Prenda hires an outside counsel in Sunlust Pictures v. Nguyen case

Posted: December 20, 2012 by SJD in Prenda, Sunlust fiasco
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

After the disastrous Sunlust Pictures v. Nguyen (FLMD 12-cv-01685) hearing on 11/27/2011, which looked more like a circus performance than a courtroom event,

  • The case was dismissed by a frustrated Judge Scriven;
  • Prenda’s “counsel for an hour” Matthew Wasinger, feeling like conned by Prenda’s scam artists, indicated his willingness to answer questions about the circumstances of his recruitment;
  • Defense attorney Graham Syfert moved for sanctions and $10,000 in attorney fees.

 

Raul reported about these developments two days ago. Today another curious event happened on this case: our scammers (Prenda Law, Inc., Paul Duffy, Brett Gibbs, and John Steele) decided to hire the Kynes, Markman & Felman, P.A., “Best law firm in Tampa for white collar criminal defense” (as they advertise themselves). This hire was only made in connection with responding to defendant’s motions for sanctions/fees. I commend John Steele for his rare paroxysm of honesty in an implicit acknowledgement that he and his clique are essentially white collar criminals.

Raul’s commented yesterday:

The beauty of this situation is that Prenda/Steele have painted themselves into a corner in that they cannot oppose either the motion for sanctions or attorney’s fees without risking another hearing before Judge Scriven.

It seems that Steele & Co. have found a workaround. Now they can contest the requested fees/sanctions AND avoid a possible personal appearance: I’m pretty sure that if trolls were to appear without an external counsel in front of Judge Scriven, she would definitely scrutinize our trolls only under oath. I don’t think I should explain that the crooks have a lot of dirty laundry to hide and that they would fight tooth and nail to avoid any truthful testimony.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time when Prenda uses an external help, although other trolls invoked an outside representation before: for example, in K-Beech v. John Does 1-85 (11-cv-00469), when Judge Gibney threatened a minor greedy troll Wayne O’Brian with Chapter 11 sanctions.

We will watch the developments on this case closely. I wrote a quick email to Katherine Yanes (one of the two Kynes, Markman & Felman, P.A attorneys hired by Prenda). In this e-mail I introduced myself, and let her know that this is hardly a regular case for her firm: this time thousands of eyes are watching, and thousands of victims are hungry for Prenda’s [preferably painful] downfall.

Followups
About these ads
Comments
  1. Raul says:

    Felman and Yanes do appear to be primarily a criminal defense team so their appearance in this case is remarkable to say the least.

    As the FLMD is Lipscomb’s primary hunting ground for shakedowns (excluding his proxies) I bet he is just loving all the attention this lawsuit has garnered.

    • Anonymous says:

      This was the judge that dismissed their case for attempted fraud upon the court, among other things. Is it too much to hope that this judge’s anger with Prenda has provoked a criminal investigation that we are not yet aware of, and this is a sign that they being forced to go on full defense? If memory serves this case has not even brought in the issue of Alan Cooper and the AF/Ingenuity/Etc. fraud, as the plaintiff is Sunlust but there is plenty more to go after Prenda for if someone in the court or law enforcement system has finally decided they’ve had enough.

  2. Subscribe says:

    Subscribing

  3. Irritated Troll Hater says:

    Ok, I am having a problem here….. Prenda changed their name recently, correct? Like in the last couple weeks?

  4. Anonymous says:

    Will this judge finally send in a bar complaint to the Illinois ARDC?

    These guys are making the legal profession look horrible.

    Their methods of “practicing law” are abhorrent and a stain. This must not be allowed to continue!

  5. Sausages says:

    http://ia701506.us.archive.org/11/items/gov.uscourts.flmd.274150/gov.uscourts.flmd.274150.43.0.pdf

    #11 & #12 explains why they retained third part representation – They (Steele) tried to once again write a motion and strongarm Mr. Wasinger into signing it with his electronic signature without seeking permission.

    Pretty funny you have all these wordy lengthy oppositions filed by the third party saying how all this is a sham and Syfert is an extortionist, then the local guy they hired (who I really feel for now and is trying to back out of it to not ruin his career) drops this kind of bomb saying they tried to commit fraud once again and incidentally backs up Mr Syferts assertion that Prenda often submits documents with other peoples signatures without permission (which the opposition motion filed by the third party lawfirm tries to discredit)

    Comedy!

    • Sausages says:

      in the year 2012 almost 2013, why the hell doesn’t the court system force using a system that preserves the authentication of electronic signatures? Is there a legitimate reason all these PDF are submitted as flat files when PDF has the capability to sign using a personal certificate (which can be authenticated and is extremely hard to forge, unlike copy/pasting a screenshot of an electronic signature and putting it in a flat PDF file)

    • John says:

      Pretty nice of Wasinger to be compiling these nice concise “a-day-in-the-prenda-lair” motions that will be great to forward to new local counsels to show them the sticky turd they’re about to lower their loafers into.

      Further this just illustrates the simple fact that these pornographers exist, but are likely not actually in this game as much as they are on paper. Pretty obvious this is a prenda plaintiff who is just righthaven-ing while subbing in prenda personnel as “reps” to likely avoid the actual “clients” from realizing what a racket this whole thing is.

      While everyone sees Steele trying to hide the truth from the courts, it feels like he’s trying to keep the “clients” at a distance too, lest they realize they have prison in the future and pull the plug on the whole thing.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Thanks Sausages! Mr. Wasinger now provides two pieces of evidence that Prenda Law INc.,/APLG does affix fraudulent electronic signatures to court documents. Mr. Syfert must love this. It gives great support that the Alan Cooper signature is a fraud.

      TAC?! I’m out of popcorn again! LMAO

      DTD :)

    • SJD says:

      Thanks! I’m writing an update featuring both the opposition from “white collar crime defenders” and Wasinger’s bomb.

  6. Irritated Troll Hater says:

    Regarding my comment above…… It was reported last weekend of Prenda changing their name. Yet, this notice of appearance was filed on 12-20-12. I would assume that if this notice was written and filed after Prenda’s name change, the notice would have their new name. Also, Steele’s name is in the notice?! For someone who claims he is not a part of Prenda, even to the courts, this is a red flag. Kynes, Markman & Felman basically puts it out their stating they will represent Prenda and Steele. If Steele was not a part of Prenda as he claims, he would not be in the notice. Maybe I’m reading too much into the notice. But to me this just shows proof of Steele being with Prenda.

  7. The Tod says:

    Dear Johnny Fraud,
    Some advice. Kick someones ass the first day or become someones bitch.
    -The Tod

  8. Irritated Troll Hater says:

    DTD, SJD, or someone…… Did I read too much into the notice with my comment or above, or is something to pass on to a judge?

    • SJD says:

      I would put faith in Graham. In addition to being a guy with the heart in the right place, he is a very good lawyer, so I’m sure he will handle the situation. And he most definitely reads comments, so any posted ideas won’t be wasted.

      • Irritated Troll Hater says:

        OK good. Thank you SJD. I hope Mr. Syfert does see my comment and or notices that in the file. Thank you again.

  9. Sausages says:

    This was posted by Raul on his twitter but I think it should be mentioned here as well for cross reference –

    Lutz tells Mr Wasinger on 12/20 that Mr. Webber is out of the country and can’t talk to him. Mr. Webbers twitter clearly stated he will be in LA (unclear if its travelling from another american city to LA or travelling from india to LA) which in context means he was in the states minimally since 12/17.

    more fun lies from Prenda. Poor Matt, he was just looking to make a buck and is facing his carreer being ruined permanently.

  10. Raul says:

    Just when you you think you have seen it all….. .

  11. [...] Prenda hires an outside counsel in Sunlust Pictures v. Nguyen case [...]

  12. sausages says:

    Syfert responds: http://ia701506.us.archive.org/11/items/gov.uscourts.flmd.274150/gov.uscourts.flmd.274150.46.0.pdf

    guys got some humor, had a good time reading this one from him.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      “Therefore, Defendant withdraws only that portion of the previous motion for sanctions against John Steele to the extent that it alleged Mr. Steele wrote Mr. Duffy’s eye surgery excuse letter. In withdrawing that portion of the first motion for sanctions, Defendant has learned the valuable lesson that the name assigned to a specific electronic device does not necessarily mean that a person committed a wrongful act.” Yes Mr. Syfert is a good read.

      DTD :)

  13. sausages says:

    glad he decided to include this:

    Gibbs blind carbon copies two e-mail addresses in his
    communication, so that Mr. Torres would not know that they were being sent to those
    particular individuals. He blind carbon copies jlsteele@6881forensics.com (John Steele,
    Illinois attorney, subject of this motion) and prhansmeier@6881forensics.com (Paul
    Hansmeier, Minnesota attorney (also licensed State of Illinois, Minnesota and others),
    former partner of John Steele)). Dkt #40, Ex. C (attached as Exhibit “A” to Exhibit “C”).

    it was a real palm to face moment reading that (in the exhibits, prior to Syferts motion for sanctions here). You know you read too much fightcopyrighttrolls when you talk to yourself when reading these things like — “Gibbs you moron your big boss Steele is trying to deny all involvement and you provide evidence that he is involved, herp derp derp..”

    • Anonymous says:

      This is my favorite part:

      “In withdrawing that portion of the first motion for sanctions, Defendant has learned the
      valuable lesson that the name assigned to a specific electronic device does not necessarily
      mean that a person committed a wrongful act. Defendant and Defendant’s counsel
      apologize to Mr. Steele for his accusation in that matter.”

      Hm…I wonder if the same thing applies to IP addresses…Hmmmmmm.

    • J.J. says:

      Has anyone actually been able to obtain proof that Hansmeier is licensed to practice law in these various states?

      • Anonymous says:

        I also would like to see some sort of credentials for the other Hansmeier, since all of their “evidence” and case is based on his expertise, of which no info to back up that expertise has been offered to date that I’m aware of.

  14. [...] 12/20/2012: Prenda hires an outside counsel in Sunlust Pictures v. Nguyen case. [...]

  15. [...] Posted: April 12, 2013 by SJD in Prenda, Sunlust fiasco Tags: 12-cv-01685, bittorrent, brett gibbs, copyright, copyright troll, Daniel Weber, Graham Syfert, john steele, Mark Lutz, paul duffy, prenda law, Sunlust Puctures, Sunny Leone 0 Thanks to Judge Wright’s resolution to get to the bottom of Prenda-related controversies, the poo-throwing among the Prenda gang members has recently escalated dramatically. In this light, yesterday’s event is not surprising. We covered the Sunlust fiasco (Sunlust Pictures v. Tuan Nguyen (12-cv-01685) extensively in December. This coverage started with a hilarious hearing where a stand-up comedian Mark Lutz tried to dupe Judge Skriven into believing that he was a Sunlust representative. Later we also wrote about apparent fact-bending in the series of declarations by the plaintiff and his lawyers, which resulted in a motion for sanctions against Gibbs, Steele, Duffy and Wasinger filed by the defendant’s attorney Graham Syfert. It is also worth mentioning that Prenda’s members (for the first time, to the best of my knowledge) have lawyered up. [...]

  16. [...] while a party (or a non-party) is represented, it cannot file pleadings pro se. Although Steele’s “white collar crime defending” attorneys indicated their intention to withdraw from the case (yet asking for an extension citing Brett [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s