Prenda's Paul Hansmeier Continues To Win Enemies, Influence Legislators With His ADA Trolling, Hiding Of Assets

from the too-bad-he-can't-monetize-the-hate-he's-earned... dept

Everyone behind the failed clown school that was Prenda Law deserves what's happening to Paul Hansmeier. Unfortunately, it appears Hansmeier is taking the most damage from the fallout of Prenda's disastrous copyright trolling… or at least he's the one doing most of his suffering in public.

Of course, it's his own fault. Rather than get out of the trolling business, Hansmeier doubled down. He swapped porn stars for wheelchairs, pursuing small businesses for Americans with Disabilities Acts violations. Fronting as a public interest, Hansmeier's "Disabilities Support Alliance" is every bit the serial litigant Prenda was.

Now, it's falling apart. As is Hansmeier himself. He's currently facing possible disbarment for his participation in Prenda's fraudulent behavior. He just lost one of his lawsuits against a Minnesota landlord for bogus ADA violations -- one out of more than 100 lawsuits he's filed against small businesses in the area. If Hansmeier's asked to cough up legal fees, one wonders where he'll find the money.

I suppose he might find some cash in the "trust" he claims handles his finances without his direct intervention. (Court filing via Fight Copyright Trolls)

According to the Trust Agreement:

a. the beneficiaries of The Mill Trust are Hansmeier’s parents, siblings, future spouse and any future descendants;
b. The Mill Trust is an irrevocable trust;
c. the trustee, Browne, had the sole discretion, subject to Hansmeier’s right to veto, to distribute the assets of The Mill Trust for the benefit of the beneficiaries; and
d. the Trust Agreement is executed by Hansmeier as “grantor” and Browne as “trustee” on December 28, 2010.
"Browne" is Padraigin Browne, Hansmeier's wife. Browne has apparently been moving money out of bank accounts and into this trust -- supposedly to handle "personal expenses." Quite obviously, the moves are being made to keep money from being rerouted to pay off judgments from Prenda's misdeeds and debtors seeking compensation. Hansmeier recently filed for bankruptcy, hoping to shield his assets from being seized/sold to pay Prenda judgments.

So, his cash -- sitting in bank accounts where it could be seized -- is being moved to his trust. (Hansmeier is also apparently using a Scottrade account and a shell entity ["Alpha Law Firm"] to keep his funds from being seized to pay off ~$400,000 in judgments. The "Monyet" name attached to the Scottrade account is another shell company.)
After Hansmeier had transferred $175,000 into the TCF Bank account held solely in Browne’s name (the “TCF Account”), Browne contacted TCF Bank and made arrangements for a TCF Bank branch to have $150,000 of cash on hand so that Browne could make a $150,000 cash withdrawal. Browne then went to the bank on December 13, 2013 and withdrew $150,000 in cash from the TCF Account.

[...]

On February 7, 2014, Hansmeier transferred an additional $70,000 from the Monyet Scottrade Account to the TCF Account.

Browne, after checking with TCF Bank to see what would be an appropriate amount that the bank branch would have “on hand” without making pre-arrangements, began to withdraw additional cash from the bank in $2,000 increments.

In the months of February-March, 2014, Browne withdrew at least $28,000 in cash from the TCF Account. She had also withdrawn $2,000 in cash from the TCF Account in November of 2013.
What Hansmeier refers to as "The Mill Trust" is actually something commonly utilized by small-time drug dealers and the lower rungs of the mob's organizational chart.
Those cash withdrawals, when added to the $150,000 in cash already hidden at Browne and Hansmeier’s home, resulted in a total of approximately $180,000 in cash hidden in a box at the home shared by Hansmeier and Browne.
The court has been unimpressed with Hansmeier's behavior so far. The following order was issued before his Cardboard Box In A Closet Trust came to light. (This opinion also provided by Fight Copyright Trolls.)
The debtor further argues that if he succeeded on the merits of the Claim Objections he would have been in a position to confirm a plan that paid 100% to general unsecured creditors, with interest. The deadline for filing claims is April 22, 2016, so there is no way of knowing at this point what the total claims will be in the case. To date a total of $2,493,510.17 in claims have been filed. Of that amount, $1,612,731.94 was the subject of the Claims Objections. Assuming for purposes of this motion only that the Claim Objections were sustained,2 the total claims would be reduced to $880,778.23.3 The debtor offered no evidence that he would have had non-exempt cash to fund an immediate payment of claims in full at the time of the conversion. Thus, the debtor would have to pay the claims over time with interest through his plan. The debtor is currently the subject of a disciplinary proceeding, the result of which could result in the suspension of his license to practice law or disbarment. The debtor has offered no evidence as to how he would fund plan payments if he is no longer licensed to practice law, which is his source of income.

The debtor asserts that the court’s decision to convert was based on prepetition conduct, a desire to punish the debtor for that prior conduct and an attempt to deny him a fresh start. While the court did recite rulings by numerous courts across the country that have found the debtor engaged in serious misconduct before those courts, and had been sanctioned for that conduct, those rulings merely established the background for the court’s finding that the debtor has continued his pattern and practice of being untruthful. The debtor’s misconduct did not stop when he filed his bankruptcy petition. Rather, the court found that the debtor had filed misleading or false documents in this case and provided potentially false testimony at his Rule 2004 examination.
Add to this the fact that Minnesota legislators -- backed by the small businesses Hansmeier has pursued for dubious ADA violations -- are now attempting to shut down Hansmeier's new money train.
Rowland, who says her restaurant was in compliance with the disability access requirements, says she eventually settled the lawsuit for $8,500 to avoid paying even more in legal fees.

“This is someone taking advantage of a very big loophole in our legal system,” Rowland said. She testified before state lawmakers Thursday as lawmakers introduced a law that seems to be aimed directly at attorneys like Hansmeier.

One lawmaker even joked, “The suggestion was made that we make this the Paul Hansmeier Act.”

The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce worked on the bi-partisan legislation with the Minnesota State Council of Disability and the Human Rights Department.

“We're really just trying to limit some of the litigation lawsuit abuse that's been occurring,” Chamber of Commerce Vice President Beth Kadoun said.

The legislation would give businesses at least 30 days to respond to lawsuits, shift the burden of proof in some cases to those filing the lawsuit and restrict attorneys from demanding immediate settlements.
Hansmeier appears to be hiding the assets he does have and presumably is attempting to pay off his debts by intimidating small businesses into lowball settlements. If he's disbarred -- or if the legislation passes -- his sole revenue stream will dry up. Then what?

The first step is already in place. Hansmeier has been ordered to liquidate his assets. His appeal motion to stay Chapter 7 conversion pending appeal has failed and the judge presiding over his bankruptcy case is no more receptive to Hansmeier's actions than the judges presiding over the tail end of the Prenda debacle.
The debtor has refused and continues to refuse to disclose complete and accurate financial information. The debtor has dissipated over $80,000 in estate assets since the case was filed. Other courts have already found that the debtor exhibits a “serious and studied disregard for the orderly process of justice” and “a relentless willingness to lie to the court on paper and in person.”
There's certainly more to come in the next few months. Hansmeier hasn't shown any interest in scaling back his trolling efforts and seems to be hellbent on pissing off every judge he appears in front of. He's likely going to end up without a license to practice law -- which appears to be his only marketable skill. And it's a skill he can't wield without being abusive and dishonest.

Might as well fire up another batch of Orville Redenbacher's Schadenfreude-Flavored Gourmet Popping Corn and settle in. For a steady stream of updates, I wholeheartedly recommend following Sophisticated Jane Doe and the Minneapolis Star-Tribune's Dan Browning, from whom much of the above has been sourced. For additional entertainment, Hansmeier himself has rather belatedly joined Twitter, although most of his posts are just self-interested hashtag ADA lawsuit spam.




Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    no way, 22 Mar 2016 @ 4:27pm

    Structuring

    Correct me if I don't have it just right, but isn't Browne taking out $2K at a time so she doesn't have to do anything special is federal bank crime?

    Banks have to report any transactions deposit or withdraw over $10k. Many people have gotten burned because they they intend to do a transaction over 10K, but break it up into smaller ones.

    I think in one case, the bank even suggested to break it up over tie so they didn't have to report it. They guy was still nabbed by the Feds for it.


