Another day, another tantrum, but this time Brett Gibbs directs judges to this site
Oh my… Brett Gibbs continues to dig the hole he has willingly put himself in. Yet another reply to Morgan Pietz’s no-nonsense document was filed, and this filing was obviously crying for having a “Shrill voice” checkbox on the ECF submit page.
Full of ad hominem attacks and delusions, this is another attempt to assume an ostrich position after the blatant forum shopping has been made obvious and a suspicion of impudent, potentially criminal, Prenda’s fraud has surfaced.
The filing in question was a reply to Morgan Pietz’s “Supplement to Notice of related cases,” that was covered during the last week by:
- This site: Facing uncomfortable questions, Brett Gibbs throws a tantrum.
- ArsTechnica: Porn trolling firm dogged by identity theft allegations.
- TechDirt: Copyright Troll Prenda Law Dances Around The Simple Question: Which Alan Cooper Runs AF Holdings?
So what are Brett’s “arguments” this time? In the past, sometimes Brett Gibbs provided contestable, yet coherent thoughts, so he could be considered a somewhat serious adversary. This time I have a sheer disappointment and a bad aftertaste, even with the realization that Gibbs essentially works on our side by letting emotions reign in a court document.
- Morgan Pietz exceeded the mandated length of his notices. This is the only cohesive argument in this opposition.
- The cases are not related because… courts found joinder improper. If you don’t believe me, read this argument (the entire
tantrumdocument is embedded below): you won’t believe your eyes either. Certainly, Gibbs has to re-take his Bar exam, and maybe even the English mid-school exam: “related” and “joined” are not only different legal concepts, but by no means are associated words in English.
- Morgan Pietz is improperly pursuing publicity by feeding information to our sites. No comment. Does Gibbs believe in this nonsense himself?
Though the undersigned stands by every word he said therein, Mr. Pietz has committed a grievous ethical violation by not only publishing those emails as an exhibit to his Administrative Motion to Relate Cases in the Northern District and the instant Supplement to Notice of Related Cases, but also providing the email exchange to the fightcopyrighttrolls.com website.
Will someone with a patience of a nursery teacher explain to Brett that the document in question is public, available through Pacer and archive.org. Also, Morgan Pietz runs his very own, quite popular, website, and many filings can be found there. No, Morgan Pietz did not send me anything. There was no need to do that. Court filings, unless sealed, are in the public domain. Should I repeat it one more time? Public.
Moreover, Arstechnica published the emails in question independently approximately at the same time: this reputable media outlet always cites the original source of information. Fightcopyrighttrolls.com was not cited, which means that the author wrote his piece based on his own research, and I was not even the one who tipped him.
Since you know that, Brett, and premeditatedly attempt to mislead judges, I urge you to look into a mirror ASAP and check the length of your nose before going outdoors: I’m sure you’ll decide to stay home to avoid public embarrassment.
In the past Mr. Gibbs referred to our sites in footnotes, and a busy judge might or might not have followed the link (most likely not). This time he mentions fightcopyrighttrolls.com and dietrolldie.com in such an intriguing way, that I surely expect a visit from court clerks, and maybe judges. It was never a secret that one of our major goals is to widely publicize the bastardization of the judicial system, fraud, and extortion that copyright trolls commit: letting judges read about our grassroots resistance to the unprecedented law abuse is a nice early Christmas Gift. Thank you, Brett.
And the main questions, asked by Morgan Pietz, are not only unanswered, but not even mentioned! Forget the Bar exam, forget a mid-school English exam. Here we talk about basic language comprehension, which any citizen of the United States should master. For readers’ and Brett’s convenience, I repeat these questions:
- Is there another Alan Cooper, other than the gentleman in Minnesota who was John Steele’s former caretaker, who is or was the principal of AF Holdings, LLC and/or Ingenuity 13, LLC?;
- Will plaintiff’s counsel Brett Gibbs produce the original signature to the verified petition, supposedly executed by hand by “Alan Cooper” and notarized, which Mr. Gibbs stated, under penalty of perjury, that he has a copy of in his own possession and control? See In the Matter of a Petition by Ingenuity 13, LLC, E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:11-mc-JAM-DAD, ECF No. 1, 10/28/11;
- Will Mr. Gibbs identify his client contact at Ingenuity 13 and AF Holdings, given that Mr. Gibbs purported to speak with his “client” at Ingenuity 13 only two weeks ago?
Last, but not least: While Mr. Gibbs proudly signs his
tantrum document as a “Prenda Law, Inc.” employee, he (and the judges) should probably be reminded that this corporation is NOT in good standing with the state of Illinois, and its crooked bosses are in the process of pulling a machination — abandoning the old corporation (most likely, to avoid writing the annual report and to get rid of bad publicity) and creating another one — with the same people, same mailing address, same website and same goal — mass extortion.
TAC’s greeting to judges
Given my strong believe (as I speculated above) that we may welcome some court clerks/judges here soon, I think it is absolutely appropriate to pull a recent TAC’s comment from a different (yet related) discussion thread and embed it it here:
Greetings your Honor,
I would like to hope that after the name of this blog was brought up that you would come visit us poor ‘misguided’ souls.
Sadly, our character is being assassinated by the lawyers who are extorting cash from senior citizens, so one hopes you will consider the source.
This is one of several blogs/website/et al., where people targeted by copyright trolls can get an education about the scam.
We help Does to stop operating in fear, and understand the legal system and how it is being abused to allow them to be harassed.
I might be crass, foul mouthed, and a litany of bad things… but I don’t extort people by abusing the legal system.
I have little respect for the lawyers who run these scams, and it shows.
I have little respect for some Judges who feel these lawyers are doing nothing wrong, how one can say that when the Federal Courts are being cheated out of millions in filing fees boggles the imagination.
The sheer volume of information presented here, should raise serious concerns in your mind about the case before you. The unanswered questions, the blatant forum shopping, the abuse of the legal system, and the desire to not actually pursue these cases is obvious and clear.
I hope if you have any questions you’ll ask, we have a pretty good research “team” at your disposal. A majority of them are people who survived troll attacks, and now help others avoid falling prey to them. We are even more expert than the expert who signed off on the IP addresses at the heart of this case, we can back up our claims with fact… not sure about their expert being able to do such. But then we aren’t paid from each “settlement” reached like their expert, we have ethics and morals.
Enjoy your stay,
- On 12/14/2012 Morgan Pietz filed an ex parte application for leave to take limited discovery prior to rule 26(f) conference regarding Alan Cooper and to stay subpoena in one of the Ingenuity 13 v. John Doe cases, 2012-cv-04976.
|I learned about this motion from the Brett Gibbs’s Motion for Sanctions described in the next bullet point. Therefore, a quick question to Brett: should I be mad at Morgan Pietz for not sending this document to me directly in order to advance his publicity agenda? Morgan did not even notify me! This is outrageous that I had to spend $1.80 to fetch this document from Pacer. I consider joining your motion for sanctions and demanding my $1.80 back!|
- On 12/17/2012 Brett Gibbs filed a motion for sanctions against a “serial filer” (oh irony!) Morgan Pietz, basically reiterating the same delusional accusations as in the document embedded above (except, maybe, for the motion length, the only argument that has a merit, yet it does not warrant sanctions in any sane court). In this motion Brett not only prompts — he begs Judge Write to visit this site. A quick reminder: Judge Write has already labeled copyright trolls’ — including Prenda Law — practice as “extortion”) .
- On 12/19/2012 I checked my inbox:
- Last time I communicated with attorney Morgan Pietz by any means: 11/9/2012.
- Number of emails with Morgan Pietz on Alan Cooper subject: 0 (zero, cero, die Null, אֶפֶס, nil, صِفْر, nolla, ゼロ, ноль, 零).
You may accuse me of lying about it, Brett Gibbs, but I was never caught deliberately telling lies. You were — on multiple occasions. You are a miserable funny little man with a long nose, Brett Gibbs.
- On 12/20/2012 Judge Write issues an Order to show cause (lack of service):
Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why Defendant has not been timely served. Plaintiff has 7 days to comply with this order; or if Defendant have been served, Plaintiff has 7 days to file the proof of service. Failure to respond will result in dismissal of this action.
It seems to me that Judge Write, although clearly understanding what kind of serial fraudsters he deals with, does not want to get his hands dirty and address Coopergate. I hope I’m wrong and we will hear more from him or other judges “forum shopped” by Prenda and its fake clients.
Still I experience a slight Schadenfreude that these 7 days fall to the holiday week. Happy holidays, Pinocchio!
- On 12/21/2012 Judge Write denies Gibbs’s motion for sanctions mentioned in an earlier update to this post. Without explanation (does anyone really need one?). Without even waiting for Morgan Pietz to file his opposition. Quite telling.
- On 1/23/2013 DieTrolDie’s “torpedo” hit the target.
- 12/28/2012: Big news: Judge Wright has granted a discovery aimed at solving the Alan Cooper mystery (and, potentially, uncovering a fraud of epic proportions).
- 12/31/2012: The unbearable shrill of desperation. Brett Gibbs moves to disqualify Judge Otis Wright.
- 1/9/2013: Attorney for a fake plaintiff questions the existence of a defendant he is suing.
- 1/15/2013: Prenda’s motion to disqualify Judge Otis Write has been denied.
54 responses to ‘Another day, another tantrum, but this time Brett Gibbs directs judges to this site’
I really do hope that the Judge does come to visit, or that the clerk will share my greeting to the Judge.
In the meantime, pass the popcorn, watching Gibbs melting down is entertaining.
Added your greeting above 🙂
You know its all because I am jealous of you and DTD getting footnote mentions, I want to get my own. It’ll be like a secret award since I can’t mention it in my other lives….
In recognition of your service, TAC, it’s like one of those secret Intelligence awards:
Why thank you. 🙂
I know I am not on the same level as SJD or DTD, but a footnote would be a major feather in my cap… and piss off several trolls.
What is this Alpha Law firm?? 8 South 8th Street Minneapolis representing Guava LLC in a case against a Spencer Merkel case number 27-cv-12-20976 im looking at a subpoena from October 2012.
Is it affiliated with Prenda or is this a different law firm entirely who happens to represent the same client?
You need to know some Prenda history. In short, Alfa is a proto-Prenda. Michael Dugas, who represents Guava in MN, works for Alfa, yet de facto he is with Prenda (even his LinkedIn displays that). Alfa is run by Paul Hansmeier, who believed to be the mastermind behind all the Steele/Prenda/Guava scams. Steele is on the surface, but he consults with Hansmeier for every major thing.
This is the same type of scam as Guava and Arte de Oaxaca in Cook County, not different. Suspected collusion, but no “smoking gun.” So far.
I also want to get documents from this case, I have a solid (and unusual) idea for a dynamite post.
Guava is the same type of a “client” as “AF Holdings”: fictional. Don’t think in “normal” client-attorney terms: these guys are scammers an the familiar terms in the mirror are not as they appear.
Thanks for the 411, I did not make the connection when I was served an order from Troll Goodhue in Scottsdale, delivered in an envelope postmarked Minneapolis with a stamps.com zip code from Chicago.( http://tinyurl.com/c6ej9gn ) Copyrighttroll trolling sure can be confusing! 🙂
Wait a minute wait a minute wait-a-freakin-minute here. Do you mean to tell me that he is now arguing that the cases are not related because judges found joinder was not proper? On the very cases that they initially filed and tried to claim that joinder was proper??? Is that what I’m reading here? HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHA. …ha..no, seriously, that is maybe the funniest shit I’ve seen them pull yet. Unbelievable, asinine, and hilarious. It is a wonder to me that these clowns even graduated law school.
And it’s even worse: It is absolutely irrelevant. Apples and oranges. Joinder deals with multiple defendants lumped in a single lawsuit because they broke the law together, while related cases are… well, related (not even necessarily similar) cases: judges want to know about them in order to possibly assign those cases to the same judge — one that dealt with the same topic before, already made some research etc.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Chewbacca defense has more merit — it’s a disgrace for any attorney to knowingly use a [beyond] fallacious argument like this.
On the other hand, it’s a good news: it means that Gibbs is absolutely out of arguments, cornered, and must be dealt with carefully, since he may explode.
i too received this subpoena. what is this all about?
I am not a lawyer, but encourage everyone, especially those of you with legal experience, to search for terms along the lines of “Illinois corporation not in good standing personal liability”
The impression I get is that anyone acting on behalf of a corporation not in good standing, and that includes employees, not just officers, is exposed to personal liability for that corporation’s actions. This means Gibbs and perhaps every local counsel can potentially be named in counterclaims or class-action lawsuits (if I were local counsel for Prenda I would be double-checking the laws ASAP, we might see a mass-exodus over the next few weeks). Perhaps the Steven Yuens of the world will find something fun to do with this blunder.
In addition, it seems quite clear that a corporation not in good standing cannot execute a valid contract, so Prenda’s officers and employees are exposing themselves to lots of trouble for any work they have done and continue to do since Prenda’s good standing lapsed and remains lapsed. It also sounds like returning to good standing does NOT make up for any shenanigans that took place while not in good standing!
It will also be interesting to see what defenses Doe-defenders come up with to take advantage of this information. At this moment, perhaps there is a great opportunity for Does in the individual/named cases to file answers, counterclaims, or motions to dismiss that take Prenda to task for failing to be in good standing. With the changeover to Anti-Piracy Law Group, if Prenda is going to be allowed to dissolve, even if it was intentional, Steele may have just thrown away all the filing fees spent on his wave of individual and named defendant cases!
SJD, since you have a habit of sending welcome letters to new local counsels, you must have many of them in your address book already. How about sending Prenda’s a helpful note regarding their employer’s current lack of good standing? Some of these guys may be naive, they may be stupid, a few may even be genuinely evil, but I’ll be all of them are lawyer enough and have a strong enough sense of self-preservation to find the idea of “Personal Liability” utterly terrifying. You may have the means to trigger a collecting pants-soiling and send the rats over the sides of this sinking ship.
Great idea! I may try to compile and send out an email tonight.
If any officers of the court do wind up here, judges and clerks, I encourage you to take a look at one of Brett Gibbs’ earlier cases, Hard Drive Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-118 4:11-cv-01567 and the countersuit it spawned, Abrahams v. Hard Drive Productions, Inc. 3:12-cv-01006.
Mr. Gibbs’ client fraudulently claimed that Hard Drive Productions, Inc. was the registered copyright holder for the work “Amateur Allure – Samantha Saint.” Unfortunately for Mr. Gibbs and Hard Drive, the work had not actually been registered, and registration was likely not even applied for until 8 months after the case was filed. Copyright registration is a prerequisite for requesting statutory damages and attorneys fees under 17 USC § 412. The obvious conclusion is that Hard Drive’s entire case was built on fraud, and that by also using the BitTorrent swarm joinder theory that California courts have repeatedly rejected, his client used fraud and deception to avoid paying $40,950 in filing fees to the District Court. As their lawyer, he should have been more than able to read, understand, and comply with the letter of United States copyright law.
There is plenty more where that came from so if you guys have tired of Mr. Gibbs hysterics and shenanigans, do not hesitate to ask us for more information or dig deeper into this and other resources that catalog his abuse of the legal system.
Wow, this is great. Sounds like Brett is really coming unglued, and this breakdown is not exactly going to convince anyone the Alan Cooper scandal is a conspiracy theory. What a pathetic, weak, immature, unprofessional display. Knowing how much grief Gibbs has caused and how far he has bent the law, including blatant lies and fraud, I am enjoying every minute of this.
Pity play and pretending to be the victim are hallmarks of the sociopath. Come on Brett, this is just pathetic, you aren’t fooling anyone.
But still, SJD (in response to D’Oh).
I completely agree that Mr. Gibbs has either unlearnedly and/OR deceptively tried to confuse relation and joinder in legal terms.
But it is worth emphasizing that a copyright troll lawyer for porn purveyor plaintiffs is using improper joinder to support troll arguments. It’s in writing now. A Steele-Hansmeier/Prenda/“Anti-Piracy Law Group” lawyer is ACKNOWLEDGING that it’s IMPROPER to join multiple defendants in (porn purveyor) trolling cases. He cites improper joinder to argue his point.
Doesn’t this argue against every non-single Prenda (etc.) case? Can’t every Doe and Doe lawyer now point to this on the record? Gibbs (with Steele and others behind the scenes), one of the most active troll lawyers, responsible for filing dozens of cases, is recognizing improper joinder by porn purveyor plaintiffs:
“The foremost of these commonalities is the fact that each route ends in the same practical result of having the cases of multiple defendants being heard by the same judicial officer. The issue of whether joinder of multiple defendants is appropriate in online copyright infringement cases has been addressed several times in the District courts of this Circuit, and the District judges of this Circuit have consistently ruled against such joinder.”
Gibbs certainly made a decisive case that Mr. Pietz’ filing is too long.
I wonder if anyone at the courthouse has ever seen such a whining, circuitous, hysterical argument to win such a trivial point. If Pietz’ filing was technically too long, all he needed to do was state the facts in one or two sentences and be done with it. Most of the judges there already know what an idiot Gibbs is because they have previously dropkicked his cases into the garbage, so bringing up topics like copying and pasting filings, wasting judicial resources and trying to get publicity is really asking to get called out.
Also, big golf clap for Gibbs standing by his words in his emails—the ones where he carefully and painfully avoided saying anything of substance so there would be nothing incriminating to have to stand behind later.
I can taste Gibbs’ fear now, and it is delicious. Get ready for the party van Brett, they may just be packing for a visit!
With 1000+ spam messages a day it is not feasible for me to check spam folder for false positives anymore. This time I had some time, browsed through the spam folder and found this message: I rarely do it!
I do not pre-moderate (and virtually never post-moderate), so if you don’t see your comment immediately, it means it was falsely identified as spam. Sometimes changing wording/credentials works, sometimes it does not. In any case do not hesitate to drop me a quick email: if I did not clean the spam folder (and I don’t do it often), then it will take almost no effort to restore your comment.
I don’t know about your state, but in California a suspended corporation (one that hasn’t renewed its state registration timely) isn’t even allowed to file or continue a lawsuit against anybody, nor can its officers cure the problem by substituting themselves as plaintiffs. The suit would be dismissed. (I am not an attorney but I am a tax professional, and have filed these registrations for clients.)
On a completely insane tangent, what do you know about St. Kitts and Nevis?
To be more specific I am curious if any action has ever been taken against a tax scheme using shells based there and if it was successful. While I’ve learned more than I should have about copyright trolling, tax stuff is something I am not up to date on so any leads would be useful.
Huh one wonders if your corporation is suspended does that destroy the veil, as that is a function reserved for real companies….
I’ve actually been looking at this from the wrong perspective (legal settlements). It’s intellectual property that I should’ve been looking at. Tax treatment of intellectual property is a fucking NIGHTMARE. Legal settlements are child’s play when trying to determine whether a piece of IP is a capital asset or not. Good God. This is how Google got out of a buttload of taxes btw.
I’m still trying to parse the specifics but based on what I know right at this second, if AF Holdings and Ingenuity 13 are subsidiaries of the assignor (Heartbreaker Films and whatever smut peddler makes movies that it assigns to Ingenuity 13), the assignor can assign the copyright to an offshore subsidiary and legally avoid paying income taxes in the U.S. even if it conducts its activities in the U.S. (i.e. suing people for infringement AFAIK). Assign the copyright, since it’s self-created it’s not subject to a capital gains tax, then assignee sues, they rake in settlements, pay whatever local taxes, and defer the rest until repatriation (aka never). Now, whether a firm can pull this assignment game by assigning to a third-party (a firm in which it has zero equity interest) making it an arm’s length transaction (more accountant speak), well, I’m still going through that.
For a general look at off shoring, check out Nicholas Shaxson’s book “Treasure Islands” and website:
Sometimes these shell businesses are off shored in more than one place, taking advantage of U.S. state and European incorporation laws together with island ones. Off shoring tax liability may be different than U.S. financial collection reporting requirements. Since some troll groups can’t keep track of a few dozen cases with strict court response requirements, I’d guess some have sloppy accounting.
Google moved cash from Ireland to an island and stomped their tax bill down to next to nothing.
And then there was that bit I previously posted from the UK based tax firm who has an Alan Cooper, about paying profits as something else to people who are part of the company which lets them alter the tax rate on them. There are some sorts of “investment” income that isn’t taxed or taxed at a pittance aren’t there? Mittens Romney used it to pay an effective rate of like 13% even thou he pulled in millions from investments. I think this shell game is just someone being arrogant and trying to hold onto his ill gotten fortune and not pay his fair share. I mean its not like he subverted the legal system and avoided paying millions in filing fees… oh wait…
No one wants to see the trolls drown in their own bile, but I have to tell you all that the status of Prenda may be nothing more than a non-issue. If the firm disbands (as it apparently has done) then all the lawyers have to do is substitute themselves in under another firm name. This is done every day of the week and has nothing to do with the merits of a case. The lawyers aren’t the plaintiffs, so the plaintiffs and their purported claims of harm aren’t impacted one way or the other.
This is why I have seen posts indicating that the veil has been broken, and I’ve tried to point out that as much as I’d like to have Gibbs or Lipscomb or Steele (or even all of them) somehow penalized for it, nothing gets through to the lawyer in the way of sanctions unless opposing counsel rings the bell loudly about judicial abuse. Don’t get me wrong, sanctions do happen and lawyers do get penalized, but it is because of how and what they do in a case, and not always what their clients do.
True, a dismissal of a case by a judge, is a sanction. But the status of the law firm representing the plaintiff isn’t necessarily the reason for the dismissal. The lawyer can substitute in and substitute out throughout the course of a case with no impact to the case’s status.
Please always remember that I’m a regular follower to this blog and I’m deeply indebted for the knowledge I’ve acquired from it. In my opinion, based upon my prior knowledge in law (not a lawyer) and my experience in court rooms, I just don’t think that there will be that much fire and brimstone because of the Prenda reorganization. I wish, and hope, I am wrong.
I haven’t seen any case in which an attorney has subbed out for Prenda and subbed in for the “Anti-Piracy Law Group.” They continue to file documents with the courts, attend hearings, and do all their other bullshit as agents of Prenda Law, Inc., not the Anti-Piracy Law Group (less the demand letter with a cut and pasted letterhead). It’s been a while since I’ve taken contracts but even attorneys who are “of counsel” (i.e. Steele and Gibbs) for Prenda are still considered agents of Prenda, correct? And there’s Duffy who actually claimed he’s Prenda’s principal after Prenda had been put on Illinois’ shit list.
This is wonderful: watching the house of cards topple in flaming brilliance. I am anxious to see how it all turns out.
I just read/skimmed the Gibbs motion for sanctions against Morgan Pietz; wow, what a whiny 5 yr old…do judges actually tolerate those kinds of motions? #wastingeveryonestime
Judges are supposed to be even tempered and patient. Usually they characterize sanction-motions as attempts to get back at each other. A sanction-motion is kind of like a mini-action against the other side, within the original action. Gibbs is famous for this kind of thing, yelling, kicking and screaming that everyone is out to get him, and that this blog is a conspiracy of some kind. Typically, fruitcake lawyers like Gibbs, Lipscum & Duffy & Siegel take the position that the world will come to an end prematurely if they can’t have their way in court. We call this, in the business, the Cry Baby Syndrome Virus.
It’s unclear when Gibbs acquired the virus. Perhaps it’s when he met Mr. Pietz. Or perhaps some other time when he didn’t get his way. Maybe he had a bad childhood.
Gibbs isn’t a scumbag, he’s a funny little man.
Never stoop to their level!
They are balding little men who have never and will never amount to anything in life.
Agree. Edited accordingly. But I stand for “miserable.”
Gibbs has some more grief to worry about from Steven Yuen, who just filed an appeal of the judgement that had effectively ended Abrahams’ suit against Hard Drive Productions, Inc. Not the best week for Prenda’s little man in Cali.
Click to access gov.uscourts.flmd.274150.38.0.pdf
More fun stuff. I just saw on SJD’s twitter feed that Prenda, Duffy, Steele and Gibbs have retained BEST LAWYERS Tampa 2011 Lawyer of the Year for White-Collar Criminal Defense, for a case in Florida where they are facing sanctions.
Plenty of food for speculation there, sounds like full meltdown in effect at Prenda. This is the case where the judge literally called them out for attempted fraud, so I wonder if maybe there is also a criminal investigation in effect that we don’t know about yet.
Wow, motion for sanctions dropkicked into the garbage without Pietz even having to file a response.
Must be getting tough for Gibbs to keep it together. It would be sad if he wasn’t a greedy scumba. A man with terminal, untreatable cancer decides to devote the remainder of his life to pure greed, running an extortion scam. Too bad his brush with death didn’t motivate him to find some purpose for his remaining time. Now he must be realizing that his shenanigans may doom him to die in prison.
This is the first time I have heard about Gibbs having any terminal disease. I haven’t seen anything anywhere on this blog or elsewhere indicating he’s terminally ill. How did you make this discovery?
Without being specific, I’ve taken a look at the few photos that are circulating around the web with regards to “Brett Langdon Gibbs.” His physical appearance almost represents someone who’s not in good health. Again, simply by appearance in the photos, he almost looks like some of the clientele around the public health clinics in SF Bay Area who were drug abusers (mostly Meth, Heroin, Crack, even simple MJ).
Bear in mind that even those who don’t abuse drugs, but are seriously ill with cancer can have a similar appearance (emaciated, possibly referrable to a hospice). I’ve also seen those who simply are have terrible nutrition have this type of appearance.
As a reminder, I’m only making an educated guess by those photos and with regards to whom I’ve seen with that similar appearance.
By reading most of his official documents, he almost appears to have an erratic speech pattern of someone who’s just not cut out for legal work. “Right” or “wrong”, there’s much public evidence of why he’s not working for more “objective” purposes in the legal field.
In any case, he and his infamous cohorts will have more personal troubles inside and outside of the court shall these types of behaviors continue.
I don’t wish ill will or ill health on anyone. I just wish he’d take all of the energy he’s put into stealing from others, and put it to better use. Imagine how good of a lawyer he could be (or would have been) if he’d have focused his work in another area of law.
The one thing about him I’ve noticed is that in reading his pleadings, he tends to tell a lot of stories that have no real basis is law. Tantrums seem to be his shining moments. It’s almost like he enjoys telling the opposition off in the hopes that a judge will side with him. He’s an amazing piece of work.
He has cancer. See http://www.marinij.com/ci_13546376
HAS cancer? No, HAD, as in he is in remission (you’re never 100% cancer free), and that’s according to Brett Langdon Gibbs himself. Unless things have changed, of course. His blog, before he pulled it down but before that, I had a chance to read it and he was jumping for joy, stating that he’s been in remission. I don’t give a shit if that (his medical bills) was his motivation for making a deal with the devil. “Oh, feel sorry for me, I’m sick.” Nope, not when you fuck people out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, I feel ZERO pity. It’s not like I wish harm upon him, I just do not feel a single ounce of pity for someone who extorts money from the weakest members of our society, senior citizens, deaf people, blind people, and by far the weakest, dead people.
And his stories, well, he was a tax attorney before this which explains why email@example.com goes to a small city that just happens to be right near Mill Valley…who’d have guessed!? BIG BIG difference between a tax attorney and a CPA, Gibbs is no CPA and it’d take a CPA to pull the shit they’ve been pulling. He spews nonsensical bullshit because that’s all he has, bullshit. He doesn’t have a real argument so he just wastes the time of the Court by telling moronic stories that have zero bearing on the case. Reminds me of Marvin Cable’s filing, comparing himself to John Adams’ defense of the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre.
Courtesy of Raul’s Twitter feed we have more butthurt from Gibbs in AF Holdings v. Navasca. Here, Gibbs is trying to avoid getting stuck with having to post another undertaking. The facts that they were ordered to post one in another basically-identical case and failed to do so should not raise any red flags, naturally. Neither should the lack of cases taken anywhere near trial (Gibbs claims only around 2% of cases go to trial and it takes forever to get there, doesn’t seem to consider that with AF Holdings having 211 cases listed on RFCExpress, many with multiple defendants, beginning 18 months ago, statistically-speaking they should have at least four well on their way to trial.)
Anyway, another day another desperate attempt at damage control.
Click to access gov.uscourts.cand.254869.34.0.pdf
document as a “Prenda Law, Inc.” employee, he (and the judges) should probably be reminded that this corporation is NOT in good standing with the state of Illinois, and its crooked bosses are in the process of pulling a machination — abandoning the old corporation (most likely, to avoid writing the annual report and to get rid of bad publicity) and creating another one — with the same people, same mailing address, same website and same goal — mass extortion.
This whole “not in good standing” and status of Prenda Law hasn’t been shouted loud enough. I know there have been many attempts to connect the dots for these judges, but for some reason that alone hasn’t been sufficient. Very frustrating.
Pingbacks & Trackbacks