During the summer of 2015, Bill Schmalfeldt filed LOLsuit V: The Final in Maryland. After his In Forma Pauperis petition was challenged and other irregularities came to light, he panicked and dropped his case. Three years ago today, I took note of his capitulation in this post titled The Cabin Boy™ Throws in the Towel.
* * * * *
He’s filed this motion to dismiss his LOLsuit against Patrick Grady and others.
UPDATE—IANAL, so this isn’t legal advice, but <em>murum aries attigit</em>.
* * * * *
In his rush to get out from under the problems he was creating for himself, the Cabin Boy™ voluntarily dismissed his LOLsuit with prejudice. Dismissal with prejudice has the effect of granting the defendants a win based on the merits of the case. In other words, the Cabin Boy™ admitted his case was baseless. That should mean, for example, that he admitted Roy Schmalfeldt did not defame him by calling him a rapist.
That’s not exactly the same thing as admitting to being a rapist. IANAL, but it also seems to me that it doesn’t provide grounds for anyone else to call the Cabin Boy™ a rapist. However, it it truthful to report exactly what happened in LOLsuit V. Anyone learning those facts is free to form his own opinion concerning them.
“He sued someone for saying he was a rapist. The suit was dismissed with prejudice.” Seems clear, factual, concise, and not really arguable. That ought to be enough.
How about: “He decided that he couldn’t prove the elements of a defamation case, one element of which would be that he wasn’t a rapist. Another element would have been that calling him a rapist diminished his reputation in the community.”
Bill is not a disturbance of the farce – he is the source of it.
A formal answer WAS filed in this case, and before the court dismissed it. The court’s original order, which granted Bill’s motion and echo’d Bill’s claim that no answer was filed, was actually corrected by the court. Bill has never formally denied the claims contained within the countersuit filed with that answer. Therefore, using his logic, he must be guilty of those claims.
So you are saying that legally, we cannot defame Bill Schmalfeldt ( AKA Bill Matthews of KGYN radio) by calling him a rapist because of the dismissal with prejudice?