    If you have been reading along, she is mixed up with all of Paul's messes. The whole Groupon class action mess, the withdrawing of the cash to give to Steele to pay Prenda judgements, etc.

    In some things you can see that Paul has tried to shift funds to her, so that they are out of reach of bankruptcy trustee.

    Toss her in a federal jail, that would put a big hurt on the Hans's household income.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      jonr (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 4:48pm

      Re: Structuring

      Indeed, as your subject line suggests, it's formally known as structuring, or more colloquially, "smurfing".

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 7:21pm

        Re: Re: Structuring

        However, as Techdirt has shown several times, deposits below the reporting threshold may look like 'structuring' even if they are legitimate. Case in point.

        One can presume that similar withdrawals can be legitimate. I can point to my own current financial situation as an example.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 7:02am

          Re: Re: Re: Structuring

          Very true, but in Hansmeier's case, I would hope/think that prosecutors have the evidence to make a case for it.

          I'm not normally the fire and brimstone type when it comes to crime, but considering the consistent level of deception this guy is producing, I'm wondering at what point they can pin Hansmeier down, hopefully one with bars or home arrest with a substantial bail, to find every nickel this bastard has, because he is not going to stop.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 6:40pm

      Re: Structuring

      "Correct me if I don't have it just right, but isn't Browne taking out $2K at a time so she doesn't have to do anything special is federal bank crime?"

      "Browne, after checking with TCF Bank to see what would be an appropriate amount that the bank branch would have “on hand” without making pre-arrangements, began to withdraw additional cash from the bank in $2,000 increments."

      The banks want prior notice to withdraw more than that at one time

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 7:28am

      Re: Structuring

      Structuring, much like "money laundering", is a lame excuse for alleging misconduct when the government cannot prove any actual misconduct. Both charges are typically brought out either to add extra time when a case is already a win or to file a case that cannot be won on its merits. "What, you can't prove that you obtained all this money legally? Well, we'll just assume you obtained it illegally and take it until you prove its innocence."

      I despise the Prenda Law people, but I strongly dislike the idea of using a Structuring claim. This particular couple may be aware of the Structuring laws, but many legitimate depositors also act in a way that is technically Structuring despite having no ill intent.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PRMan (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 8:02am

        Re: Re: Structuring

        When you see people like Kent Hovind spend 10 years in prison for structuring, and every other case against him fall apart, you see what a witch hunt it is.

        The reality is, they probably didn't like his stand on creation. So much for free speech...

        Similarly, even though I detest absolutely everything about Hansmeier and think he (and his wife) deserve punishment, I wouldn't convict her (or anyone) for structuring if I were on the jury.

        Laws like this are certainly ones where jury nullification needs to be invoked.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Bergman (profile), 20 Mar 2017 @ 12:27pm

      Re: Structuring

      No, it's not structuring. Structuring occurs when people make bank transactions deliberately below the reporting threshold to avoid the bank making reports.

      Asking the bank how much cash they have on hand, and how big a withdrawal you can make without the bank running out of cash and having to call for an armored car delivery, then making that size withdrawal is not illegal.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 4:54pm

    This "Hansmeier's twitter account" stretches the reach of the Poe's Law.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Anon E. Mous (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:03pm

    The real sad thing here is that people and groups not associated with Hansmeier that had legitimate ADA complaints were getting the guilt by association that Hansemeier's ADA trolling was responsible for with his lawsuit spree.

    It's reprehensible that abuse of legislation and process can be used to get quick cash such as Hansmeier has been responsible for and many small business owners have been hit by and some forced out of business due to the costs of settling or trying to fight these lawsuits.

    Is Hansmeier on the ropes right now? Most would agree he is treading water in the deep end of the pool. The thing is that Steele is also in the ADA lawsuit game, so they have both found a new way to generate easy cash settlements to which they are addicted to in my opinion.

    If the ADA lawsuits settlement game draws to a close, I would fully expect you will see Steele and Hansmeier look for another law or piece of legislation that they can twist and use to generate quick cash settlements under the guise of enforcement.

    One has to remember this is only occurring in Minnesota where they are trying to bring some semblance of fairness to those being hit by ADA lawsuits, I believe Steele is plying his trade in Illinois although I believe in a much quieter manner.

    No one should under estimate the temptation that Steele and Hansmeier have to that sweet easy settlement cash that I believe they are addicted to, and I would be of the belief that if Hansmeier efforts start to peter out on the ADA front, that a new scheme will be presented and operational to get cash rolling in.

    I thought after the Prenda gang came crashing down that they would scale back their desire for easy settlement cash, but it would appear that addictive lure of easy settlement cash was much to hard to walk away from and hence the ADA lawsuit game was born.

    There is no way Hansmeier will walk away from the game of easy settlement money, if ADA troll suits go down the drain, I fully expect Hans to either take this game on the road by finding poor schmucks who just got their law license in other states to get brought in to the game while Hans stays behind the scenes or Hans finds a new legal loophole to generate lawsuits and cash settlements.

    I dont see Hansemeier having the want to walk away from the easy cash lawsuit settlement game, Steele either. I am of the opinion they will just find a new one

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:06pm

    From the legal minds that gave us...
    'Those guys are total fraudsters'

    I plan to govern myself appropriately here in the big leagues.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ideaman, 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:12pm

    Prenda Law TShirt

    Anyone in for a Prenda Law Tshirt? With an ADA symbol?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:31pm

    Wow. Even Saul Goodman has better ethics than this dipshit.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 23 Mar 2016 @ 5:15am

      Re:

      If I remember correctly, the Minnesota Ethics Committee of the Bar Association (or what it's called) is headed by Hansmeier's father.

      So they might come to a different conclusion.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Chris, 23 Mar 2016 @ 9:19am

      Re:

      I was thinking Hansmeier could always get a job at Cinnabon to pay off his debts

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:32pm

    Assuming he loses his licence to practice law, is there a likelyhood that he will become disable and continue suing as a pro se litigant?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 12:35am

      Re:

      He still controls the 'non-profit' entity he lists in his suits. So he could hire some lawyers to just files some papers for him for a low fee & maybe kick them a bonus from the settlement amounts.

      Look at the Prenda operation, swap in ADA for copyright and its maaagic.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 5:40pm

    Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, he deserves every bit of it and then some. When the hell is his wife gonna get in trouble for all her actions though? She knows what he's doing and knows what's going on since she's obviously helping move money and assets in an attempt to keep them from being seized.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 6:46pm

    How has his assets not been seized? How are the Prenda people not in jail when their misdeeds are SO WELL documented? It's a real travesty that the courts can allow this to go on. The wheels are going far too slow in a case of blatant misconduct, smarter and more clever people can feel confident in never ever facing punishment if this is how slow it is for Prenda.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 12:40am

      Re:

      Nothing they've done yet is criminal.
      (I KNOW I'M CHOKING ON TYPING IT)

      While there are meant to have been referrals for criminal investigations, we have no idea what is actually happening on that front.

      I once wondered if they would wait until the appeals were done before moving in... its starting to look like that is the case.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 2:14am

        Re: Re:

        Nothing they have done yet has been "proven illegal". That it takes a long time to get to a case is common when the guy knows the law and are willing to look as bad as needed to escape judgement (basically what this judge is saying). They are likely to build up the case slowly and methodically untill they have an airtight case. At that point Hansmeier would need to turn towards the mafia or wall street to find use for his skills and it would not be as a lawyer, but as an advisor.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PRMan (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 8:05am

        Re: Re:

        Perjury?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 10:52am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Alleged, thought, yet not charged... yet.

          As much as these asshats gall me, they are entitled to be treated fairly by the system. Unlike those they were shaking down with the courts blessing but then I am not unbiased.

          For months after much of the Prenda scheme was exposed, courts kept allowing them to move forward. After evidence was before courts, they got to keep going. When courts questioned they moved to courts who hadn't heard of them yet.

          Of course perhaps the legal system is waiting to see if 2 of the locals facing federal charges want to cut deals and offer up evidence.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    kaboom, 22 Mar 2016 @ 7:08pm

    Nevis trust?

    What ever happened to the millions they moved through Under The Bridge or whatever it was called and on to the Nevis Trust? Anything ever come of that?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 12:44am

      Re: Nevis trust?

      There is a McManion in Florida Steele owns, one of thsoe states where they can't force you to sell your home in bankruptcy.

