I Wanna See the Courthouse Movie! Updated Schedules, Links to Casefiles

[AntSucks]

Do Judges bang their gavel on zoom calls? I really want this case to end with a gavel bashing.

 

[Mikekeke]

Do Judges bang their gavel on zoom calls? I really want this case to end with a gavel bashing.

 

[HotDogJoe]

Do Judges bang their gavel on zoom calls? I really want this case to end with a gavel bashing.

I rule that the subpoena is quashed and plaintiff is fat. So be it!

 

[GiveItAResto]

What exactly is this 'recommendation' thing about? Judge Stein will review the case and then recommends the outcome to another judge? It seems so unnecessary

 

[FranksWirecutters]

What exactly is this 'recommendation' thing about? Judge Stein will review the case and then recommends the outcome to another judge? It seems so unnecessary

The guy that heard it the first time wasn't the official judge on the case. He was like (((becky))) from the temp agency who can't make the real decision. I'm sure he created an account and is now a lurker though.

 

[Cuphead]

What exactly is this 'recommendation' thing about? Judge Stein will review the case and then recommends the outcome to another judge? It seems so unnecessary

Judge Stein was the person who reviews the case for the official judge. He recommended the motion be granted, but was willing to give fatass's team another chance to make an argument which they didn't based on the filings.

Get ready for an Apollo 13 moment boyss.

 

[guest]

What exactly is this 'recommendation' thing about? Judge Stein will review the case and then recommends the outcome to another judge? It seems so unnecessary

Stein is a judge pro tem. They are attorneys in good standing who want to get experience as judges. Their rulings are only binding if both parties agree to it. It saves the court time and money for things that should normally be simple processes. A motion to quash is generally fairly simple. This case is exceedingly complex which is why Stein was unfamiliar with Krinsky and first amendment law. If you remember in the hearing he remarked that this is was a very interesting case and he was excited for the complexities.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/general-info/temporary-judges[/URL]

The Temporary Judge Program utilizes a panel of qualified, experienced and trained attorneys who volunteer their time to serve in various divisions of the Court as Temporary Judges.

As stated they can make binding decisions, but Stein didn't even consider it since it was so complicated. He compiles the evidence and then makes a recommendation. This helps to take the strain off the actual judges since the courts are so clogged as it is.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=ten&linkid=rule10_741[/URL]

~~ not a lawyer ~~

 

[Guest]

Stein is a judge pro tem. They are attorneys in good standing who want to get experience as judges. Their rulings are only binding if both parties agree to it. It saves the court time and money for things that should normally be simple processes. A motion to quash is generally fairly simple. This case is exceedingly complex which is why Stein was unfamiliar with Krinsky and first amendment law. If you remember in the hearing he remarked that this is was a very interesting case and he was excited for the complexities.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/general-info/temporary-judges[/URL]



As stated they can make binding decisions, but Stein didn't even consider it since it was so complicated. He compiles the evidence and then makes a recommendation. This helps to take the strain off the actual judges since the courts are so clogged as it is.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=ten&linkid=rule10_741[/URL]

~~ not a lawyer ~~

Thanks judge Stein

 

[guest]

Stein is a judge pro tem. They are attorneys in good standing who want to get experience as judges. Their rulings are only binding if both parties agree to it. It saves the court time and money for things that should normally be simple processes. A motion to quash is generally fairly simple. This case is exceedingly complex which is why Stein was unfamiliar with Krinsky and first amendment law. If you remember in the hearing he remarked that this is was a very interesting case and he was excited for the complexities.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/general-info/temporary-judges[/URL]



As stated they can make binding decisions, but Stein didn't even consider it since it was so complicated. He compiles the evidence and then makes a recommendation. This helps to take the strain off the actual judges since the courts are so clogged as it is.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=ten&linkid=rule10_741[/URL]

~~ not a lawyer ~~

Looking at case nr CPF20516998 he probaly has experience in that stuff.

 

[LockedHDD__Pot]

REMINDER: Judge Stein confirmed we're still hilarious: ("they reported Mr Tomlinson for impersonating himself while banned from twitter") "that's pretty funny"

 

[guest]

REMINDER: Judge Stein confirmed we're still hilarious: ("they reported Mr Tomlinson for impersonating himself while banned from twitter") "that's pretty funny"

Pretty sure it was Stav...

 

[Guest]

REMINDER: Judge Stein confirmed we're still hilarious: ("they reported Mr Tomlinson for impersonating himself while banned from twitter") "that's pretty funny"

It was his own lawyer that confirmed we are still hilarious not the judge

 

[Mitch Weaver]

It was his own lawyer that confirmed we are still hilarious not the judge

That’s even funnier, in fact it’s PFG

 

[AntSucks]

Stein is a judge pro tem. They are attorneys in good standing who want to get experience as judges. Their rulings are only binding if both parties agree to it. It saves the court time and money for things that should normally be simple processes. A motion to quash is generally fairly simple. This case is exceedingly complex which is why Stein was unfamiliar with Krinsky and first amendment law. If you remember in the hearing he remarked that this is was a very interesting case and he was excited for the complexities.

What exactly makes this case complex? It seems pretty simple to me.

1) Plaintiff is fat. Therefore of low moral character.

Motion denied.

Brinton overcomplicated it with his jibberjabber. The case he cited was a default judgement where the John Doe never even hired a lawyer and was never identified.

 

[Mikekeke]

What exactly makes this case complex? It seems pretty simple to me.

1) Plaintiff is fat. Therefore of low moral character.

Truth hurts.

 

[GiveItAResto]

Here's the thing, I let a lot of friends and strangers use my WiFi and laptop. You cannot prove otherwise. And I plead the 5th, so case dismissed

 

[Nick Gerlips]

how much longer is this court case going to last?

 

[FranksWirecutters]

how much longer is this court case going to last?

1941-1945 (approximately)

 

[UnPRePared]

Here's the thing, I let a lot of friends and strangers use my WiFi and laptop. You cannot prove otherwise. And I plead the 5th, so case dismissed

Tony Smith and Mike Rutherford have been hijacking my wi-fi for the last decade - no way to tell when they've been impersonating me.

Oopsie Doodles!

 

[TokenX]

Pretty funny that he wasted tens of thousands of dollars for no reason. Anyway.