iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 20/11/2024

You should request publication. This is an important decision.

Reposted by Matthew Strugar

Keri Blakinger @keribla.bsky.social · 14/11/2024

This is WILD: After a YEAR of whining about it, LA is finally admitting that NONE of the officers whose photos were released *by them* thru a *public records request* are actually undercovers anyway, so the whole claim it would endanger undercovers was … not true. www.latimes.com/california/s...

latimes.com

Many 'undercover' officers in lawsuit over LAPD photos are just regular cops, city says

Los Angeles dials back its claim that hundreds of cops were put at risk after their photos were made public, saying most of them weren't working undercover.

8378119

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 03/10/2023

just saw a cease and desist from a landlord claiming it is defamatory to call him "greedy." lord, give me strength.

0312

Reposted by Matthew Strugar

Alan Chen @profalankchen.bsky.social · 20/09/2023

Reposting from @strugar.bsky.social's "X" account: At the Eighth Circuit court of appeals with @profalankchen, @DavidMuraskin, & @CristinaKladis trying to protect our win against Iowa’s 2nd and 3rd ag gag laws! Alan & Dave argued and were both incredible.

091

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 19/08/2023

because talkin shit is good and cool

000

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 19/08/2023

(Assume no damages from A telling B and only B, apart from B’s republication to the world.) Is B a necessary party? Maybe the cleaner Q is whether the original speaker is liable for a republisher’s republication?

000

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 19/08/2023

defamation q: A tells B something about Z. B then publishes it widely. Z knows of both A & B but sues only A for defamation per quod for harms from the public knowing it. But A didn’t tell the public. Has Z pleaded damages for the defamation claim?

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 24/07/2023

I’m announcing my new social media app BLOCKED where you can talk about everything blocking: everyone you’ve blocked, why you blocked them, who should be blocked, who got blocked elsewhere by some other person or app.

110

Reposted by Matthew Strugar

wint @dril.bsky.social · 22/07/2023

just spoke with the mods... they said theyre adding DMs on this web site as soon as they get one user who people actually want to talk to

4260401293

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 11/07/2023

just heard from a formerly incarcerated client calling to say hi and he's like "life is great, man! i live in a huge RV; I'm somewhere different every day. And I got this security gig with 12 hour shifts where i don't do shit but sit there and watch karate movies!" :')

160

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

i would try to not lose fee shifting cases if these were my firm's rates that i swore under oath reasonably reflected the market

020

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Anyway, victory is sweet. Victory against Paul Clement's firm is sweeter. And victory against an animal abuser is the sweetest.

040

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Now Ziebold is on the hook not only for his own expensive lawyers' fees, but for ours, too. The protests are going to start up again right away. He's only bought himself more pain. And all he had to do to avoid all of this was not sell foie gras.

120

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

The Court largely stayed away from the First Amendment argument, buying our argument that protest activity directed at a business (even if the protesters name the owner) are not "stalking" of an individual. In other words, if anyone is a real party in interest, it's the business.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Anyway, Clement's firm's brief wasn't that good. And today the court granted our anti-SLAPP motions, dissolved the temporary restraining orders, and dismissed Ziebold's claims with prejudice.

120

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

In response to the anti-SLAPP motions, Ziebold hired *Paul Clement’s* firm. On a damn anti-stalking petition! Maybe Ziebold is richer than I thought, maybe the right wingers love foie gras and hate animal rights activists more than I thought.

110

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

We argued not only that the protest activity was protected by the First Amendment, but that this activity was directed at the *business*, not at Ziebold personally. Businesses can't get anti-stalking order; only people can. This was an attempt to get around that limitation.

110

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Together with my co-counsel (not on here), we filed anti-SLAPP motions to Ziebold's petitions. D.C.'s anti-SLAPP law is still pretty new and we're pretty sure no one had tried to apply it to civil harassment or anti-stalking order petitions yet.

110

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

And the judge issued a temporary restraining order saying the activists couldn’t go near the restaurants or say anything “false” about the restaurants on the internet.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Procedures are truncated, discovery is limited if at all existent, trials are quick, evidence rules are relaxed. This is all really appealing to people who want to shut someone up. So that's what he did.

110

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Why not just take the quick and easy route and seek to shut up the activists by claiming they are stalking you? Like most state's civil harassment restraining order procedures, DC lets you go in without notice and get an order to shut someone up.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

But like a lot of litigious jerks these days, Ziebold didn't want to go the normal route of filing a lawsuit for interference with business advantage or even defamation or trespass. Those are expensive and take a long time. And he's not looking for money, anyway.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

The protests took a variety forms. People held signs and chanted outside of the restaurants. Sometimes people went inside the restaurants and chanted until they were asked to leave. Activists left all kinds of negative reviews of the restaurants. And they called; a lot.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

A new group in D.C. called the D.C. Coalition Against Foie Gras is trying to end the sale of the cruel product in the District. And Ziebold’s fancy French restaurants sold and served it. So they started protesting at the restaurants.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Those birds are slaughtered and their diseased, fatty liver is sold as foie gras. It is the cruelest food; so cruel that its sale or production is banned in over a dozen countries, as well as New York City and the entire state of California.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

For some reason, foie gras is still legal to sell in D.C. It is the diseased liver of force-fed ducks and geese. It is produced by shoving a pipe down a bird’s throats and pumping large quantities of feed into the bird’s stomach.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Eric Ziebold is a D.C. chef. He runs Métier & Kinship. The guy has gotten himself into a lot of controversy over the years, including reports that he is a kind of a jerk to work for to allegations of racism. www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/08…

washingtonpost.com

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 28/06/2023

Excited to share this win I got today in some cases I haven't tweeted about at all yet. It involves a problem that seems to be getting worse: rich business owners trying to shut up their critics not through regular civil lawsuits, but civil anti-harassment statutes.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 21/06/2023

happy summer solstice (best day of the year) everyone

030

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 14/06/2023

dale ho becomes the second aclu attorney ever confirmed the federal bench (bader ginsburg, d.c. cir. 1980)

000

Reposted by Matthew Strugar

Summer Anne @summeranne.bsky.social · 04/06/2023

Haven’t been so excited about seeing a social platform since chatroulette debuted but there are fewer people jerking off here. that’s fine, I guess!

0161

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 04/06/2023

Ah, the 52 states 🫡🇺🇸

020

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 03/06/2023

not sure the “speech i like isn’t hate speech, the other side’s is” is the way through this kind of bullshit. just abandon the concept; it’s not a thing in american law and shouldn’t be. pro-palestinian speech will always be called hate speech in this country if hate speech is a thing.

000

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 01/06/2023

former sutton/kavanaugh clerk, too. 😙👌

000

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 01/06/2023

such a euphoric feeling to watch the other side die inside during a virtual hearing that goes all bad for them. especially when the case is deeply ideological for both sides/attorneys.

100

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 01/06/2023

gotta respond to those 74 unreads yourself my man

000

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 31/05/2023

You already have 40+ followers, which on here is like 10k!

010

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 30/05/2023

welcome @mbolotnikova.bsky.social to blue sky, y’all! Marina is an editor at Von and does incredible reporting on the criminalization of dissent and government overreach in the animal rights movement. give her a follow.

251

Matthew Strugar @strugar.bsky.social · 26/05/2023

Yes! This. It’s increasing, too, but nothing new. I’ve been anti-SLAPPing civil harassment petitions since 2012 and have filed on more than a dozen. (Even took one to the California Supreme Court twice and won.) It’s the cheapest, easiest SLAPP for censorious plaintiffs.

164