      The Nevis entity existed to hold the trust for Mark Lutz's unborn children, there were no records of payments made to it from Prenda.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Mar 2016 @ 7:10pm

    Trust beneficiaries?

    OK, so Browne is the trustee, but neither she nor Hansmeier are beneficiaries. So how is it legal for her to disburse trust funds to herself or Hansmeier? Isn't that theft from the trust?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 2:09am

      Re: Trust beneficiaries?

      As Paul's spouse, she is also a beneficiary.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 7:25am

        Re: Re: Trust beneficiaries?

        I wonder about the provision that while Browne has sole discretion regarding distributions, Hansmeier has a veto right. Might MN trust law or the Internal Revenue Code consider that to be a retained interest by the grantor (Hansmeier) and so the property in the trust might still be considered his property?

        From the IRS website (humorously found under "Abusive Trust Tax Evasion Schemes"):
        Q: What is a grantor trust?

        A: "Grantor trust" is a term used in the Internal Revenue Code to describe any trust over which the grantor or other owner retains the power to control or direct the trust's income or assets. If a grantor retains certain powers over or benefits in a trust, the income of the trust will be taxed to the grantor, rather than to the trust. (Examples, the power to decide who receives income, the power to vote or to direct the vote of the stock held by the trust or to control the investment of the trust funds, the power to revoke the trust, etc.) All "revocable trusts" are by definition grantor trusts. An "irrevocable trust" can be treated as a grantor trust if any of the grantor trust definitions contained in Internal Code §§ 671, 673, 674, 675, 676, or 677 are met. If a trust is a grantor trust, then the grantor is treated as the owner of the assets, the trust is disregarded as a separate tax entity, and all income is taxed to the grantor.

        I haven't dug into all the IRC sections to determine what might be applicable.

        (I also wonder at the "future spouse" reference in (a.). Were Hansmeier and Browne married at the time this trust was signed? If they were, who is this "future spouse" to which the document refers. If a case for construction of language were brought, and the court decided to do so literally, is Browne therefore not actually a beneficiary?)

        According to the Trust Agreement:

        a. the beneficiaries of The Mill Trust are Hansmeier’s parents, siblings, future spouse and any future descendants;
        b. The Mill Trust is an irrevocable trust;
        c. the trustee, Browne, had the sole discretion, subject to Hansmeier’s right to veto, to distribute the assets of The Mill Trust for the benefit of the beneficiaries; and
        d. the Trust Agreement is executed by Hansmeier as “grantor” and Browne as “trustee” on December 28, 2010.


        Disclaimer: IANAT&EL - I just work for them and like to read.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 9:34am

          Re: Re: Re: Trust beneficiaries?

          Would you give your existing wife the power to give or not give money to the person you divorced her to marry?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2016 @ 7:22am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Trust beneficiaries?

            Well, he already did. Current spouse is the trustee with sole discretion to make distributions to any of the class of beneficiaries noted. Makes me wonder if there is a power to change trustees in the document.

            The more I look at it, the more I think this "future spouse" reference may be instead to the future spouse of a parent (after the death of a current spouse), sibling or descendant. Or it's a typo or misinterpretation of what is written in the document.

            I dunno... Would have to look at the entire trust.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 11:48am

        Re: Re: Trust beneficiaries?

        As Paul's spouse, she is also a beneficiary.

        He isn't a beneficiary, so how do you figure that she is?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DB (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 7:26pm

    The Nevis 'defined purpose trust' we know about (AF Holdings AKA AF Films) likely just holds copyrights to worthless films.

    The Prenda guys are clever enough to not put any money into the single front entity. That trust was intended to be the sole public face of the scam.

    Incidentally, in order to skirt around the laws about transferring assets out of the county, the copyright was nominally acquired by AF Holdings for $0. Yes, they were suing over a literally worthless film.

    A Nevis Defined Purpose Trust is a pretty obscure construct. The Prenda guys must have scoured the ends of the earth to set up their scam. That makes it extremely likely they also researched much better known ways of hiding money in offshore accounts. It remains to be seen if the Trustee can sniff out the trail.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    LVDave (profile), 22 Mar 2016 @ 8:17pm

    You gotta wonder..

