Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by Federal Judge

June 5, 2008 -

The Florida Bar's motion to disbar Jack Thompson for a decade wasn't the only bad news the 56-year-old anti-game activist received this week.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Joan Lenard dismissed - with prejudice - a federal lawsuit filed by Thompson in March, alleging that the Florida Supreme Court had unconstitutionally barred him from representing himself before that body.

Readers may recall that Florida's high court sanctioned Thompson for, among other things, including pornographic pictures in a court filing and styling another motion as a children's picture book for adults.

The dismissal with prejudice means that Thompson can bring no further federal action on the claim.

Although the suit against the Florida Supreme Court is now a dead issue, Thompson has two additional federal suits pending in South Florida. One, against the Florida Bar, was placed on hold by Thompson recently, pending the state-level resolution of his Bar issues. Another, filed late last month against the State of Florida, deals with Thompson's contention that the legal status of Bar trial referee Judge Dava Tunis is invalid due to a clerk's apparent forging of her signature on a loyalty oath.

Read U.S. District Court Judge Joan Lenard's decision here.


Comments

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Gallagher can araç kiralama say all he wants, but I strongly rent a car believe it's due to his crappy leadership and E3 being a joke. ESA's Board of Directors need to find a way to get out rent a car of this horrid contract with this Bush cronie before there's no one left on the Board.

Btw, I think Atari and Midway will drop out too, but mostly travesti because  these guys have done nothing ttnet vitamin or little and need to start saving costs.

YES.

Now I don't have to get off my ass for the important shit anymore!

Whats next, ordering pizza from Xbox live?

Wait... I think that sounds like a good idea.

But I think voting should MAKE you get off your ass, and see outside or a second while you go vote. I mean, your picking the president of the United States of America for God's Sake... least you can do is drive down there and punch out a card.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Poor JT. He's so entangled in his legal wranglings, he's lost focus on what he's initially set out to do, fight for democracy and riddng the cancer in our legal system. You have to be either a Moron, and/or part of the cancer itself to realize JT, is a good man, who's just caught up in a one man crusade. I hope JT prevails, somehow, someway, because what Jt is going through, alot of others are dealing with the same situation, of course not getting the same attention. I f you can't see what is going on in this country, morally and what the founding fathers have intended for us as a country, I suggest reviewing your history books, and the Bible, if you have one, and understand what happens to every so called, great empire, let the few determine what's best for everyone, leads to disaster. It's a fact and history will repeat itself, read the book and learn something...have a good day

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

deals with Thompson's contention that the legal status of Bar trial referee Judge Dava Tunis is invalid due to a clerk's apparent forging of her signature on a loyalty oath.

I still don't see him getting much out of that one, sounds like the screw up was the clerk's fault, and one of those "I'll do something stupid to make things easy on me and save time" cases where the other party had no knowledge of or approved for that matter.

And again I ask, just who gave Jack such info?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

what do they mean by "dismissed with prejudice"?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

That means he is not allowed to file the same claims again.  If something is dismissed without prejudice, you can try again if you want.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

thanks man

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Hit the road, Jack...

Come on, you all know the words.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Yeah, but you're the 20,163rd person to mention that song, and it really wasn't all that funny or clever the first time.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

The image it invokes of Jack on a couch in the basement being ridiculed by a stuffed animal is grand though (assuming anyone even remembers the series)

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Ten year disbarrment, eh?

That means he will be 67 when he can practice law ever again. And what with his health the way it is, he'll probably die before his debarrment expires. I'm holding back from singing ding dong the witch is dead until the offical ruling by the Supreme Court. Does anyone know when that will be?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

I laughing at the fact that Judge Lenard uses Jack own pleadings to kick him to curb. Jack says the Florida Supreme Court is a "state entity" then goes on to claim that the state entity is a "person' is violating Sec. 1983. HAHAHAHAHA!!

If you're ever sued by Jack Thompson, don't waste your money hiring a defense attorney. Just sit back, relax, and bide your time. Sooner or later, with no assistance needed, Jack'll work his own way towards a dismissal with prejudice.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Ohhh...life's not what you thought it would be, huh Jack? Cry...yes cry, your tears sustain me!

 

-GRIZZAM PRIME(c)is property of the U.S. Marine Corp. Wetworks Dept., and also The Incredible Hulk-GRIZZAM PRIME is not to be associated with GRIZZAM 512 or any other GRIZZAM entity under penalty of law, so sayith ZARATHOS.

