03-16-2015, 06:48 PM
A recent flurry of activity in the Charisma v. Douglas case, coinciding with the recent flurry of Klempner trolling activities at this website. Mere happenstance? You be the judge.
On March 10, 2015 Charisma filed amendments naming Gustavo Armando Sainz, Thomas Vernon White and Steve F. Levicoff as Doe defendants. Previously only Doogle, DD, DI and MBWA SHENZI were named as defendants. No speculation on what the "F" stands for in Levi-jerkoff's middle name.
On March 2, 2015, Doogle filed an amendment to his motion to strike. This appears to be identical to the first motion, except the reservation number is included under the document title and a duplicate word "move" was removed. Local rules may require the former, which illustrates how even experienced attorneys can bungle otherwise routine pleadings because of picayune formalities that differ from venue to venue. Imagine the difficulty a pro per party encounters in such an environment.
More significantly, on March 10, 2015, Charisma filed a response to Doogle's motion and demurrer. Nowhere does the plaintiff cite any legal points and authorities, or otherwise offer any proof of the facts alleged in the complaint, or much of anything else that is going to overcome the motion to strike. This motion is different from the usual demurrer, where in theory the sufficiency of the complaint is supposed to be decided on the facts alleged therein. Under the Anti-SLAPP statute there are real proof issues, none of which appears to have been addressed by plaintiff in other than conclusory terms.
OkpalaOppositionMStrike.pdf (Size: 202.09 KB / Downloads: 13)
For example, although it's a fact that Charisma is ASICS accredited, Charisma offers no documentary proof establishing this or the bona fides of ASICS, or even any declarations supporting the point. I hope Charisma has some documents or something more than just this opposition in mind to file. Otherwise, looking strictly at these filings (as a court should do) it would appear that this situation is not only just some internet dork spouting his lame opinions (i.e., constitutionally protected free speech), but that there has not been even any basic showing that those statements were arguably untrue. A very easy decision for a judge to blow out this case as to Doogle and award attorney fees.
The quality of this response is a real disappointment because I believe there are facts that could be alleged that might uphold the business tort counts. Whether Okpala could prove them would be another story. For example, although Doogle was not a formal member of "The Gang" boys club at DD he made 2,132 posts there and another 9,999 at DI, which suggests he just might be a significant player in their sick game. The volume of his posts is easy enough to prove, but no effort to do so or even a mention of it by Okpala.
This illustrates the Catch 22 that underfinanced parties often face in the legal system. A real lawyer probably could cook up something that would pass muster, but a real lawyer isn't going to take a case like this without a substantial retainer because there is lots of work and likely no real pay day.
On March 10, 2015 Charisma filed amendments naming Gustavo Armando Sainz, Thomas Vernon White and Steve F. Levicoff as Doe defendants. Previously only Doogle, DD, DI and MBWA SHENZI were named as defendants. No speculation on what the "F" stands for in Levi-jerkoff's middle name.
On March 2, 2015, Doogle filed an amendment to his motion to strike. This appears to be identical to the first motion, except the reservation number is included under the document title and a duplicate word "move" was removed. Local rules may require the former, which illustrates how even experienced attorneys can bungle otherwise routine pleadings because of picayune formalities that differ from venue to venue. Imagine the difficulty a pro per party encounters in such an environment.
More significantly, on March 10, 2015, Charisma filed a response to Doogle's motion and demurrer. Nowhere does the plaintiff cite any legal points and authorities, or otherwise offer any proof of the facts alleged in the complaint, or much of anything else that is going to overcome the motion to strike. This motion is different from the usual demurrer, where in theory the sufficiency of the complaint is supposed to be decided on the facts alleged therein. Under the Anti-SLAPP statute there are real proof issues, none of which appears to have been addressed by plaintiff in other than conclusory terms.
OkpalaOppositionMStrike.pdf (Size: 202.09 KB / Downloads: 13)
For example, although it's a fact that Charisma is ASICS accredited, Charisma offers no documentary proof establishing this or the bona fides of ASICS, or even any declarations supporting the point. I hope Charisma has some documents or something more than just this opposition in mind to file. Otherwise, looking strictly at these filings (as a court should do) it would appear that this situation is not only just some internet dork spouting his lame opinions (i.e., constitutionally protected free speech), but that there has not been even any basic showing that those statements were arguably untrue. A very easy decision for a judge to blow out this case as to Doogle and award attorney fees.
The quality of this response is a real disappointment because I believe there are facts that could be alleged that might uphold the business tort counts. Whether Okpala could prove them would be another story. For example, although Doogle was not a formal member of "The Gang" boys club at DD he made 2,132 posts there and another 9,999 at DI, which suggests he just might be a significant player in their sick game. The volume of his posts is easy enough to prove, but no effort to do so or even a mention of it by Okpala.
This illustrates the Catch 22 that underfinanced parties often face in the legal system. A real lawyer probably could cook up something that would pass muster, but a real lawyer isn't going to take a case like this without a substantial retainer because there is lots of work and likely no real pay day.