OA491: Letitia James – Kicking Ass and Taking Names

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:01:17 Thomas: Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments. This is episode 491. I am Thomas and that's Andrew, lawyer extraordinaire. Mr. Fantastic himself, how are you doing?

0:01:28 Andrew: Well, do I have to pick a word other than fantastic now?

0:01:30 Thomas: No, you're required to say fantastic. We can't start the show until you say fantastic

0:01:31 Andrew: Alright, well then, I am fantastic. This is Opening Arguments' love letter to Letitia James, the New York Attorney General. She is amazing.

0:01:43 Thomas: Yeah. Well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions is what I want to name this episode. We've got consequences. Consequences.

0:01:52 Andrew: And since you get to pick what the episodes are named. I you can pick the name, so long as I can pick the thumbnail for the episode.

0:01:56 Thomas: Yeah. Well, That's so funny. I was going to suggest the opposite. We can keep your name, which is Tish James is a superhero. And then I could just find, is that in meme form, the consequences of my own action meme? Maybe I could find that. But hey, you know what'll be super cool, Andrew, is WordPress will ruin the thumbnail anyway, so it won't come out on Twitter.

0:02:17 Andrew: Yep. Yep.

0:02:18 Thomas: And then I'll be mad because there's absolutely nothing I can do about it. Because it's a blank, uh, it's black box. I have no idea I put in the field that says image for the show. It sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, no idea why. If any, if Mr. WordPress is listening, feel free to tell me.

0:02:24 Andrew: I I The One that hurt us the most is these Stormy Daniels.

0:02:35 Thomas: Oh, Yeah. Yeah, it also decides to zoom in on certain uh areas of people and then we get accused of stuff.

0:02:36 Andrew: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They were they were like, yeah, well, wait, wait. On an episode entitled Stormy Daniels is a legal genius.

0:02:43 Thomas: Yeah. Yep. And it zoomed way in on our cleavage and we were monsters, and you know what, I get it, but uh, I don't have any control over that. I don't understand it. I put the thing in the field where it says, and then it doesn't work sometimes. So my apologies. Anyway, enough griping about WordPress.

0:02:49 Andrew: Yeah, yeah. Yep.

0:03:04 Clip: YOU BETRAYED THE LAW!

0:03:05 Thomas: Consequences.

0:03:06 Andrew: Woo.

0:03:06 Thomas: This is we could have a running segment, Andrew, of how is this asshole not in prison? And that applies to a number of people, several people with the last name Trump, by the way. Weird, weird coincidence. They all have the same last name. But what if Jacob Wohl is up there on that list? I mean, near the top. So what's going on here?

0:03:17 Andrew: Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Oh, man. Jacob. Jacob Wohl. Where do we begin with America's dumbest right-wing grifter? Press conference accusing Elizabeth Warren of having hot lesbian sex. That was amazing. Amazing.

0:03:31 Thomas: Yeah.

0:03:42 Andrew: Um.

0:03:42 Thomas: Well. Wait.

0:03:42 Andrew: And. Well. Well.

0:03:42 Thomas: There's the marine too, though.

0:03:43 Andrew: Well. Right, yeah, I should, I should say both.

0:03:44 Thomas: Yeah. I.

0:03:46 Andrew: Yeah, the, the three-way with the marine that led to her, uh, Liz Warren posting, like, at a time, like, today, I, I just want to give a shout out to, you know, the University of Houston, go Cougars, uh, god, I love Liz Warren.

0:03:59 Thomas: Know. Never. Liked her more. I actually wanted it all to be true, by the way, I was hoping

0:04:00 Andrew: Uh. Uh. Obviously. Obviously. But yeah, though, the time he gave a press conference with his pants unzipped like it was just he's he is the gift. That keeps on giving. So what happened in October? Jacob Wohl and his partner, the apparently equally stupid Jack Berkman, founded a an LLC called Project 1599. What is Project 1599? I'm going to quote from paragraph 32 of this complaint, although described as a civil rights organization, It is not a civil rights organization. It conveniently sounds very similar to the New York Times 1619 project, which documents the history of slavery and racism. The title likely only relates to Berkman's street address. So. So, yes, that's the that's his house number. Fifteen ninety-nine.

0:04:05 Thomas: Oh. God.

0:04:54 Andrew: So what did they do? They got together to create a bunch of robocalls that to suppress voter turnout when I say solicited money, gathered together, formed a partnership to deceive people, Paul, I'm quoting directly from paragraph 25 of this complaint, which says that Wohl sought investors in a scheme to use fraudulent news stories to suppress voter turnout and manipulate political betting markets. He described in his fundraising documents how the entity would, quote, aim to ultimately suppress turnout, quote.

0:04:54 Thomas: Oh. My. God. Can.

0:05:26 Thomas: Now.

0:05:27 Andrew: Have a devastating impact on Democratic candidates, end of quote. Target, quote important demographics of Democrat voters in swing districts, end of of quote, and employ a voter suppression effort. That's also a direct quote. Indeed, the document specifically states Wohl's intention to and I'm not going to clown horn this because it's in a court document. Quote, make shit up. End of quote.

0:05:50 Thomas: Wohl's advocate here, this sounds like the platform of the Republican Party, so is anything, I'm not even, I am not even joking, Andrew, I'm not even making a joke. I wish I were. Is there anything illegal about this behavior when it seems to be the mainstream, out in the open, strategy of our other major party in this country? So what's, what's, is their crime? What's the crime?

0:06:13 Andrew: As it as it turns out, there is a crime here and before we get to the crime, there is also grounds for civil liability here. The civil liability, which was the basis for this lawsuit, which was filed by the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, as well as individuals who received this robocall, sought really two forms of relief, right? The first was injunctive relief to stop you from continuing to issue these robocalls. And I'm going to read the text of the robocall to you so that you understand how egregious it is. But Section 11B of the Voting Rights Act says that no person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten or coerce or attempt to intimidate threatened or coers any person for voting or attempting to vote.

0:07:03 Andrew: OK, person shall do that. And then 42 U.S.C. Section 1985, subsection three, is the Ku Klux Klan Act, which says that it is both a crime and a civil liability to, that if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote from giving his supporter advocacy in a legal manner toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for president or vice president or a member of Congress, then that is again both a, both a crime and a civil wrong. And so the plaintiffs sought, under the first count, under the Voting Rights Act, for an injunction stopping Wall and Berkman from making these robocalls, and then under the KKK Act, compensatory and punitive damages, which are provided for by statute. So what was the robocall? We have the direct transcript, it's in paragraph 29 of the complaint. Yeah.

0:08:01 Thomas: So Sarah Connor, you know, what

0:08:03 Andrew: Hi, this is Tamika Taylor from Project 1599, the civil rights organization founded by Jack Berkman and Jacob Wohl. Mail-in voting sounds great, but did you know that if you vote by mail, your personal information will be part of a public database that will be used by police departments to track down old warrants and be used by credit card companies to collect outstanding debts? That's not true, by the way. The CDC is even pushing to use records for mail-in voting to track people for mandatory vaccines. That's also not true. Room. Don't be finessed into giving your private information to the man. Stay home, safe, and be aware of vote by mail. And now you might be thinking, OK, maybe Berkman and Wohl are going to claim, like they have in previous.

0:08:50 Thomas: Speech or something.

0:08:51 Andrew: Well, they're certainly going to blame free speech. We're going to talk about that. But maybe Maybe we'll, as with some previous efforts, is going to say, oh, hey, that's not me. Those are liberals putting my name on stuff, trying to make me look bad. But because these people are idiots, they made the calls, the robocalls from their personal cell phones.

0:09:11 Andrew: So please, please, Please. What I said, I wanted to use the.

0:09:13 Thomas: Wait, they didn't even get like a Google number or something?