Reality/////////////////////////////////////Fantasy. Seems like a pretty thick line to me...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

This is a time to bring out my favorite quote from a US Supreme Court Justice:

"There are all kinds of nuts who can get 90% on the bar exam" - Justice Anthony Kennedy

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

No, he'd probably use that copy of GTAIV to train himself, go on a spree, and then BLAME the game for his actions. Thus, recreating every foul attempt to use the game as a scapegoat that other idiot people have done.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

i want the animal house reference! This forum demands it!

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

You mean "As of this moment, they're on double-secret probation"?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Jack Thompson, Attention Whore, fits best...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Moot is a real word.  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moot

Which defines jackie rather well methinks. 

Monty Python reference

"Tis but a flesh wound!"

Re: Monty Python reference

you got no arms on!

Re: Monty Python reference

"Right. We'll call it a draw." (*walks off*)

"...I'll bite your legs off!!!"

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

It's not all bad news for JT.

"" easily fits within the 60 character limit on the "Your name" field...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

 

If Thompson fails in a forest does he make a sound? Or is that merely the collective scream of all the tree's and fax machines at the thought of the amount of paper to be wasted on his 'we am de best, you am de suck' response?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

At the end the "denied as moot" part... is moot even a real word I mean Ive heard it but I always thought that it wasnt really a real word... more like slang...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Moot is a real word used in legal proceedings.  It was used by the judge in context that Jack's assertion the 6th amendment has merit is incorrect because the Florida Supreme Court is not a person it is a legal entity.  So his argument that his 6th amendment rights have been violated is moot since the scope of the amendment does not include the Florida Supreme Court.

-Loudspeaker
"Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

"Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Isn't it even more moot because the 6th Ammendment specifically applies to criminal trials only? And that means it applies to a defendant in a criminal trial? So nowhere does that apply to someone attempting to file a case against someone ELSE?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

With everything that has been happening with JT, has anyone else gotten the mental Image of the Judge in Ghostbusters II, when he's letting off his tirade that causes the slime to 'Pop'?

Might just be me, mind you, but I see the same unhinged attitude in both of them.

"The Good, the Bad, and the Videogame" Reviews on the best, worst, and controversial issues of Videogames. gryphonosiris.blogspot.com/

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

What happens next for this disbarrment?  When does it become official?  I take it the FSC is the entity to make this happen.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

First, Judge Tunis must make particular recommendations.  Though there's a lot of discussion of disbarment, that's just a guess--albeit a likely one.  Once the judge makes her recommendations, the Florida Supreme Court must choose whether to accept those recommendations or whether to do something else.  Usually, the supervisory court will accept the recommendations, but that's not always the case.

There may be additional procedures that JT could try after the Florida Supreme Court makes its ruling (such as a petition for rehearing), but I'm not familiar enough with Florida's rules to know for sure.  An anyway, those sorts of relief are granted only rarely.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Of note, however, is that Tunis is not just recommending a regular disbarment of five years, but an enhanced disbarment of ten.  That is probably going to speak volumes to the FSC when they get the report, and even if they decide to be lenient, Thompson could still end up disbarred.

Fail-o-rama

Jack just keeps adding more and more hash marks to his "Loss" column.

I'm reminded of an old inspirational axiom:

 

"Winners never quit, and quitters never win.  But those who never win, and never quit, are idiots."

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

I can't help but notice we haven't seen any more pics of him grinning with GTA4

Welcome to the ordinary Jack. I know he's not going to go away anytime soon, or quietly for that matter, but at least after the hammer falls, he'll be just another (beep) with an opinion; and I'll have no more problems with him.

"Even if it was online gaming that somehow inspired him to kill his parents, he must have realised at some point that they wouldn't drop any good loot." - GP member, Doomsong

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Aw, poor Jacky.

I vote we send him copies of the Phoenix Wright games to cheer him up! That way he can be a competent lawyer for the first time ever, all from the safety of his DS!

Though of course that *would* require him to purchase a DS...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

"He may even have to take the bar exam again (I don't know). I really don't see how he passed the first time."

I don't think he did.  Didn't someone here say his book mentions that he failed on his first attempt?  The start of a long and hilarious pattern of failure.

 

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

I don't think he did.  Didn't someone here say his book mentions that he failed on his first attempt?  The start of a long and hilarious pattern of failure.

