SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
In April of 2018, the Twin Galaxies video game scoreboard announced its finding that well-known classic game score-chaser Billy Mitchell did not achieve his Donkey Kong high scores on unmodified arcade hardware, stripping him of all his accumulated records in the process. Since then, Mitchell has oft claimed that he would fight the decision every way he could. And in September 2019, Mitchell and his lawyers said in a statement they would be forced to "resort to legal recourse" if Twin Galaxies didn't rescind its decision and reinstate Mitchell's scores.
But court filings obtained by Ars Technica show that Mitchell had already filed suit against Twin Galaxies in a Los Angeles County court as early as April 2019.
Mitchell's defamation lawsuit—misfiled as "William James Mitchell vs. Twin Galexies, LLC [sic]" and not reported in previous press accounts—has been slowly building to a planned July anti-SLAPP hearing, where Twin Galaxies will make use of a statute that lets defendants quickly strike down lawsuits that threaten "public participation." Twin Galaxies says in court filings that its statements regarding Mitchell's scores were not defamatory and that finding in Mitchell's favor "would have chilling effects on the freedom of speech."
"My law firm and I are fully confident that we will establish a prima face [sic] case for all parts of the lawsuit," Mitchell told Ars Technica in a Twitter Direct Message.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 05 2020, @03:17PM (6 children)
You shouldn't, often times cases require the discovery process and subpoenas to establish whether or not the lawsuit should be taken to trial. Judges have the ability to issue a summary judgment if there's anything so serious as to make the case unwinnable. This is for things like lack of standing or if the suit doesn't allege a cause of action that would result in a judgment being entered even if all the evidence was interpreted to the benefit of the plaintiff.
The problem with holding somebody in contempt for filing a BS suit, is that by the time you determine whether or not it's a BS suit, you'd have to already involve the courts. In practice, anything that BS is likely to be tossed out early in the process without proceeding to trial.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ikanreed on Tuesday May 05 2020, @03:38PM (5 children)
I vacillate back and forth on the question of whether it'd be right for there to be a "that's fucking stupid" short circuit in the legal system. There's so much bullshit is fucking stupid, but the amount of abuse a corrupt or incompetent judge could leverage that for is scary.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 05 2020, @03:52PM (1 child)
That's why we make it so expensive - to keep justice free of poor people stuff and concentrate on things that matter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 05 2020, @04:19PM
We make it expensive, because it is expensive to have the related officers of the court and attorneys investigating what happened in an effort to get a result that approximates a just outcome. Any system is going to have mistakes made and miscarriages of justice, but minimizing that requires resources. We could save a ton of money by just throwing out the safeguards, but I don't really think that people would really like to live in a country like that.
Requiring that expenditures be appropriate to the case before being awarded legal fees is part of how that's handled. Another is to require the losing party to pay. I'd like to see limits placed on things related to guessing or manipulating the jurors. Hiring consultants to help interpret the evidence is legitimate, hiring consultants to try and manipulate the jurors should be illegal.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 05 2020, @04:15PM (1 child)
That's what summary judgments are for. They deal with situations where the evidence can't support a ruling for the plaintiff, the plaintiff can't prove that they were harmed or it's flat out not a violation of the law or contract even if all the evidence is assumed to be true and complete.
Throwing a suit out for other reasons is something that's risky as it can lead to situations where people can engage in injurious conduct without worry even though the conduct is a violation of either the law or a relevant contract.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday May 05 2020, @06:31PM
Summary judgements are when both sides agree on enough relevant facts for there to be no need of finding of fact. I.e. the judge can fairly make a decision based on the summaries of the case provided by both sides.
(Score: 2) by TrentDavey on Wednesday May 06 2020, @10:08PM
Is that different from vacillating to and fro?
Upon reflection, can we vacillate round and round?
Is it improper to mention vacillating in and out?
Now I'm all hot and bothered.
Enquiring minds want to know!