- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
For the record, Greer, in a way to try getting over his Taylor Swift pain, reached out to other celebrities he admired, doing gifts that were frankly much better than the Swift gift, and he never sued or did anything outlandish for those celebrities to notice him because no representation of helping others or commercially saying they like underdogs was ever given for Greer to rely upon, and so Greer took the risk of investing and didn't feel his investments were worth fighting for because there was no reliance or given representations like the ones Swift gave. And for all he knows, the Swift incident could have scared the others off, which is not a presumption because Greer had been talking to a publicist for a major celebrity and then the publicist vanished. The fact that Greer has not sued any of those celebrities should solidify his reliance arguments as sincere, and therefore, reliance establishes causation.
So is he just memory-holing his lolsuits against Ariana Grande and Farrah Abraham? Also I just have to marvel at the incomprehensibility of this paragraph. In fact this entire filing is just mind-boggingly nonsensical. It's kind of a shame that Russ will still fail to serve Taylor Swift properly and we won't get to see his arguments taken apart. But I am a mere layman who doesn't even have a paralegal degree so perhaps Russ's legal genius is just not apparent to such a lowly simpleton like myself.
And I will never get over Russ's shitty photocopies that he enters in as exhibits: