Ever see the guy who tries to sneak his half-eaten chip into the onion dip when he thinks no one is watching? Disgusting, right? And not just because of the sores around his mouth. At best, it’s poor form. At worst, it’s repulsive. And it’s no better when it happens in the law.
When wealthy businessman Christopher Comins tried to shut poor blogger Matthew VanVoorhis down with a SLAPP suit the first time, everybody was watching.
So what does a shooter do when he’s caught on video and properly castigated everywhere? He sues a blogger.
Matthew Frederick VanVoorhis has a blog called Public Intellectual, where he posted about Comins’ dog-shooting. The title is Christopher Comins: Barbarian Hillbilly Dog-Assassin (w/Friends in High places). My guess is that Comins objected to being called a Hillbilly. I bet Hillbillies objected to being associated with Comins.
The post is harsh. Then again, trying to murder dogs, especially when the owner is screaming to stop and you’re close enough to see the collar around their necks, deserves some harsh words. But Comins is a businessman. He’s got both the wherewithal and motivation to make somebody pay for his getting caught.
And sure enough, VanVoorhis’ lawyer, somebody named Randazza, beat the rap, his motion to dismiss being granted. Unfortunately, the case being in Florida, there was no price to pay for bringing a SLAPP suit, other than the public humiliation of getting whupped.
The good thing about being a successful businessman suffering from butthurt, however, is that upon losing a case with a lot of people watching, you can always count on the attention span of your critics being far shorter than the pain you suffer. And as long as there’s money for lawyers, there’s hope.
Now that the video of Comins shooting dogs is more than three years old (21 in dog years, half a century in internet years), and all eyes are looking for new images to capture their angst and imagination, the patient litigant figures no one is watching. And so he’s going for his double dip.
Christopher Comins has,
I’m watching, Chris. I see you double dipping. It’s disgusting.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m confused. I see the same attorney signed both complaints. How does said attorney think he’s getting this past res judicata dismissal? Or was the original suit dismissed without prejudice?
I have found a docket report online that indicates that final judgment did not occur until November 10, 2011, after the date of the new complaint. The source is unofficial; I’d link, but that’s against the rules.
What am I missing here? Is there any way at all that the new complaint could be considered non-frivolous?
Excellent questions. Remember, this is happening in Florida, not the United States.
Florida–oh that legal system! Florida and SLAPP suit. Been there, got the T-shirt.
Hey! We really do have Rules of Civil Procedure here, and they’re remarkably similar to the ones they use in other states and federal courts. Some of our judges have actually read them.