Bill Schmalfeldt has promised to publish a letter which he has sent to John Hoge’s attorney about Schmalfeldt’s Lolsuit. Actually, Mr. Nettles represents all of the defendants in the case, including Sarah of BillySez. Follow the links for great discussions of the email.
Here’s Bill’s Tweet promising to publish the email:
Sorry. Wrong Tweet.
Here’s the thing. Mr. Nettles is working pro bono, which is Latin for “this one’s on me.” John Hoge has not claimed to be a pauper, and neither have the other litigants…but I’m sure hiring a lawyer would be a hardship. I don’t know why Mr. Nettles has stepped up and agreed to this, but it is a good thing.
When Bill Schmalfeldt temporarily had a free attorney, it was because he claimed to be a pauper. He has also convinced a court to waive fees, based upon his financial situation.
Bill Schmalfeldt is complaining because John Hoge is apparently prepared to spend thousands of dollars of his own money to obtain court transcripts and file an appeal of the Hoge v Kimberlin case, which was recently decided.
There is a logical difference between the two situations. I look forward to reading Schmalfeldt’s justification for contacting John’s lawyer, but I’m simply worried.
Is it even possible for a pro bono attorney involved in litigation to obtain a Restraining Order on an opposing pro se litigant?
And do Lulz muscles wear out?
We’re really going to miss David Edgren around here.