Frauditor Troll & DMA Stipulate to Legal Do-Over (Update)

Wednesday saw the second skirmish in the longer battle as there was more activity in the case of Christopher “Denver Metro Audits” Cordova v. Jonathan “Frauditor Troll” Huneault, which effectively negated everything that happened the day before.

In a filing that is weirdly listed as being filed on behalf of plaintiff Cordova instead of his clients, defendants Huneault and Nneka Ohiri, attorney Steven C. Vondran that recapped Tuesday’s fast and furious action in the lawsuit then announced stipulations from both sides that will set the pace for what’s to come in future filings.

Vondran said that he made a simple mistake as he was not aware that Ohiri was a defendant in the suit and filed his motion to dismiss on behalf of Huneault and not Ohiri. When Cordova’s attorney, that Randall S. “The Unhinged Attorney” Newman, Esq., noticed this, he pounced and filed a motion to hold Ohiri in default.

Correcting his error, Vondran filed a revised motion to dismiss, essentially inserting “both defendants” into the existing document.

The two sides came together and apparently agreed on a path forward by stipulating the following actions:

• Huneault’s Motion to Dismiss is withdrawn.
• The hearing that was set for November 18, 2025, is cancelled.
• Cordova, through Newman, will set aside the default entered against Ohiri.
• Cordova will file a First Amended Complaint by November 3, 2025.
• Huneault, through Vondran, will accept service of the First Amended Complaint through 14693663 Canada Inc., which is now a party to the lawsuit.
• Huneault’s response will come by November 24, 2025, should they file one.
• If Huneault opts to file a motion to dismiss, Cordova will have 21 days to file opposition to the motion.
• Defendants will have 14 days to reply to the defense’s response to the motion to dismiss.
• Defendants will notice a possible hearing date consistent with the schedule and the Court’s availability.

The filing essentially says “never mind” to everything that happened on Tuesday, but shows a path forward, establishes that defendant Ohiri will actually be defended in future filings and adds Huneault’s 14693663 Canada Inc. to the lawsuit.

The Judge in the case must approve the stipulation, and the court clerk will handle doing away with all of Tuesday’s multiple filings.

With screw ups in mind, we do have an actual paint fumes excuse for our own screw up in Yesterday’s coverage of the case as we misstated Ohiri’s involvement as there’s some home improvement going on at the office and things are a messy blur.

Our reporting on Wednesday indicated that Ohiri filled out the DMCA takedown response and assumed responsibility for the Frauditor Troll main channel. This was false and conflicted with our own previous reporting of the events.

Ohiri’s involvement in the channel was revealed by Google, who released information that it is Ohiri, and not Huneault, who owns the AdSense account associated with the main Frauditor Troll YouTube channel.

We apologize to Ms. Ohiri for the mix-up.

There’s also some confusion as to the “fair use” doctrine. We were incorrect, it was codified in the act itself, though confusion abounds about the limits of “fair use.” As it’s nearly 3AM when we write this, we’ll leave it to Google’s AI overview to clear up our mistakes:

DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and Fair Use are related legal concepts in U.S. copyright law, where Fair Use allows limited, unauthorized use of copyrighted material for purposes like criticism, commentary, news reporting, and research. While the DMCA is a tool for copyright holders to protect their work online, Fair Use serves as a critical defense for users who believe their use of copyrighted material is permissible under the law. Determining Fair Use is a complex, case-by-case legal analysis based on four key factors, and only a judge can ultimately decide if a use is fair. 

This is an on-going news story.

Update: The Judge in the case has approved the stipulation and voided the motion to dismiss.