Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[FamicomGorby]

Why are these two dudes just dragging their feet about Greer? Are they just conferring about how to give the gimp a win and not make it look like another total miscarriage of justice? Are they cobbling together the legal version of a Goldberg machine?

I'd assume that they just hate this case since it generates an inordinate amount of filings they have to review, most of them being piece of shit ones written by Greer. If there's one thing a federal employee hates, it's doing work.

Tuesday this week will have been 14 days since Hardin filed his request for ~$4500 in sanctions against Greer, I don't think we'll hear anything else from the court until we're past that. Unless maybe they finally wanna get around to doing something about Greer ignoring the show cause order because reading emails is hard.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

ECF 371

 

[StinkySnack]

ECF 371

View attachment 8092720

View attachment 8092730
View attachment 8092731
View attachment 8092732
View attachment 8092733
View attachment 8092734
View attachment 8092735

This one reads to me like the AI he's using doesn't fully understand the reason for the sanctions.

 

[obsdj]

ECF 371

He definitely utilized AI to some extent for this one. Also "good faith/good-faith" appears no fewer than five times.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

This one reads to me like the AI he's using doesn't fully understand the reason for the sanctions.

It's also factually wrong and with hallucinations. For example, the AI asserts that "the Court has already acknowledged that Plaintiff acted in good faith", but that is neither true, nor proven in the response

 

[Thoughtcrime84]

Plaintiff has already paid $1,245 in prior sanctions arising from a misunderstanding over the initial disclosures. Reopening the financial penalty box for another $4,620 on top of that would not deter future conduct

I like how he states outright, even via gpt, that more sanctions won't deter him from greereing out further.

 

[goblin enby]

'$4,620 would not deter future conduct'

Is this the first time Greee has said something that is actually true?

 

[StinkySnack]

It's also factually wrong and with hallucinations. For example, the AI asserts that "the Court has already acknowledged that Plaintiff acted in good faith", but that is neither true, nor proven in the response

Yep. Big time hallucinations. I can only imagine the wild crap Russ is furiously feeding into it for it to generate such incorrect nonsense. Hopefully Hardin makes mention of these falsities.

'$4,620 would not deter future conduct'

The correct response to this from the judge would be to double the amount and ask if that would be enough to deter.

 

[Terrifik]

i think RUSS asked the ai to ask for what he need ignoreing the other facts in the case.
everytime this thred gets locked a random big up date comes out.
I expect a ruling by friday .

 

[Harvey Danger]

You know what would be really really useful here? Calling out individual items in Hardin's billing that are unrelated, self-multiplying, or excessive. But Greer the AI doesn't object to a single specific thing in that report.

The only thing Greer has learned from these sanctions is that AI can't nitpick billing reports, only whine about them generically.




Every judge and lawyer I know would yell THAT'S A GOOD THING.

 

[Jacknife]

Yep. Big time hallucinations. I can only imagine the nonsense Russ is furiously feeding into it for it to generate such incorrect nonsense. Hopefully Hardin makes mention of these falsities.

Easy, he does trial and error and bends the truth until the AI tells him what he wants to hear (that he's in the right)
The resulting document is purely coincidental

Something that stuck out to me was how he said that Hardin self inflicted these fees and mentioned various staus reports.

But these were ordered by the court, weren't they?

 

[Terrifik]

View attachment 8092750

You know what would be really really useful here? Calling out individual items in Hardin's billing that are unrelated, self-multiplying, or excessive. But Greer the AI doesn't object to a single specific thing in that report.

The only thing Greer has learned from these sanctions is that AI can't nitpick billing reports, only whine about them generically.


View attachment 8092744

Every judge and lawyer I know would yell THAT'S A GOOD THING.

he believes the judge will save him again on the extra issues & that this the process for the song & dance.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Something that stuck out to me was how he said that Hardin self inflicted these fees and mentioned various staus reports.

But these were ordered by the court, weren't they?

Mr. Hardin did not seek even a single dollar for any status report relating to Rule 11. There were various status reports order for the other (discovery) sanctions.

 

[DavidS877]

'$4,620 would not deter future conduct'

Is this the first time Greee has said something that is actually true?

Well, if a financial sanction won't deter future conduct you know what would.

Dismissal.

Make it so, Greeen admits as much.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

I like how he states outright, even via gpt, that more sanctions won't deter him from greereing out further.

Well, I think it's proof positive he doesn't read what Chat GPT spits out. There's no way he'd willingly write this. I can't believe the AI is actively sabotaging his case.

 

[StinkySnack]

Well, I think it's proof positive he doesn't read what Chat GPT spits out. There's no way he'd willingly write this. I can't believe the AI is actively sabotaging his case.

I wouldn't give him that much credit. He likely read it, but is too stupid to understand the implications of it.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I'd like to make some few obvious points.



Russ is admitting that his claim that Taylor was "eager to testify" was false and that he had reason to believe it was false.



An opinion cannot "appear inconsistent" with an order one did not read.



Two points:

1. He reiterates his false understanding of the litigation privilege.
2. There were no reasonable "factual" assumptions, which is the reason he got sanctioned.

 

[Shig O'nella]

Every judge and lawyer I know would yell THAT'S A GOOD THING.

He's not pro se.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

He's not pro se.

He is pro se.

 

[StinkySnack]

He's not pro se.

He quite literally is.