There were new developments in the on-going legal war between Christopher “Denver Metro Audits” Cordova and Jonathan “Frauditor Troll” Hudon-Huneault on Monday when Cordova’s attorney, That Randall S. “The Unhinged Attorney” Newman, Esq., filed his opposition to a recent motion filed by Hudon-Huneault’s attorney, “Sinsational” Simon Lin.
Lin’s motion asked for a complete stay on the Court ruling on a motion to strike count three of the defendant’s counterclaims and a voluntary dismissal of strike three until the court rules on their new Forum Non Conveniens and Security for Costs motions.
In his response, Newman pointed out that Hudon-Huneault deleted large portions of his Frauditor Troll YouTube channel after being notified of the lawsuit and has been less than cooperative in the discovery process.
Newman’s filing states that he was recently able to identify 67 videos with titles relating to his client that had been removed from Hudon-Huneault’s channel. When he asked for a meet and confer with Lin, Lin instead filed his motion to stay discovery.
Attorney Newman wrote: “Under these circumstances, staying discovery would prevent Plaintiff from obtaining the central evidence in this case. The Court should see Defendants’ Administrative Motion for what it is, an attempt to avoid accountability for their discovery delay and their destruction of relevant ESI.”
The filing also complains that the vast majority of Lin’s motion relied entirely on his separately Forum Non Conveniens and Security for Costs motions, whose replies are not yet due. Because of this attorney Newman is now in the position of replying to both the motion and the separate motions in the five page limit of a reply to the new motion.
Newman also points out that staying discovery at this point would be improper as “staying discovery would prevent Plaintiff from obtaining the very evidence necessary to prove the claims alleged in the FAC and would reward Defendants for their bad faith conduct. The Court should note that Defendants seek to halt discovery immediately after Plaintiff raised preservation and spoliation issues relating to the deleted channel content.”
Addressing Lin’s attempts to continue discovery on behalf of the defendants despite the call for a pause on discovery, Newman asserted that Lin was incorrect in his assertion that Cordova did not retain copies of videos that were recently set to private on Cordova’s channel.
Newman took Lin’s motion to task as it cited no authority for postponing outstandings rulings in the lawsuit in favor of first ruling on their Forum Non Conveniens and Security for Costs motions. While Lin relied on Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Int’l Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007) for his arguments, Newman stated, “that decision merely holds that courts may address forum non conveniens before reaching the merits. It does not require courts to suspend rulings on motions that have already been submitted for decision.”
He concluded by asking for a status conference regarding the on-going discovery issues in the lawsuit.
No reply has been made by Hudon-Huneault’s camp as of press time.
Hudon-Huneault’s Help us Fight this anti-free speech retaliation lawsuit campaign placed second in the crowd sourcing race for Tuesday, bringing in $11.00 in value due to conversion rate adjustments.
SeanPaul “Long Island Audit” Reyes took the day with $20.00 in new donations to his Help Me Fight These Unlawful Charges & Injustice fund.
No other campaigns that we follow received donations for the day.
Cordova v. Huneault – 95 – Defendants Request to Reschedule Final Pretrial Conference Cordova v. Huneault – 96 – Order re Defendants Request to Reschedule Final Pretrial Conference Cordova v. Huneault – 98 – Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Administrative Motion Cordova v. Huneault – 98-1 – Declaration of Randall S. Newman
