Prenda Law Tries The 'I Know You Are, But What Am I' Legal Strategy
from the legal-childishness-at-work dept
Ah, Prenda Law. As you may recall, there’s been an ongoing fight over some Prenda cases in California, with the key players being Prenda lawayer Brett Gibbs, lawyer for some John Doe defendants Morgan Pietz, and judge Otis Wright. Oh yeah, and the possibly mysterious Alan Cooper, who may or may not be Prenda mastermind John Steele’s property caretaker. As you may recall, the caretaker Cooper had a lawyer file some documents in some Prenda cases involving shell companies AF Holdings and Ingenuity 13, suggesting that he was worried that Steele had faked his identity and claimed that Cooper was the CEO of those two companies, when they were really controlled by Steele.
While Cooper’s claims were not made by him in the California cases, Pietz brought them up in those cases, leading to a series of hissy fits from Gibbs. At first he refused to answer a simple question about who Alan Cooper really is, and then when ordered to do so by Judge Wright, asked that Wright be removed from the case for bias. If you thought that was the end of things, you don’t know Prenda Law, apparently. The latest filing from Gibbs takes legal childishness to altogether new levels, more or less trying to flip things around and claim that it’s really Pietz who is making up people who he represents. I’m not joking.
Thus far, Attorney Morgan Pietz has submitted filings in approximately twenty cases in the Central District on the basis of the fact that he represents the putative John Doe in this case. However, Mr. Pietz has not offered a single shred of evidence to support this assertion. As it stands, Mr. Pietz could very well be intervening in all of these cases for his own ends, with no real client that he is defending. If Mr. Pietz wishes to contest the plain, unambiguous evidence of bias that Plaintiff has demonstrated in its Motion for Disqualification, then Mr. Pietz should have to submit evidence that he is, in fact, representing the actual individual he claims to represent, and not merely inserting himself into cases on the pretense of representing that individual.
Every time we see another story about Prenda law, it seems to involve someone associated with the firm doing something incredibly unprofessional and childish, in a manner suggesting they think they’re a hell of a lot smarter than everyone else and are actually pulling something over on the world — when the reality is that all of their moves seem ridiculously transparent.
Filed Under: alan cooper, brett gibbs, copyright, copyright trolls, john steele, morgan pietz, otis wright
Companies: af holdings, ingenuity 13, prenda, prenda law
Comments on “Prenda Law Tries The 'I Know You Are, But What Am I' Legal Strategy”
Ahh, Prete^H^Hnda Law...
Anyone else think they should change their name from “Prenda” to “Pretenda”? Just read it in the “It’s-a me, Mario!” voice:
“We pretend-a to a-know what we’re a-doing!”
Re: Ahh, Prete^H^Hnda Law...
I demand a nickel
Prove you're John Doe's lawyer
Prove your John Doe’s lawyer by providing us his real name, address, phone number, bank account and credit card information.
If you don’t, you must be just some lawyer off the street who has too much time on your hands and took on a case just for fun.
Re: Prove you're John Doe's lawyer
From a psychology standpoint, this appears to be a classic case of projecting. Here we have lawyers who are willing to do anything to subvert justice without any care for honesty or legality and automatically assume all other lawyers must be the same. It’s also an attempt at misdirection, to get eyes looking where you want them instead of where they should be, typical sleight of hand tricks one expects from a magician, not lawyers. They don’t seem to realize that it’s far too late for that. The judge has already seen the man behind the curtain.
Be proud, Charles Carreon, for your Effect lives on.
Re: Re:
CC even thinks to himself, “man, these guys are f’ed up.”
Re: Re: Re:
Nah, he’s probably thinking to himself ‘Why didn’t I think of that?!’
If I was Pietz, I’d hire a detective to follow Gibbs in case he tries to skip the country. The guy’s backed into a corner and knows it, and he’s too much of a sleazeball to go down fighting.
Re: Re:
Pietz should not have to spend his (or his client’s) money to do that.
If the real possibility exists, could the court order Gibbs to turn over his passport to the court?
Re: Re: Re:
In a civil trial? I doubt it.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
But in a criminal extension? Sure!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“Fraud on the court” is in play. There may be contempt charges or more.
Re: Re: Re:
I’d just like to point out Mr. Lutz Pretenda’s debt collector/1099 company representative who knows nothing about the companies he’s appeared in court representing has already sold off most of his possession from his FL home and fled to Mexico.
It might be high time that someone freeze the assets of Pretenda and the new company name, grab some passports, and start demanding answers to very serious questions.
Mr. Steele publicly stated he was making millions, and I am willing to bet most of that money is in St.Kitts/Nevis where the shell companies are set up.
10,000 daily in sanctions
Perhaps that would be incentive enough to answer the question.
I can’t help but think that at the end of the day it would be pretty freaking amusing to be in Prenda’s cross-hairs.
Nigel
Re: 10,000 daily in sanctions
It might not be collectible. But the court could hold him in contempt, and in jail until he answers. Things like that have been done before by judges.
What are the chances?
What are the chances that this strategy will actually distract the court and Gibbs won’t have to answer the question of who is Alan Cooper?
Re: What are the chances?
Well that depends, has the judge in this case taken massive amounts of drugs recently, and/or suffered extensive cranial trauma? If not, then I really doubt this newest bit of smoke and mirrors will actually work.
But that does raise the interesting question...
If a defendant wishes to remain anonymous, how does the court verify that the lawyer who claims to be representing them really is representing them?
Re: But that does raise the interesting question...
If he’s doing a good job defending, does it matter? 🙂
But seriously, I suspect the court would take his word that he is actually defending the John Doe as sufficient.
I also suspect that they would probably take Gibb’s word as sufficient as well that Alan Cooper is a different Alan Cooper then John Steeles’ caretaker – the problem is that he won’t come out and say it which is probably why he is being pressed on it.
Re: Re: But that does raise the interesting question...
The problem for Gibbs is, John Steele’s caretaker has filed statements saying Steele told him to call if anyone contacted Cooper asking about John’s fake companies… Now why would a property manager need to be in the loop on the property owner’s extortion scam? It sounds super-suspicious, and the bottom line is if there is a real Alan Cooper in Saint Kitts and Nevis it should be easy enough for him to file even just a statement saying he exists, especially if he expects to enjoy the use of the US courts. Forget invasive discovery or document filing requirements, why isn’t there some person who will least claim to be the Alan Cooper at issue? Think of how stupid this defendant’s attorney would look if Gibbs just busted out some simple proof the real Alan Cooper exists and made all of these accusations disappear. The fact that he won’t do this when it would only be to his and his plaintiff’s advantage and the defendant’s disadvantage says it all.
Re: But that does raise the interesting question...
Maybe the defense counsel can identify their anonymous client to the court and only to the court. The client can remain unknown to the plaintiff. That could satisfy the court that the defendant is indeed real.
The plaintiff in this case wants to discover the identify of the defendant. If the plaintiff can stop playing games like “where’s the CEO?” and “I know you are . . .”, then they could get on with starting a real litigation against the defendant and then discover defendant’s identity during actual litigation.
Alas, the plaintiff never had any actual intention of litigating.
Re: Re: But that does raise the interesting question...
And watch Prenda make up some crap how they “already told the Judge who he is (He’s ALAN COOPER of course!)” so they don’t have to say it again……
Re: Re: But that does raise the interesting question...
Also, “where’s the CEO” isn’t a game.
It’s a very VERY serious issue which could get a lot of Prenda’s lawyers disbarred and in deep deep shit with the IRS, the SEC and a bunch of others…..
I say we combine the forces of today’s modern evil and have a TSA agent do a full cavity search of Steele to see if Alan is hiding up there…..
Sounds familiar
“… evidence that he is, in fact, representing the actual individual he claims to represent, and not merely inserting himself into cases…”
Cue the Monty Python bit:
M: “If you’re arguing, I must have paid.”
A: “Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.”
A few, not so, good men
Gibbs: You want answers?
