Judge Wright Orders Second Prenda Hearing, Tells Everyone They Better Actually Show Up This Time

from the encore! dept

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130314/12144422324/judge-wright-orders-second-prenda-hearing-tells-everyone-they-better-actually-show-up-this-time.shtml

This morning, Judge Otis Wright issued a new order in the big Prenda case, in which he's set up a new hearing, for March 29th, and made it quite clear that everyone associated with Prenda had better show up this time. He's rejected the motions from Team Prenda claiming that the court has no jurisdiction, saying that he's satisfied that he has specific jurisdiction over everyone involved based on the evidence from the hearing this week, "because of their pecuniary interest and active, albeit clandestine participation in these cases." Also, he's clearly not pleased about the claims that the court has no jurisdiction over Team Prenda:

Not only does the Ex Parte Application lack merit, its eleventh-hour filing exemplifies gamesmanship. Accordingly, the Ex Parte Application is DENIED.

Judge Wright again notes that there is evidence of sanctionable activity, as well as the possibility of fraud on the court, and he's ordering everyone involved to show up. The list has expanded somewhat. This is who is ordered to show up:

a) John Steele, of Steele Hansmeier PLLC, Prenda Law, Inc., and/or Livewire Holdings LLC;
b) Paul Hansmeier, of Steele Hansmeier PLLC and/or Livewire Holdings LLC;
c) Paul Duffy, of Prenda Law, Inc.;
d) Angela Van Den Hemel, of Prenda Law, Inc.;
e) Mark Lutz, of Prenda Law, Inc., AF Holdings LLC and/or Ingenuity 13 LLC;
f) Alan Cooper, of AF Holdings LLC;
g) Peter Hansemeier, of 6881 Forensics, LLC;
h) Prenda Law, Inc.;
i) Livewire Holdings LLC;
j) Steele Hansmeier PLLC;
k) AF Holdings LLC;
l) Ingenuity 13 LLC; and
m) 6881 Forensics, LLC.

Obviously, it is likely that there is a fair bit of overlap between the main players behind many of these entities. I note that he's still asking Alan Cooper from AF Holdings to show up... but no longer demanding Alan Cooper, caretaker to show up. Basically, one last chance for Steele to prove that the "other" Alan Cooper really exists. I'm a bit surprised there's no request for Alan Mony/Monay too.

Judge Wright even tells the lawyers from the other side -- Morgan Pietz and Nicholas Ranallo -- that they don't have to show up, though they're welcome to "if so desired." In other words, they don't have to do any more to prove the claims that they were making. The judge knows what's going on.

In terms of what the hearing will cover:

These persons and entities are ORDERED to appear on March 29, 2013, at 10:30 a.m., TO SHOW CAUSE for the following:

1) Why they should not be sanctioned for their participation, direction, and execution of the acts described in the Court’s February 7, 2013 Order to Show Cause;

2) Why they should not be sanctioned for failing to notify the Court of all parties that have a financial interest in the outcome of litigation;

3) Why they should not be sanctioned for defrauding the Court by misrepresenting the nature and relationship of the individuals and entities in subparagraphs a–m above;

4) Why John Steele and Paul Hansmeier should not be sanctioned for failing to make a pro hac vice appearance before the Court, given their involvement as “senior attorneys” in the cases; and

5) Why the individuals in subparagraphs a–g above should not be sanctioned for contravening the Court’s March 5, 2013 Order (ECF No. 66) and failing to appear on March 11, 2013.

Furthermore, to prevent further gaming around claims of not having enough time to find out about this order, Judge Wright has ordered Brett Gibbs to serve everyone by tomorrow, and to file proof of service by Monday. Oh yeah, he also has to show up for the big hearing on the 29th.

Oh, and should Team Prenda decide not to show up on the 29th? Sounds like it won't be a pretty picture:

Should the persons and entities in subparagraphs a–m above not appear on March 29, 2013, the Court is prepared to draw reasonable inferences concerning their conduct in the cases before the Court, including any inferences derived from their failure to appear. Failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of sanctions.

And I had just been running out of popcorn....