![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
VICTORY! The Jonmon lawsuit is over! Dismissed voluntarily with prejudice by the plaintiff
My awesome lawyer Dan Booth has just informed me that Jonathan Monsarrat's lawyer has filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice. This means that the case is OVER, against all defendants, named and unnamed, Doe and Buck alike. "With Prejudice" means that it can never be filed again, against any of us, for any statement in any of the exhibits that were attached to the complaint.
Johnny Monsarrat and his lawyer tried several times to reach a settlement agreement with Dan and me, but for various reasons we ended up rejecting each proposal. In the end, he has simply given up, without any mutual agreement, public or private.
Here's the official text of the notice:
NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
Pursuant to the provisions of Mass. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(i), the Plaintiff, Jonathan Graves Monsarrat, in the above-captioned matter, hereby files and gives notice of dismissal, with prejudice and without costs to either party, as to Deb Filcman, Ron Newman, the Doe Defendant identified as Doe Defendant "srakkt" in paragraph 51 of the Amended Complaint, whose real name is Richard James Scheffler of Somerville, Massachusetts, and John and Jane Does 1-99, as defendants in the Amended Complaint.
ETA: If Johnny had not voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit today, Dan Booth was ready to file this motion to dismiss and this supporting memorandum on Monday. (The supporting memo is the more interesting document.) It would be a shame for Dan to go to all that trouble and not be able to share his work, so I'm linking it here with his permission, for your legal edification.
no subject
1. jonmon sues multiple people with a stated purpose of hurting them monetarily for causing him imagined harm.
2. They are forced to hire separate multiple lawyers.
3. jonmon threatens more people with being added to the lawsuit, and brags in two press releases that he's intending to harm all these people.
4. jonmon dismisses the lawsuit.
Thus, the upshot is that he has put out the money for one lawyer, and the people he wanted to hurt have put out money for multiple lawyers.
I'd say jonmon has won, because he has succeeded in his purpose of hurting multiple people monetarily.
Yes, I know that Ron doesn't have to pay for council, but Deb (or her employers) and srakkt did. And since a fund was created, those who donated to the fund are out that money too.
IANAL, but can a dismissed suit be countersued for damages? I hope so.
no subject
1) That Ron not be held accountable for something he did not do.
2) That members of the community be allowed honest and free expression.
I feel no need to reclaim my donation and honestly, I have zero desire to engage in any sort of interaction or discourse with the guy. He's out of my life and he can damn well stay out.
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
In my IANAL opinion, and I think in the opinion as I understand it of several attorneys who have commented on and litigated the suit, it was sufficiently frivolous that if, indeed, it had proceeded, Ron's and Deb's lawyers could have countersued for legal fees and sanctions, and there's a good chance they would have won both.
Having said that, it would have prolonged the lawsuit for months and possibly years, and it would have been hanging over the head of all the defendants during all that time, and it would have given Monsarrat more time to do something irrational like start outing people's real identities just out of spite, and in the end, winning legal fees and/or sanctions was not a sure thing. Therefore, convincing Monsarrat and his lawyers to dismiss the suit with prejudice is by far the more expedient thing to have done.
Furthermore, you have to keep in mind that the fact that Monsarrat filed this lawsuit and ended up dismissing it with prejudice, and the absolutely devastating responses to the lawsuit filed and made public by Ron's and Deb's lawyers, are going to hound Monsarrat for, quite literally, the rest of his life. Stuff like that is On The Record Forever, as he should have known all to well before he sued, since that's essentially what he was suing about!
With all that available in Google to anyone who searches for it, in my opinion Monsarrat doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever again convincing anyone to invest in any venture with which he's involved.
Believe me, now that it's over, this lawsuit is going to hurt him a lot more than it hurt Ron, Deb, and the other defendants.
no subject
and also: this motion to dismiss and this supporting memorandum, which Dan Booth was ready to file next Monday if Monsarrat hadn't voluntarily dismissed the case with prejudice today.
It would be a shame if I were the only person who ever got to read these documents, so I've made them public here (with Dan Booth's enthusiastic permission).
no subject
no subject
I, likewise, would have loved to see Monsarrat pay costs, but what happened is a much better outcome overall.
no subject
no subject
I'm curious because I think the only people who can say this (that they feel they lost because they spent money on the defense) are in a position to say that it was a loss. If you did, then you're totally in your rights to feel that it was such, but if you didn't, then I don't know that it's for you to say.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
WOOHOO INTERNET DISCOURSE STAY AWESOME.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject