Vic Mignogna is in Trouble

[The1gairon]

Roosterteeth announced that Jason Liebrecht will replace Vic as the voice of Qrow in RWBY.  Jason can currently be heard on Toonami as the voice of Zeke and the Beast Titan in Attack on Titan.

https://www.cbr.com/rwby-jason-liebrecht-to-replace-vic-mignogna-in-rooster-teeth-series/?fbclid=IwAR1PtSFbxoJjGbkmpyNUklGgqf1kqH5By_DL24b2Q2oy9BtLxnK-2awDRTo

 

Edited July 2, 2019 by elfie

[Jman]

He’s gonna be harassed to hell and back.

[Top Gun]

https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2019-07-03/funimation-files-anti-slapp-motion-to-dismiss-vic-mignogna-lawsuit/.148570

Vic is so fucked.  It's fantastic.

[QueenoftheDorks]

Goddamn this makes me feel good.

[Daos]

Real lawyers vs imaginary lawyers.. WHO GUNNA WIN?

[PokeNirvash]

Whoever wins, we lose.

[HardcoreHunter]

So funimation has a 168 page document to dismiss the case against them. What I'm taking from it is that Funimation is saying that Vic is a public figure which ignores your public expectation of privacy. They also throw Monica, Jamie, Ron and the gang under the bus to separate their cases. Making it very clear that these are all separate social media accounts and they are not responsible for what their co-defendants say. Their argument is for Vic to prove that Funimation has acted with malice. 

They are also calling for Monica and Jamie's to have their social media harassment charges be dismissed. This is very much throwing the others under the bus and almost exactly what I said they'd pull.

They further emphasis that neither the co-defendants nor Vic are employees or agents of funimation and are Independent contractors; absolving funimation of any libel.

They go on to say that Funimation has no right to control any of their co-defendants alleged conduct nor their social media. I can see this being brought up against them. It's pretty much saying that they wouldn't do anything to police their freelance workers; when case in point they did that to Vic. They continue to emphasis that their co-defendants were operating outside of their scope and relationship with funimation.  Once again same can be said with what Vic was accused of. 

First part of the evidence they have deposition of Karin Mika. this goes over a lot of what we already know of the investigation run by sony. What is interesting is her wording was that she had informed Vic that they were terminating his contract. This is different from what we have been told up till now. Everything I have seen prior to this said that he wasn't in the employ of funimation, and that they simply chose not to hire him in the future. Him being under contract and terminated does give him a wrongful termination case if what Mika's saying is accurate. She then goes on to say that Funimation is not responsible for their co-defendants. 

 

Then there's over 150 pages of articles from twitter, polygon, ANN etc as their evidence. From what I can tell from that is that they're just trying to prove he's a celebrity and not a citizen, which removes expectation of privacy, and helps cover their backs. Some of the articles though are actually from well before all this happened and speak rather positively of Vic. Still it's odd seeing shit like memes and twitter comments about yaoi in a court document. All in all they don't care about their co-defendants and are doing what they can to get out, like I said. They may very well have the case against them dropped by the judge. However that also might not happen because they talked themselves in circles and contradicted their point a few times 

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/415375645/Funimation-s-TCPA-Motion-to-Dismiss

 

 

[Top Gun]

They're not "throwing anyone under the bus."  They're simply stating the fact that FUNi's own tweets on the matter are the only relevant ones to the suit against FUNi specifically, and that because Vic is a public figure (which he absolutely is), the entire foundation of the suit is invalid.  There's a massive difference between not being responsible for any tweets Monica and Jamie may have chosen to make, and making the decision to stop working with an alleged sexual predator who made unwanted advances on other people they were employing.  Apparently part of Vic's original suit (absurdly enough) is that FUNi was responsible by proxy for those tweets by other people, which falls flat on its face under any sort of logic.  And nothing in that document states that FUNi had any sort of permanent "contract" with Vic, only that, like all of its voice actors, it contracts them independently for specific roles.

Seriously your takes on this continue to be complete bullshit.

