Jim Sterling in court.

[Gades]

Could the fact that Mr Romine altered his complaint from being against the entire company to against him be used as evidence against him even if he was ordered to by the judge (or hire a lawyer to keep it against the company)?

I think the order of the Judge would still apply, like we said here, he agree with the Defense that James Romine lacks Jurisdiction to make claims of damages suffered by DigiHom, Robert and Himself. He still mentions them and seeks payment damages for their. The Judge was clear that he lacks the jurisdiction and know how to make the claims, hence he needs to bring a lawyer to continue claiming said damages or remove all references of DigiHom and Robert unless they joined as named plaintiffs in the lawsuit to continue been Pro Se.

The lawsuit (Romine v Stanton) would have to be renamed Digital Homicide and Party (James Romine and Robert Romine) v James Nicholas Stanton. But to do THAT he needs a lawyer, as LLC partnerships don't have the right to go Pro Se (Representing themselves without a lawyer). I dunno that the sole proprietor is going to fly, because he claims Jim makes business in Arizona because he donated $1 a month to his patreon - thinking a Donation is some sort of Legal Business contract (to put it lightly).

What we dunno is if the deadline of tomorrow is postpone until the new amended compliant is reviewed.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

I think the order of the Judge would still apply, like we said here, he agree with the Defense that James Romine lacks Jurisdiction to make claims of damages suffered by DigiHom, Robert and Himself. He still mentions them and seeks payment damages for their. The Judge was clear that he lacks the jurisdiction and know how to make the claims, hence he needs to bring a lawyer to continue claiming said damages or remove all references of DigiHom and Robert unless they joined as named plaintiffs in the lawsuit to continue been Pro Se.

The lawsuit (Romine v Stanton) would have to be renamed Digital Homicide and Party (James Romine and Robert Romine) v James Nicholas Stanton. But to do THAT he needs a lawyer, as LLC partnerships don't have the right to go Pro Se (Representing themselves without a lawyer). I dunno that the sole proprietor is going to fly, because he claims Jim makes business in Arizona because he donated $1 a month to his patron - thinking a Donation is some sort of Legal Business contract to put it lightly.

What we dunno is if the deadline of tomorrow is postpone until the new amended compliant is reviewed.

If I may be honest, I don't want the lawsuit to end like this. All the above is technicalities that don't address the core issues. While it is an issue that Romnie is so far out of his depth he can't even correctly initiate a lawsuit, the heart of the problem is he's attempting to sue for ludicrous amounts out of a desire to silence critics based on a fundamentally broken understanding of plainly-stated laws. In other words, I want a judge or some other legal authority to plainly state to the Romnies that they do not have a legitimate complaint or case.

 

[Ima Lemming]

If I may be honest, I don't want the lawsuit to end like this. All the above is technicalities that don't address the core issues. While it is an issue that Romnie is so far out of his depth he can't even correctly initiate a lawsuit, the heart of the problem is he's attempting to sue for ludicrous amounts out of a desire to silence critics based on a fundamentally broken understanding of plainly-stated laws. In other words, I want a judge or some other legal authority to plainly state to the Romnies that they do not have a legitimate complaint or case.

While I'd love for the case to get thrown out tomorrow so Jim could move on with his life, I agree. It would also set the precedent that you can't sue for lost revenue when somebody called your shit products shit (I think? Not a lawyer here).

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

While I'd love for the case to get thrown out tomorrow so Jim could move on with his life, I agree. It would also set the precedent that you can't sue for lost revenue when somebody called your shit products shit (I think? Not a lawyer here).

I'm not sure if the precedent would go that far, but my concern is the total lack of it. If someone else gets sue-happy down the line, they can't learn from Romnie's mistakes because the message being sent here is not "the argument is abusive and nonsensical" but rather "the Romnie's were too incompetent to correctly state their case." On more moral grounds, I really don't like it when people lose not due to the morality and strength of their arguments but because the judicial process is so hung up on the smallest of technicalities. James' stupidity is actively preventing justice and the justice system won't look past that to address the core issue.

 

[Cap'nPipsqueak]

While I'd love for the case to get thrown out tomorrow so Jim could move on with his life, I agree. It would also set the precedent that you can't sue for lost revenue when somebody called your shit products shit (I think? Not a lawyer here).

I'm not sure if the precedent would go that far, but my concern is the total lack of it. If someone else gets sue-happy down the line, they can't learn from Romnie's mistakes because the message being sent here is not "the argument is abusive and nonsensical" but rather "the Romnie's were too incompetent to correctly state their case." On more moral grounds, I really don't like it when people lose not due to the morality and strength of their arguments but because the judicial process is so hung up on the smallest of technicalities. James' stupidity is actively preventing justice and the justice system won't look past that to address the core issue.

I'd not impossible he might get labeled vexatious; that'd sink his little boat right away.

Not likely, but not impossible. He's basically just making a nuisance of himself at this point.

 

[Gades]

If I may be honest, I don't want the lawsuit to end like this. All the above is technicalities that don't address the core issues. While it is an issue that Romnie is so far out of his depth he can't even correctly initiate a lawsuit, the heart of the problem is he's attempting to sue for ludicrous amounts out of a desire to silence critics based on a fundamentally broken understanding of plainly-stated laws. In other words, I want a judge or some other legal authority to plainly state to the Romnies that they do not have a legitimate complaint or case.

]While I'd love for the case to get thrown out tomorrow so Jim could move on with his life, I agree. It would also set the precedent that you can't sue for lost revenue when somebody called your shit products shit (I think? Not a lawyer here).

While I dunno if dropping the lawsuit without Trial might be a legal precedent, Romine requested NO Jury. So this is going to be looked at by this or another Judge. What Judge Tuchi is doing is reviewing whether there is any merit of Romine's claims to go to Trial.

Honestly at this pointed, to quote a fellow member at Katbox, Romine has hit a brick wall at this point.

 

[DarklordKyo]

Oh my god. Massive EMOTIONAL damage? I... what... is this how litigation works in the United States?

Have these two loons been taking notes from Donald Trump?

After some dillweed got a light sentence because "he was too spoiled to know the consequences of his actions" after he committed DUI vehicular manslaughter, I stopped being surprised at what our legal system can use as an excuse.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Oh my god. Massive EMOTIONAL damage? I... what... is this how litigation works in the United States?

Have these two loons been taking notes from Donald Trump?

After some dillweed got a light sentence because "he was too spoiled to know the consequences of his actions" after he committed DUI vehicular manslaughter, I stopped being surprised at what our legal system can use as an excuse.

Didn't they reverse that after he fled the country to Mexico to avoid his reduced slaughtered people while drunk sentence?

 

[RaikuFA]

Oh my god. Massive EMOTIONAL damage? I... what... is this how litigation works in the United States?

Have these two loons been taking notes from Donald Trump?

After some dillweed got a light sentence because "he was too spoiled to know the consequences of his actions" after he committed DUI vehicular manslaughter, I stopped being surprised at what our legal system can use as an excuse.

Didn't they reverse that after he fled the country to Mexico to avoid his reduced slaughtered people while drunk sentence?

Only got two years for that.

 

[DarklordKyo]

Didn't they reverse that after he fled the country to Mexico to avoid his reduced slaughtered people while drunk sentence?

Just the fact that it happened, and gave him a legitimately-lightened sentence, is enough to make me not care anymore.

 

[Hades]

Wasn't February 10th the date that the case would be either dropped or extended depending on the Judge accepting Romine's new move? So far I haven't heard any cheers or boo's from that front so what happened?

 

[Mangod]

Wasn't February 10th the date that the case would be either dropped or extended depending on the Judge accepting Romine's new move? So far I haven't heard any cheers or boo's from that front so what happened?

Judge probably has the weekend off. We'll hopefully learn something tomorrow.

 

[Gades]

Wasn't February 10th the date that the case would be either dropped or extended depending on the Judge accepting Romine's new move? So far I haven't heard any cheers or boo's from that front so what happened?