0:09:16 Andrew: Nope, nope.

0:09:16 Thomas: What?

0:09:17 Andrew: They use their personal telephone in the case of Jack Berkman, because this is a matter of public record. I can tell you. 703-795-5364. And the screenshot of his cell phone showing up as Jack Berkman is in the complaint. It's. It is in paragraph number 27. Again, public record. So I'm hoping you use that as the the show graphic thumbnail. But down the complaint notes that I'll read from paragraph 31, the tone, tenor, language and content of the call is designed to deceive and intimidate black voters in particular. It is currently unknown who Tamika Taylor is, but the name is similar to Breonna Taylor's mother, Tamika Palmer, who the press has sometimes misidentified as Tamika Taylor.

And that strikes me as not coincidental, right, the bit about Project 1599. So good news was the court immediately granted the injunction under the Voting Rights Act. And as you alluded, this is a civil case, but this is also a crime. And so Wohl and Berkman didn't just do this in New York. They did it in Ohio and Michigan and possibly other states. So they were indicted in Ohio and Michigan. And again, because they're idiots, they were defending themselves pro se in this case without a lawyer. At first they have now they have since retained counsel. And their first response was to say, yep, we definitely made those robocalls and we have a free speech right to do that. That. Pretty dumb.

0:10:12 Thomas: Right. Right.

0:11:00 Andrew: And so they got counsel and the lawyers came in and said, oh, man, you're not paying us enough to represent you idiots. But we're going to do our best anyway. And and what we're gonna do is we are going to move to stay the civil case pending the outcome of your criminal cases in Ohio and Michigan. And I want to tell you, that's a smart and routine lawyer move. Because right, what you don't want to have happen is you don't want one court to get out in front of the other in terms of fact-finding, right, you don't want to have either a case where, you know, it's sort of whichever court goes first winds up deciding something on the facts, or the worst case scenario. Right. One court decides one way and the other court decides another way. The problem as for Wohl and Berkman, as I alluded to, is that basically all of the facts that are at issue in their criminal case, they've already admitted to in the civil case.

0:11:09 Thomas: Is

0:12:01 Andrew: So the judge was like, no, I'm going to deny that motion and we're going to go ahead and brief up this, you know, civil trial. Wohl and Berkman noted an interlocutory appeal to the Second Circuit and moved again to stay the case. And the court was like. No, not going to do that. You're you're free to appeal to The Second Circuit. But but we're moving forward. And by the way, you know, things move pretty slowly in the Second Circuit. So good luck with that. And that sets the stage for Tish James superhero. As it turns out, the New York attorney general's office has resources that private plaintiffs do not. Here they have connected up the Wohl and Berkman 1599 organization with the specific telecom provider that actually created the robocalls, an entity called Message Communications. Communications and its owner, Robert Mahanian.

0:13:05 Thomas: This person also a giant asshole, or is this just like they are, they in on the being an asshole, or are they just like a provider of robocall generally? I

0:13:13 Andrew: Let me let me answer that by.

0:13:15 Thomas: Guess it's the same thing, though, now that I think about it.

0:13:16 Andrew: Well, ME ANSWER THAT BY READING FOOTNOTE TWO OF OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S MOTION TO INTERVENE.

0:13:21 Thomas: I've Great, I Was hoping You would Read Footnote Two of the attorney general's Motion. Interview. Yeah.

0:13:25 Andrew: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Well.

0:13:27 Thomas: Be.

0:13:27 Andrew: So it says, notably, the New YORK attorney general's Office, sought to investigate these claims under its independent authority. However, defendants Wohl, Berkman, and Berkman associates have refused to respond to lawful duly issued subpoenas. Our investigation revealed substantial information about defendant's conduct in creating and disseminating the robocall, and while defendants refused to response to the subpoena, enforcing compliance would only further delay the Attorney General's ability to seek a remedy in this case. Accordingly, intervention would be the most efficient and productive way to enforce the The reason that's relevant is if there was no relationship between Wohl and Berkman and Berkman Associates, which is their fake LLC in 1599, and this entity, Message Communications and Robert Mahanian, they would have just thrown him under the bus, right?

0:14:18 Andrew: Right. They would been like, oh, yeah, definitely. It's all about, you know, message communications. The fact that they refuse to respond to those inquiries leads me to believe that it's probably more than just a, you know, an arm's length vendor transaction, right, like the ISP of it, you know, that there was probably some coordination. But we're about to find out. So so look, the AG's position is could open up a separate proceeding against Mahanian and message communications. But then we would just move to consolidate that proceeding with this one. Right. Because it's all coming out of these robocalls. So it makes sense for all of that to be in the same court. And at the parties haven't even briefed the Second Circuit stuff yet because of some procedural stuff.

0:15:08 Andrew: There hasn't been any discovery. There's no. Right. So there's no prejudice, no harm, no foul. Let us in. Again, I would tell you, in an ordinary case, there would be some, I think, a decent argument to say, look, like, let's make sure that we're not prejudicing a civil lawsuit that is contingent upon facts that might be developed in pending criminal cases. But the degree of stupidity here, I think, makes it possible that the court says, yeah, no prejudice. We're at kind of square one. New York Attorney General, you want to come in an additional party to this case? We're going to go ahead with that.

0:15:53 Andrew: And I base my reasoning on that based on the opposition filed by Wohl's lawyers, which repeats their idiotic First Amendment defense. Right. And it says, quote, the New York attorney general's so-called strong interest is predicated on what defendants purported efforts to, quote. Discourage mail-in voting, and then there's parenthesis, which without conceding that defendants engaged in this conduct, they already have, is undisputedly constitutionally protected political speech. No, it is not, right? Intimidating voters from exercising their constitutional rights is not as any sensible person would understand constitutionally protected political speech. It is constitutionally protected political speech to form a grassroots organization that says, man, voting is stupid and uncool. But calling people up and telling them that if you vote, you will be put on a mandatory vaccination list and It will be handed over to credit card companies to collect outstanding debts. Not, that is neither legal, uh, nor protected, uh, you know, by our our civil rights. Um, it's a bad criminal thing to do. Uh, and I am just delighted, uh, that the New York attorney general's office is not letting this go.

0:16:44 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. But

0:17:13 Clip: Down the law, down the law.

0:17:17 Thomas: Andrew, time for the update in the NRA thing. I, I, this is a little complicated, so I could try to intro it, but basically the NRA is screwed, right? Just

0:17:26 Andrew: Yes, they are. So we covered in Episode 410 when Letitia James and the New York Attorney General's office filed an incredibly lengthy motion to dissolve the National Rifle Association. That complaint was was a couple hundred pages long. And as we pointed out again in Episode 410, was not based at all on the political corruption of the NRA, but was in fact solidly rooted in New York corporations law. Yeah.

0:17:58 Thomas: The Regular Kind Of corruption, yeah.

0:18:00 Andrew: Yep. In particular, the allegations were, one, that the NRA has exceeded the authority conferred upon it by New York law and has conducted its business in a persistently illegal manner and abused its powers, contrary to the public policy of the state of New York, without operating by effective oversight or control by its operators and directors. And then number two, those directors or members in control of the NRA, including most prominently its executive director, Wayne LaPierre, have looted or wasted the corporate assets, have perpetuated the corporation solely for their personal benefit or have otherwise acted in an illegal, oppressive or fraudulent manner. Go back and listen to that episode. The evidence is damning, so damning that the N.R.A. developed a secret plan to move to Texas.

0:18:01 Thomas: T

0:18:47 Andrew: Again, when I say secret plan, what I mean is that although the board of directors authorized Wayne LaPierre to continue to represent the organization, the board Board of Directors was, quote, not informed that the NRA was considering filing for bankruptcy, end of quote, which was the linchpin of the strategy. Right. So on January 15th of this year, the N.R.A. and a special entity that was created called Seagirt, S.E.A., G.I.R.-T. I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Seagirt LLC was formed as a transitional vehicle to facilitate the NRA's relocation to Texas.

0:19:34 Andrew: So the NRA filed a voluntary bankruptcy under Chapter 11. That is the liquidation provisions of the bankruptcy code, along with Seagirt LLC.

0:19:47 Thomas: Gert, yeah.

0:19:48 Andrew: Seagirt, I got nothing. So they did this is very, very obvious. In fact, they announced it in public. They said, we want a plan of reorganization that will, one, pay all of the allowed claims of our creditors in full. Because remember, part of what's happened here is that the funds that should have been used for the benefit of the National Rifle Association were used for the personal advantage of Wayne LaPierre and some of the other top executives. Two, provide a mechanism for adjudicating and or resolving the claims of the New York Attorney General and any other creditor with contingent, unliquidated, and disputed claims. And three, allow the NRA to exit Chapter 11 as a Texas nonprofit organization. So you see the game, right? The idea is we're not just going to let you say there's a persistent pattern of fraud here, therefore shut it down.

0:19:50 Thomas: Okay.

0:20:40 Andrew: We want you to identify each and every specific fraudulent transaction. Action. We will have some kind of mechanism to rectify that. But we're going to keep the name, the donor list, everything else. So basically evade sort of real lasting penalty. So the New York attorney general's office moved to dismiss the bankruptcy, and the grounds Bounds for moving to dismiss a bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. Section 1112B4 include, like, 13 different non-exhaustive list of things, right? Like gross mismanagement, or substantial or continuing loss or diminution of the estate in the absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation, or the failure of the debtor to pay a domestic support obligation, right.

0:21:29 Andrew: Right. Like those are all of the kinds of reasons that you can go into court and say this bankruptcy is nonsense. Get it out of here. But is also an underlying test. And the underlying test is whether that bankruptcy was filed in good faith or whether it was filed to evade the law. Right. So here's what the court says as a as a sneak preview hint. The court granted the motion to dissolve the bankruptcy. That's a good thing. And and here'swhat it said on page two. We're going to break down how it reached this conclusion. It said debtors commonly file bankruptcy when faced with a judgment that has or will render them insolvent. Right. Right. But the threat against the NRA differs from the classic scenario in that dissolution would not be a collateral effect of litigation, but rather the intended relief sought by a state's regulatory action.

0:22:22 Andrew: And in this instance, dissolution could only occur after judicial consideration of whether dissolution is in the best interest of the public. The question the court is then faced with is whether the existential threat facing the N.R.A. is the type of threat the bankruptcy code is meant to protect against. The court believes that it is not. Um, and, and so we're going to get into the reasons, uh, why it is not as a matter of law. Um, I think these are, uh, although this is a case of first impression, right, and will certainly, uh be appealed, uh to the Fifth Circuit, uh and maybe to the Supreme Court. It is Um, also the straightforward application of kind of long-standing bankruptcy law as far as I can tell. So, again, with the asterisk that I'm not a bankruptcy lawyer, although I have litigated in bankruptcy court where I had claims that were subject to a bankrupt.

0:23:13 Andrew: We also learned some new facts in this filing that I want to share with you that that did not come out in the complaint as a result of the investigation. So these new flat facts include that in the middle of 2017, then Attorney General for New York, Eric Schneiderman, called an NRA board member, Tom King, and told him that investigations into the NRA were being opened and that they should, quote, prepare for the worst.

0:23:41 Thomas: Was that like a heads up, or Was that like a, was that like a Portland Police talking to white supremacists kind of call, or like a, uh, I, I'm, you're gonna, gonna get it kind of call, like a threatening call? Okay.

0:23:43 Andrew: Yeah.

0:23:53 Andrew: No, I certainly interpret it as the former. Right. King then went to Wayne LaPierre, and Wayne LaTierre testified that he decided that, quote, the NRA ought to take a look at everything. A 360 degree look to make sure we were in total compliance with the New York state not for profit law. And if we weren't, we needed to fix things. This was the beginning, the court notes, of what the NRA now refers to as its, quote, course correction. Correction. Yep.

0:23:57 Thomas: Is This before Like all the stuff about LaPierre and was Known Okay, gotcha.

0:24:23 Andrew: This Is Three years before it came out, right? So as As partofits course correction, the NRA hired a couple of different law firms, including Brewer Attorneys and Counselors, the Brewer firm, um, that, uh, presently represented in all of its litigation matters, and that's going to be important to kind put up in on that. As the court notes, since that time, in addition to becoming the NRA's primary litigation council, the Brewer firm appears to have been involved in many aspects of the NRA. March of 2018, the NRA hired Craig Spray as its new chief financial officer. Before joining the NRI, Mr. Spray served as the CFO for two different companies, one of which is a publicly traded company valued at over a billion dollars. Um, then the next month, on April 19th, 2018, the New York Department of Financial Services sent letters to insurers and financial institutions, encouraging them to review their relationships with the NRA and consider whether such relationships harm their corporate reputations and jeopardize public safety.

0:24:26 Thomas: Yeah.

0:25:20 Andrew: Um, I I'm sad we missed that on the show. Cause, uh. I sure would have covered that in April of 2018. So then less than a month after that, the NRA, with the assistance of the Brewer firm, sued governor of New York and the New York Department of Financial Services in federal court regarding their alleged attempts, quote, to deprive the N.R.A. and its constituents of their First Amendment rights to speak freely about gun related issues and defend their Second Amendment freedoms against encroachment. Right.

0:25:45 Thomas: Because We know gun owners have no rights In this country, They can't even Talk About it. I haven't, at first I've heard of a gun, actually. Yeah.

0:25:49 Andrew: And none. And nope. So then while this is going on, Mr. Spray, right, the the new CFO encouraged whistleblowers to come forward in July of 2018 to internally, at least right to the NRA audit committee regarding their concerns and their concerns. There were six of them, but they are financial conflicts of interest of senior management and board members, lack of controls, all the things that showed up in the in the New York attorney general's investigation. Right. So after that whistleblower memo came forward, the NRA took made some internal changes, including examining vendor contracts and what they call, quote, improved documentation and record keeping.

0:26:40 Andrew: And then it notes, while most vendors complied with these new measures, some did not. Yeah. The ones that didn't, the ones that were controlled by Wayne LaPierre. Right. So as a result, some contracts with vendors were renegotiated. Some were terminated. This process caused a rift between the NRA and one of its most significant vendors, Ackerman McQueen Inc., which is an ad firm. They had been the NRA's marketing and PR firm for decades. They were named in the whistleblower memo. And then that led to various lawsuits that beyond the scope of discussion here. So that all happened in 2018. And then in 2020, August of 2020, was when the New York Attorney General filed the complaint, the one that was the subject of our episode 410. The day we went to press, August 6th, 2020, and that was seeking dissolution of the NRA, which is, again, perfectly appropriate under New York not-for-profit corporations law.

0:27:37 Andrew: So then in November, the NRA came up with this strategy for bankruptcy and restructuring. In January, they held a board meeting and the board of directors adopted a resolution approving of an employment agreement for Wayne LaPierre. And that would permit him to, quote, exercise corporate authority in furtherance of the mission of the NRA, including without limitation to reorganize or restructure the affairs of the association for the purposes of cost minimization, regulatory compliance or otherwise. End of quote. But as as we mentioned at the beginning of the segment, the board was not told that Wayne LaPierre intended to petition for bankruptcy. But the week after getting that broad authorization on January 15th was when the NRA filed for bankruptcy in the U.S.