[HardcoreHunter]

16 minutes ago, Top Gun said:

 Seriously your takes on this continue to be complete bullshit.

Some of it could be viewed as harming to the co-defendants defense, which is how I view it. They also pointed out that Vic was telling people online to knock their shit off, and felt that their co-defendants allegation of malicious online harassment should be dropped; and posted evidence of Vic 's tweet telling people to knock their shit off. That is 100% throwing them under the bus. They had no reason to state that, nor any grounds to request their co-defendants counter claims be dropped. I see that move in two ways. 1 thrown under the bus in the hopes that Vic will just drop the charges against Funi since this would help his case against who I assume his real targets are. 2 Funi actually views the co-defendants social media blow ups as more harming to themselves than harmful to Vic. Then again I could just be overthinking it. Either way Ron should request that be redacted from the record if they plan to use that as part of their counter claim. 

[Top Gun]

You're entirely over-thinking it.  FUNi's lawyers are solely concerned with FUNi's own defense, and they don't want FUNi being named as a third party in separate suits that FUNi had nothing to do with.  Their mentioning of Vic's own statements is to further the case that Vic himself admitted at least some degree of culpability. That's it.

[Daos]

Vic's lawyers are trying to use the "they called my client a piece of shit but he is not in fact an actual piece of shit" defense.

They're not serious lawyers.

[The1gairon]

It's funnier because the abbrevation resembles comedic physical abuse!

Ya can't make this stuff up.

[PokeNirvash]

Fapping =/= slapstick.

[The1gairon]

53 minutes ago, PokeNirvash said:

Fapping =/= slapstick.

SLAPP.  From the link above.

[PokeNirvash]

Oh, right. FAP was something else I read about recently. My bad! 😅

[The1gairon]

 

I gues ......Vic's testimony has been posted online for all to see today and ....my lord is it a mess! He is go-ing tooo loooose this case!

[DragonSinger]

5 hours ago, elfie said:

 

I gues ......Vic's testimony has been posted online for all to see today and ....my lord is it a mess! He is go-ing tooo loooose this case!

😏His dumbass should not have tried to fuck with Funimation.

 

[Daos]

I actually read an article months ago from a girl that said that she was at that school when he was a teacher, and he was doing the same shit back then. Being super aggressive in the pursuit of underage tail. But never actually getting to the point of sexual assault. Then he basically just disappeared and no one knew why.

So yeah funny that they dug that up and are using that against him as well.

[Jman]

Gee, it’s almost like trying to mess with a company backed by Sony lawyers is a bad idea.

[DragonSinger]

7 minutes ago, Jman said:

Gee, it’s almost like trying to mess with a company backed by Sony lawyers is a bad idea.

And the idjit probably has no idea that he's made himself unemployable to any legit company after the answers he gave about kissing children. I have zero training in law, and even I know his lawyers fucked him up the ass with a nail-studded club by not preparing him properly for any of these questions. 

[Chapinator_X]

These are mistakes that a criminal from Ace Attorney would make. You'd think he'd be more prepared to answer questions if he was sure he'd win the lawsuit that he filed, but it's telling when the plaintiff is giving the flimsiest answers and the poorest defense. How can you even create the suit to begin with if you already planned on telling the judge that kissing underage girls is fine depending on the circumstances?

[Gina Szanboti]

I'm still working my way through this guy's recap (does anyone have a link to the whole deposition?), but this is not what I'd call a clever opening gambit:

"Sorry, I was daydreaming of the tropical getaway $200G is going to buy me just for showing up here.  At least Lemoine seems to be having a good time, but you can just hear his wry amusement at all this coming through the text.

[Daos]

Nope turns out Vic won according to Flash and the people commenting.

 

[Chapinator_X]

 

[Gina Szanboti]

Daos, can you provide a brief summary of some of their delusions on how they think Vic won?  I don't want to give them views.

[The1gairon]

What the hell did I say about linking to videos about this??

[PokeNirvash]

7 minutes ago, elfie said:

What the hell did I say about linking to videos about this??

First amendment rights, Elfie. They're a thing, even in cases such as this.

[Chapinator_X]

15 minutes ago, elfie said:

What the hell did I say about linking to videos about this??

I think my YouTube link is highly valuable in demonstrating the plaintiff’s deductive reasoning. 

[Daos]

3 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

Daos, can you provide a brief summary of some of their delusions on how they think Vic won?  I don't want to give them views.

I don't even know. But there's lots of comments like this

"Now, now. We should all remember. It's unwise to claim victory until you actually get the victory. We've all just learned from this video. Ah, who am I kidding. Vic won. Vic has won. Vic has won so hard that he could overload both Korea's economies. Why? Because it's easy to win when your opponents are actively making themselves look bad."

Edited July 13, 2019 by Daos

[EmpressAngel]

48 minutes ago, Daos said:

Because it's easy to win when your opponents are actively making themselves look bad.

Vic's lawyers: Our client is not literally made out of feces.

[Daos]

2 minutes ago, EmpressAngel said:

Vic's lawyers: Our client is not literally made out of feces.

They have a smoking gun. It's a video of Vic taking a dump.

As we all know, a piece of shit can not actually take a shit. So this video proves without a shadow of a doubt that Vic is NOT a literal piece of shit.

Case.... Closed.

 

[QueenoftheDorks]

Lord in heaven thank you rando Twitter man for reading this for me because this is gold.

[DragonSinger]

40 minutes ago, QueenoftheDorks said:

Lord in heaven thank you rando Twitter man for reading this for me because this is gold.

I find it hilarious that some of the people posting the court documents aren't even into anime. They saw Vic stans acting like fools on Twitter, wanted to know what all the nonsense was about, so they looked up the story and got hooked on how stupid Vic's attorneys were 😂.

[Gina Szanboti]

Again, has anyone found where the whole thing is online?

Ironically, I think it could well be the Risembool Rangers that are the biggest leak in this sinking ship.

Any jury they get would almost certainly have no idea about FMA or why his fans would want to call him The Fuhrer.  His mother being The Matriarch of his fandom is just icing on the shit pie, given his age (and boy did he try to avoid admitting she was even involved!).  It's kind of weird that he didn't try to clarify why they attached that name to him (come to think of it, it's kinda weird no matter what you know about it, since he wasn't playing Bradley).  I mean, just imagine him or his lawyers trying to explain this to a jury.

Edit: and note how careful Lemoine was to specify "human being" in that question.  I think he expected Vic to try to explain it too.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Gina Szanboti

[The1gairon]

If you know you are going to be questioned, you prepare in advance any and all reasons for them!!! Why didn't he state what the story behind the nickname was!? Why is Vic acting so passive through this entire thing?? Does he care about his own future!?

Edited July 15, 2019 by elfie

[PokeNirvash]

Simple: he knows he's fucked and sees no point in trying to salvage his already sunken reputation by any means.

I'm already prepared for Xander Mobus to take over most of his roles that could require reprisal in the future.

[DragonSinger]

2 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

Again, has anyone found where the whole thing is online?

Ironically, I think it could well be the Risembool Rangers that are the biggest leak in this sinking ship.

Any jury they get would almost certainly have no idea about FMA or why his fans would want to call him The Fuhrer.  His mother being The Matriarch of his fandom is just icing on the shit pie, given his age (and boy did he try to avoid admitting she was even involved!).  It's kind of weird that he didn't try to clarify why they attached that name to him (come to think of it, it's kinda weird no matter what you know about it, since he wasn't playing Bradley).  I mean, just imagine him or his lawyers trying to explain this to a jury.

Edit: and note how careful Lemoine was to specify "human being" in that question.  I think he expected Vic to try to explain it too.

Here ya go.

[Gina Szanboti]

Thanks.  I had actually found that earlier, but I thought it was just regarding the scope of discovery motion.  The depo doesn't start until page 20 as Exhibit A.