Yeah, it's part of his EPIC™ struggle. He failed the first time, then his wife (and JEBUS!) got him through the second attempt, or something like that.

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Maybe *this* was the "surprise" he thought he had? Too bad so sad.

I'm a little confused, did they dismiss it on a technicality of how he worded his suit? (IE he tried to treat the Florida SC as a "person")

Then again, I guess if he really wanted to overturn this, he should have appealed it to federal court, not sued them.

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

No, the s. 1983 dismissal is not a "technicality" (whatever that really means).  It's established law that states and their agencies, etc. are not liable under s. 1983.  There are some borderline cases, and a significant gray area as far as defining who is a "person" under the statute, but a state court doesn't even come close to the line.

I'm not sure what JT's other claims were, so I can't comment much on any of the 11th Amendment stuff, but the 11th Amendment is generally sovereign immunity.  Sovereign immunity generally means that you can't sue the state (i.e., the sovereign) unless it says you can.  Most (likely all, but I'm not sure) states allow suits under defined circumstances.  The ruling therefore implies that JT did not allege anything that falls within Florida's waiver of sovereign immunity.  But that's just speculation.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

not a "technicality" (whatever that really means)

I meant "dismissed because it fell under some other ruling/law/procedure" other than ruling on the merits of his complaint.

He was basically claiming that the Florida SC violated his 6th Amendment rights by telling him he couldn't file with the court on his own. I was kinda hoping the Federal court would slap him around and go "yup, they can do that". So it was a bit of a letdown to see his suit fail for the usual reason "you suck at procedure, NEXT!"

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Ah, I see, thanks for explaining.  Different people usually mean all sorts of things when they use that descriptor, so I wasn't sure.  Keep in mind that procedural rules serve critical interests.  The law generally favors decisions on the merits, but not at the cost of letting litigants violate those procedural rules all over the place.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

I read it as meaning that the court wasn't subject to that particular law, because as a state agency in official capacity the court is able to lawfully do just what that law prohibits people from doing. A court using this sort of sanctions is like an air marshal being allowed to take a gun on a plane. Normal people get in trouble for it, they have to do it in the course of duty.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Not quite.  The federal statute at issue was passed after the civil war to prevent individuals from those acting under color of state law from violating the victims' civil rights.  The point is that the federal government, through a private suit, acts as a protector of an individual against the power of the state.  The case law interpreting the statute is often confusing (and to some legal academics, flat wrong).

But by any interpretion, JT's claim doesn't stand up.

Also, remember that constitutional rights are not absolute.  For example, the 4th Amendment prohibits warrantless searches.  But if the cops have a good reason to think that someone in his home is in danger, they can enter the home without a warrant (the "public safety exception") without violating the federal Constitution.

The same reasoning applies here.  JT may have a constitutional right to represent himself (though that's highly questionable because this is not a criminal proceeding), but he doesn't have the right to effectively monopolize the court's time and attention, at the expense of everyone else who needs access to the court system, in doing so.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

I see the difference you're pointing out, thanks. Great to know that even law scholars have trouble with interpreting laws though.

But you do, indeed, confirm what I expected; that it's not so much a fact of the arguement being dismissed on a fault in the procedure as it was Jack (willfully or not) misinterpreting the law to his advantage while he should know better. I'll gladly concede that others are better versed at explaining the specifics and explaining such things accurately :)

edit:

reworded, gave a completely wrong impression of what I was saying

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Perhaps so, but I was disappointed somewhat that the judge didn't address the issue of whether JT's being essentially labeled a vexatious litigant is valid. JT's argument is that being required to have another lawyer sign legal papers that you're filing on behalf of yourself infringes on his right to represent himself in court. There's supposedly some case law saying that sanctions like the one placed on JT are valid when deemed necessary to preserve reasonable access to the courts for everyone else. This ruling didn't reference that at all, it just said that JT's petitioning for relief under the wrong statutes, I guess.

I'm hoping that there is some statute JT could reference which would have made his complaint valid - otherwise it's almost frightening that the state could sanction you and then claim sovereign immunity if you wish to argue the fairness of the sanction.

 

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

JT had a chance to argue the fairness of the sanction--that's what the "order to show cause" business was all about.

As for other circumstances that I think you're getting at, what you're identifying is some of the tension between finality of decisions and the correctness of those decisions.  But in this case, that tension is illusory.  JT was arguing that a federal constitutional right was violated, so he can petition for certiorari ("appeal") to the U.S. Supreme court.  Perhaps knowing how negligible was the chance that it would accept the case, he tried something in the lower federal courts first.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

1.  Yes he is going to be disbarred, with a 10 year wait before reapplyment.  It's not a suspension, its a disassociation.

2.  God bless that judge and everything she stands for.  Score:  Constitution and due process 1, Jack Thompson and his antics 0.

3.  That letter he wrote yesterday?  I read the whole thing through, and I've got to say that I read 9/11 conspiracies that were more intelligent than his letter.

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Anyone know if the Honorable Judge Joan Lenard signed her loyalty oath?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Why would a federal judge need to sign a Florida loyalty oath?

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

no bonus point!

it should be a  picture of "you know who"

Re: Jack Thompson's Suit vs. Florida Supreme Court Dismissed by

Nice to see that Jack is reaping the benefits of Karma.  This must of been building up for a LONG time, though.

So we just have two(?) more of his suits to be knocked down, right?  Then, hopefully the Florida State Bar will agree with Judge Tunis and Jack will be gone forever. 

At this point, I'm about 98% sure that this is the end for Jack.  I can't imagine too many lawyers are found guilty of 27 counts of misconduct and recommended for a 10 year suspension.  That doesn't seem light by any stretch of the imagination.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Who's responsible for crappy Netflix performance on Verizon?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilson@pm I doubt it. Google seems to be distancing themselves from G+07/25/2014 - 9:31pm
Papa MidnightGoogle+ Integration is coming to Twitch!07/25/2014 - 8:41pm
MaskedPixelanteThis whole Twitch thing just reeks of Google saying "You thought you could get away from us and our policies. That's adorable."07/25/2014 - 2:52pm
Sleaker@james_fudge - hopefully that's the case, but I wont hold my breath for it to happen.07/25/2014 - 1:08pm
SleakerUpdate on crytek situation is a bit ambiguous, but I'm glad they finally said something: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-07-25-crytek-addresses-financial-situation07/25/2014 - 1:07pm
E. Zachary KnightMan Atlas, Why do you not want me to have any money? Why? http://www.atlus.com/tears2/07/25/2014 - 12:06pm
Matthew WilsonI agree with that07/25/2014 - 10:45am
james_fudgeI think Twitch will have more of an impact on how YouTube/Google Plus work than the other way around.07/25/2014 - 10:22am
IanCWelp, twitch is going to suck now. Thanks google.07/25/2014 - 6:30am
Sleaker@MP - Looked up hitbox, thanks.07/24/2014 - 9:40pm
Matthew WilsonI agree, but to me given other known alternatives google seems to the the best option.07/24/2014 - 6:30pm
Andrew EisenTo be clear, I have no problem with Google buying it, I'm just concerned it will make a slew of objectively, quantifiably bad changes to Twitch just as it's done with YouTube over the years.07/24/2014 - 6:28pm
Matthew WilsonI doubt yahoo has the resources to pull it off, and I not just talking about money.07/24/2014 - 6:15pm
SleakerI wouldn't have minded a Yahoo purchase, probably would have been a better deal than Tumblr seeing as they paid the same for it...07/24/2014 - 6:13pm
MaskedPixelanteIt's the golden age of Hitbox, I guess.07/24/2014 - 6:08pm
Matthew Wilsonagain twitch was going to get bought. It was just who was going to buy it . Twitch was not even being able to handle the demand, so hey needed a company with allot of infrastructure to help them. I can understand why you would not want Google to buy it .07/24/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew Eisen"Google is better than MS or Amazon" Wow. Google, as I mentioned earlier, progressively makes almost everything worse and yet there are still two lesser options. Again, wow!07/24/2014 - 5:43pm
Andrew EisenI don't know. MS, in my experience, is about 50/50 on its products. It's either fine or it's unusable crap. Amazon, well... I've never had a problem buying anything from them but I don't use any of their products or services so I couldn't really say.07/24/2014 - 5:42pm
Matthew WilsonGoogle is better than MS or Amazon.07/24/2014 - 5:33pm
Sleaker@AE - I've never seen youtube as a great portal to interact with people from a comment perspective. like ever. The whole interface doesn't really promote that.07/24/2014 - 5:28pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician