In Re Counterclaims

Yesterday, I mailed my Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims to the Clerk of the Court in the Hoge v. Schmalfeldt copyright lawsuit. The motion is now posted on PACER.

Since the motion speaks for itself, I do not wish to make any further substantive comments about it.

34 thoughts on “In Re Counterclaims

  1. I LOVE it: you cited Cassidy against him. Complete and utter hilarity. Bravo Mr. Hoge. Time for me to hit your tip jar again.

    I can’t wait for him to argue that comments about him are prohibited by Cassidy whereas comments to you are protected by Cassidy.

    • “I can’t wait for him to argue that comments about him are prohibited by Cassidy whereas comments to you are protected by Cassidy.”

      Yep. And… hilarity will ensue! LOL!

  2. As was obvious from Cabin Boy’s incoherent sputterings, his counter claims were all frivolous and there was no Federal jurisdiction.

      • Elephant? Blue whale! One would have to get all Star Wars to properly reference the size of that failure.

        No that’s not a fat joke. Lack of jurisdiction was that obvious, Bill.

      • And, Gus, I add that federal courts love, love, LOVE dismissing cases for lack of jurisdiction. It is an issue that a court can raise on its own, as opposed to being raised by the parties.

      • Well, since his sputterings were in contradiction to principles that show up in week 2 of a first year law students’ civil procedure class …. uh, yep.

  3. *BOOM*

    once his counter is dismissed I predict much wailing and gnashing of teeth from a certain trailer park in MD…


  4. I bet that if Schmalfeldt had never heard of Hoge he would be happier and no one would be investigating Schmalfeldt’s various copyright infringements.

      • This raises another old issue re Mr. Schmalfeldt: hypocrisy.

        One of the axes he has tried to grind against Patterico has to do with Patterico publishing court documents without redacting the name of the plaintiff. BS has gone on, ad nauseum, about how dreadful it was to post public court documents, and claimed that the plaintiff suffered because of it.

        Uh, huh.

        This is the guy who, after being criticized for doxing innocents, their wives, and their children, hides behind the “it’s on the internet” argument to defend his actions.

        This is the guy who has documents posted on scribd with the unredacted addresses of people he is suing or has thought about suing.

      • Wjjhoge –

        FYI Scribd was acting funny and giving me the text, in the wrong font, gibberish for headers, etc. I refreshed and got clean copy before I got down to the end, so maybe that is why Gus didn’t think it was blacked out?

        See my comment (that I’m still writing, give me a minute or so) to Krendler on the prior post…

    • Gus, Bill published in the last month, his own SS#, phone number, address, and now – his security code for his blog – BesTY BEST BEST B ESTES BESTICIOUS INVESITGATIVE REPORTER EVAH!

      He’s soo powerful he doxed himself cleaning his keyboard…

  5. Will this motion to dismiss stall the motion for discovery re-Paul? It would seem to streamline the proceedings it should. After all, if Hoge is victorious, there is no need to serve Paul.

    • one would hope so..
      I hope twinkie doesn’t try to drag this out with pointless replies (but we all know he’s going to…)

  6. Hmmm… IANAL, but the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction seems to be a good point to raise. Are there other means of establishing subject matter jurisdiction? I think I once read that there are two means of establishing jurisdiction in federal court, by federal issues (a question of federal law – such as a fanciful RICO claim) OR by diversity of the parties AND an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.00.

    Anyone know if there is complete diversity of all plaintiff’s and defendants in the counter suit?

    I also wonder how Mr. Schmalfeldt is going to establish PERSONAL jurisdiction on the all of the parties.

    Well, maybe whoever helped him write the counterclaim can help him figure out these jurisdictional hurdles. No idea what the court will do here, but I can’t think he has thought all this through. I wonder if the parties defending this will seek sanctions… the court probably wont grant them, but you can’t get what you don’t ask for, am I right?

  7. All these legal actions must be taking up a great deal of your time and money.

    It is difficult to expect any successful action on your part will result in your actually collecting damages. (You might be awarded damages, but collecting them is another matter.)

    I know you are doing this on first amendment grounds and I appreciate it. And I am sorry for the time and grief this is costing you.

    Wish you got to spend all this time on something more enjoyable.

Leave a Reply