
It seems as though that someone is really interested in another’s website and has an opinion or two.

It seems as though that someone is really interested in another’s website and has an opinion or two.

Let’s say you do something for the seven times and fail. On the eighth try, while attempting to convince the authority you’ve “learned from your mistakes”, you still make the same mistake.
Some might call that a pattern.

In Schmalfeldt v. Grady, et al, the Plaintiff says in Count II that all the defendants are part of a larger conspiracy because.. well..

.. a certain someone said he was going to trial and the defendants were going to lose their livelihood, possessions and wives? Wonder how that turned out?

I have been reading Schmalfeldt’s ridiculously crafted “Memorandum of Law” in his opposition to the motions filed by Attorney Louis Nettles on behalf of the defendants. In it, Schmalfeldt makes this statement in support of his contention that jurisdiction is prudent in his .. um.. lolsuit..

There is not a sin in this world that gets by Schmalfeldt. In fact, the intrepid reporter from Billy Boy Unread has decided that one of the individuals he is suing apparently brags too much about his wealth on the internet. This is a big fat no-no when Schmalfeldt struggles to pay rent at a run-down condo, and run a “hardly-listened-to-internet radio station” playing songs about poop he produced.
Even worse, he spams his few twitter robots continuously, hoping one of them will actually listen to one, or perhaps retweet one.

Chief Justice Pro-Se Prosecutor Bill S(chmalfeldt) Preston, esq. is all over the twitterz about process of service to Patrick Grady. He thinks that because an attorney has made an appearance on behalf of Grady, it means service has been effected. Continue reading