@david_ingram @tchambers This is dismissal on motions pretty early in the case timeline — even before discovery is granted to the plaintiffs (as is the intended effect of anti-SLAPP protection). So, legal costs of the defendants shouldn’t be too significant at this point…maybe in the low tens of thousands of $$ for a few hours of research and drafting on the motion to dismiss, and a court appearance for the arguments. (1/2)
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Michael Fisher (mjf_pro@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Mar-2024 04:39:03 JST Michael Fisher - Tim Chambers repeated this.
-
Embed this notice
Michael Fisher (mjf_pro@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Mar-2024 04:39:18 JST Michael Fisher Where to look for impact: Musk likely wasted a TON of scarce X Corp money having his lawyers to chase this dead end (indeed probably *forcing* them to push it against their better advice).
He’d be extra stupid to try to appeal the dismissal, particularly to the 9th Circuit, so watch him try. (2/2)
-
Embed this notice
Tim Chambers (tchambers@indieweb.social)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Mar-2024 04:39:43 JST Tim Chambers @mjf_pro Any thoughts on appeal changes?
-
Embed this notice
Michael Fisher (mjf_pro@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Mar-2024 04:55:07 JST Michael Fisher @tchambers On its face the trial court’s reasoning seems sound. I wouldn’t think Musk’s chances on appeal are all that great. The wildcard would be whether after a 9th Circuit affirmation, the SCOTUS reactionaries would (1) have any actual desire to radically overturn anti-SLAPP statutes or defamation precedents at this point, and perhaps more importantly, (2) whether they would use *this* particular case as the vehicle for doing so. (1/2)
-
Embed this notice
Tim Chambers (tchambers@indieweb.social)'s status on Tuesday, 26-Mar-2024 04:55:31 JST Tim Chambers @mjf_pro X has said they will appeal. So thanks!