I'm being sued by Mike Postle, as are ESPN, Doug Polk, Joey Ingram, Bart Hanson, Phil Galfond, Matt Berkey, Daniel Negreanu, Jonathan Little, Veronica Brill, Haralabob, and Pokernews

[FRANKRIZZO]

2 plus 2 sucks

[Matt The Rat]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

[Dan Druff]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

Sadly not to my knowledge. I wish they archived these, but they don't.

[JoeD]

I think most courts in CA have a rule against broadcasting, which includes rebroadcasting, the video court hearings without the Judges permission. Like Sac Rule 1.124. Sac looks like the video is up for the day of the hearing and then removed at the close of business.

Druffs case is over so whatever. IMO Veronica should be a bit more cautious until she gets her judgment

Also Mason and his site are washed up and useless

[zealanddonk]

Postle is a poker pro, I'm sure he'll be able to win that money in a week and you'll be paid by WSOP 2021.

[Dan Druff]

The weird thing is that I'm the only one in poker to get a judgment against Mike Postle -- and I never even played poker with him, nor have I ever met the guy.

This will likely change next week, when Veronica is highly probable to become the second.

Still, when this whole thing broke 19 months ago, if forced to guess who would win the first court judgment against the guy, I wouldn't have picked myself in the first 1,000 guesses.

As I've stated a ton of times, I never wanted any of this. I didn't even get involved in commenting until several days after it blew up. Even after it became a big story, I never exploited the situation for views or clicks. I only covered the matter when there was something new to talk about. Even when sued myself, I gave matter-of-fact updates on the case as it progressed, and that was it.

Hopefully this situation will at least make others think twice before engaging in frivolous defamation suits against poker personalities, who are simply commenting on current events.

[garrett]

Druff clearly had the best Legal Representation here...

There really is a massive difference unfortunately in Quality of Defense that one can hire, and honestly some people can't afford the highest of quality legal representation. The State Attorney's or Public Defender's Office isn't referred to as the 'Public Pretenders' Office for no reason. They are actually wayyy over worked and have unreasonable case loads, which Private Counsel does not if you can afford that of course. .Druff clearly had the best, got the first settlement well played whoever it was. If it was Bensomoean (sp?)

lol well played well played

[The Shrink]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

I gather that Bart Hanson saved a copy of the relevant portion of the original video and uploaded to youtube:



It really is something to behold. Postle is completely out to lunch. You can see where this is heading the whole time. He has no legal recourse. The judge knows it. Eric Bensamochan knows it. So we sit and watch Postle ramble incoherently for 20 minutes and wait for the judge to basically say, "Nothing you just said matters. You owe Todd this money."

I can't imagine how the Brill hearing will go. Postle looks like a broken man. For the sake of his daughter I hope he doesn't do something drastic.

[BCR]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

I gather that Bart Hanson saved a copy of the relevant portion of the original video and uploaded to youtube:



It really is something to behold. Postle is completely out to lunch. You can see where this is heading the whole time. He has no legal recourse. The judge knows it. Eric Bensamochan knows it. So we sit and watch Postle ramble incoherently for 20 minutes and wait for the judge to basically say, "Nothing you just said matters. You owe Todd this money."

I can't imagine how the Brill hearing will go. Postle looks like a broken man. For the sake of his daughter I hope he doesn't do something drastic.

He really was off. All the repetitive over-explaining about why he didn’t have legal counsel. Like a judge doesn’t immediately know if you had a real case against high wealth individuals like many among those sued, you’d have no shortage of attorneys happy to take their money and your case. That zoom call was like here’s a quick example of wasting the courts time in some law school.

[dwai]

Thank you for the kind words. It was my pleasure to step in and help my friend Todd. I am truly glad with the outcome. Now, the actual hard part, is collecting.

lol, the 26k doesn't hurt either eh

[nunbeater]

Thank you for the kind words. It was my pleasure to step in and help my friend Todd. I am truly glad with the outcome. Now, the actual hard part, is collecting.

lol, the 26k doesn't hurt either eh

43k actually

[rum dick]

Just watched the vid. Plaintiff is an idiot. The judge is a really good judge. You got a bit lucky there to have your case heard in her courtroom.

[Gordman]

Vid is solid gold

Holy fuck Postle is an idiot

That judge was way too nice about this. Postle literally spewed a bunch of meaningless gibberish the entire time and did nothing more than waste everyone's time and make himself look stupid.

[BartHanson]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

I gather that Bart Hanson saved a copy of the relevant portion of the original video and uploaded to youtube:



It really is something to behold. Postle is completely out to lunch. You can see where this is heading the whole time. He has no legal recourse. The judge knows it. Eric Bensamochan knows it. So we sit and watch Postle ramble incoherently for 20 minutes and wait for the judge to basically say, "Nothing you just said matters. You owe Todd this money."

I can't imagine how the Brill hearing will go. Postle looks like a broken man. For the sake of his daughter I hope he doesn't do something drastic.

I didnt record this, but its gold.

[Dan Druff]

There's some pretty poor understanding of defamation law on 2+2, a forum which tends to be full of pseudointellectuals who posture as if they know about a topic, but in reality are completely misinformed.

I'm glad we don't have such stupidity over here. The discussion in this thread has been intelligent, for the most part.

Defamation is far more complicated than people think. In general, you have to consider:

- Whether the defendant was expressing an opinion or a statement of fact

- Whether the plaintiff was a public figure and/or limited purpose public figure

- Whether the defendant suffered actual damages from the alleged defamation

- Whether the statements in question were a matter of public concern

- Whether the defendant's statements were false

- If the defendant's statements were false, did he/she know it at the time they said it?


All of the above goes into the analysis of the quality of a defamation lawsuit. In most cases, these are not winnable, as there's a fairly high standard for what qualifies as actionable defamation. The court doesn't want to be bogged down by a million cases every time someone is butthurt because someone else said something bad about them.

The proper legal advice to Postle here should have been, "This case sucks. Don't file it, especially in California which has strong anti-SLAPP laws." I don't know what advice he actually got, and if he chose to follow it.

Many dummies in the 2+2 thread thought that Postle had a slam dunk defamation case because the lawsuit against him in June was dismissed on a California law technicality.

[MumblesBadly]

Video is now marked private and unavailable. Is there a link to it somewhere else?

I gather that Bart Hanson saved a copy of the relevant portion of the original video and uploaded to youtube:



It really is something to behold. Postle is completely out to lunch. You can see where this is heading the whole time. He has no legal recourse. The judge knows it. Eric Bensamochan knows it. So we sit and watch Postle ramble incoherently for 20 minutes and wait for the judge to basically say, "Nothing you just said matters. You owe Todd this money."

I can't imagine how the Brill hearing will go. Postle looks like a broken man. For the sake of his daughter I hope he doesn't do something drastic.

Postle’s actions in this hearing remind of the adage that “Someone who acts as his own attorney has a fool for a client.”

[Cerveza Fria]

The hearing was just now.

It was basically just to give Postle and Eric to object to the preliminary ruling on the attorney's fees, if they saw fit. Eric did not object and said that while he was disappointed, he accepted the reduction and wouldn't challenge it.

Postle attempted to state that I didn't have the right to hire an attorney and incur the billing for an anti-SLAPP because he hadn't served anyone yet. The judge shot that down, stating that I was well within my rights to hire an attorney to prepare the anti-SLAPP motion, since he actually filed the lawsuit. While many people wait to be served before taking action, that's not a requirement. As soon as you're named in as a defendant a filed court case, it is reasonable to retain counsel, which I did.

Postle attempted to state that, even with the reduction, the fees were unreasonable, and claimed to have consulted "attorneys" about the matter, but didn't provide evidence of that.

He did say that "one of opposing counsel doxxed me", but it was presumably referring to Randazza (Veronica's lawyer), who posted a court document on Twitter at one point which had Postle's address on it. However, this doesn't really qualify as doxxing, because it was an official court document related to one of Randazza's clients. Some attorneys will redact info like that, but if one of the parties lists his own address on the documents as Postle did, I think there's nothing he can do.

The judge stopped Postle at that point and said that this hearing was only about the fee award, so his statements weren't relevant to what we were doing here. (I also don't understand why he was complaining about Randazza at our hearing! He can do that next week at Veronica's.)

When it was all done, the fee amount was affirmed, and did not change from yesterday.

I now have a judgment of $26,982 against Mike Postle, which is $26,547 of attorney's fees, and $435 of court costs.

This was not a fun experience for me, and I'm glad it's over. However, I'm glad I had an excellent attorney representing me, whose recommendations were all spot on, and his work was thorough and well reasoned. I couldn't be happier with how Eric handled this case.

In my experience, most Courts will go out of their way to accommodate Pro Se parties, and this hearing seemed no different. Your attorney was smart to just sit back and let the Court make his arguments for him, especially on the point made by Postle about you not needing to hire counsel before Service of Process. Enjoy the collection process!

[Matt The Rat]

Nothing new but story update about latest ruling is on Poker News Daily here

https://www.pokernewsdaily.com/mike-...yuIjRE2oeKAV60

[Walter Sobchak]

I like how Drexel pronounces Eric's name like it rhymes with omicron

[ftpjesus]

I like how Drexel pronounces Eric's name like it rhymes with omicron

Not sure if you recall by EB was on the show awhile back and actually clarified its pronounced Ben-Som-I-Khan .. Druff has pepetuated the whole Benz-i-mochan thing its kinda become an inside joke much like the Arch Chives thing..