0:28:31 Andrew: Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, because they were hoping that a court would be more favorable than than a New York court. So then the AG's office moved to dismiss that as being filed in bad faith. So the court had to evaluate the evidence, right, and say, was this filed in good faith or not? And no surprise, the bankruptcy court was like, this was clearly filed in Bad Faith. They note, and again, this is a bankruptcy court. This is, you know, if regular courts are pretty state and reserved, bankruptcy courts are even more so. Right.

It says the testimony of the NRA's general counsel, Mr. Frazier, on the reasons for filing bankruptcy was, in some respects, a bit difficult to reconcile, despite being not involved in the decision to file for bankruptcy and not knowing about the decision until after the bankruptcy was filed. Mr. Frazier was designated as the corporate representative of the NRA as to the reasons, both financial and non-financial, for the NRA seeking protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. During his deposition, the only reasons for filing bankruptcy that Mr. Frazier identified were to streamline litigation, consolidate the claims against the N.R.A. and reorganize in Texas. He did not identify avoiding dissolution or avoiding receivership as the reasons for filing bankruptcy at the time.

0:28:55 Thomas: Yeah. Yeah.

0:29:54 Andrew: Nevertheless, at trial, Mr. Frazier testified that he agreed that the bankruptcy filing allowed the NRA to seek protection from regulators in New York, because of course it did. Right, You

0:30:04 Thomas: Just To First off, how is Wayne LaPierre still in charge of the NRA?

0:30:08 Andrew: Know it. I'm gonna answer a couple of questions, but but but our patron Justice for Beer asked that exact question, um, And and I don't know. He says, how is, right, Wayne LaPierre still serving as the executive vice president, This seems boneheaded to me why on earth would you keep a guy that's been robbing you blind. Yeah, I cannot explain that other than, right, the investigation details sort of the stranglehold that Wayne LaPierre had over the board and over, you know, the senior leadership of the NRA. And, you know, usually what happens.

0:30:15 Thomas: Oh, yeah. And still has, apparently.

0:30:41 Andrew: Yeah. Yeah, is that you get an independent board of directors in there, but board of director's voted to continue to employ him. I don't get it right. I mean, this is again, you forget that it is the odious and popular Wayne, Wayne LaPierre, and that it's the odius NRA. Like if this were, you know, Andrew Torres.

0:30:52 Thomas: Yeah.

0:31:01 Thomas: Well, yeah, if you're a gun nut who is part of the NRA or on the board or supports it, like you would want to not be run into the ground by a corrupt person, you know, so that you could do more gun nutting, gun nuttery advocacy.

0:31:12 Andrew: Yeah, right. Exactly. It, it, it.

0:31:21 Thomas: Yeah.

0:31:21 Andrew: That's right. It's, it's clear, right? Like nobody survives this kind of, you you know, level of outright theft from their employer.

0:31:27 Thomas: Weird. I just picture, he, it's a constant, he has guns drawn on the board, like, at all times, like, every meeting he's got like two guns and then like a third arm with a gun, he's Oh, you're gonna, oh, you're going to, uh, get rid of me, are you, you can have my executive vice presidency when you pry it from my cold dead hands, probably. I This episode is brought to you by X-Chair, folks. I love my X-Chair. And what's funny is I'm literally telling you about the thing I'm using as I'm right now, as we speak. I record every OA from my X chair. I love it. I've never had an office chair that looks and feels this amazing in my entire life. It's so comfy that I can sit for hours and I never feel uncomfortable, which is very important to my career.

And with more people working from home than ever, I suspect it's very important for you folks as well. The secret is not only their patented dynamic variable lumbar, DVL, support, which offers unbelievable lumbars support to my lower back, but now, thanks to their new X-HMT technology, I can also get heat and massage therapy while I'm sitting at my desk. Instead of my old uncomfortable office chair, now I look forward to spending hours sitting in the ultimate therapeutic massager. The x hmt delivers heat and massaged technology right to my core, helping increase blood flow, muscle recovery, and energy.

0:31:38 Andrew: Yeah, it could be.

0:32:50 Thomas: Perks that make working from home or the office a joy. It even has four different massage modes and fast-warming heat technology for therapy when I'm sore. You won't believe the X-chair difference until you feel the X chair difference for yourself. Trust me, this is a luxury supercar of office chairs. The X-Chair is on sale now for $100 off. Go to xchairoa.com now. That's the letter X, chair, the letters O and A, dot com, or call 1-844-4X-CHAIR. X-Chair has a 30-day guarantee of complete comfort, and you can finance your purchase for as little as $30 a month. Go-to-xchairoa-dot-com now and use code X-Wheels for free X-Wheel Blade casters. XChairOA.com One more time, XChailOA dot com.

0:33:42 Thomas: Opening Arguments is brought to you by Lucy. Lucy Nicotine is a company founded by Caltech scientists and former smokers looking for a better and cleaner nicotine alternative. Finally, tobacco alternatives that don't suck. This was researched and developed for three years to be made for people, not patients. Lucy has created a nicotine gum with four milligrams of nicotine that comes in three flavors, wintergreen, cinnamon, and pomegranate. And Lucy also has a lozenge with four milligrams of nicotine in the cherry ice flavor. Each and every flavor actually tastes great, and it's convenient and discreet. Products can be enjoyed anywhere, on flights, at work, on the go, or even in the gym. So if you are someone who wants to make the switch from cigarettes to a cleaner alternative, Lucy can help you.

0:34:28 Thomas: It's 2021. Get rid of your cigarettes, unplug your vape, throw out your dip, and get some Lucy nicotine gum or lozenges. This is the real deal. A subscription to Lucy comes directly to your door each month, so it's simple and you don't have to leave your house because Lucy has delivery down. Opening Arguments listeners, go to lucy.co and use promo code OPENING to get 20% off of all products on your first order, including gum or lozenges. That's lucy, L-U-C-Y dot C-O, and use Promo Code OPENNING at checkout. Also, I have to give this disclaimer, warning, this product contains nicotine derived from tobacco. Nicotine is an addictive chemical. Lucy.co and be sure to use that promo code opening.

0:35:15 Andrew: So the only other argument that was made was, well, you know we started to realize that New York was a bad place for the NRA to be organized and we thought, you now, the environment would would be better in Texas. And bankruptcy court, they're not wrong. But the bankruptcy court asked the right question, which was, aha, but like, why right now?

0:35:29 Thomas: Mean, that's Curious timing. Yeah.

0:35:37 Andrew: Yeah, Exactly. Yeah. And it says, "While the court does not find that reincorporating in Texas was the true purpose of bankruptcy filing, the court would have concerns even if it were. Reincorparating in Texas could be accomplished outside of bankruptcy pursuant to applicable regulations, regulations for New York not-for-profit organizations, which begs the question of what the bankruptcy code is being used for. If the goal is moving to Texas, the purpose of the bankruptcy would still be to avoid the regulatory scheme in New York that would be required for such a transition outside of bankruptcy, or at least the avoidance of the New York regulators." So the bankruptcy court also did a super smart thing here. I love this. They did not dismiss, dismiss the bankruptcy with prejudice, okay? So by dismissing it without prejudice, that means NRA can file another one.

0:35:37 Thomas: Hmm.

0:36:22 Thomas: They can try again Yeah.

0:36:27 Andrew: Yeah, but on page 31, it says, "This court is not dismissing this case with prejudice. But should the NRA file a new bankruptcy case, this Court would immediately take up some of its concerns about disclosure, transparency, secrecy, conflicts of interest of officers and litigation counsel, and the unusual involvement of litigation counsel in the affairs of the NRA, which could cause the appointment of a trustee out of a concern that the NLA could not fulfill the fiduciary duty required by the bankruptcy code for a debtor in possession." So let's unpack that a little bit. The relief that New York asked for here was, get rid of this bankruptcy, get rid of it with prejudice, say they can't do this, or in the alternative, appoint a receiver, right?

0:36:28 Thomas: Well,

0:37:15 Andrew: Appoint a trustee to run the NRA, who's not Wayne LaPierre, right, who's not stealing their stuff, and then require that trustee to issue regular reports to the bankruptcy court as as to how the NRA is being run. Right. The NRA desperately does not want that to happen, obviously. And so the court is using that second stick as a potential threat to to get the NRE to just kind of stop the scheme. Right. Ultimately, what the bankruptcy court wants is, keep your nonsense out of my court. Right. Stay and take your lumps in New York and be subject to whatever regulation there is. Don't, don't clog up the bankruptcy Court with this political stuff.

0:38:02 Andrew: And so by doing it this way, by saying we're going to dismiss this without prejudice, you can file again. But if you file again, we're 100 percent going to appoint a trustee that's going to authorize how every dollar that the NRA spends going forward. Um, that is such a massive deterrent that I feel confident in saying the NRA is just going to like, lick its wounds, uh, and try and come up with some other horrible strategy. Uh, but it's going to bail on this one.

0:38:30 Thomas: Yeah. Big picture me here, uh, So they were, for some reason, established in New York. I think we, you know, I think we covered this before, and they were established in New York. They're terrible, obviously, there's so much like theft and grifting that they, they can't be a nonprofit in New York, essentially. And then I still wonder. So at the time, I think I was like, OK, they can just move. But I think you said that it's more serious than that, right? Like, it's a real existential threat to the NRA itself.

0:38:33 Andrew: Yeah.

0:38:58 Andrew: Yes, that is exactly correct.

0:39:00 Thomas: So how does that work? So why can't they just be in another state? Is this an example of that? Like, is? So I guess the part that I'm maybe struggling with is there's a bankruptcy thing and there's a Texas thing. Are those the same thing?

0:39:13 Andrew: Yes. They went to Texas to file for the bankruptcy and also to create the new entity that would would then be.

0:39:22 Thomas: Right. But why would you file for bankruptcy in Texas? Like, I get the creating the new entity in Texas, but aren't you bankrupt, like, wherever you are in New York currently?

0:39:28 Andrew: You are right. Yeah. They just wanted to get more favorable judges right down in Texas as opposed to a bankruptcy judge in New York. Right.

0:39:37 Thomas: Yeah. Right, but are you allowed to just do that? Was that part of the thing, the reason that they lost this?

0:39:47 Andrew: Nope.

0:39:48 Thomas: No, it wasn't. So you are allowed to just forum shop.

0:39:48 Andrew: Nope there. You are absolutely allowed to do that. And again, reason that you want bankruptcy here is because the NRA has a lot of assets. Right. Wayne LaPierre hasn't stolen everything yet. Right? And so when you're trying to move those assets from one organization to the other, right, the question is, somebody going to be able to jump in with a claim on those assets? And the complaint set forth by the New York attorney general's office makes a very, very strong legal claim to the assets of the NRA. Right. To be able to to seize those and refund them to donors, to pay

0:39:52 Thomas: Okay. Okay. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Okay. OK, so

0:40:33 Andrew: Vendors. Right? All sorts of things.

0:40:35 Thomas: Basically, New York wants control of that process because obviously they would do a better, more just job than Wayne LaPierre control or, you know, the NRA itself having more control of the process had this bankruptcy gone forward in Texas.

0:40:50 Andrew: Exactly right. Right. And what a bankruptcy is designed to do is imposes an immediate automatic stay, right, and stops all litigation against the bankrupt estate. So it freezes the assets and then you kind of figure out like, OK, we've frozen the assets. Now let's figure out a just way to divvy this up. And that includes the pending litigation.

0:40:51 Thomas: OK, right.

0:41:14 Andrew: Right. So

0:41:11 Thomas: Yeah, but it's more about who's in the driver's seat, right?

0:41:16 Andrew: It's exactly right. So, you know, for example, I've talked about this. I've talked about This before, in terms of as bestest litigation, for example I've, I talked about the Manville trust, right. And that was the Johns Manville Corporation was basically amalgamated asbestos. Right. And so in 1987, they looked at the the status and they were like, yeah, 100. We made a lot of money on asbestas. We're going to have to pay way more than what we have out to our claimants. So, you know what? We're going we're going to declare bankruptcy and we are going to reorganize, take all of our assets and organize this as a trust fund to And then they segregated the types of claims, but principally mesothelioma claims, right?

0:42:03 Andrew: Cancers. Again, the Manville Trust was perfectly transparent about this, right? They were like, look, we have a lot of money right now. However, we know that money is going to run out. And so if don't go into bankruptcy, then it's just going to run out on a first-come, first-served basis, right, whoever's filed their claims first, uh, when we take judgments, uh, are going to get paid. And so that's going to result in, right, a scramble to the court, I mean, There already has been.

0:42:34 Thomas: Yeah, it's not it's Not fair, basically.

0:42:35 Andrew: Yeah. And that, like, you know, different classes of people, right, would Not Get paid, right? So, and basically the idea was, uh, people with asymptomatic asbestosis, uh, you know, who were getting five hundred dollars per claim, right, you, might potentially have diminished lung capacity 30 years down the road. We agree, in a settlement you're entitled to 500 bucks. And and and and Manville was saying, like, if you pay out a million or, you pay up two million asymptomatic asbestosis claims, which, by the way, a totally realistic number. Right. Well, that's a billion dollars that doesn't go to people with cancer. Right? And so Johns Manville was like, you know what? Not we get it. There's no way this business is going forward. All of of our assets will be used to pay claims.

We want to go into bankruptcy and come up with a way to divvy up our assets, to satisfy our creditors in such a way as to do justice under the bankruptcy code, right? To prevent kind of the run for the money that seems like would be the worst possible outcome. And by the way, like that's the classic justification for chapter 11 bankruptcy,

0:42:39 Thomas: Mm hmm. Geez. Yep.

0:43:45 Andrew: Right, for liquidation is to say, we don't want you to pay out claims, uh, terms of first come first serve, because that incentivizes the company to pay back its buddies, right, and not, you know, the the people that that maybe have the the highest secured priority interest. So,

0:44:06 Thomas: But That's, you're talking about a bankruptcy versus not a bankruptcy. Right, so This is a bankruptcy in Texas versus New York getting a chance to do something mandatorily first, right?

0:44:09 Andrew: Right. Exactly. Yep. Yep, and That goes back to the language on page two that says, yeah, companies do this when litigation would threaten their assets all the time, except that usually it's diminution of their assets is a collateral effect of the litigation, not the intent, right? Like, They're trying to evade regulatory action by the state of New York by taking its assets and putting it in a, in a bankruptcy under which. But by the way, like, you know, one of the things that bankruptcy extends to is claims by the IRS for back taxes. Right. Like, so that that stay applies even to governmental claims. So it would apply even to New York's claims, you know, for damages and for fraud. Right. So that was the strategy that they came up with to try and save all of those assets. And and a bankruptcy court has said, no, we think this is a bad faith filing. We think you are filing this not to really satisfy your creditors, but to evade the judgment of the New York regulators. And we're going to let New York take its shot at you.

0:44:19 Thomas: Okay. Uh, Yeah.

0:45:27 Andrew: And by the way, we're going to backstop that with the threat of appointing a trustee. And And we're going to instruct that trustee that the first thing they're going to look at is the real weird relationship you have with your lawyers, the Brewer firm, which, wrapping this up full circle, was the second question that Justice for Beer rather perceptively asked, which was, they hired the Brewer firm, which appears to be a boutique aggressive litigation group. But presumably they were hired to represent the NRA. Isn't Brewer required to act in the best interest of the N.R.A. and not the best interests of LaPierre and his co-defendants? If so, isn't filing Chapter 11 without the full knowledge of the board going against their obligations as a lawyer? Yeah, absolutely. One hundred percent.

