: frivolous lawsuits, handwritten
Companies: google

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ajax 4Hire, 15 Feb 2008 @ 12:25pm

This is why I am doomed to work
till I retire.
I am not stupid enough to think up a lawsuit like this.
I am not naive enough to think that it is someone else fault.

I could never think up or expect anyone to believe my alligations.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trojan John, 15 Feb 2008 @ 12:29pm

See, if you made people pay to sue someone, you would get much fewer frivolous lawsuits.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dharmazi, 15 Feb 2008 @ 12:31pm

Dylan Stephen Jayne, Please finish your Elementary School!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2008 @ 12:34pm

I could never think up or expect anyone to believe my alligators.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Willton, 15 Feb 2008 @ 12:42pm

Well,
at least he's got the form of a legal complaint down. Some people can't even do that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Boyd, 15 Feb 2008 @ 1:53pm

Re: #2
Trojan John, despite whatever benefits may come from restricting the ability to bring suit to those who can pay certain fees, the disadvantages are disproportionately considerable. In this case, Mr. Jayne filed under the "in pauperis" regulations in his county/state/district. Apparently you'd like to remove such an ability.

Even though *this* case is illegitimate, what would we make of legitimate cases under your proposed scheme? The impoverished could never file suit, even when it was justified.

I'd rather pay for illegitimate lawsuits than remove the right of the poor to sue the rich altogether.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:25pm

Re: Re: #2
How about a counter proposal. Let's make a fine for frivolous lawsuits. The person who brought it up would have to pay all the court costs and lawyer fees. And their lawyer gets nothing for supporting it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Schmitt, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:26pm

He's worried...
... that his SS# is revealed to the world through Google, but by making this lawsuit, he's given away his mailing address. Now, all we need is for him to write a check and we've got his bank account number and we can assume his identity.

He doesn't need to worry about what Google is giving away as information... HE shouldn't be giving this information away either!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Schmitt, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:26pm

He's worried...
... that his SS# is revealed to the world through Google, but by making this lawsuit, he's given away his mailing address. Now, all we need is for him to write a check and we've got his bank account number and we can assume his identity.

He doesn't need to worry about what Google is giving away as information... HE shouldn't be giving this information away either!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
x, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:35pm

hmm
how does a 9 digit number spell a 6 letter word?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Willton, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:38pm

Re: Re: Re: #2
How about a counter proposal. Let's make a fine for frivolous lawsuits. The person who brought it up would have to pay all the court costs and lawyer fees. And their lawyer gets nothing for supporting it.

We already do. They are called Rule 11 Sanctions. See Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The problem is that you can't fine somebody who has no money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Willton, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:39pm

Re: Re: Re: #2
How about a counter proposal. Let's make a fine for frivolous lawsuits. The person who brought it up would have to pay all the court costs and lawyer fees. And their lawyer gets nothing for supporting it.

We already do. They are called Rule 11 Sanctions. See Rule 11(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The problem is that you can't fine somebody who has no money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Willton, 15 Feb 2008 @ 2:43pm

Re: He's worried...
... that his SS# is revealed to the world through Google, but by making this lawsuit, he's given away his mailing address. Now, all we need is for him to write a check and we've got his bank account number and we can assume his identity.

Since he's filing in forma pauperis (means "in the form of a poor person"), my guess is that he doesn't have a bank account, or at least doesn't have anything in one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dr. Slobber, 16 Feb 2008 @ 3:57pm

Delusional
It's obvious that this person is delusional. It's just unfortunate that that the foes of legitimate litigation will use this case to push their agenda along.
[ link to this | view in thread ]