I Wanna See the Courthouse Movie! - Part 3

[guest]

You're right, but I don't think it's about Pat's choices in the matter. Quasi has the right to know about Pat's financial position, in order to both recover his money and treat Pat fairly in the eyes of the law. I believe whatever deal he comes up with has to meet the approval of a judge as being not too unfair to Pat; he can't just order Pat to donate a kidney.

So, was the SFWA money a gift? A loan? Was it paid to Pat or straight to the lawyers? Is there some sort of fringe benefits tax due on it; and is that up to the SFWA to pay, or Pat? If Quasi decides that Pat gets $120K+ every year in fringe benefits from the SFWA, plus his insurance income, it'll produce a repayment plan that'll fuck Pat hard. If Quasi comes up with a deal based solely on Pat's insurance income but it leaves out $40k of IRS fringe benefits tax which Pat needs to pay, that'll also fuck over Pat. Same if Quasi's deal leaves out Pat's repayments on his $120k loan from the SFWA.

I'm assuming by the way that Jerry caved on this, that he's already got the info.

Just noticed this post and wanted to add, what could Pat's diseased, alcoholic, diabetes, kidney get on the organ market anyway? 15 bucks for a study maybe, otherwise it's as useless to anybody as it will be to him in 3-4 years.

 

[Caverlock]

Just noticed this post and wanted to add, what could Pat's diseased, alcoholic, diabetes, kidney get on the organ market anyway? 15 bucks for a study maybe, otherwise it's as useless to anybody as it will be to him in 3-4 years.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars in lamp oil and scrimshaw opportunities.

 

[FurBurger]

Hundreds of thousands of dollars in lamp oil and scrimshaw opportunities.

I'm not sure just swallowing a bunch of it qualifies him as a sperm whale.

 

[guest]

WWAW this?

Is Quasi fucked? Pat is obviously a worthless human with nothing of value in his possession

 

[SFWA liaison]

entertain us, Jerry

 

[Jenna]

Hey guys, let me just say I got a lot of friends, I know a lawyer over there in California who knows Jerry through conferences and such. Guy's a shark, believe you me. Funny too, he'd totally get our sense of humor and will probably become a Patposter after all this is done. I can't reveal my sources but let's just say I'm feeling good about Jerry...

 

[Cuphead]

WWAW this?

Is Quasi fucked? Pat is obviously a worthless human with nothing of value in his possession

Quietly atalker. Quietly is the key

 

[FurBurger]

WWAW this?

Is Quasi fucked? Pat is obviously a worthless human with nothing of value in his possession

No, he's fine. JJ will have subpoenaed all of Pat's sources of funds - publishers, his bank, the IRS, his agent, whatever insurance he sells for a living, that shitty UFO show he was on - and the SFWA are the only one who pushed back on admitting a financial relationship with Pat.

At some point he'll go back to court with a plan for Pat to pay Quasi back, the court will rubberstamp it as Pat's not participaTing in the process and so won't object, and hopefully the court will throw in a bench warrant so that Pat and Nikki can be arrested for contempt of court and dragged to California to explain themselves to the judge. I'm assuming Pat's website, Instagram and Twitter accounts will be transferred to Quasi on or around that date.

Also, Admin's suggested there's something going on with the SFWA that meant JJ could drop the SFWA subpoena, so we've got that to look forward to.

As for Pat not having any assets, Quasi will also get a taste of any future earnings; so as long as Pat or Nikki's eating Quasi will get a taste.

 

[Harry Powell]

No, he's fine. JJ will have subpoenaed all of Pat's sources of funds - publishers, his bank, the IRS, his agent, whatever insurance he sells for a living, that shitty UFO show he was on - and the SFWA are the only one who pushed back on admitting a financial relationship with Pat.

At some point he'll go back to court with a plan for Pat to pay Quasi back, the court will rubberstamp it as Pat's not participaTing in the process and so won't object, and hopefully the court will throw in a bench warrant so that Pat and Nikki can be arrested for contempt of court and dragged to California to explain themselves to the judge. I'm assuming Pat's website, Instagram and Twitter accounts will be transferred to Quasi on or around that date.

Also, Admin's suggested there's something going on with the SFWA that meant JJ could drop the SFWA subpoena, so we've got that to look forward to.

As for Pat not having any assets, Quasi will also get a taste of any future earnings; so as long as oPat or Nikki's eating Quasi will get a taste.

Does Quasi really have a taste for burned Wellington though?

 

[BakersfieldChimp]

No, he's fine. JJ will have subpoenaed all of Pat's sources of funds - publishers, his bank, the IRS, his agent, whatever insurance he sells for a living, that shitty UFO show he was on - and the SFWA are the only one who pushed back on admitting a financial relationship with Pat.

At some point he'll go back to court with a plan for Pat to pay Quasi back, the court will rubberstamp it as Pat's not participaTing in the process and so won't object, and hopefully the court will throw in a bench warrant so that Pat and Nikki can be arrested for contempt of court and dragged to California to explain themselves to the judge. I'm assuming Pat's website, Instagram and Twitter accounts will be transferred to Quasi on or around that date.

Also, Admin's suggested there's something going on with the SFWA that meant JJ could drop the SFWA subpoena, so we've got that to look forward to.

As for Pat not having any assets, Quasi will also get a taste of any future earnings; so as long as Pat or Nikki's eating Quasi will get a taste.

They could force Pat to turn over his social media accounts?

 

[guest]

They could force Pat to turn over his social media accounts?

I can't see Pig being forced to liquidate his stealthygeek brand, let alone transfer it to Quasi's lawyer. I don't think it's that easy to fuck with debtors.

 

[FurBurger]

They could force Pat to turn over his social media accounts?

It's an asset; I don't see why Quasi couldn't get it evaluated and claim it.

I can't see Pig being forced to liquidate his stealthygeek brand, let alone transfer it to Quasi's lawyer. I don't think it's that easy to fuck with debtors.

Is it his brand, though? Is it on the front of his books? Does it appear under his name on his TV appearances? Has he argued on his blog that losing his Twitter "will ultimately have negligible impact on my success as an author, reputation, or future prospects. If anything, it’s made me even more well-know in the circles that matter professionally"?

Sorry, that last question was me being a rhetorical asshole; reading his blog must have rubbed off on me.

That said, remember that he's not just an ordinary debtor: he's someone who's ignored a court order and very publicly pissed that money up against the wall on holidays rather than pay what he was ordered to, and has used his social media accounts to advertise that fact. Taking his socials - when he's admitted that they aren't necessary to his business, and when the companies that run them are located in the same jurisdiction as the court, and are thus easy to get to - seems doable. Plus, by not participaTing in the proceSs Pat doesn't get a say in how or what order he's fucked.

Besides, I think most of Pat's income comes from his medical insurance sales, and that will no doubt have shown up when Quasi subpenissed the IRS. If his writing is just a hobby that turns a buck here or there, and his socials aren't needed for it, then I don't think he's got much of a claim to them.

Finally, it looks like you're new; so you might not know that Pat's Bookscan report got leaked, and his last book only sold something like 250 copies. He's not exactly an author in the classic sense.

EDIT: Pat's sales, assume 10% of the sale price (not RRP) as income, and he had a $10k advance for each of his three Tor books which have to "earn out" first:

 

[guest]

@FurBurger I fully agree with all the other things you said except being able to commandeer a private debtor's social media. I've just never heard of that happening and it rubs me the wrong way.

I found a case about business social media accounts that may have doubled as personal and Pat would be able to overcome the reasoning that led to their being seized. [URL]https://casetext.com/case/in-re-ctli-llc[/URL]

Don't get me wrong, Jen should certainly make some argument. Just Pat finding out about it will injure my ribs, but I can't see it prevailing.

Pat's lack of participation won't be of import, the judge will argue basics for him. This isn't a business, so any judge can point some of this out:
- Pat has some privacy rights with Twitter DMs and similar, maybe he was sexting trannies;
- As a boomer judge with a limited Facebook presence, evaluating social media accounts as assets seems an NFT-like scam;
- People befriended him on social media on the premise that it's him, so you can't keep his friends;
- You can't have his previous tweets because they're about him;
- You can't have his password, and it looks like he won't cooperate at this stage;
- He uses social media to stay in touch with people, it's a weird, unnecessary hardship to impose;
- He may use social media to get timely news of public interest, taking that away is bad.

If the judge buys the argument that it's something of value, to keep things reasonable Jen would still have to limit his proposal to forcing him to give up only his specific Twitter handle - some arrangement where he changes it while someone else grabs it. But it would also throw off an evaluation based on followers and current reach, so if it's not worth much then why seize it?

 

[Udders]

@FurBurger I fully agree with all the other things you said except being able to commandeer a private debtor's social media. I've just never heard of that happening and it rubs me the wrong way.

I found a case about business social media accounts that may have doubled as personal and Pat would be able to overcome the reasoning that led to their being seized. https://casetext.com/case/in-re-ctli-llc

Don't get me wrong, Jen should certainly make some argument. Just Pat finding out about it will injure my ribs, but I can't see it prevailing.

Pat's lack of participation won't be of import, the judge will argue basics for him. This isn't a business, so any judge can point some of this out:
- Pat has some privacy rights with Twitter DMs and similar, maybe he was sexting trannies;
- As a boomer judge with a limited Facebook presence, evaluating social media accounts as assets seems an NFT-like scam;
- People befriended him on social media on the premise that it's him, so you can't keep his friends;
- You can't have his previous tweets because they're about him;
- You can't have his password, and it looks like he won't cooperate at this stage;
- He uses social media to stay in touch with people, it's a weird, unnecessary hardship to impose;
- He may use social media to get timely news of public interest, taking that away is bad.

If the judge buys the argument that it's something of value, to keep things reasonable Jen would still have to limit his proposal to forcing him to give up only his specific Twitter handle - some arrangement where he changes it while someone else grabs it. But it would also throw off an evaluation based on followers and current reach, so if it's not worth much then why seize it?

The funniest thing to come out of this would be Pat having to re-establish himself under a new twitter handle but can't find a good one since the impostor childs used them all.

 

[FurBurger]

@FurBurger I fully agree with all the other things you said except being able to commandeer a private debtor's social media. I've just never heard of that happening and it rubs me the wrong way.

If it was "PatrickSTomlinson", I'd agree with you. I think the fact that it's stealthygeek makes that less certain.

I found a case about business social media accounts that may have doubled as personal and Pat would be able to overcome the reasoning that led to their being seized. https://casetext.com/case/in-re-ctli-llc

TL,DR - but I'm going to mouth off anyway. (I will read it later, promise)

Don't get me wrong, Jen should certainly make some argument. Just Pat finding out about it will injure my ribs, but I can't see it prevailing.

Pat's lack of participation won't be of import, the judge will argue basics for him. This isn't a business, so any judge can point some of this out:

You are asking a lot of judges who - to quote Mr Patrick S. Tomlinson, Esq - don't know shit about the internet. If JJ makes a good argument ("this is a free account on a free social media site, obtained by The Debtor at no cost that by The Debtor's own admission contributes nothing to his income, and that has been used to both harass my client and his customers and flaunt The Debtor's absolute contempt of this court") and there's nobody other than the judge in Pat's corner, I think it'll get over the line.

- Pat has some privacy rights with Twitter DMs and similar, maybe he was sexting trannies; People befriended him on social media on the premise that it's him, so you can't keep his friends; You can't have his previous tweets because they're about him;

Quasi's entrusted his lawyer with his own anonymity; so get that lawyer to delete Pat's friends, inbox and previous tweets and not pass on the contents. Shit, hire Brinton to do it, he needs a gig.

- As a boomer judge with a limited Facebook presence, evaluating social media accounts as assets seems an NFT-like scam;

I.E. they're worthless. Put a $50 valuation on it, maybe hire some social media evaluator to back that up. Let Pat hire his own expert if he disagrees.

Otherwise you've discovered an incredible loophole in bankruptcy law - if the judge doesn't personally know how to evaluate the worth of an asset, the debtor gets to keep it, irrespective of whatever expert opinions have been presented to the court. Is the judge an expert on Dutch Impressionist paintings? Then I guess they're immune to bankruptcy procedures. Cars, yachts, planes, second hand books; bankruptcy proceedings will end up squabbling over the contents of the debtor's fridge, assuming His Honor can remember what a pint of milk costs.

- You can't have his password, and it looks like he won't cooperate at this stage;

Don't need it if his honor tells Twitter to change the password and email address. That would be like subpoenaing Google for Quasi's details, and expecting Quasi to fill out the response.

- He uses social media to stay in touch with people, it's a weird, unnecessary hardship to impose; - He may use social media to get timely news of public interest, taking that away is bad.

He's got Facebook, and Twitter accounts are free; so both of those hardships can be fixed by The Debtor in moments at no cost. Also, just looking at Pat is a weird, unnecessary hardship to impose; so it's not without precedent.

Lastly, surely Pat needs some sort of punishment for contempt of court; and taking away some of his toys would be a good start.

 

[SmellenShoehorn]

Otherwise you've discovered an incredible loophole in bankruptcy law - if the judge doesn't personally know how to evaluate the worth of an asset, the debtor gets to keep it, irrespective of whatever expert opinions have been presented to the court. Is the judge an expert on Dutch Impressionist paintings? Then I guess they're immune to bankruptcy procedures. Cars, yachts, planes, second hand books; bankruptcy proceedings will end up squabbling over the contents of the debtor's fridge, assuming His Honor can remember what a pint of milk costs.

Ryan Gosling's likeness is worth millions, but regardless of how much debt he might rack up and how sternly (hoo hoo) he refuses to pay, a judge won't award you his face.

 

[guest]

Just because Twitter is Pat's life doesn't mean it's worth anything to Quasi who just wants to get paid, unless one of us offers to buy it.

 

[Mitch Weaver]

Just because Twitter is Pat's life doesn't mean it's worth anything to Quasi who just wants to get paid, unless one of us offers to buy it.

@CarolMaxheinie you’re up.

 

[NoBacon]

Just because Twitter is Pat's life doesn't mean it's worth anything to Quasi who just wants to get paid, unless one of us offers to buy it.

I’d like to open the bidding at TEN UNITED STATES DOLLARS!

 

[FurBurger]

Ryan Gosling's likeness is worth millions, but regardless of how much debt he might rack up and how sternly (hoo hoo) he refuses to pay, a judge won't award you his face.

Nobody's asking for Pat's face, child. And there's plenty of wrestlers who've been denied the use of their wrestling name and persona after Vince put his foot down.