What jumped out at me right off the bat was this:

So what's the first thing they do?  Put it online and have a YT livestream of the video (I think - I haven't given them any hits, so the titles could be lyin')!  oO

Anyway, I dl'd it before it gets yanked.  ::puts on the popcorn::

[HardcoreHunter]

5 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

It's kind of weird that he didn't try to clarify why they attached that name to him

You can't clarify. If you try to clarify it is objected as a non-responsive answer. You're only options are yes, no, not to my knowledge, to the best of my memory yes/no etc. There are a few times where they called Objection Non-Responsive on Vic for trying to clarify. I think it's sad that the attorney is trying to paint fans who aren't involved in this as a neo nazi group. Vic even says that they're kids and they didn't mean anything harmful by it; and it gets objected non-responsive.  Then he was saying that Vic should have had full control over what this fan group was saying about him and told them to stop, and that he is responsible for it....unlike how Funimation can shirk responsibility for things that their freelance workers say on social media while currently under contract.  

[Gina Szanboti]

They can object to what he says in the depo, but they can't stop him from saying it, like they can in a trial.  He had as much latitude as he wanted to explain, he just didn't bother.  It's up to a judge to later determine if the jury can hear his explanation or not.  If they don't object at the time, then they can't later.

His lawyers come off as utterly disinterested in the whole proceeding, while he comes off as someone who's insulated himself in such a tiny bubble that all he can see is actually doing his job and having a vague sense that people are being mean to him.  I don't know if he was trying to seem stupid, or if he really is that helpless about adulting?  If neither, then he's an habitual liar like Trump.  All those "I don't know, can't recall" moments feel like his version of taking the 5th.

Some of the things he claims he doesn't know:

Whether he's a contractor or regular employee, and how he gets paid.
How much money has been raised in his name and where it's going, or really anything at all about the GFM War Chest, including its purpose or whether he's even seen the website before.
The general makeup of his fandom.
Whether he was fired for sexual misconduct or resigned from his teaching job. (dude, if the former, you'd remember that.  If not, then that leaves the latter)
The names of any other voice actors in the industry who might be more well-known than he.
Who his lawyers were and are.  Who his agent(s) is.
Who the main players behind the Rangers are (except for one moderator), including the extent of his mother's involvement.
He's never heard of Gizmodo, barely heard of ANN, has never read any of the interviews he's done with anyone, though he might've heard some rumors about their content.  At least he finally admitted to maybe reading the Polygon article, after a lot of hedging.
He's not entirely sure what Sentai is, or ADV Films (though he made some miraculously spot on guesses!)
He may or may not have an iCloud account, but doesn't know if his phone backs up to it.
Can't put a monetary value on the results of the alleged defamation (does that mean he doesn't even know what he's asking for in the lawsuit???).
How many people have publicly accused him of sexual misconduct in his hotel room(s), though he thinks it's probably fewer than five.
Plus many, many more (unfortunately, it's in a format that's not searchable).  He's not working, or going to many cons, so you'd think he'd have time to bone up on some of this stuff.

But given how dire all this ought to be, he's taking it bizarrely lightly.  Like these exchanges:

Q: [Are you familiar with] chebedragonessa47?
A: It's fun to say, isn't it?

Q: If you turn to Exhibit 8.  Are you familiar with a magazine called --
A: Oh, that's awesome, what a great picture.  [This is like stopping in the middle of your testimony and whipping out a mirror to admire yourself in it.]

This is just not how you behave in court or a deposition room. 

Lol about the "witness consultant" they had in there at the beginning, who turned out to basically just be Vic's hair and makeup before they booted her.

Edited July 15, 2019 by Gina Szanboti

[HardcoreHunter]

I've been to court multiple times, some of the time it's a really informal table session when you're going over things. It can sometimes be a good or bad thing depending on the person. You just have to remember that you are working on your case the whole time and not to say anything dumb. The casual nature tends to make people slip up. Usually they're testing for credibility. If you make your case sound more dire than it really is that can be held against you, like over exaggerating or even underselling. I do believe that Vic defiantly will raise some credibility concerns in his refusal to accept his celebrity status. Youtube personalities are considered celebrity for far less. 

I'd believe though that he can't recall names or reports people have done on him. Hell some people in this thread I've talked to for over a decade and they don't remember me. There are people in real life and online who I can't personally remember. I even helped write an article for Evangelion 2.22 when it came out for otaku usa, and couldn't tell you exactly what it says from memory. 

As for answers like "i don't recall". Those are actually considered good answers by attorneys. From speaking with my attorney a non answer is usually preferred over sitting there and holding up proceedings. These things are appointments and Judges hate it when they go over because it backs them up. As for money figures he was very ill-prepared. Even in small claims you can bring some cheat sheets in with you that have figures, names, dates etc on them. I don't know if that is all on him or if Beard was horrible at preparing him for what questions he would most likely be asked, and how to go about answering them, ontop of bringing some documents. For his million it would be salary x years left till retirement, and for cons it would be going back the last decade gathering the money made, and going by the average to figure out what you would make for the next 10 years or so. If he made between 7k and 12k then it would be 9.5k x 10 = 95k. Most likely though no VA is going to do that because they're probably only reporting what the Con is paying them and not all the under the table cash that they'd get from signing stuff merch etc. So if they're only reporting so much in taxes then they really wouldn't want to bring that up, and risk catching the IRS attention. 

Really just going to have to see how things progress. 

[naraku360]

6 hours ago, SorceressPol said:

Here ya go.

18. This is not at all surprising, as Plaintiff admits receiving criticism for years for 
kissing young girls, and acknowledges rumors of pedophilia following him well prior to January 
2019.17

 

[DragonSinger]

1 hour ago, HardcoreHunter said:

I've been to court multiple times, some of the time it's a really informal table session when you're going over things. It can sometimes be a good or bad thing depending on the person. You just have to remember that you are working on your case the whole time and not to say anything dumb. The casual nature tends to make people slip up. Usually they're testing for credibility. If you make your case sound more dire than it really is that can be held against you, like over exaggerating or even underselling. I do believe that Vic defiantly will raise some credibility concerns in his refusal to accept his celebrity status. Youtube personalities are considered celebrity for far less. 

I'd believe though that he can't recall names or reports people have done on him. Hell some people in this thread I've talked to for over a decade and they don't remember me. There are people in real life and online who I can't personally remember. I even helped write an article for Evangelion 2.22 when it came out for otaku usa, and couldn't tell you exactly what it says from memory. 

As for answers like "i don't recall". Those are actually considered good answers by attorneys. From speaking with my attorney a non answer is usually preferred over sitting there and holding up proceedings. These things are appointments and Judges hate it when they go over because it backs them up. As for money figures he was very ill-prepared. Even in small claims you can bring some cheat sheets in with you that have figures, names, dates etc on them. I don't know if that is all on him or if Beard was horrible at preparing him for what questions he would most likely be asked, and how to go about answering them, ontop of bringing some documents. For his million it would be salary x years left till retirement, and for cons it would be going back the last decade gathering the money made, and going by the average to figure out what you would make for the next 10 years or so. If he made between 7k and 12k then it would be 9.5k x 10 = 95k. Most likely though no VA is going to do that because they're probably only reporting what the Con is paying them and not all the under the table cash that they'd get from signing stuff merch etc. So if they're only reporting so much in taxes then they really wouldn't want to bring that up, and risk catching the IRS attention. 

Really just going to have to see how things progress. 

Unless you receive brain damage, you're gonna remember whether or not you had to resign or were let go for inappropriate behavior with a student. And that is NOT a question you want to be on the record for not having a strong denial for. Dude was unprepared for all of the questions. And it's only Vic's fault for having such a stupid lawsuit that no one competent wanted to touch this, but he went forward with that schmuck Beard representing him anyway. This is what happens when you're a smug asshole who's gotten away with shady shit for years while living in a bubble of people fawning over him. He has absolutely no idea how to handle real consequences that he brought on himself.

[Daos]

8 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

They can object to what he says in the depo, but they can't stop him from saying it, like they can in a trial.  He had as much latitude as he wanted to explain, he just didn't bother.  It's up to a judge to later determine if the jury can hear his explanation or not.  If they don't object at the time, then they can't later.

