Bill Schmalfeldt is all about being an adult now. He wants the world to believe that the people he’s suing need stern discipline for their childish behavior.
So naturally, when he received the four motions in response to his poorly conceived federal complaint, he chose to compliment the lawyer of his adversaries while still throwing a bit of shade at the defendants.
There is a certain irony when a man of Schmalfeldt’s reputation talks about being an adult.
So Bill, you think you’re an adult here?
Isn’t “following the rules” part of being an adult? What about listening to the Judge and following the instructions of the court, like “Become familiar with the rules of civil procedure”?
For instance, what kind of person calls his foe a “poop flake” in a legal document? Where is that allowed in rules?
Does an adult make salacious and impertinent statements describing the defendants in a complaint, such as “adulteress”, “wife lives in Indonesia and he never writes about her” and “functioning sociopath” ?
What about photoshopping a dildo onto a picture of an adversary?
Tattling to the District Attorney about a “checkbox” and threatening a tantrum to the media even though you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about?
Making misogynist, shaming remarks about your adversaries when you claim to be a tolerant progressive?
Adults know how to not look for butthurt, but they also know how to take down a childish bully and deal decisively with a whining douchebag.
And while the attorney for the defendants is professional as part of his ethical obligations as a lawyer, that doesn’t mean he’s on your side. He works for the people you’re suing.
One of the motions he brought before the court on behalf of his clients is to bring your complaint up to “adult” standards. Why would he need to go to the court and ask that?
You might gushingly think losing to him is a badge of honor, but that’s not how this works. A pro-se adult would make sure they understand all the consequences of playing with a legal system if the other side gets an attorney with strong skills.
I wonder why the opposing attorney took this pro-bono? It means the defendants decided as adults to seek counsel. I would bet they were looking at more than just getting your case thrown out.
There are serious repercussions to losing your current case, which means maybe you’re not adult enough to be lawyering on your own if you can’t see that.
The real question is this: What happens if John Hoge gets a large judgment in his favor against you in Maryland in a couple of weeks? It’s too late now to think how you could have better handled that. An adult would have taken the responsibility seriously. How come you didn’t? No time to be adulting in making comedy skits involving poop?
So if you lose in Maryland to a guy who you consider beneath you – which is not very adult like – what’s your strategy for salvaging your federal case and escaping unscathed if you lose?
So many questions, so little adulting time left.