0:46:12 Andrew: And it's weird. I mean, it is. I have never seen a bankruptcy court look at at a situation like this and go, man, something looks fishy between you and your lawyers. That is incredibly, again, rare on the on this on the order of I've never seen a court do this before. So good eyes, justice for beer. There's our story. I can't wait for the New York regulators to to shut down the NRA.

0:46:35 Thomas: I Just want to add that I pulled up Wayne LaPierre and, uh, previous books, these are great, just some quick book titles for fun, uh, 1994, Guns, Crime, and Freedom, you know, when the moral panic was around crime. And then 2002, so importantly, 2002, after 2001, the new book, Guns, Freedom, and Terrorism. So, you know. So Guns Crime And Freedom, and then Guns, Freedom, and Terrorisme. It's just a weird, what if the, why would you name your books like, I guess Freedom moved up in the priority list, and terror. Yeah. And dann, finally, oh, you got another one, 2006, The Global War on Your Guns, dang, Egypt is coming for my gun, you know, The Global War on Your Guns, the global Who How the

0:46:58 Andrew: Yeah. Now That we're Now I Have To think that's part of the like Alex Jones level conspiracy theorists of, you know, secret Globalists are in Our shadow government that are gonna trade our sovereignty to the United Nations and a shadowy cabal of international bankers And, yeah, so So global.

0:47:27 Thomas: Global, yeah, Yeah, Global War On your gun, anyway, couldn't happen to a nicer guy. All Right.

0:47:42 Andrew: Love it. Exactly.

0:47:44 Clip: What I hear when I'm being yelled at is people caring loudly at me.

0:47:50 Thomas: And Quick listener comment about Robotech, by the way, fan favorite episode, that was a huge hit, Andrew Torrez, people love transforming robot toys as much as you, I guess, well done on the episode, tons

0:48:04 Andrew: I had one person on Twitter who was like, know, who said something grumpy about it. And I'm like, oh, sorry, you didn't like the episode, man. A lot of a lot of folks enjoyed the episode. And, and I think enjoyed, uh, Yeah, It Was Cool I I Won't I won't, um, But I, I think, uh, on this podcast, uh, not to suggest there might not be future podcasts, but on this podcast, I think we've gone as far down the 80s toy rabbit hole as we can, um, so despite some requests for follow-up, uh, I don't, Thomas would not, would not appreciate that, uh, It

0:48:14 Thomas: Of Response, yeah, don't Don't listen To The hater, The hator, Singular, Tons Of great response, hey, What, don't Pin it on me, we

0:48:42 Andrew: Would also be a very, very niche At That Point

0:48:46 Thomas: Just Have To Do a Magic the Gathering law, law first Before We Do That.

0:48:48 Andrew: All Right, we Can do That. We'll get, we'll get Liz Dye on It'll be fun, um, but just in order to to address a couple things, number one, a lot of people wrote to talk about battle tech because Harmony Gold sued battle tech over some of their designs, um, yeah, I had some notes on that. But, uh, we were already over an hour. I'm aware of that. I included it in my comment where I said, after Robotech kind of went nowhere, that Harmony Gold sued the hell out of everybody for a long time. Battletech was one of those everybody. So, yes, I'mware of the Battletex stuff. Yes, it's kind of fascinating. No, we're probably not going to get to it. But Dan wrote in to say that I said Magnavox a couple of times when I meant Matchbox, which is probably true. And Dan and Brian and others wrote in to say that some Macross material apparently did make it to the United States, including Macross Plus, Which is supposed to be good, Macross 2, which is supposed to to be terrible, um, no,

0:48:51 Thomas: Yeah.

0:49:51 Thomas: Wait, Macross Plus isn't the monthly subscription to Macross that you have to pay every now? Yeah, that's everything. And

0:49:55 Andrew: Yeah, Uh, And That, uh, Macros Plus does not use any of the mecha designs or any of the original characters, um, it was not quite, uh, an absolute ban on stuff coming into the United States, so fair, fair point, uh, and all of that is well taken. I really do. I love that that a bunch of you kind of wrote to me individually to say that you you love the episode. I loved doing it. It was a was a good one to do when I was recuperating from the ill effects of my second Covid vaccine shot. Put a smile on my face even while I was shivering to death. Don't think we're going to become a Robotech intellectual property law podcast. But but thank you all

0:50:38 Clip: And thank you, Let's go!

0:50:40 Thomas: Now it's time to thank our hall of famers our all-time greats over on patreon.com/law enjoying all the goodies the uh Law'd Awful Movies that's already out at this point uh I will commit I will submit to having finish that by By the time you're hearing this, so go on patreon.com/law and get Law'd Awful Movies 50 with Heath Enwright, of Chicago 7, ton of fun. Go get that right now. And let's thank those fine, fine patrons who are probably already enjoying it. Thank you too. Don't take medical advice from a Joe Rogan experience. Somebody tell Michael Cox that Pro Hoc Vitae is Latin for you done effed up, A.A. Ron. Hmm. Actually, instead of reading names, bonus cop rock for listeners still with us. Oh, I wish John Brockman, Lisa, see you at the next true crime podcast festival. Tell Morgan, get Tom's son, January 20, baby.

0:51:28 Thomas: Oh no. Associate of this firm has ever delivered a toe by this afternoon with nail polish. Oh. That's a weird, mashup Zach bloom, Thomas. I don't want to make you worried, but I think the T three B E coin may be rigged. How many credits in law school is a decade of sea lawyering worth. All right. Legal Eagle is so handsome. Thomas will officiate. Andrew, you will be my man of honor. Absolutely. Can't wait. California employment, work accident or litigation questions. Call or text attorney David Nitka. 310-776-5879. Again, 310. 776-58 79. The Smiths. Money ball, but Thomas instead of the A's, the bar exam instead of baseball, and a coin instead of on-base percentages.

0:52:15 Thomas: That was, ooh, that was a lot. Oh, speaking of, that guy has a new book out. Might be interesting to check out. Thomas, you are a fop doodle and a Nash gab. I bite my thumb at thee. Richard Scott, praise be unto Hamilton. My reaction to the census needs to be censored. Time to add 160 seats to the house. Rest in peace, Brandon Bernard. We must abolish the death penalty. Justice for Beer. Wow. Featured in today's episode. Sparkle Donkey Tequila wants the next live show in Seattle. We'll supply the tequila. Seriously. Yeah, that's definitely a possibility. The Coterie, driving success for direct-to-consumer companies like Tonal.

Find us at thecoterie.io. Budget Botanist on Fiverr. Plant of the Week is Hillary's Sweet Lemon Mint, named for HRC in 1993. My second favorite mint, but can be rare. Wow, okay. OK, listening for years, still can't come up with something clever. Adam Borchoff, Brian K. I don't, don't say invasion, I say avoision. Mary the Great, new book, The Greatest Gift of All: Logical Path from Religion to Humanism by Mark McLean out now. Becoming a patron to get five episodes a week. And I finally caught up on months of backlog. One mediocre straight guy slowly coming out as a fabulous lesbian.

Five, artifact equipment living web. Oh, this is already Batterskull, I know it. Uh, artifact equipment living weapon, equipped, uh, creature gets plus four plus four, vigilance and lifelink, five, equip three, returns to your hand. Yeah, that's Batterskull. I should have gotten the last one I got wrong, Phyrexian Obliterator. It just, I, it was a brain fart. I couldn't come

0:52:58 Andrew: Ooh.

0:53:43 Thomas: Up with that obliterated part, but, uh, you know, I, I'd like to think I got half credit there, but yep, batter skull for this one. I'm look forward to voting Ron Johnson out of office. Speaking of batter skull I remember, Andrew, I don't know if, if this is a good legal tie-in, when we're talking about Magic, the othering law, there's a whole thing where, like, that card and that whole set got leaked early because some people had access to, like, the new card list, and they got banned for, like, a year. It was a, it was the whole scandal. Yeah, they, it was, it was, it was a champion, too, like, previous champion, world champion, got banned, uh, for like a year or more, I can't remember. Anyway, I'm looking forward to voting Ron Johnson out of office. I like my pork streaks paired with At Casa Agria and At Emperor's Brewery Beer. Josh Hawley's dorm room poster. If we can't take legal advice from a podcast, can we take podcast advice from a law firm? Lee Sharp.

GD Tree says, so long and thanks for all the fish. Thomas Kleberg. Sparkle Donkey, we should triple down on supporting the Trevor Project. I will match your donation up to $500. Oh, wow. I don't know what that's going through, but that sounds awesome. Buddy freaking Geiersen. Is it weird that I refer to you all as my podcast friends? My wife thinks so. Idea for Idea a screenplay, Air Bud,

0:54:07 Andrew: Ooh.

0:54:52 Thomas: Man's best amicus. Don't take legal advice from a quarter two fabulous lesbians. Good luck to all studying and taking law school finals, aka not updating my Patreon for several weeks. Well, true to your word, I don't think they have updated that for several weeks. Edgy Veggie Bob Newhouse. Sassy Italy Tours bets you a bottle of grappa that Kevin McCarthy is a liar. Le do le bien fabulo. One Smart Cookie Cutters. Jennifer Tchaikovsky. Anti-disestablishmentarianism. Does Jack Black know you have his Pick of Destiny? Strict Screwing Me, it's so weird. John Brown did nothing, that's just out of nowhere, it's funny, they're like, let's find the closest thing we can do a pun on, Strict Screw In Me. Okay, John Brown Didn't Do Wrong. My Call. Evie Huntington, Harvard alum. No, Hood. Maybe if we call that place Dakota Territory again, they will stop sending people to DC. Yes, Nuzzly Fuzzly Torsten Peel. This Satanic Temple, I'm not even a tortfeasor, I'm kicking your ass. Angry Mac Face. Penelope is glad Sydney got sanctioned for turpsickery.

The Books That Burn podcast, revealing fictional depictions of trauma since 2019. This is not the greatest patron name in the world, no, this is just a tribute. Crimer, no criming. Not that Chris Wallace. Not that my call. Not that prince of propitia. My name is Harvey. Beers in the beer fridge. Torts in the tort freezer.

0:56:16 Thomas: Ritz of mandamus in the Ritz cellar. Cool glass of motion and lemonade waiting for you on the porch. Two different patrons.

0:56:22 Andrew: The coordination there is really excellent.

0:56:24 Thomas: I know, Murray Gregerson, get on it or something. Or not that Chris Wallace. Somebody, somebody around there. Picking a Supreme Court justice is a lot like crossing a river. It all comes down to Roe v. Wade. Another week down, another week I forgot to change my Patreon name. We'll change this Patreon name when our newborn lets us sleep. Simple Country Hyper Chicken. This patron name intentionally left blank. Ace Associate Morgan Stringer makes my heart smile. Jake, so my future DJ name can be MC Donald as long as I don't sell burgers. Oh, MC Donald is good, I should have, I should have thought of that. Crazy Corgi Seattle. Pete, plug whatever you guys want here, I don't listen anyways. Patreon benefits rule. Another Minneapolitan waiting for a live show in Minneapolis. Guardians Adelaide of the Galaxy. Christopher Brown.

0:57:10 Thomas: Philly Live Show 2022. I'll bring the scotch and cheese steaks. Who's bringing Gritty? Oh my God. Can we hire Gritty for, you know? I bet we can't because if we hire Sharky for stuff, we've hired Sharky for birthday parties and stuff. We got to be able to get Gritty. A fabulous single French lesbian who got her first dose of vaccine. Lawful Copter says, Andrew and Thomas from From the bottom of my heart, thank you for everything you guys do. A podcast that pairs a man racing a quarter and a real-life lawyer. Medicon 7. OA live show in Sydney, Australia. Please, I won't be vaccinated until October at the earliest. Thanks, government. Wow. Andrew Seidel's butt has been to Raleigh, North Carolina. Great place for an OA live. Live and your turn, Andrew.

0:57:17 Andrew: I'm sure we can at a Philly live show yeah yeah a special shout out to, if Thomas can't pork the streak, he can at least streak the pork. Also thanks to Odin the Law Dog, JD, to Robert M, to Lou, to Hannibal Montanable, RB, Trary and Capricious, with puns that don't work when read aloud. Well, that worked a little bit. Horrified. Episode 489 had no discussion of FASA TCI, the unseen lawsuits, and the superior carrier U.S. intellectual property, based off the same toy's Battle Tech. See what I'm dealing with, Thomas?

0:58:22 Thomas: Yeah, I know.

0:58:23 Andrew: The Dinosaur National Monument live show. To good news, everyone, I've developed a machine that lets me speak through a random person in the past. To becoming a patron for that sweet, sweet spreadsheet implementing equitable distribution. Polly Hernandez, that's a big Twinkie. Emily Rainbow Spence, Jason Kopas, Hot Spears, Ode to a Small Lump of Filibuster I Found in My Armpit One Midsummer Morning. Keep keep calm and Kelno Ream, uh, which I think is a Battlestar Galactica reference. I was told I don't know this profile name is hilarious in the context of some other podcast. I do love when our patrons sign up for other shows and I'll hear that. Yeah, that is the best. Uh, a series of fake patrons, each more Conrad Michaels than the last. Natrex, Darth Mandy Pants, can you, can a canned can into an uncanned can, like a canner can, can a can can into an uncammed can? Take burger restaurant naming advice from a podcast. There's also a brief trial of Cobra Commander in the G.I. Joe movie, lamb double feature with Transformers. Yeah, I'm down on that one.

Give to modest needs dot org give to modest needs dot org I am not falling behind or running late. Jennifer Cratch. Not that Chris Wallace. I got some money, how much will it take to dethrone Conrad Michaels? Well, more than that, apparently. Don't take legal advice from a cat. CivilPoliticsRadio.com. Fridays at 7 p.m. Eastern on Valley Free Radio. John Bilderbeck. My, my friend's cousin mixed Coke with Cop Rocks and he died.

0:58:59 Thomas: Yep. It's The best. No.

0:59:50 Andrew: Stephen Balticate Zandoval. I would like to sample the drugs that convinced the GOP that Liz Cheney is a liberal. Yeah, it's not that she's liberal. It's just that

0:59:58 Thomas: But yeah I'm, I hate that, stupid topic for another time.

0:59:58 Andrew: Yeah. Yep. Yep, yeah, we'll do an SIO on it. I'll come on. We'll yell. Philip Kizer.

1:00:01 Thomas: Oh, sure, you just booked yourself a appointment

1:00:09 Andrew: Andrea the Arbitrary and Capricious. COVID showed me I am the kind of guy that wants a little prick. I love that. Dude, Aquafina is Latin for the end of water as we know it. Absion, Painstrumpet. Sorry for making you use the last one for so long. It was dumb anyway. Alfred Wallace. Jonathan, Lord Kinboat. Quote, way to go, Thomas. Pork that streak like a karaoke legend.

1:00:32 Andrew: Buy Volvos. They're boxy, but they're good. Milo Mead song pronounces it Hobetian. Join your labor union together. We bargain alone. We beg. All skybreakers are bastards. Eat the light eyes. I have no idea what that means. Deer testicles are really cheap. In fact, they're under a buck. Because of you, PIAT and Cogdis, I left the LDS church and the Republican Party.

1:00:32 Thomas: All

1:00:53 Andrew: Well, I'm super happy about that. Really thought the chili story would end with, And that's how dad found out he had COVID. Yeah, no, this was way before COVID. False. Anonymous. WordOrigins.org, your source for word and phrase origins. My witty names aren't original and my original names aren'T witty. Nerd Gnostic. RIP Notorious RBG. I'm thumping the chest. Our kitchen is your kitchen for an eventual Seattle live show platinum dinner. The offer stands. They said I could be anything, so I became two fabulous lesbians. Derek, I don't pray, but when I do, it's for evangelicals to get vaccinated. Big easy blasphemy. It's kind of nice having a competent federal government again. That's courtesy of SummitShuffleboard.com. A string of unpronounceable characters. RhondaTheDork.com Hey, I actually went there. It is Rhonda the Dork's blog.

1:00:53 Thomas: Right

1:01:40 Andrew: It''s a good read. HPL is my favorite racist science fiction author. PKD is a close second. Malika Chandler, tricycler, manslaughter, soggy pants. The leftist textualist says if corporations are people, they need to pay personal income tax on revenue, not profit. It. Yeah, I'm with you. Thanks, GOP, for giving Tories a voter suppression template to copy-paste into UK law. Hey, you know, you do not have to follow our dumbest politicians, UK. Adam Costa, adopt a homeless pet and oppose declawing and ear docking. J. Alden Walt, dead jury belly at Pecky's at last. Baby Heather L., Matthew Vernon, Jeremiah's fancy microwave emporium. Ian and Allie, he's not even a coin and he's kicking your ass. That's so good. Dan Irizarry, Eli Bosnick, McDavid in Brooklyn, Anita Charity Dick, Sam Donnell, Mitchell finally got back into my account. Couldn't Liz Cheney just declare the ouster vote a big lie and keep her position? I agree with that 100%. Natasha Crunchwrap wants you to support the Justice Policy Institute, Sam Buck, and of course, our all-time great, he who shall never be dethroned, Conrad Michaels.

1:02:19 Thomas: And

1:02:45 Clip: Oh, no associate of this firm has ever failed the bar exam. No kidding.

1:02:52 Thomas: Now it's time for T3BE. Well, TC3BE, TCBY. What is that? Is that the frozen? Anyway, Thomas and the coin take the bar exam. Sam, this was a confusing one. No confidence, but who knows? Let's see how I did.

1:02:56 Andrew: That that is all right, so this was, uh, a man entered a tavern in an intoxicated condition, uh, they said no, he was ordered to leave, he was escorted out, he staggered across the road trying to go to a liquor store, uh, was hit by a car, was severely injured, sued the, the tavern for being responsible for his personal injuries. And at trial, that was the evidence that came out. And then both sides moved for judgment as a matter of law. And how should the court rule on those motions? First, I want to say you interpreted the question exactly correctly, right? So judgment as matter of loss says that we do not want to give this case to the jury because the facts do not support a jury verdict in one way or the other, right?

1:03:49 Thomas: Yeah. Mm-hmm.

1:03:56 Andrew: And so classically, the way in which you would get judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a judgment as a matter of law is if there is no duty between defendant and the plaintiff in a negligence action. And, right, so you asked exactly the right question. And you said, would a bar be responsible for a patron crossing the street? And the answer you picked, C, grant the tavern's motion, because there is no evidence that the taverner breached a duty to the man. You said, I'm going to go based on American capitalism. Nobody has any duty to anybody.

1:04:31 Andrew: Yeah, no, I know I'm being a little uncharitable there for humor purposes. But, in fact, taverns do owe a duty to drunk patrons, but they owe that duty while you are inside the premises. Right. So, in other words, you come in and you're intoxicated.

1:04:30 Thomas: Not exactly, but yeah, sure. Hmm. Yeah. They have the duty of not over-serving you, right?

1:04:51 Andrew: Right, and you drink yourself to death. Your estate can sue them for violating their duty.

1:04:54 Thomas: Yeah. But not like you have to let a guy in. That's what I'm saying. Yeah.

1:05:00 Andrew: Yep. Yep. And so, but, but the area where this becomes a little bit of a gray area is what happens when, when the duty begins on the inside but continues to the outside. Real case in Illinois, for example, in which a drunk patron and his buddy were not only escorted off the premises, but were walked over to their car, car. And so the court said, "Hey, if you just ejected them, you'd have been fine." But you walked somebody who was too drunk to serve to a car.

1:05:36 Thomas: So it's like you contributed to drunk driving.

1:05:39 Andrew: You absolutely, when you put them in the car, you were then responsible for them driving drunk. Andso there are efforts extend that duty from from inside the premises to outside the premises. But the facts don't show that here. The facts are just here that they kick the guy out. And once they kick you out at common law, that's it. They owe no more duty to you. So your answer of C was 100% correct.

1:05:40 Thomas: Right. Damn straight. Rate. The coin and I. All

1:06:09 Andrew: Yeah, so the coin finally gets one right. You get one right, two question winning streak for Thomas.

1:06:09 Thomas: Right. Yeah. So I'm at two thirds and the coin's at one third. Okay. I think ever since the introduction of the coin, coin law. No, the coin and I got it right. Well, you know, good for the coin. I, I had felt bad for the coin. It wasn't, you know, yeah, it wasn't.

1:06:16 Andrew: Yeah, exactly. Yep. Yeah, there you go. It's good. It's good to do. I

1:06:31 Thomas: It was a little bummed that it hadn't done very well, but I'm going to, I'm going to report to the coin, it'll be so happy that it got one right with me.

1:06:38 Andrew: Think it will be.

1:06:39 Thomas: Well, uh, it's a trifecta. Some, there's a big winner, so we got to find out who, who joined the coin and I in our new musical and got this one right. And looks like I get to pick the winner this week, and we had a lot of correct answers. I think this one was an easy one, and that's why the coin got it right. I think that makes sense. Lots of good ones, but I gotta hand it to someone who wrote a little poem, or maybe this is supposed to be to the tune of a song that I'm not recognizing. Either way, Matthew Tai says, "Once upon the time there was a tavern where we used to raise a glass or two. Remember when we turned away the drunkard, not knowing he'd get creamed and try to sue? Those were the days, my friend, the judge would say the trial ends, because the answer is C, and so we never lose." Yeah. So you nailed it.

1:07:24 Thomas: You use the hashtag T3BE, which is what you have to use on Twitter to play. You have to retweet the show and use that hashtag, which Matthew Tai did perfectly well. And so give Matthew Tai a follow. It's what it sounds like at Matthew and then T-I-E. Thank you so much, Matthew Tai, for being this week's big winner. Thanks so much for listening everybody we will see you on friday for as always a rapid response see you then

1:07:52 Clip: I move for a bad court thingy. You mean a mistrial? Yeah, that's why you're the judge and I'm the law talking guy.

1:08:26 Clip: www.openargs.com. Be sure to join the Facebook group at facebook.com/groups/Yodel Mountain and follow us on Twitter at OpenArgs. This podcast is a production of Opening Arguments Media LLC, all rights reserved. It is produced with the assistance of transcriptionist Heather Leverage, production assistant Ashley Smith, and additional contributions from Morgan Stringer and Debra Smith. Special thanks to Teresa Gomez, who runs our live shows and heads up the OA Wiki, follow at OA Wiki on Twitter. Additional thanks to the moderators of the Opening Arguments Facebook community, Emily Waters, Alicia Cook, Eric Brewer, Natalie Newell, Brian Ziegenhagen, and Teresa. And finally, thanks to Thomas Smith, who edits the show and created the fabulous theme music, which was used with permission.