March 5, 2008
Controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson has filed a new federal lawsuit against the Florida Bar. It's at least his fourth such case since late 2006. To tell you the truth, we've lost count.None of those earlier actions against the Bar were successful. In fact, GamePolitics readers will likely recall the legal train wreck that was Thompson's most recent case before Judge Adalberto Jordan.
Highlights included Thompson's sending gay porn to the court in a case filing as well as his failed attempts to add GP, the ECA and even Judge Jordan himself as defendants at various points. The longtime Rockstar nemesis also made a rather entertaining pleading to the Court, complaining that he is parodied in the upcoming Grand Theft Auto IV (he's probably right about that).
The new complaint, filed yesterday, doesn't specifically address Thompson's own issues, but claims in a more global fashion that the Bar forces its supposed ideological agenda on Florida attorneys. We'll keep you posted on any new developments, but this one has the look of a non-starter.
Thompson, of course, underwent a 10-day disciplinary trial prosecuted by the Florida Bar in December. Judge Dava Tunis is expected to rule on the fate of Thompson's legal career next month.
You can read Thompson's lawsuit here, but be forewarned: It's a 74-page monster of a PDF file.
Comments
Re: Jack Thompson Sues Florida Bar (yet again)
I think he's right on the mark. The Florida Bar protects corrupt attorneys rather than protecting the public from illegal and fraudulent practices of corrupt attorneys. Everyone who believes in justice should stand up and applaud Thompson. But I'm sure they'll take away his license and thus silence him.
/no, I couldn't keep a straight face while typing that
Judge: With all due respect Mr. Thompson, Piss off and die.
"THEY CAN'T DO THAT, FORCING IDEOLOGY IS MY JOB"
"THE'YRE STEALING MY WORK"
"STEALING IS A CRIME!"
"THE FLORIDA BAR IS CRIMINALS"
ah......seriously though...
I don't actually remember that employee being identified..
He better think of something else quick, time is running out.
Uh, you mean the Bar's attempt at having their lawyers act with some form of dignity and/or semblence of normality is an ideological agenda? I did not know that.
Seriously JT, the Bar is giving you a bit of "tough love". They want to take away your right to be a lawyer because its for your own good (and for the sanity of everyone you're around).
In short, stop doing what we're trying to stop you from doing, like filing stupid lawsuits that you're going to lose because you're an idiot.
I think the only 'law' they're violating is the made-up one where JT can do whatever the f*** he wants.
In the world of Thompson, it will always be someone else's fault.
He filed his preliminary response on the 21th and then four more suplemental responses on the 26th.
Check out this site for a list of filings related to that case. Most of it appears as a lot of legal mumbo jumbo to me, but it communicates the drift.
http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket?p_caseyear=2007&p_casenumb...
Let me reiterate:
Rather than just citing two cases, Thompson attached two entire Supreme Court decisions, in full, to his lawsuit.
Hey, maybe that's standard practice but it seems like a cumbersome waste to me.
Andrew Eisen
I'm guessing he doesn't want us to see it because he's licking the Supreme Court's ***.
@godrobotus
So the response he sent to gamepolitics (http://gamepolitics.com/2008/02/21/florida-supreme-court-comes-down-hard...) was actually filled with the court?
Good lord!
His argument is pretty interesting. Isn't it the entire point of Bar Associations everywhere to do exactly what he's accusing the Florida Bar of doing?
Are you refering to the document just posted, because thats a whole new document for a new legal case. I wasn't aware his Show Order response(s) have been made avaliable yet? Got a link? If i'm mistaken I apologise.
@GoodrobotUs; so the response he sent to gamepolitics
(http://gamepolitics.com/2008/02/21/florida-supreme-court-comes-down-hard...) was actually filled with the court and Jack considers it his Show Cause?!
Good Lord!
"This court’s panicked threat against Thompson… has wonderfully proven not just that Thompson has no “adequate state remedy” but that he has no state remedy at all. This court threatens Thompson if he even files this pleading.
This is a brazen attempt by this court to repeal the absolute right of every citizen, under the First Amendment, to “petition the government for a redress” of grievances…
The [Florida] Bar threatens a whistleblower with retribution because he dares to keep blowing the whistle? This court has threatened Thompson. He does not threaten back. He hereby informs this court that he will see it in federal court. This court has just thrown Brer Rabbit into the briar patch."
I can't believe he ACTUALLY filled that as his Just Cause.
Matriculated is right, I'm talking about Thompsons' initial response to the show cause and his filings afterwards. Yup, this case is a brand new one, though, I have to wonder at the timing of it, does a ruling regarding vexatious filing apply only to the case it is specifically dealing with, or is it a general application to all ongoing cases? Can't help thinking this is just a way of side-stepping the possibility of being barred from making additions to his complaint by 'starting a new pile', as it were.