Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Benchmark Young Adult School / Benchmark Transitions

Benchmark v. Crawford Attorney's Fees Ruling

<< < (2/7) > >>

psy:

--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---I can't download at the moment. Don't tell me... Benchmark is reneging on their legal responsibility to pay your attorney fees?
--- End quote ---
Not quite yet.  This is the judge's ruling on the motion for attorney's fees.  Basically it says: Benchmark has to pay me and my attorneys 187k.

Add their attorney's fees, decreased enrollment, shit economy and I imagine they're going to be in a world of financial hurt.

psy:

--- Quote from: "Guest" ---A HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SEVEN THOUSAND FUCKING DOLLARS

FUCKING OWNED

 :jawdrop:  :jawdrop:  :jawdrop:

 :twofinger:  :twofinger:  :twofinger:
--- End quote ---

basically.

 :seg2:

The judge gave us the 1.5 lodestar multiplier too (for the contingent fee basis risk).

psy:

--- Quote ---11 The opposition to the anti-SLAPP motion (which was nearly as substantial as the
12 motion itself and included 18 declarations) injected new and never-before-pleaded
13 statements. The opposition appeared to abandon the original allegations of the
14 complaint and brought in new allegations, essentially amending the complaint.
--- End quote ---

This is where they tried to create a moving target.  It's their own fault it was so expensive.  They didn't have to keep amending their damn complaint every time we turned up evidence to support what they claimed to be "defamatory".

It was like they said "you lied about X" and when we explained how X was either opinion or true, they attempted to say "you lied about Y"...  and so forth.  My attorneys ended up calling this a "switcheroo" in one of their motions (I think it was the one for attorney's fees).

The thing is, an anti-SLAPP motion forbids the amending of a complaint (the legislation was designed to prevent this exact moving target game).  So what they did was to try and use their response to the anti-SLAPP motion to amend their complaint.  The judge did not appear to be amused by his ruling.

REad the ruling...  it's fairly straightforward and easy to read.  It tells a facinating and hilarious tale.

Anonymous:
What makes this one really funny is that Psy didn't even have to initiate the lolsuit; an anti-SLAPP counterclaim, which any attorney worth his shit could do, was enough to bring the ownage. Programmies are fucking clueless when it comes to law in places their mindset doesn't control.

I think the lesson learned here should be clear: Give in, and get nothing except more abuse. Fight, and win. Potentially win quite a lot.

Going to Disney World?

act.da:
Congrats psy! I'm glad the court has done the right thing, it must put your mind at ease knowing you won't have to pay the $30,000 bill from fighting Benchmark's SLAPP. Hopefully these rulings should discourage other programs from trying such dirty tricks. Wonder how Benchmark will take this loss of $187,417.74 to you/your lawyers PLUS their own lawyers fees... I'll keep my eyes open for a "closing due to financial situation" notice from them.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page