Pietz: I think I’m entitled to them.
Gibbs: You want answers?
Pietz: I want the truth!
Gibbs: You can’t handle the truth!
=P
Im going to wake up
And this will have been a Three Stooges movie playing in the background to which there is a good ending… it wasn’t real.
But alias…. its very very real… and wont end soon enough.
The dream of a dream is nice to dream about though.
Re: Im going to wake up
an afterthought
Wouldnt it be funny if there was a Craigslist ad:
Looking for an Alan Cooper.
Cushy CEO position awaits.
Of course the part that kills me the most about this circus act, is that despite apparently being smart enough to make it through law school, Prenda’s lawyers actually seem to think that all this song and dance is doing anything other than making everyone even more sure that the ‘mystery CEO’ is in fact a complete fabrication.
Re: Re:
No its keeping the doors of their extortion mill open another day.
The new company name they moved onto after not filing the yearly report with IL for Pretenda, has been sending out demand letters under the new name to unmasked Does.
Mind you some of the names they hold are from a case where they Judge told them they could not use them… and funny those names have been used.
The money rolls in, is quickly offshored, and the empty husk of the company will have nothing for anyone to pick over.
Re: Re: Re:
Hmm, should something like that happen, I would hope that a judge would be able to threaten them with either A) Jail time, or B) Extensive monetary fines. I bet if they were presented with those two options that money would come stateside mighty quick.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thats the problem. They are getting the names in cases scattered across the country. They dismiss the cases, and just run the settlement machine. No oversight, no one to complain to (who will bother to listen), and the people making all of this public are all hiding behind nyms because we can’t afford the hassle of Pretenda launching a campagin against us.
Its so very hard to get a Judge to accept someone filing anonymously, let alone get them to consider the facts reported to them.
If you’re wondering why Mike Masnick is always writing about cases like this… it’s because he hates copyright and hates it when copyright law is enforced.
You’re welcome.
Re: Re:
“If you’re wondering why Mike Masnick is always writing about cases like this… it’s because he hates copyright and hates it when copyright law is enforced.”
Aside from being a troll, what’s your point?
Re: Re:
If you’re wondering why the same troll can’t explain the legal failings of his heroes, it’s because calling his bluff makes his dick sad.
Re: Re:
Ohai Mr. Gibbs… glad you could take time to bring your temper tantrum online.
Problem with Argument
If Gibbs is saying that Pietz is making up clients, doesn’t that mean that the cases are targeting imaginary people from the start.
[Insert Imaginary Character’s Name Here] being sued for copyright infringement of [Insert Imaginary Character’s Name Here] movie.
Re: Problem with Argument
Somehow, I don?t believe he thought his cunning stunt all the way through.
Re: Re: Problem with Argument
Well a cunning plan that results in a crisis requires another cunning plan of course.
Should we send Gibbs two pencils and a pair of underpants perhaps?
Why hasn’t Brett Gibbs had his attorney’s license revoked by the state bar? Because, surely, he’s crossing some ethical line that lawyers should never cross. You would think that the American Bar Association would pull him in for a hearing.
It’s the old legal strategy of …
If the law is on your side, pound on the law.
If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts.
If neither facts nor law are available, pound on the table.
… with a new twist:
If you’re in way, way, waay over your head, and the stress has blown most mental fusing, pound that career to bits on the rocks.
If I were Cooper, and Gibbs and Steele insisted I am the CEO, then I would just say, “Fine, you’re fired.”
Re: Re:
Like the end of RoboCop. “Dick, you’re FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED!”
This time I’m late to the feast 🙂 Ohai TAC BTW.
Re: Re:
Ohai SJD.
So odd seeing the party kick off here…
I’d laugh if:
The judge dismissed this whole mess with prejudice and throwing Pretending Inc. in jail for abuse and contempt.
Will the real Alan Cooper please stand up?
“I am Alan Cooper.”
“No, I am Alan Cooper.”
“I am Alan Cooper.”
“I am Alan Cooper.”
Just doesn’t have the same ‘machismo’ as “I am Spartacus”….