His lawyers come off as utterly disinterested in the whole proceeding, while he comes off as someone who's insulated himself in such a tiny bubble that all he can see is actually doing his job and having a vague sense that people are being mean to him.  I don't know if he was trying to seem stupid, or if he really is that helpless about adulting?  If neither, then he's an habitual liar like Trump.  All those "I don't know, can't recall" moments feel like his version of taking the 5th.

Some of the things he claims he doesn't know:

Whether he's a contractor or regular employee, and how he gets paid.
How much money has been raised in his name and where it's going, or really anything at all about the GFM War Chest, including its purpose or whether he's even seen the website before.
The general makeup of his fandom.
Whether he was fired for sexual misconduct or resigned from his teaching job. (dude, if the former, you'd remember that.  If not, then that leaves the latter)
The names of any other voice actors in the industry who might be more well-known than he.
Who his lawyers were and are.  Who his agent(s) is.
Who the main players behind the Rangers are (except for one moderator), including the extent of his mother's involvement.
He's never heard of Gizmodo, barely heard of ANN, has never read any of the interviews he's done with anyone, though he might've heard some rumors about their content.  At least he finally admitted to maybe reading the Polygon article, after a lot of hedging.
He's not entirely sure what Sentai is, or ADV Films (though he made some miraculously spot on guesses!)
He may or may not have an iCloud account, but doesn't know if his phone backs up to it.
Can't put a monetary value on the results of the alleged defamation (does that mean he doesn't even know what he's asking for in the lawsuit???).
How many people have publicly accused him of sexual misconduct in his hotel room(s), though he thinks it's probably fewer than five.
Plus many, many more (unfortunately, it's in a format that's not searchable).  He's not working, or going to many cons, so you'd think he'd have time to bone up on some of this stuff.

But given how dire all this ought to be, he's taking it bizarrely lightly.  Like these exchanges:

Q: [Are you familiar with] chebedragonessa47?
A: It's fun to say, isn't it?

Q: If you turn to Exhibit 8.  Are you familiar with a magazine called --
A: Oh, that's awesome, what a great picture.  [This is like stopping in the middle of your testimony and whipping out a mirror to admire yourself in it.]

This is just not how you behave in court or a deposition room. 

Lol about the "witness consultant" they had in there at the beginning, who turned out to basically just be Vic's hair and makeup before they booted her.

Vic's entire problem seems to be a massive case of ....

"Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. People with narcissistic personality disorder may be generally unhappy and disappointed when they're not given the special favors or admiration they believe they deserve. They may find their relationships unfulfilling, and others may not enjoy being around them."

 

That pretty much explains why he's even bringing this case to court. A normal person busted for 20 years of inappropriate behavior would probably lay low for a while.

 

 

Edited July 15, 2019 by Daos

[EmpressAngel]

12 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

Whether he's a contractor or regular employee, and how he gets paid.

Dude, even the 16-year old girls he's creeping on who are working their first jobs at Walmart know how they get paid. This is just embarrassing.

[Gina Szanboti]

13 hours ago, HardcoreHunter said:

I'd believe though that he can't recall names or reports people have done on him. Hell some people in this thread I've talked to for over a decade and they don't remember me. There are people in real life and online who I can't personally remember. I even helped write an article for Evangelion 2.22 when it came out for otaku usa, and couldn't tell you exactly what it says from memory. 

I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but remembering you or anyone here is not high on my list of priorities.  You guys don't impact my career or professional standing in any way.  If your income and employability depend in a not insignificant way on your public image, then most people would at least know some of the major players in that side of the business (like ANN, who interviewed him just last year (and two other times), and asked for a response for their story on this just 5 mo. ago.  He's also appeared on their podcast, but he's practically never heard of them?), as well as who their "rivals" and colleagues are. 

I've been interviewed a few times in my life, and I always wanted to see how the article turned out and how badly what I said was misrepresented.   If my career hinged in part on my fame, it seems like I'd be even more vigilant about that, but maybe that could get overwhelming at a certain point.  But I don't think he's reached the level of fame where you have to ignore the tabloids to keep your sanity.

