Prenda Lawyer Says Judge Wright's Order Is Inapplicable In Georgia Because California Recognizes Gay Marriage
from the wtf? dept
So, you may recall that as a part of Judge Otis Wright's Prenda sentencing, he ordered that a copy of the ruling be submitted in every other case involving Prenda:For the sake of completeness, the Court requests Pietz to assist by filing a report, within 14 days, containing contact information for: (1) every bar (state and federal) where these attorneys are admitted to practice; and (2) every judge before whom these attorneys have pending cases.In one Prenda case (involving AF Holdings again) in the Northern District of Georgia, the defendant, Rajesh Patel, and his lawyer, Blair Chintella, submitted Judge Wright's ruling themselves to the court in the case. As pointed out by Fight Copyright Trolls, Prenda's local counsel in Georgia, Jacques Nazaire has filed one of the most ridiculous filings we've ever seen yet in all of the Prenda filings. It argues that the court should not allow Judge Wright's order to be entered into the docket because California recognizes gay marriage and Georgia does not. I'm not joking.
The defendant has filed a copy of that Order hoping that it would be viewed as a mandate by this Court. However, the defendant’s attempts to issue this mandate should fail for the following reasons.It doesn't stop there. It notes that California courts have different immigration rules and (randomly) that NY has different gun rights. Basically, it throws out every hot button issue that stereotypical conservatives might disagree with stereotypical liberals on.
First and foremost the undersigned respects the California decision and believes that it was rendered in the best interest of the residents of California.
Nevertheless, this instant case is pending in a Georgia District Court and it is trusted that any decision rendered, whether for or against the plaintiff, will be done so in the best interest of the residents and practitioners of Georgia.
While this Court may or may not agree with some of the issues presented in the California case, unbeknownst to the defendant, the California case will not necessarily become a mandate on this Court. It is solely within the discretion of this Court to follow or not follow the decisions made in the California case.
The defendant should realize that California has different laws than Georgia, a different Governor than Georgia; a different legislative body than Georgia, different business needs than Georgia and different views than Georgia and as such all of its decisions cannot serve as a mandate for Georgia.
For example the California Courts have legalized gay marriage. Perry v. Schwarzenegger 704 F.Supp.2d 921 (N.D. Cal., 2010);Certified question, 628 F.3d 1191 (9th. Cir.); Answered 52 Cal.4th 1116 (2011) Affirmed, 671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.) Such a decision cannot serve as a mandate on Georgia Courts to legalize gay marriage as well.
Of course, all of that is meaningless. While it's true that Judge Wright's ruling is in no way a precedential ruling for the Georgia court, it's still a ruling about federal law, not any specific state law. And the ruling itself is about flat out misconduct (including potential racketeering and tax evasion claims) by the plaintiff in this case, because of actions in a nearly identical case. That's not about California having a "mandate" over Georgia. It's about very relevant additional information that the court should know about.
Nazaire then goes on to list out a ridiculous parade of horribles that he claims would happen if the Georgia court "followed the aforesaid California Order" including that law firms wouldn't be able to use boilerplate text any more. This makes absolutely no sense at all. First of all, the inclusion of Judge Wright's order is not about having the Georgia court "follow" the order, but adding additional important information about the parties in this particular case. Separately, the idea that adding a California ruling into the docket suddenly means lawyers wouldn't be able to cut and paste any more... just doesn't make any sense at all.
Nazaire then tries to argue, incredibly, that there is no "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" that Alan Cooper's signature was forged. Earth to Nazaire: that ship sailed a long, long time ago. It also leads to this completely random attack on the EFF:
Prior to filing the document, the undersigned contacted Prenda Law to find out whether or not Mr. Cooper would be available to testify at trial but was advised that they could not locate Mr. Cooper. The undersigned was advised that Mark Lutz and Peter Hansmeier would be available to testify as witnesses. Had the undersigned realized that the Electronic Frontier Foundation was hanging with Mr. Cooper, he would have been able to track down Mr. Cooper and questioned him about the documents. It turns out that Mr. Cooper was a caretaker of one of the properties of a Prenda Law member and had left said property in August, 2012.Wow. Honestly, this one needs no commentary. It speaks volumes (of insanity) for itself.
Therefore, even if the undersigned had placed a knife to the throats of each of Prenda’s members, none would have been able to give him Mr. Cooper’s contact information at the time on November 5, 2012 when Plaintiff commenced its law suit. It is certainly not the first time a company has lost contact with an agent (or alleged agent as stated).
And Nazaire is not done. He also argues that Patel's lawyer, Chintella, was "one of the two star witnesses in the California case" (which, um, isn't true) and then claims that this is an ethics violation in Georgia.
This whole filing really is quite remarkable, but certainly seems to fit in to the growing pile of "Prenda crazy" filings in various cases around the country.
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: blair chintella, california, copyright, copyright trolls, federal law, georgia, jacques nazaire, otis wright, rajesh patel
Companies: af holdings, prenda, prenda law
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Well thank you very much Prenda, for proving me wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clKi92j6eLE
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They may even list this whole debacle as a win on their part.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
As I said on the popehat thread about this....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The irony that kills Prenda's case in Geogia...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The irony that kills Prenda's case in Geogia...
*It is kind of ironic that Prenda would be so worried about other lawyers of other defendants copying and pasting District Judge Wright's ruling as a reference filing to Prenda's activities...*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
He will continue on board...all the way to the crash site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I have to give the lawyer credit
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I've just worked out where they're going with this...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The reason his argument falls flat, is because the issues being raised are independant of any district differences between the two courts and focus on federal level infractions and concerns that are valid in ANY United States district.
Still, points for trying. If I wasn't so disgusted that it had been working, I'd be quite impressed with the smokescreens and diversionary tactics that has lead the Prenda folk so far.
At the very least they'll likely wind up villains in a few stories I have floating about in my head XD
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Unfortunately, I can personally torpedo some of Nazaire's claims. I KNOW where Blair was during the last two hearings, mainly because I was speaking to him. In fact he, like many other lawyers and 'interested parties' took part in my liveblog during the April hearing. I'm sure she can subpoena scribblelive to get his IP address, that is the modus operandi after all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nigel
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Prenda: The new SCO
Here's hoping Prenda will continue to die a slow, painful death whilst giving us all quite a show.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The reason his argument falls flat, is because the issues being raised are independant of any district differences between the two courts and focus on federal level infractions and concerns that are valid in ANY United States district."
It can certainly be used as evidence for the defense on Prenda's tactics. And is quite admissible as such if I recall...oh and Federal District Court JUSTICE Otis D. Wright II is a federal court judge and they since he has made a ruling...precedent stands with relevancy to the case at hand...in other words the defendant's filing against against Prenda in Georgia because the filing is known as a referral....It alerts other judges to the goings on of Prenda and how to handle the case accordingly within the law of another state's laws and is a referential basis or alert system when admitted or filed into court by a defendant......*takes a deep breath*...Nazaire is only shooting himself and Prenda in the head with his filing because of the ruling by FDC JUSTICE Wright and referral which was ordered at the FEDERAL LEVEL. Which is kind of ironic because he is trying to make it so that his case against Mr. Patel look as thought it were a merely copy and paste....if you don't get the irony I will spell it out to you..... Prenda's case filing against Rajeesh Patel was a copy and paste filing and matched the California filing by Prenda, word for word, in California.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Doesn't know the difference...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Wow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Death Throws
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Death Throws
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wait...Did Prenda Law just invoke the "Chewbacca Defense"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
What they said was that "because Judge Wright's order came from a different state than here in Georgia, which happens to hold to some very legal precedents than Georgia does, (and here's a list of several important ones, such as gay marriage,) it should not be honored here."
That argument is a whole lot less ridiculous, and actually makes sense. It's wrong, as Mike pointed out, due to it being based on matters of federal, not state, law, but it's not crazy.
Really, these guys manage to screw things up enough on their own, frequently venturing into "truth is stranger than fiction" territory. We really don't need to invent fictitious screwups for them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm confused, is thought Steele said he wasn't with Prenda Law?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Desperation move
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
So, believing this a minor setback, they will seek to 'correct' the issue the same way they've been doing all this time. Its like all crooks. Get away with it too long, you get to feeling bulletproof.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'm confused, is thought Steele said he wasn't with Prenda Law?
Er... that's actually a really good point. Did one of Prenda's lawyers just blow Steele's (very thin) "cover"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Weather it works is another thing regardless of the gay decision in CA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Desperation move
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cry me a river.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wrong disorder
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Inquiring minds want to know...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh, you found my fudge packing uniform.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
For team preda it will be more like a pirana attack than a shark attack, at least with a shark, you might only loose a limb than a life, besides, more people wrongly accused will receive some recompense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Death Throws
That's "throes" in case you care.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The best and brightest of copyright enforcement, ladies and gentlemen.
John Steele just hates it when due process is enforced.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
average_joe would be proud.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Attack of the clones...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Attack of the clones...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Attack of the clones...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Wow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Wrong disorder
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Death Throws
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I've just worked out where they're going with this...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Wrong disorder
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Also it is necessary for other Courts to know that there are Bar proceedings against same Attorneys since it is highly likely based on previous history that the Attorneys at question would not have the candour to explain same to the courts as they are meant to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Attack of the clones...
I love it when people don't realize how the snowflakes work and pretend to be different people.
Also, take a guess what state those comments come from? You only get one guess, and if you're wrong, you really need to check your logic sensors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'd suggest that you obtain this 'new' skill we like to call Reading Comprehension!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Attack of the clones...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Attack of the clones...
Anyway, Florida? ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Attack of the clones...
I say Endor!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
An open letter to Jacques Nazaire---
I sincerely hope that your novel “The Crown: A Tale of Blood, Women and Wine” is climbing the New York Times best seller list. Even though it seems that your novel is probably an awful piece of fiction, based on the fact that all reviews of it online were written by you; I really do hope that your self-published (iUniverse) book is a hit, because you are about to become an ex-lawyer. Pro-tip: search google news for the name “Brett Gibbs.” Hopefully your book sales have been large enough that you can flee this country for a safe haven like North Korea. Otherwise you may find yourself wearing orange coveralls, like your new Prenda friends.
apauld.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Mike, no need to be sensationalist, I think TD should achieve more with more factual and informative titles than hype.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
as for the gay marriage comments, I'm guessing that Prenda is hoping to establish in the mind of the judge that California is different enough for the precedent not to apply.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Interesting. And when I say "interesting" I mean in a "I never thought I'd live long enough to see bullshit piled that high in my entire life" kind of way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Death Throws
lol!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I've just worked out where they're going with this...
There is a chance that was just a joke...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Attack of the clones...
Now I can't say for sure that someone who throws his military experience around to try and get people to treat him differently would do something like that... but it is possible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The problem is people assumed lawyers would not do the things they were doing, and that allowed them to ignore the growing pile of bad acts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Where?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That's got nothing to do with anything. There's nothing about it being "binding." It's about the *finding of fact* being entered into the record.
No one is binding the GA court to do anything. Even suggesting that is ridiculous.
That is objectively true, Wrights' ruling doesn't create precedent that the Georgia ruling is required to follow.
Nor has anyone suggested otherwise.
as for the gay marriage comments, I'm guessing that Prenda is hoping to establish in the mind of the judge that California is different enough for the precedent not to apply.
This isn't about precedent. It's about the finding of fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
That would only matter if they were saying that there's a precedent here or that Wright's ruling was binding on the GA court, but no one said that.
They're just putting this into the record as a finding of fact.
So, yes, it is ridiculous. Very, very ridiculous. And crazy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
It was factual. It was not hype. We stand by the title.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
if you replace receive with awarded you will probably be more accurate. An award =/= received, especially when shell companies are involved.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steele translated into geek
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone ought to confirm the details of Nazaire's resume
Any of the obvious possible outcomes -- truth, lies, forgery -- are interesting.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Because he was in the military and... and... gay marriage!!
oh and OHAI!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Prenda: The new SCO
They can have the slow death once someone gets the list of names out of their hands.
Even as these rulings were coming they were still "negotiating settlements" with targets.
They need to be made unable to inflict themselves on others expediently.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jail time please
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jail time please
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Death Throws
PS: Kudos on hitting the 5k comment mark, dude.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death Throws
That's me!
PS: Kudos on hitting the 5k comment mark, dude.
Thanks, I hadn't even noticed. :-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death Throws
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death Throws
I'm also rebellious, or inconsistent, or something.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]