Charles Carreon Keeps Digging; Now Targeting Lawyer Who Is Seeking Legal Fees [Updated]

from the digging-digging-digging dept

If you haven’t had your Charles Carreon fill in a while, here you go. Last we’d heard, despite promising to go after a parody blogger who was mocking Carreon (and threatening the blogger’s employer), when that blogger filed for declaratory judgment, Carreon first avoided being served, and upon finally being served almost immediately capitulated and promised not to sue. However, what Carreon did not apparently realize was that he left himself open to having to pay the legal fees from the other side, which has led to an ongoing fight in which the lawyers, Paul Levy and Cathy Gellis, are seeking upwards of $40,000 — a number that seems to keep going up the more and more Carreon tries to fight their every move.

The latest is that Carreon has asked the court for a 120-day extension in responding to Levy’s motion for fees. Asking for an extension is not uncommon, and it’s often granted — but the reasoning here is a bit out of the ordinary (which, perhaps, should not be unexpected given who is involved). Rather than citing significant other cases or workload that might get in the way, or highlighting why the basic requirements in responding to the motion require more time, Carreon seems to be trying to smear Paul Levy and his employer, Public Citizen (full disclosure: Levy is a friend, and has, at times, represented this site against threats). Much of Carreon’s argument is this bizarre conspiracy theory suggesting that Levy trolls the internet seeking cases where he can file for declaratory judgment, and then tries to cash in on legal fees. He cites two (two!) cases where Levy has, in the past, sought legal fees and lost. And then suggests he needs more time to research all of this more, including seeking discovery from Levy and finding groups to file amicus briefs (“friend of the court” briefs) on his behalf.

To put it mildly, this is crazy. Carreon seems to be trying to turn a case in which he was clearly the initial bully, and got called on it, into one where he tries to sift through documents concerning the lawyer who called his bluff. Basically, it’s back to Carreon’s game plan throughout this mess: when in trouble, keep digging — and, as part of that digging, accuse everyone against you of somehow doing something nefarious. In the past, this has included accusations against bloggers and press who were covering his saga (including threats to sue some of them), and now it’s extended to threats to drag Levy into a time consuming and meaningless discovery process. Levy filed a short response, noting that he has no problem giving Carreon a 30 day extension, but going on a fishing expedition via discovery makes no sense as they’re just trying to settle whether or not Carreon needs to pay legal fees. Furthermore, the search for amici to support him is no excuse for asking for an extension.

Carreon then responded not by countering any of the legal points that Levy raised concerning the extension or discovery, but simply by playing a weird game of “gotcha” in which he wants to call the court’s attention to the fact that, in his reply, Levy decided not to even bother responding to Carreon’s silly assertions about Levy deliberately trolling the internet for cases where he could seek legal fees (based on the two cases Carreon found where Levy sought legal fees).

Plaintiff’s counsel’s silence regarding the judicial rebuffs his arguments suffered in the Eleventh and Fourth Circuits speaks volumes.

Mr. Levy is simply engaging in a form of forum shopping, eagerly seeking and recruiting clients who create gripe sites to file preemptive declaratory relief actions in various venues, hoping to coerce settlements from vulnerable defendants, or perhaps to lead some court into error by failing to disclose his prior defeats on the very same issue in other jurisdictions

Of course, this ignores a much more plausible scenario (one that happens to be true). As is Public Citizen’s charter, Levy and others in the Public Citizen litigation group have a core focus, which is that the group “specializes in cases involving regulation, consumer rights, access to the courts, open government, and the First Amendment, including Internet free speech.” Basically, they look for cases that help promote the public good on those particular issues. As such, they are certainly one of the leading groups that people reach out to when they are threatened unfairly. And, based on that, it’s not surprising that, at times, this leads to cases in which it is appropriate to seek legal fees. Sometimes they will get those legal fees, and sometimes they will not.

What that has to do with whether or not Carreon should pay up legal fees for his actions is anybody’s guess.