Likely Studying Romine's "Newly filed complaint" and waiting for the defense response.

 

[Fsyco]

Wasn't February 10th the date that the case would be either dropped or extended depending on the Judge accepting Romine's new move? So far I haven't heard any cheers or boo's from that front so what happened?

The 10th was the deadline for the new complaint, not necessarily the date that the judge would dismiss it. Hopefully there will be a response sometime this week on whether or not this new complaint complies with the judge's order (smart money says it doesn't), but considering how long this case has been going on, we might still be at this a while yet.

 

[Gades]

Minor Update in Romine v Stanton...

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to37 Amended Complaint by James Nicholas Stanton.(Hartman, Bradley) https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/10890330/Romine_v_Stanton

 

[Pyrian]

So now Jim's asking for an extension? Hmm.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

So now Jim's asking for an extension? Hmm.

Why would Jim draw this out even more? Drain DH of cash?

 

[KoalaMan412]

So now Jim's asking for an extension? Hmm.

From the looks of it in the document, it seems that both Jim's lawyer and Romine were getting in contact since February 9th regarding both the new allegations from the amended complaint and getting some kind of resolution. So basically they want some kind of resolution during this week and if not, then Jim's lawyer will respond to the amended complaint by February 24th and Romine agrees with the motion. So pretty much, nothing much until either they resolve something or respond to the amended complaint sometime next week as far as what I can tell.

Here is the full text from the document:

Defendant James Stanton moves the Court for an order extending his time to respond to
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint One? [Doc. 37] for seven (7) days, to and including February
24, 2017. The current response deadline is February 17, 2017.

In support of this motion Defendant states that Defendant's attorney and Plaintiff have
been in regular contact since February 9, 2017, regarding the allegations of the Amended
Complaint One and potential resolution of the same. Counsel believes the parties are close to
resolving the issues and that if a resolution can be reached it will be reached this week. If the
parties are unable to resolve this matter Defendant will file a response to the Amended
Complaint One? by February 24, 2017.

Undersigned counsel has personally conferred with Plaintiff James Romine regarding
this motion and he has given his consent to the requested extension.

A proposed order is submitted herewith.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

So now Jim's asking for an extension? Hmm.

From the looks of it in the document, it seems that both Jim's lawyer and Romine were getting in contact since February 9th regarding both the new allegations from the amended complaint and getting some kind of resolution. So basically they want some kind of resolution during this week and if not, then Jim's lawyer will respond to the amended complaint by February 24th and Romine agrees with the motion. So pretty much, nothing much until either they resolve something or respond to the amended complaint sometime next week as far as what I can tell.

Here is the full text from the document:

Defendant James Stanton moves the Court for an order extending his time to respond to
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint One? [Doc. 37] for seven (7) days, to and including February
24, 2017. The current response deadline is February 17, 2017.

In support of this motion Defendant states that Defendant's attorney and Plaintiff have
been in regular contact since February 9, 2017, regarding the allegations of the Amended
Complaint One and potential resolution of the same. Counsel believes the parties are close to
resolving the issues and that if a resolution can be reached it will be reached this week. If the
parties are unable to resolve this matter Defendant will file a response to the Amended
Complaint One? by February 24, 2017.

Undersigned counsel has personally conferred with Plaintiff James Romine regarding
this motion and he has given his consent to the requested extension.

A proposed order is submitted herewith.

As in reach a settlement? As in Jim admits to some degree of fault and they settle for only 1 trillion dollars?

 

[Pyrian]

Hmm, yes, that would be consistent with a settlement. Jim's announcement was that he was willing to settle for paying Romine back the amount he supposedly donated to Jim's Patreon - basically a few bucks. I can't imagine Jim's willing to admit any kind of fault, which would be unusual in a U.S. court settlement anyway. But Romine might be willing to walk away with "winning" an "undisclosed amount" in a settlement, in order to subsequently claim a moral high ground - especially given that the alternatives are "unilaterally drop the suit" or "get his butt kicked in court".