    You gotta wonder how much more the courts are going to take of this bozos antics before they throw him behind bars.. oh wait.. He's a lawyer.. Judges are/were lawyers, its professional courtesy.. Thats gotta be why he (and the rest of the Prenda clowns) are not behind bars.. You or I certainly would, if we did even .05% of the crap these bozos have pulled...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 22 Mar 2016 @ 10:21pm

    I think...

    Paul Hansmeier is aiming to be on an episode of "American Greed, Scams and Scoundrels".

    Fits the profile nicely.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    David, 23 Mar 2016 @ 1:43am

    I smell the sequel!

    Those cash withdrawals, when added to the $150,000 in cash already hidden at Browne and Hansmeier’s home, resulted in a total of approximately $180,000 in cash hidden in a box at the home shared by Hansmeier and Browne.

    I'm very much convinced that the most unfortunate burglary will be reported just when that box was about to be seized by order of a court.

    Even the Mafia is more subtle about its dealings than Hansmeier.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 2:02am

      Re: I smell the sequel!

      "Well you see Your Honor just last week we deposted the entire amount in a trust fund that we happened to stumble upon, the W.A.Y.G.T.D.A.I.'

      "W.A.Y.G.T.D.A.I.?"

      "As I understand it the full name is something along the lines of 'What Are You Going To Do About It?' But that's besides the point, I'm afraid the terms of the trust put the entire amount of money out of our reach for the foreseeable future, and we just cannot pay the court fees and fines. I'm sure you understand, and would of course never order someone to break the terms of a legally binding agreement."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 1:53am

    Why not?

    The debtor has refused and continues to refuse to disclose complete and accurate financial information. The debtor has dissipated over $80,000 in estate assets since the case was filed. Other courts have already found that the debtor exhibits a “serious and studied disregard for the orderly process of justice” and “a relentless willingness to lie to the court on paper and in person.”

    If I were a greedy sociopath I'd probably do the same thing for a very simple reason: There is no downside.

    Use 'legal' extortion tactics to grab as much money as you can, shift it around using 'legal' methods, and then when/if the hammer finally comes down plead ignorance/poverty. So he has a chance to be disbarred? Oh noes, however will he manage to survive only having the piles of money scattered about in various accounts to live off of?

    The 'legal extortion' racket is insanely profitable, and carries almost no risk at all unless you get too cocky and screw up, and even then the risk is minimal so long as you know the right tricks. It's not surprising(disgusting yes, surprising no) that he and those like him are using the system for fun and profit, the only surprising thing is that it doesn't happen more often.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 3:34am

      Re: Why not?

      Think of Alan Cooper!!!!!

      Ahem. The fact that the Prenda team isn't already behind bars says a lot about the judicial system so yeah, agreed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Machin Shin (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 5:27am

    Marketable skill?

    "He's likely going to end up without a license to practice law -- which appears to be his only marketable skill."

    Considering all that we have seen from him do you really think it is fitting to call this a marketable skill? If I needed a lawyer I am more likely to go hire a random homeless guy off the street than I am to hire this guy.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 5:39am

    The man should be in jail for his constant defrauding

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dan Browning, 23 Mar 2016 @ 7:20am

    Hansmeier (#prenda)

    Thanks for the shout-out.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Baron von Robber, 23 Mar 2016 @ 7:44am

    "The greatest trick the Devil ever did was convincing everybody he didn't exist" - Salty Marsh

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 8:05am

    Hopefully that little rodent that crawled up inside him and died is beginning to take its' toll.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2016 @ 9:04am

    Not just MN

    ...The legislation would give businesses at least 30 days to respond to lawsuits, shift the burden of proof in some cases to those filing the lawsuit and restrict attorneys from demanding immediate settlements...

    Arizona's legislature introduced a bill with this language this year. AFAIK it's held in committee and likely won't see any more action.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 23 Mar 2016 @ 10:18am

    The audio of today's hearing on Trustee's motion to compel Hansmeier's attorney to turn over funds is available.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bees!, 24 Mar 2016 @ 8:41am

    If he's disbarred -- or if the legislation passes -- his sole revenue stream will dry up. Then what?

    Well, if he doesn't get disbarred and the legislation passes, he can always move to FLSA lawsuits.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.