Oh, and I think that we (and a few other sites still talking about Carreon) get a bit of a backhanded mention in this one:

Defendant is not a public figure, no issue of public importance has been addressed, and the matter has not been found newsworthy except in online publications desperate for pseudo-legal content.

Are we an “online publication desperate for pseudo-legal content”? We have more than enough content, honestly, and I could do without any more Carreon filings, but he just keeps digging, so the topic just keeps flowing.

Oh, and despite Carreon’s claims that Levy is all too eager to jump into these kinds of cases, filing declaratory judgments and then seeking legal fees, I will note that my own personal experience with Levy was that he has, multiple times, steered me away from going that route. If his ultimate goal was to file as many such cases as possible, I doubt that would be the case.

Update: And… between me writing this story and publishing it, the judge has quickly rejected most of Carreon’s arguments, giving him 60 days as an extension but saying no to the discovery request, saying simply:

Defendant’s request for extensive discovery would amount to a mini-trial on plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees. Such extensive discovery is unnecessary and a waste of resources.

“Unnecessary and a waste of resources” seems like a phrase that can be applied to an awful lot of Charles Carreon’s recent activities.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Charles Carreon Keeps Digging; Now Targeting Lawyer Who Is Seeking Legal Fees [Updated]”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Adam Steinbaugh (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

An Internet cartoonist lampoons another site in a hyperbolic rant, using the word “thief” to describe a site profiting off of his creations while the site looks the other way. I can’t imagine a court would that defamatory, and many courts have ruled as a matter of law that similar statements were not defamatory in less-sympathetic contexts.

FunnyJunk’s threat was an attempt to get a quick settlement at nuisance value. Nothing more.

Adam Steinbaugh (profile) says:

Judge: lolno

Charles Carreon lost much of his motion today. He gets 60 days to file a response (not the 120 he sought) and won’t get discovery The discovery Carreon wanted was (in my opinion) a thinly-veiled attempt to harass both the satirical blogger and his counsel (he wanted to depose the blogger to ask him questions about how little his blog mattered to the world, and subpoena his lawyer for information regarding his firm) and drive up the costs of litigation.

Key quote from the judge: “The Ninth Circuit discourages major litigation with respect to attorneys? fees. […] Defendant?s request for extensive discovery would amount to a mini-trial on plaintiff?s motion for attorneys? fees. Such extensive discovery is unnecessary and a waste of resources. Accordingly, defendant?s request for a 120 day extension is denied.”

Anonymous Coward says:

I’m reminded of a Family Guy skit which I will transcribe because posting a link to the video would be copyright theft and I’ll go to jail for 50 years.

Dealer: “You’ve got 20.”
Peter: “Hit me.”
Lois: “Peter, don’t.”
Peter: “Hit me.”
Dealer: “21!”
Peter: “Hit me.”
Lois: “Peter!”
Peter: “Hit me.”
Dealer: “That’s 30…”
Peter: “Hit me.”

DannyB (profile) says:

Carreon may not be a public figure, but . . .

Carreon may or may not be a public figure. But Carreon is newsworthy. Carreon wanted his own threats and legal actions to be publicly known. It’s only when he is called on his BS that it wants it all hushed up. Carreon’s legal actions and the counter actions are public information. The court proceedings are public. He has no cause to complain that people want to laugh, er… I mean want to know.

Mike: you really should add the STRIKE tag to your allowed html tags.

weneedhelp (profile) says:

Ha ha ha

Here is a snippet from charles-carreon:
This is not a delay tactic to impose further unnecessary burdens upon the plaintiff and his counsel. It is quite simple, if I don?t get an extension of 4 months I won?t be able to complete my DinoCloner? in time to storm California and redact my defeat.

LOL. I almost miss Bush for all the great comedy he provided. Almost. Yeah, it’s like that.

Anonymous Coward says:

Denial that Inmann has a superior Intellect and played people like a game

“Carreon seems to be trying to turn a case in which he was clearly the initial bully, and got called on it, into one where he tries to sift through documents concerning the lawyer who called his bluff.””

The poor helpless cartoonist Inmann.
aka… viral marketeer, proven link scammer(banned by google), Millionaire, SEO etc….
Calls funnyjunk thieves.
Carreon (funnyjunks lawyer) Asks for defamation settlement
Carreon the evil bully. “”clearly the initial bully” ?
Inmann never called funnyjunk admin a “thief”
Inmann never admitted he didn’t even try to use DMCA

Please… Mike, spare the Carreon hate fest while 100% ignorance of Inmann and the bullshit narrative that has been SPAMMED out there.
Many a retard bought into the narrative by only selectively acknowledging facts to suit their PRECONCEIVED narrative, of poor helpless cartoonist who can’t afford to pay $25,000 for defamation VERSUS the evil funnyjunk and baffon evil lawyer.

This is probably the only issue after years of me being a reader and supporter here, that you clearly have a somewhat OVERLY biased opinion on.

Yes… Carreon is a hateful cunt. Like 99.99% of other lawyers who also have no morality. Which I assume also applies to your lawyer, given the probability that a decent lawyer leaves morality at the door to win cases.
BUT Inmann is also a cunt that played you all, to get out of paying $25,000 defamation settlement. (he was clearly guilty of defamation :FACT, unless of course calling someone a thief, who isn’t, is not defamation)

Long story short.

Enjoy hating Carreon, who is being an average acting, immoral lawyer. (your lawyer is special lol)
It hides the fact that Inmann played you all like little puppet fools.
He spent your money, donating to charity. (isn’t he a charitable person LOLWOT)
The rich, VIRAL marketeer, scammer, SEO and to be fair, a shitty cartoonist, has people with a lower intellect eating out of his hands.

Hate Carreon, it makes deluding yourself that Inmann didn’t use you at his will, easier to accomplish.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Denial that Inmann has a superior Intellect and played people like a game

“It hides the fact that Inmann played you all like little puppet fools.
He spent your money, donating to charity. (isn’t he a charitable person LOLWOT)”

Explain to me again, how a person openly asking for donations to charity, who then receives that money and openly gives it to the charities in question…is playing us for fools?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

poor cartoonist lol “openly asking for donations to charity” to ……?

be a nice person.
support a good cause.
fight a defamation SETTLEMENT in the court of public opinion.

/ pick one /

Please do disregard circumstantial facts of Inmann being rich, viral marketeer, a proven scammer(banned by google),SEO etc…
Also disregard the relevant case facts that he admitted to not filing DMCA’s and also that he did in fact call the Funnyjunk admin a “thief”.

I know a fucking troll from a brilliant intellect when I see one.
Hat’s off to Inmann for nearly everything. I admire him for it. Some of his work is genius.
That link baiting that was banned by google was a fucking genius move.
Even selling those comics is pretty genius.
Shitty comics tho. YES… He fucking knows it too.

The line Inmann crossed was when he used charity to hide his obvious mistake.
He could have damaged those charities by doing that. The law is the law, morality is not law.
Charities get money taken off them LEGALLY and have to pay costs too. Morality usually doesn’t mean shit in the real world.
Inmann was lucky to get enough public support as to make the charities nearly untouchable by law.

Call me a moralfag troll if you want (most probably just call “troll”– still don’t geddit), but…
I was completely ok with Inmann’s actions until he put those charities in the line of fire to protect his ass.
I wouldn’t call him out for anything if he didn’t do that.
/ That* is my motive.

Shit… I wasn’t even pissed that he called the Funnyjunk admin a thief and all that “filesharers = thieves” bullshit.
That is just part of the game. People(FANS) buy moar because of statements like that.

Inmann played lot’s of people… I admired his work… til he hid behind and put charities in the line of fire.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Thanks for the concern. (though I do get sarcasm/ I will pretend I don’t)

Not hate tho, that’s an irrational conclusion to what I said. I dislike what he done concerning putting charities in a legal firing line.
I honestly admire most of the work Inman done. I bet he would be a great guy to have an intellectual conversation over a beer with.

Not even close to hate.
Charities are selfless. He dun goofed and created liability for them.
For that, people should see him for what he really is.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 am really just a moralfag troll

Without being too rude, but please do understand it will sound somewhat rude anyway.
I look into things before jumping on the band wagon. I suggest you do the same, not for this arguments sake of me being right and an obnoxious douche etc…. But for your sake, LRN2Google.
I will however do the work.
You won’t do it ?
Again not trying to be a douche… (I do it myself and catch myself on)
Must be willful ignorance ?

A few links.
Which I applaud btw.

People haven’t got a fucking clue of how smart Inman is.
Like a shitty comic even comes close to showing it. That is just a vehicle.
*Notice how true that vehicle statement is.
Also he knows it is a shitty formulation comic for people mentally inferior to him. Obvious.

Really, I ENJOY that people can’t see that they are being played by people like Inman. Their problem.
BUT…He shouldn’t have used charities in the way that he did.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 am really just a moralfag troll

Which I applaud btw.

Did you see his response?

That buzzfeed link is basically garbage.

First off: I agree with you that Inman’s initial anger towards FunnyJunk was silly and misunderstood what Funnyjunk was doing, but none of that applies to anything here. This is about Carreon, not Inman.

So, not sure what you’re whining about.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Which I applaud btw.
Was in reference to the above link of Inman’s linkbaiting, which at the time was pretty genius.

Buzzfeed article… I know it was mostly a “character assassination” littered with irrelevant and some relevant facts.
The Oatmeal reply is mostly a “character assassination” littered with irrelevant and some relevant facts too.
That aside… I still think Inman is a superior than most being, with serious skills at manipulating people. That to me is obvious.

What I’m “whining about”.
Carreon Inman
but none of that applies to anything here
It does apply here.
Carreon has to be a buffoon. Has to be.

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 am really just a moralfag troll

But for your sake, LRN2Google.

Oh, I know how to search and am not too lazy to do it, but you didn’t give me enough to know what to search for.

I’m not defending Inman. I know nearly nothing about him, that was why I was asking for information. I’m not sure how either of those links demonstrates that Inman is a scammer, though.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

So… then since you admit that this case really has nothing to do with Inmann other than the blogger involved was commenting on the dispute with Inmann so… he really has nothing to do with THIS case so… you are saying that we should disregard the part of your comment that is about Inmann which is… pretty much your entire comment then… Ok… and so the rest of your argument stands… ok… and that part then would be?

alanbleiweiss (profile) says:

Re: Denial that Inmann has a superior Intellect and played people like a game

“Many a retard bought into the narrative”

“BUT Inmann is also a cunt that played you all”

“It hides the fact that Inmann played you all like little puppet fools.”

Since enough effort has been placed on essentially blowing your diatribe out of the water in general, I’ll just focus on your self-proclaimed superior intellect over the majority of people on this site and around the web who applauded Inmann.

As an internet professional for eighteen years, and one who has specialized in SEO for more than a decade, I am first and foremost, a marketing professional.

As a marketing professional, I applaud the Oatmeal and Inmann for most of what he has been able to accomplish through wit, intellect and marketing savvy.

As someone with an IQ of either 145 or 154 (depending on IQ methodology used), I find your rant laughable in the highest order.

Congratulations for representing intellectually inferior people everywhere through your finger-pointing. Because when one finger points out at the world, more are pointing inward.

Job well done.

That One Guy (profile) says:

I can’t help but think this article is going to get a series of additional updates as this progresses…

Update 2: Carreon, once more told ‘No’ again tries to get the judge dismissed from the case, citing previously mentioned ‘No’ to his insane stall tactic as obvious evidence that the judge hates ‘pro-IP’ people.

Update 3: Panel of judges finally respond back to Carreon’s second motion to get the judge dismissed with yet another ‘No’. Claim delay in response was due to over half of them face-palming so hard they were knocked unconscious.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...