"Go watch a soap opera or something"
-Michael Basl on being creeped out by a stranger observing HIM
Proceedings in the Case of Misery v. Eesh
Posted by: CourthouseObserver ()
Date: March 13, 2015 12:54PM
I had a couple of hour-long break in my schedule this morning, and so I decided to drop into Fairfax County Circuit Courtroom 4F to observe as much as I could of today's proceedings in the case of Misery v. Eesh.
My Bottom-Line take on the situation is that Eesh is in a lot of trouble here.
First, the atmospherics...
The court was entertaining pretrial and interlocutory motions, rather than conducting trials and so, for the most part, those present in and addressing the court were attorneys for plaintiffs and defendants who were arguing their motions before the court.
Eesh was there, accompanied by Lizzy, and they sat together in the back row until their case was called.
Eesh was smartly dressed, with well-pressed Khaki pants, a blue blazer, a dress shirt and tie. Lizzy was conservatively dressed in black in what appeared to be business attire and running shoes. While Lizzy sat beside him for much of the time that the court was in session, she left the courtroom occasionally (to make phone calls, I believe) and returned each time. Indeed, she actually was out of the courtroom when the Misery v. Eesh case was called before the judge and missed most of the proceedings.
Someone who I assumed was Misery was there, as well, sitting by himself dressed much more casually.
Misery's attorney was unconventional in his appearance, in that he had long, flowing hair and a good amount of facial hair. But he was professionally dressed in a dark suit, dress shirt, tie, and pocket square, and he comported himself well professionally during and after the proceedings.
The biggest surprise for me, though, was that Eesh was appearing pro Se, which (for the few FFX Underground users who are not attorneys) means he was without counsel.
The purpose of today's proceedings was for the court to hear arguments and rule on a motion by Eesh's attorney for summary judgement in the case. As best as I can understand it (I did not speak to any of the parties after the proceedings to confirm this), the motion was predicated on the fact that Eesh did not file a response to the suit within the time period required by law and still had not filed a response. As a general matter, when this occurs, a plantiff (the charging party) will ask the court to enter a summary judgement against the defendant (the person who is being sued) and in favor of the plaintiff.
Eesh's "defense" to the motion for summary judgement was to file a motion of his own, asking the judge to quash service (ask the judge to rule that he, the defendant, had not been properly served or given notice of the suit and/or not given proper notice of the motions filed by the plaintiff).
Misery's attorney presented a compelling case in favor of his motion for summary judgement, asserting that the suit and notice had been properly served by the Sheriff, offering the court proof of the same, and asserting that Eesh had not responded to the suit in the proper timeframe. He asked that, in the alternative, if the judge declined to make a summary judgement in favor of Misery, that she award Misery $1,900 in attorneys fees and costs that had been incurred so far to research, prepared, file, and argue the motions and that said fees and costs be paid as a precondition to allowing Eesh to continue in the case without summary judgement.
Appearing on his own behalf, Eesh offered no defense to not having responded to the suit. Instead, contended that he had not been properly served and asked the judge to quash service.
The judge agreed with Misery's attorney that service had been properly made; that Eesh had not responded at all, let alone within the timeframes required by law; and that grounds were there for summary judgement. She indicated however, that she was reluctant to do so in this instance at this time, in part because Eesh was appearing Pro Se. She castigated Eesh for not responding to the suit, as well as for his motion to quash service -- both on the merits of the motion and for his failure to properly file it.
Eesh appeared confused about the legalities of the situation he is in and of what he needs to do in order to defend himself, saying several times that he has no legal training; that he is attending school on the GI Bill and has no money for attorneys; and that he had consulted an attorney who wanted $10,000 from him to take the case, which he did not have.
The judge was having none of it.
She told him that he was gambling by not having counsel and that, at the very least, he needs to talk with one. She quizzed him on several aspects of court procedure. He was unable to satisfactorily answer her.
In the end, she cut him a MAJOR break.
She denied both the motion for summary judgement and the motion to quash service. However, she gave Eesh ten days to either respond to the suit or properly file a motion to quash service, whichever he chose to do. On the request by Misery's attorney for attorneys fees, she denied that request without prejudice, saying that the attorney could bring that up again at the appropriate time.
Eesh is in trouble.
My free legal advice to him is ...
First, get an attorney. If you cannot afford one, SURELY you can find a First Amendment attorney (ACLU, perhaps?) who would do it for free. This is a significant case that could have implications far beyond FFX Underground, and I am sure that there are attorneys and organizations out there who, notwithstanding his bad behavior, would take on this case. Misery's attorney is good. You have little hope of prevailing if you are not represented, as well.
Second, stop posting on Fairfax Underground until this suit is over. Nothing you could possibly post can help you. But you have no idea how things you might post might hurt you.
Third, as wonderful a person as Lizzy might be (I offer neither an endorsement nor a commendation of her), you might not want to show up with her in court. If you want her to be a witness for you, she might not be permitted to testify on your behalf if she has been prejudiced by viewing prior proceedings. And she DOES have pending felony charges against her (although, from what I can tell, those charges might well be bogus).
More later...
/
edit by Cary: This post was generated by the author formerly known as Mr. Misery aka jimmylegs. Mr. Misery, I would take these comments seriously if they were produced by ANYONE but yourself. You have been permanently banned from this forum. Any attempt by you to access this interactive computing resource is against repeated explicit instructions that you are not authorized to do so.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2015 12:17PM by Cary.
Attachments: