Bonus Legal LULZ Du Jour

The Dreadful Pro-Se Freeloader Schmalfeldt has a post up on one of his myriad wastes of bandwidth (No, I won’t link to it.) in which he claims that he is within his rights to deep six potential evidence related to his LOLsuit VII: Degenerations. To “prove” his point he cites a bit of Illinois case law from this case: Martin, et al. v. Keeley & Sons, Inc., 979 NE 2d 22 (Ill. 2012). The Cabin Boy™ seems to have forgotten that he filed his suit in a federal court, so the Federal Rues of Civil Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence govern his case.

popcorn4bkIANAL, but FRCP 37 seems to allow the following sanctions for spoliation of evidence: dismissal of the wrongdoers claim, entering judgment against the wrongdoer, or applying the adverse inference rule.

The unfortunate lawyer “recruited” to represent The Dreadful Pro-Se Freeloader Schmalfeldt is in for an interesting time.

35 thoughts on “Bonus Legal LULZ Du Jour


    • I wondered the same. Or if maybe, like Medicaid, there are certain bargain-basement “state rates.” Which means Billy will get his legal needs tended do with all the quality we’ve come to expect from government hacks. 😛


  1. The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is.

    Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive inability of those of low ability to recognize their ineptitude and evaluate their ability accurately. Their research also suggests corollaries: high-ability individuals may underestimate their relative competence and may erroneously assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.

    Yup


    • Plus narcissism, arrogance, and stoooooooopid.

      Remember this barely-graduated-high-school lifetime of FAIL believes it can out-lawyer a Yale law grad, and out-think a rocket scientist quantum mechanic who works with NASA. bwahahahaha


      • Fact: Billy won’t believe otherwise until he’s treated to some tangible consequences. The VROOM VROOM being seized. Leg-irons on his nutshuffling ankles. His [self-redacted] being [self-redacted].
        Like some have said for quite some time now: Police reports. File them. Every time Schmalfeldt violates the law and the rights of a victim.


  2. This may be the first time counsel has requested his own client be placed in shackles and restraints.. It’s the only way to keep Teh Blab from continuing to shoot himself by trying to clean up his Internet history.

    Both feet are toast, he is up to shooting the knees now….


  3. This is from Cornell.Edu.
    FRCP 37 (e) Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored Information. If electronically stored information that should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation is lost because a party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it, and it cannot be restored or replaced through additional discovery, the court:

    (1) upon finding prejudice to another party from loss of the information, may order measures no greater than necessary to cure the prejudice; or

    (2) only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation may:

    (A) presume that the lost information was unfavorable to the party;

    (B) instruct the jury that it may or must presume the information was unfavorable to the party; or

    (C) dismiss the action or enter a default judgment.

    OH MY…………… WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?


  4. Say Blob, who did you copy that legal masterpiece from? You should know by now everyone knows how incompetent your legal skills are. It’s like reading a paper turned in by a third grader but it’s written on the level of a college senior. Your plagiarism “tell” is when something is coherent and well written. Of course you are still completely ignorant of the law that affects you but that’s a different story.


          • That’s one reason my MPA Program uses capstones. They’re harder to plagiarize. I did manage to get one graduate student thrown out for gross plagiarization. Much like BS she seemed to think she could slide by a totally different writing style — multiple times in the same paper. Also she probably never considered that I might be familiar with “The New England Handbook for Newly Elected Local Officials.” OTOH, students never really know what strange stuff professors may be reading, do they? 😉
            Anyway, she also ripped off huge chunks of other stuff, easily findable using Google. The Student Judiciary guy said it was, bar none, the worst case he had seen in 30 years on the job. If I can locate him [he retired] maybe I should send him some of DF’s best work.


  5. Even if its a Federal Court Diversity case, State law applies to the Tort of negligence. Good luck with that. Also, given the massive deletions wholesale of exculpatory material a bench warrant might just get issued for perjury (the complaint was perjurious) or even obstruction of justice. Given the multi year history of harassment by this cretin, this pornographer – he might just get the book thrown at him. A black female judge is going to just love the year long harassment of Ali Akbar and all the nasty stuff and then the MICROSOFT LETTER is going to suck and that evidence has been deleted too.


  6. Rules?

    The courts have rules?

    Rules that people are supposed to follow?

    And then if they don’t, someone enforces them?

    None of this seems familiar.

Leave a Reply