The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Thu Nov 07, 2019 1:05 am

Considering that Amber has a habit of leaking more or less true things to the tabloids I would worry that such a report would be leaked. And she wouldn't be too careful about telling the truth either ...

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:05 am

Johnny can leak things to the tabloids too about her and others connected to her that are more famous like Franco and/or Musk.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Thu Nov 07, 2019 1:45 pm

There is that, yes :love:
But he would stick to the truth, whereas she wouldn't let anything as old fashioned as the truth come in the way of a "good" smear :sad:

thiefcat
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:57 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by thiefcat » Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:20 am


User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:25 am

:loveshower: :ok: :yahoo: :hug3: :yahoo: :ok: :loveshower:

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 9:45 am

Lots happening today:

AH team to hear their motion to allow her to amend her pleading
Depp team to hear their motion to stop VPA from having their motion heard
Depp team to hear their motion to NOT allow her to amend her pleading

11/18
Depp team to hear their motion to remove her 11/22 scheduled Amended Pleading (Claiming technicalities that she shouldn't have been able to file an oversize brief and pre-schedule something that wasn't approved and didn't clear it with Depp attorneys) I forgot: If the judge grants her demurrer and Plea in Bar, Depp team insists on a jury and no way to complete that for 11/22. My understanding is the Plaintiff has a right to ask for a jury for this.

11/21
Rocky trial - lots of motions to be heard for pretrial, including Depp request to exclude Rocky's therapist Rocky also filed a brief on allowable punitive damages (I don't have it) There are other motions

11/21
Buckley has a status conference. They filed 20 motions to place liens on multiple properties and business entities that I have not seen Depp team answer to yet (thought you had to answer in 10 days, but at least not uploaded) . Their hearing on this is Feb 11

11/22
AH Motion to present her Amended pleading if Judge approves that she can amend it (and Denies depp opposition to keep this on the calendar) I forgot: If the judge grants her demurrer and Plea in Bar, Depp team insists on a jury and no way to complete that for 11/22. My understanding is the Plaintiff has a right to ask for a jury for this.

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Fri Nov 08, 2019 11:42 am

The judge denied her first "first pleading" which was motion to dismiss and move to the VA court so it would be ridiculous for him to grant this motion to amend her first pleading, imo.

She still has not filed an official answer to the complaint but instead she used the motion as her first pleading.

The judge also denied the other request to join in so my guess is he will deny the VA request also. Besides, if they have a beef or worries about their jobs they should take it up with The Washington Post since they are the ones who published the article and I think the judge will decide that.

The filing of her notice for a hearing for the plea in bar was premature and that's a given grant for JD.

I don't know anything about liens and the time frames for which to reply but I would think normal time frame would be 30 days and I expect his team to oppose.

Of course, all this is my opinion but the facts are pretty clear.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 1:35 pm

VPA IS OUT!


Press group: Hollywood libel lawsuit could set bad precedent
Nov. 8, 2019 Updated: Nov. 8, 2019 9:16 a.m.

FAIRFAX, Va. (AP) — Free press advocates in Virginia are concerned that a libel lawsuit between two Hollywood stars could set a bad precedent.

The Virginia Press Association asked Friday to intervene in a $50 million lawsuit filed by Johnny Depp against his ex-wife, actress Amber Heard. Depp says he was defamed by an article Heard wrote in The Washington Post. She never identified Depp by name but referred to herself as a "public figure representing domestic abuse."

The press association argued Friday in Fairfax County Circuit Court that the case could set a bad precedent for cases involving "defamation by implication."

A judge, though, barred the press association from filing any briefs outlining its position. He said his job was to apply the law as it exists without considering the association's policy concerns.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 1:49 pm

I misread the date:
11/18
Depp team to hear their motion to remove her 11/22 scheduled Amended Pleading (Claiming technicalities that she shouldn't have been able to file an oversize brief and pre-schedule something that wasn't approved and didn't clear it with Depp attorneys) I forgot: If the judge grants her demurrer and Plea in Bar, Depp team insists on a jury and no way to complete that for 11/22. My understanding is the Plaintiff has a right to ask for a jury for this.

should be 11/15

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:38 pm

I love rereading the docs as I get more and more tid bits I missed before. So Kaplan was screaming that no one with the command of the English language would remotely assume the OpEd was about Johnny.

I didn't notice in one of the recent filings by Depp Team, they cited an article from THE WASHINGTON POST that stated most media thought it was about Johnny:
Washington Post
A timeline of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard’s ongoing legal battle
By Sonia Rao May 22, 2019 at 5:49 p.m. EDT
"Though Heard didn’t name Depp or any specific allegations, her piece was widely interpreted as being in reference to him because of the media coverage of their tense split. She touched upon the death threats, overwhelming paparazzi attention and career hits that followed her coming forward.

“Two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out,” Heard wrote. "

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:53 pm

Looks like the judge ruled in favor of AH allowing a Leave to file an amended plea (presumably the demurrer & Plea-In-Bar)

An excerpt from this article:
Indeed, White issued a separate ruling Friday that gives Heard's attorneys an opportunity to raise new potential defenses in the case. Earlier arguments had focused largely on whether Fairfax County was the proper venue for a libel lawsuit involving two California residents.

The judge ruled earlier this year that Depp could sue in Fairfax because the Post's online editions are published through servers located in the county.

The trial is scheduled to begin in February.

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Fri Nov 08, 2019 3:49 pm

She really doesn’t want to face the fact that she has been caught lying ...
And how many men have she accused of abuse again? Even those who didn’t know her scribblings was about Johnny could just google her name - she’s almost only famous for being a poor little “victim” of a big bad man.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:24 pm

We have to recognize, from what everyone has told me, this is the abusers tactics. To continue to abuse after the survivor has escaped Full on retaliation. She will do everything she can to get this dismissed and at the same time destroy whatever she can of his reputation, drugs, alcohol and now mental state. Anything to keep him from working again. JD is ok. He recognizes this-was already facing this with her continued activism and the SJW attacking all his work. He said that already, he would say toodle-do and go on with his music.

Anyway, I also saw comments on her not providing evidence. Remember, at the crux of any law suit, the proof is the burden on the Plaintiff. In a civil lawsuit it is the presumption of guilt (thus 51% have to believe JD). However, her best defense is to show at least one instance of believable abuse. Or Likely it happened because of drugs, alcohol, mental state and he doesn't remember. Her best defense so far is a smoke screen of reasonable doubt. So JD has to prove he did NOT abuse her and she lied in her TRO (hard to prove a negative).

They appear to have really solid evidence based on all Adam has told the press. Let's hope he gets a chance to release it to a jury (and the public).

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:31 pm

Re Ruining his Reputation
Anything medical related is supposed to stay confidential. But they included an excerpt from the interrogatories they submitted to him in their last emergency to compel motion. Questions he is supposed to answer. These skirt the medical issue and will be made public, most likely. I'm sure there are more questions like this.

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:15 pm



Getty
Nov 8, 2019 at 20:17 pm UTC
By Mike Walters

Amber Heard Wants Johnny Depp To Undergo A Mental Evaluation

Amber Heard is asking the court to force Johnny Depp to undergo a mental health examination to question his current mental state, but Depp claims she is victim-blaming him.
According to legal documents, obtained by The Blast, Amber is asking that a mental health professional be allowed to conduct an "Independent Mental Evaluation" or IME on Johnny Depp.

Depp's lawyers have filed documents in the case, arguing it is an intrusion of privacy, and that his current mental state has little bearing on what may or may not have happened years ago between the couple.

"This is a defamation case in which Mr. Depp does not allege that he suffers from any mental disorder or condition. Thus, Mr. Depp's mental condition is not "in controversy" nor does good cause exist under the rule for an IME of Mr. Depp," Depp's lawyers say.

In the documents, Depp's attorney says, "It is preposterous notion that an IME now would shed light on Mr. Depp's mental state at the time of Ms. Heard's abuse hoax back in 2016. Ms. Heard's effort treads a well-worn path of victim blaming using the pretext of mental health.

They continued, "By Ms. Heard's tortured credibility logic, current IME's would also be warranted for all the dozens of eyewitnesses who have attested to the various facets of the hoaxes they witnessed years ago."
As we reported, Amber is seeking mental health information about Johnny because she believes his drug and alcohol use, along with medications he is taking, contributed to the abusive environment.
Heard says in her legal filing, "mental conditions in combination with his rampant use of alcohol and drugs were inextricably intertwined with the abuse she suffered at his hands."

She continued, "Johnny's relationship with reality oscillates, depending upon his interaction with alcohol and drugs. As Johnny's paranoia, delusions and aggression increased throughout our relationship so has my awareness of his continued substance abuse."

In response to the filings, Depp's lawyer Adam Waldman tells us, "Why does Amber Heard seek a mental health evaluation from a victim who has 32 eyewitness statements, 87 surveillance videos and a multitude of photographs showing beyond any doubt that Ms. Heard is a serially violent abuser who sought to cover and compound her crimes against Mr. Depp with a fraudulent hoax?

Is His Current Mental State Relevant?
The 'Pirates Of The Carribean' star's legal team argues in the case, however, "Mr. Depp's current mental state has no bearing on the truth or falsity of the alleged incidents allegedly occurring years ago."

Also, Depp's team made it clear, if the mental evaluation was done now, it wouldn't necessarily result in information important to when the events actually took place, saying, "A present-day mental evaluation to prove the truth of incidents that allegedly occurred over three and a half years ago would be unavailing because the results of such an IME conducted now would not constitute reliable evidence of Mr. Depp's mental state then."

A Judge Will Decide....
Amber Heard's attorney Roberta Kaplan believes Depp's mental state then and now is highly relevant, saying in a statement, “Mr. Depp’s well-documented history of drug and alcohol abuse, as well as his serious issues with anger and violence, raise legitimate questions about his mental state during the course of his relationship with our client, not to mention his ability to remember and truthfully recount what happened. We hope that Mr. Depp will agree to be examined so that we can get to the truth and our client can put the abuse she experienced and continues to experience as a result of this lawsuit to an end.”

The judge in the Virginia case will decide if the test will be conducted.