Since The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin more or less followed the procedure set out in the case management order for the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness for seeking permission to file motions, Judge Hazel is going to let him file some motions.
UPDATE—Aaron Walker has some comments here.
Off topic, but some interesting parallels in this story. Just change the names to Grouch, Bunny Man, etc.
This may be the Plaintiff stumbling block, that will be a high mole hill for him to climb.
Additionally, Plaintiff’s motion must establish why service under Md. Rule 2-121(b) is either inapplicable or impracticable. See Md. Rule 2-121(c).
What is it now, five-plus months since Twitchy asked for sanctions? Hello? McFly?
Yep, and how long since BK was ordered to pay Mr. Ostronic $600. That’s not gonna happen anytime soon either.
I think Twitchy should be sending requests for status on the forgery deal every week.
Otherwise it is simply going to disappear.
Disappointed that the judge is allowing alternate service on Ace without (the appearance of) addressing the anonymity concerns – effectively deeming Ace served because (paraphrasing) “[he’s] obviously aware of it”. Thus now forcing Ace to either expend funds to hire a lawyer to remain anonymous, or give up their anonymity to file pro se. [semi-sarcastically] I wonder if Mr. Levy can send the plaintiff an invoice since he has been ordered by a judge to be his process server.
Although, what’s perhaps confusing me – wouldn’t the disqualification request now be moot?
I thought that Mr. Levy had said that he was only Ace’s lawyer with regards to the anonymity concerns, but not the actual RICO case?
I suspect the BK would try to disqualify any lawyer helping Ace keep his/her name anonymous.
He did say that.
In a hypothetical where both motions regarding Ace are granted….
If Levy is dismissed first, then is the alternate service mooted?
If alternate service through Levy is granted (as seems to be the case) and then Levy is dismissed, does that alternate service hold?
Or, since it appears alternate service through Levy is a done deal, does this telegraph that the judge is allowing the motion to dimiss Levy but is going to rule against the dismissal?
I am not sure that the alternate service moots the issue of anonymity. Because, now served – which is what the letter means, as I read it – Ace of Spades is a defendant. That means that somehow he still needs to protect his identity. For example, when discovery and other notices are delivered, where do they go? Who responds?
I think that Judge Hazel is about to make some new law.
Should be interesting to see what the Diddler pulls out of his hat for this. Plaintiff’s motion must provide proof, by affidavit, of the date(s) and attempted method(s) of service
Can’t imagine he’s be stupid enough to submit forged docs yet again.
What was so stupid about doing it? He forged the service to Twitchy, and they are now defendants. And he has paid no price for it.
I have to say that Judge Hazel does not appear to be having a spectacular start to his judicial career. He doesn’t seem to have thought carefully about what he has just done. If we take his position seriously, all that it means is that in the future Paul Levy will merely have to ensure that his clients remain anonymous even from him. The first words from Paul Levy to his anonymous client will be, “Never tell me your actual name, or anything that can identify you.” Something as simply as a pre-paid cellphones, or Skype call through free public Wi-Fi that cannot be traced to closer than to some city. Emails can be sent by TOR network to one-time mailboxes that are deleted after use. Better yet, encryption keys to one-time websites could be sent by telephone. Should Levy be ordered to serve his client all he need say is that it is unreasonable to expect him to read a fifty page document over the phone.
All this assume that Paul Levy and Ace of Spades haven’t actually taken exactly these precautions. If they have, Judge Hazel is in for a rude surprise months down the road after any appeals have been exhausted. Sure, Judge Hazel could order Levy to reveal his phone records, but, Levy could insist on having the hearing he has requested. Further, Levy has already noted that Kimberlin could have attempted to subpoena the Ace of Spades blog advertising company. The only thing that stopping Kimberlin is the before mentioned hearing.
In the interim, I would suggest that Ace of Spades can file pro se motion in this case under the name “Ace of Spades” with Levy’s address and phone number. If “Ace of Spades” is a party, and, Judge Hazel has deemed “Ace of Spades” served absent a known name, it would follow that he allowed for anonymous filings. If the court rejects his filing for as pseudonymously filed rather than eponymously filed Ace should demand to know when the relevant standard cited by Levy has been met.