I need to inquire as to why the Plaintiff would be unable to select mediators. Maybe there’s a conflict of interest somewhere in the case. And that wouldn’t surprise me.
So I will ask around and try to find out why this is happening and update everyone asap.
So I will ask around and try to find out why this is happening and update everyone asap.
Forwarded from AntifaWatch
Christian "Antifash Gordon" Exoo was served a subpoena in his ongoing lawsuit on March 6th demanding his Twitter data and a deposition on the 20th
His NLG lawyer is attempting to get it quashed for several reasons including that it would be used to "identify members of antifa"
Exoo has largely been exiled from leftist circles following a statement from Torch Antifa accusing him of abuse and being a predator. The statement (archive.md/VeMqW) was taken down after a cease and desist
Quash- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.199.0.pdf Subpoena- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.199.3.pdf
His NLG lawyer is attempting to get it quashed for several reasons including that it would be used to "identify members of antifa"
Exoo has largely been exiled from leftist circles following a statement from Torch Antifa accusing him of abuse and being a predator. The statement (archive.md/VeMqW) was taken down after a cease and desist
Quash- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.199.0.pdf Subpoena- https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.199.3.pdf
AntifashGordon Lawsuit
I need to inquire as to why the Plaintiff would be unable to select mediators. Maybe there’s a conflict of interest somewhere in the case. And that wouldn’t surprise me. So I will ask around and try to find out why this is happening and update everyone asap.
It seems that this can’t be settled through mediation. Interesting to say the least
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.196.0.pdf
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.196.0.pdf
This case has taken an interesting turn with the mediation failing.
And if the subpoena of Exoo survives, there may be a trove of details revealed. For example, we know that Exoo was close with former journalist Hilary Sargent. It’s believed that she is the owner of the recently suspended “AnonCommieStan”. The account engages in the same behavior as Exoo did to get sued. Sargent openly justifies Exoo’s actions and even believes them to be less harmful than anything that Andy Ngo does.
Was Sargent part of the team? Maybe the subpoena will put an end to speculation.
https://archive.vn/w31nX
And if the subpoena of Exoo survives, there may be a trove of details revealed. For example, we know that Exoo was close with former journalist Hilary Sargent. It’s believed that she is the owner of the recently suspended “AnonCommieStan”. The account engages in the same behavior as Exoo did to get sued. Sargent openly justifies Exoo’s actions and even believes them to be less harmful than anything that Andy Ngo does.
Was Sargent part of the team? Maybe the subpoena will put an end to speculation.
https://archive.vn/w31nX
After lengthy discussions between the parties, no settlement can be agreed upon.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.206.0.pdf
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.206.0.pdf
For those wondering about discovery, Exoo appears to be stonewalling his communications.
This is the April 1st filing by D’Ambly and I’ll link the most pertinent document. The attachments are just related proof of service. And since all are available and not entirely interesting I won’t post them all.
D’Ambly’s argument is that these communications are directly related to the case and should be within scope.
Exoo’s response is to try and quash the subpoena or file a protective order to remove them from the scope of discovery and keep them private. This includes communications with Daryl Lamont Jenkins as well.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.203.0.pdf
This is the April 1st filing by D’Ambly and I’ll link the most pertinent document. The attachments are just related proof of service. And since all are available and not entirely interesting I won’t post them all.
D’Ambly’s argument is that these communications are directly related to the case and should be within scope.
Exoo’s response is to try and quash the subpoena or file a protective order to remove them from the scope of discovery and keep them private. This includes communications with Daryl Lamont Jenkins as well.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.445946/gov.uscourts.njd.445946.203.0.pdf
AntifashGordon Lawsuit
For those wondering about discovery, Exoo appears to be stonewalling his communications. This is the April 1st filing by D’Ambly and I’ll link the most pertinent document. The attachments are just related proof of service. And since all are available and…
But the declaration filed by Exoo in his response to this subpoena are interesting, and it’s hidden behind Pacer. I’ll post that entire filing below
AntifashGordon Lawsuit
For those wondering about discovery, Exoo appears to be stonewalling his communications. This is the April 1st filing by D’Ambly and I’ll link the most pertinent document. The attachments are just related proof of service. And since all are available and…
In his response to the subpoena Exoo makes some interesting claims.
D’Ambly argues that Exoo’s public statements indicate that there may be further communications pertinent to discovery.
Exoo’s response is
1) the tip about D’Ambly being fired wasn’t entirely accurate
2) the tip was anonymous
3) he’s never communicated with the Daily News or Insite Risk Management.
If all of the above is true, why not just produce the proof?
Second, Exoo never addresses any possible communications with Daryl Lamont Jenkins. He seems to have left that out entirely.
Full filing below with all documents (PACER). Be advised that it’s one single document but it includes all documents in the filing.
D’Ambly argues that Exoo’s public statements indicate that there may be further communications pertinent to discovery.
Exoo’s response is
1) the tip about D’Ambly being fired wasn’t entirely accurate
2) the tip was anonymous
3) he’s never communicated with the Daily News or Insite Risk Management.
If all of the above is true, why not just produce the proof?
Second, Exoo never addresses any possible communications with Daryl Lamont Jenkins. He seems to have left that out entirely.
Full filing below with all documents (PACER). Be advised that it’s one single document but it includes all documents in the filing.