13 hours ago, HardcoreHunter said:

As for answers like "i don't recall". Those are actually considered good answers by attorneys. From speaking with my attorney a non answer is usually preferred over sitting there and holding up proceedings. These things are appointments and Judges hate it when they go over because it backs them up.

There's no judge present during a deposition.  It's not even done in a court room.  That's why Lemoine reassured him he could ask for a break, or take his time answering because this wasn't "a Bataan Death March."

I know that "I don't recall" is a standard way of not answering a question.  I have been watching the House Committee hearings.  But while there are some things it's reasonable not to recall, or to hedge with "not to my knowledge," waffling that way on some questions just really shoots your credibility in the hoof.  Like why hedge about knowing what Sentai is for crying out loud?  Why not just say "They're an anime dubbing company in Houston," instead of "I believe Sentai is the new company formed in Houston" like it's some kind of gotcha question?  And yet, he does remember that the woman organizer of a new convention was the yellow ranger in Power Rangers! 

[EmpressAngel]

I fail to understand how "I don't recall" is a quality answer to who your lawyers are during a legal appointment. Like, unless it's some weird attempt to lay the groundwork for claiming they were such a terrible law firm he didn't even know who was representing him?

[HardcoreHunter]

14 hours ago, Gina Szanboti said:

There's no judge present during a deposition

I've had them in some of the ones I've been involved with. I was in one last week where the judge told us we could ask for breaks. Then again small claims can be far different than a larger case like this. 

7 hours ago, EmpressAngel said:

I fail to understand how "I don't recall" is a quality answer to who your lawyers are during a legal appointment. Like, unless it's some weird attempt to lay the groundwork for claiming they were such a terrible law firm he didn't even know who was representing him?

It's odd but that's how it is. Pretty much the court can't say how good your memory is or what you choose to remember, it's a person to person basis. It makes it so that you have to rely more on concrete evidence that you can physically see and show to the court. 

[Gina Szanboti]

9 hours ago, HardcoreHunter said:

I've had them in some of the ones I've been involved with. I was in one last week where the judge told us we could ask for breaks. Then again small claims can be far different than a larger case like this. 

Are you sure that was a deposition? oO Judges aren't usually present for those even in criminal cases, let alone small claims, and depositions usually take place in attorney's offices or a business that provides deposition services.  It's hard to imagine a judge taking time to oversee a deposition for a small claims case.  I can't say it's never happened but as the lawyer told Vic, you must be a unicorn.

Heh, regarding objections to form, I ran across this bit about TX rules:

Objections to form are frequently used to signal the witness to be careful in answering the question. Since the judge is not present, all other objections, in particular those involving the rules of evidence, are generally preserved until trial. They still can be made sometime at the deposition to indicate the serious problem to judge and witness, but the witness must answer the question despite these objections. If the form objection is made, the opposite party still has the right to re-phrase the same question and ask it again. Indeed, in Texas, lawyers were so aggressively using objections to indirectly coach their witnesses on the record that all objections outside four narrow categories are now prohibited and making such prohibited objections waives all objections to the question or answer at issue.

[HardcoreHunter]

1 hour ago, Gina Szanboti said:

Are you sure that was a deposition?

Yeah she was Judge tananbaum. It is rare, as usually there isn't a judge. However last week and a couple of other times I've seen judges present. Right now I'm dealing with someone who doesn't want to pay construction fees. They're 3 weeks behind, so I had to tell them that I can't continue this unless they pay me for at least one week as to our agreement etc.  Their argument is that they shouldn't have to pay me despite signing a contract, and if I don't finish then I have to pay them ontop of my labor I've already done, materials etc. Needless to say we did this and the court date is at the end august. Unrelated. 

Yeah I can't say that I'm fully brushed up on TX rules. From what I understood on objections was that you could object for a multiple of reasons. A judge can approve or deny any objections though. Things that can be objected would be hypothetical scenarios not presented by an expert,  leading questions, relevance etc.