Friday, August 19, 2016

Clark County Nevada Judge Rob Bare completely discredits Randazza Legal Group’s key witness of civil case A-14-699072-C

"Randazza Legal Group named domestic violence assailant Ari Scott Bass aka Michael Whiteacre as their key witness for their April 2014 frivolous and fraudulent lawsuit filed by attorney Marc Randazza’s wife (Jennifer Randazza) against independent investigative blogger Alexandra Mayers (Clark county Civil court case A-14-699072-C).
The Clark County Nevada Judge assigned to the lawsuit is the honorable Judge Rob Bare.
Ironically, on March 7, 2014 a ruling by Judge Rob Bare completely discredited Ari Scott Bass aka Michael Whiteacre in a separate legal matter (which involves him physically assaulting his wife and sex trafficking victim – well known prostitute Christina Parreira).
That’s right – the only witness Randazza Legal Group was able to find to face Alexandra Mayers in a United States court of law, was no more than some loser porn industry fanboi who thought he could get away with physically assaulting his meal ticket (a woman he married and pimped repeatedly into to Dennis Hof’s brothels).
Way to go Randazza Legal Group…
randazza legal group ari scott bass porn attorney parody
’nuff said.
This matter came before the Court on January 20, 2016 and Court took matter under advisement. After carefully considering the papers submitted and hearing arguments, Court issued its Decision this 7th day of March, 2016. COURT ORDERED, Appellant’s conviction is AFFIRMED and REMANDED back to the lower court for any further proceedings. The standard of review on appeal challenging sufficiency of the evidence is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Koza v. State, 100 Nev. 245, 250, 681 P.2d 44, 47 (1984). It is not the purview of this Court to weigh the evidence or to re-examine the credibility of witnesses. Lay v. State, 110 Nev. 1189, 1192, 886 P.2d 448, 450 (1994). In this case, this Court finds that after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found Appellant guiltySpecifically, the 911 call that the victim made the night of the incident was played and the victim told the dispatcher that, He grabbed me today, putting his hand around my neck, again, and threw me down on the floor. Additionally, Officer Miller observed that the victim had visible injuries in the form of redness and scratches on her right elbow and arm area. Furthermore, this Court will not reweigh the evidence or re-examine the credibility of witnesses. Therefore, a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt and Appellant’s conviction is affirmed. Counsel for Respondent is directed to submit a proposed Order consistent with the foregoing which sets forth the underpinnings of the same in accordance herewith and with counsel s briefing and argument. A Status Check Re: Order is set for May 4, 2016 in chambers. Parties need not appear. 5/4/16 (CHAMBERS) – STATUS CHECK RE.: ORDER CLERK’S NOTE: Counsel is to ensure a copy of the forgoing minute order is distributed to all interested parties; additionally, a copy of the foregoing minute order was distributed to the Service Recipients via the Wiznet E-Service (3/7/16 amn).

Thursday, August 18, 2016

Alexandra Mayers Clark County Nevada Court Filing; Jennifer Randazza / Randazza Legal Group. Ari Bass aKa Michael Whiteacre, Sean Tompkins, Mike South aKa Michael Strother, Marc Randazza.



Source
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bypu5iLNbbmwQzdWblcxNHlaS3M/view

AND

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bypu5iLNbbmwUFBmRWtnUHFVLWM/view

Alexandra Mayers Reports; "Michael Strother / Mike South states WHO posed as Jennifer Randazza requesting my help, AFTER Marc Randazza offered legal services to Strother to sue me"

"Michael Strother / Mike South has stated WHO posed as Jennifer Randazza requesting my help, AFTER Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group offered legal services to Strother (in what appears to be “pro-bono” form) to sue me.
The following document (complete with exhibits) has been filed and accepted into the United States of America Clark County Nevada Civil Court – case A-14-699072-C Dept. 32
I will post a video blog (vlog) about this issue soon on http://www.MonicaAtHome.com
click here for the complete filed and stamped copy of the PDF document
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bypu5iLNbbmwQzdWblcxNHlaS3M/view?usp=sharing
click here for a higher resolution of the exhibits in PDF document format.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bypu5iLNbbmwUFBmRWtnUHFVLWM/view?usp=sharing
Below is the text of the legal statement filed into the case:
On August 16, 2016 porn industry blogger Michael Strother aka Mike South of http://www.MikeSouth.com wrote a post (exhibit A) stating that Sean Matthew Tompkins and Ari Scott Bass posed online (trolled me) as Jennifer Randazza – which is what led me to post the tweets in question (exhibit B) that this lawsuit is based on.
            I have been told by another porn industry blogger known as Kelli Roberts, that Randazza Legal Group was involved in Sean Matthew Tompkins’ acquisition of a website called LukeIsBack.com
            Ari Scott Bass aka Michael Whiteacre was on the initial witness list sent to me from Jennifer Randazza’s legal council (exhibit C).
            The domestic and international organization, the Aids Healthcare Foundation, recently released a press released which states that Michael Strother aka Mike South is a credible blogger / journalist (exhibit D).
Michael Strother told me on Twitter August 13, 2016 that he would take up Mr. Randazza (Marc Randazza’s) offer to sue me if I did not delete the claims I posted online about him being a pimp and being involved in sex trafficking (exhibit E).
            Michael Strother aka Mike South has also stated that to me via email (exhibit F) as of August 15, 2016 that if I don’t apologize to him for stating that he is a pimp (even though he labeled himself a pimp as of December 4, 2002 and November 26, 2002: exhibits G – H) and involved in sex and human trafficking, that he will sue me.
            Michael Strother aka Mike South has a multitude of posts (some in which he recruited civilians for his Bukakke pornographic adult movies which are filmed in Atlanta, Georgia), on a website called http://www.USAsexGuide.info (a website that labels itself as a sex travel / sex tourism guide. Sex Tourism is a form of human and sex trafficking). Strother vouched for illegal prostitute’s sexual performances on the website’s forum and offered recommendations to other posters of the website who were seeking to illegally purchase sex (exhibit I).
In addition from 2002 to 2011 Michael Strother operated a website called http://www.StreetsOfAtlanta.com (exhibit J) which showcased photographs and stated the exact streets in Atlanta where illegal prostitutes could be located.

Strother stated on his own blog MikeSouth.com (exhibit K) that he gained financially from the sexual exploitation of illegal prostitutes, being that the photographs he took of them drew online traffic to his website, which converted into sales of his pornography on his “pay sites”.
Michael Stother aka Mike South emailed me September 5, 2014 (exhibit L) stating that Marc Randazza was receptive to the idea that someone was impersonating Jennifer Randazza and that he felt he could arrange for Marc Randazza to drop this lawsuit against me if I apologized.
Lastly, August 16, 2016 at 2:20pm (PST) Michael Strother aka Mike South sent me an email stating that “several people” are offering him money to get a judgment in Georgia against me to take all of my websites (exhibit M).
            Considering Marc Randazza’s offer to Michael Strother to file a lawsuit against me, I believe that Marc Randazza’s and that of Randazza Legal Group’s actions are that criminal conspiracy & illustrate the abuse the United States judicial system to intimidate me, silence my work on the truth of pornography and organized crime (namely sex and human trafficking), harass me and extort money from me via a legal judgment.
DATED this 16th day of August, 2016.
Pursuant to NRS 53.045, I declare under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Alexandra Mayers
/s/ Alexandra Mayers
Defendant, In Proper Person"

Source 

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Bankruptcy Cry Baby Victim Marc Randazza. RANDAZZA has me, Crystal Cox the Biggest Creditor in this CASE, yet I have no Rights and my LAWSUIT against him, as my former attorney is simply FROZEN. Marc Randazza, attorney, has used the Nevada Bankruptcy courts as a tool to violate the rights of his former clients, and to STOP legal action again him.

"Debtor’s misguided criticisms of the IAA are an example of Debtor’s attempt to portray himself as a victim"

Source and Full Motion
http://ia801505.us.archive.org/20/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.155.0.pdf


SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT BY CREDITORS EXCELSIOR MEDIA CORP., AND LIBERTY MEDIA
HOLDINGS, LLC TO DETERMINE NON-DISCHARGEABILITY OF DEBTS

"III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Defendant Randazza is the former in-house General Counsel of E/L. Randazza was employed as E/L’s General Counsel continuously from June, 2009 until August 2012.

8. Excelsior is a sister company to various entities including Liberty and Corbin Fisher. Corbin Fisher is an on-line entertainment website and brand name whose intellectual
property is owned by Liberty. Excelsior is a film production company that creates videos for the Corbin Fisher brand.

E/L has consistently endeavored to and succeeded at conducting its business in a principled and professional manner. E/L relocated its headquarters from San Diego, California to Las Vegas in February 2011.

9. Randazza also relocated from San Diego, California to Las Vegas in 2011 to continue his employment relationship with E/L. Randazza markets himself as a “specialist” in First Amendment and intellectual property law, particularly with regard to the adult entertainment industry.

10. E/L and Randazza became acquainted while Randazza was an associate at a firm specializing in First Amendment related legal work in Florida. E/L later decided to hire a General Counsel. Randazza pursued and accepted the position. Randazza drafted an employment agreement, which was executed by the parties in June, 2009 (“Employment Agreement”).

Randazza at no time advise Plaintiffs that they should seek independent counsel to review the agreement even though Plaintiffs were obviously unrepresented. During the course of his
employment with E/L, Randazza was an integral part of E/L’s management and, along with several other executives, participated in making many of E/L’s major corporate decisions.

11. The primary reason E/L decided to hire a General Counsel was to ensure its intellectual property was protected. One of the most significant challenges faced by E/L and all companies in the film and entertainment industry is the illegal downloading and sharing of content/videos produced by E/L. However, Randazza was tasked with handling all of E/L’s legal  matters.


A. THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

12. Pursuant to the Employment Agreement, Randazza was to wind down his private practice during his first 90 days of employment and become E/L’s full-time General Counsel.

13.  Section “6.C” of the Employment Agreement permitted Randazza to continue to provide professional services to a “limited number of outside clients” during non-working hours if such work did not present a conflict of interest for E/L. Contrary to his obligations under the Employment Agreement and without the knowledge of E/L, Randazza continued to aggressively grow his private practice during his employment after becoming E/L’s General Counsel.

14. Randazza’s compensation consisted of an annual salary of $208,000. Randazza also included in the Employment Agreement the unique arrangement of a nondiscretionary bonus of 25% of any settlement funds paid to E/L.

15. At the time of the execution of the Employment Agreement, the parties contemplated that Randazza would be handling all of E/L’s legal matters independently. Instead, Randazza began to utilize his own firm, Randazza Legal Group (“RLG”) and various outside counsel to assist in E/L’s legal matters.

16. The Employment Agreement also required that E/L provide Randazza with a laptop computer and PDA/phone, which were to be primarily used for E/L business with only occasional and incidental personal use permitted. The Employment Agreement further provided that such equipment was not to be used for professional services rendered to other clients.

17. The Employment Agreement provided for severance in the amount of 12 weeks of salary if E/L were to unilaterally terminate Randazza in the fourth year of employment or later.

There is no severance obligation if Randazza resigned or was terminated for cause.

18. The Employment Agreement also includes a governing law provision stating “[t]his Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to conflict of laws.” Randazza was able to reside virtually anywhere he wanted. Initially, Randazza lived and worked in San Diego, California. However, Randazza relocated to Las Vegas, Nevada in June 2011, just as few months after E/L relocated its headquarters.

19.  At Randazza’s request, E/L hired Erika Dillon (“Dillon”), a paralegal. Dillon was employed by E/L as a paralegal at the time of Randazza’s resignation. Dillon left her employment after Randazza’s resignation at Randazza’s request B. ISSUES ARISE BETWEEN E/L AND RANDAZZA

i. Randazza’s Non-E/L Work

20. As noted above, under the Employment Agreement Randazza was obligated to wind down his private practice during the first 90 days of his employment with E/L.

21.  After becoming E/L’s General Counsel, however, Randazza kept adding clients to his practice, RLG, and over the period from October 2009 through August 2012, he billed over 1,643 hours to clients for work unrelated to E/L (and not including pro bono work). This amounts to an average of 47 hours per month.

During Randazza’s employment at E/L, he never billed less than 14.5 hours in a given month to other clients and in many months he billed between 50 and 90 hours to such clients. During the period from September 2011 through January 2012, Randazza billed 390.65 hours to non-E/L and non-pro bono clients, an average of over 78 hours per month.

This pattern of extensive and increasing work for non-E/L clients is evidence that Randazza had no intention of winding down his private practice as required by the Employment Agreement.

22. During his employment with E/L, including during the period from September 2011 through January 2012, E/L paid Randazza’s full salary and benefits, including bar dues in multiple jurisdictions.

ii. Randazza’s TNAFlix Relationship

23. Randazza, through RLG, represented Liberty in a lawsuit that he filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California against TNAFlix (“TNA”) (Case. No. 10-CV-1972-JHA-POR) alleging that TNA (a file-sharing website) infringed Liberty’s copyrighted works (the “TNA Matter”). Valentin Gurvits, Esq. (“Gurvits”) of the Boston Law Group, LLP (“Boston Law”) represented TNA.

24.   In December 2010 and January 2011, Randazza and Gurvits negotiated a settlement of the TNA Matter. During the course of those negotiations, Gurvits raised a concern about his client (TNA) being sued by other copyright owners in the future based on the same or similar allegations made by Liberty against TNA in the TNA matter.

In an email dated December 7, 2010, Randazza advised Gurvits that he “could largely prevent other plaintiffs from entering the fray.”

25. According to Randazza, Gurvits wanted to pay Randazza a “fee” of $5,000 in order to conflict Randazza out of future cases against TNA. In an email dated December 22, 2010, Randazza responded to Gurvits’ offer as follows:

As far as conflicting me out of future cases, that will require significantly more than $5,000. In fact, I have someone waiting in the wings with a $50k retainer right now. Naturally, I’m in a strange ethical bind, as your offer to conflict me out of future cases against your client is something that would benefit my current client. Accordingly, I would be willing to be conflicted out of cases against TNA, but that $5k figure has to come up. Either that, or you can give [Liberty] what they asked for, and I’ll conflict myself out for a token payment
 26. Randazza and Gurvits continued to discuss the prospect of conflicting Randazza out of future cases against TNA during the course of negotiating a settlement of the TNA Matter.

For example, on January 11, 2011 Randazza wrote in an email to Gurvits:

Keeping me out of the TNA game is a little more complicated.
If your client wants to keep me personally out of the TNA game, then I think that there needs to be a little grave for me. And it has to be more than the $5k you were talking about before, I’m looking at the cost of at least a new Carrera in retainer deposits after circulating around the adult entertainment expo this week. I’m gonna want at least used BMW money.

In order to conflict me out of future matters, I suggest this:

Your firm retains me as “of counsel” to you. I get $5k per month (for six months) paid to me, from you (TNA will reimburse you, I presume). I will render advice on TNA and TNA only, and I’ll be Chinese walled from your other clients so that other conflicts are not created.

*******************************

That way, I’m adequately compensated for my loss of major potential work, and I’m conflicted out of acting adversely to TNA.

27. On January 12, 2011, Randazza apparently discovered that he was ethically prohibited from discussing limitations on his right to practice law during the course of settlement negotiations on behalf of a client, and sent an email to Gurvits saying that he could no longer discuss it, saying: “But I’m certain now that such an arrangement is unethical, in the terms we’ve been discussing it.” Nevertheless, Randazza recommended finding “some other way of addressing [TNA’s] interests,” and stated as follows:

Like I said before, if TNA wants to hire me *after* settlement, on terms that we discuss *after* settlement, then my phone line will be open.

However, it seems that if we place any part of a “buyoff” as a condition of settlement, then all four of us could wind up in bar trouble. I’m certainly not risking it.

28. On February 1, 2011, Liberty signed a Settlement Agreement and General Release of Claims (the “TNA Settlement Agreement”) under which Liberty agreed to dismiss its claims against TNA without prejudice in exchange for payment of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00).

The next day (February 2, 2011) and before Randazza had even received the signature of Gurvits’ client on the TNA Settlement Agreement and the sameday that Randazza received the settlement  payment from TNA, Randazza sent an email to Gurvits asking if TNA wanted “a retainer letter form [him].”

29.   On February 11, 2011 Randazza emailed Gurvits a draft retainer letter from TNA to sign, which required a $36.000.00 retainer to be paid at the outset of the representation and deemed to be earned upon receipt. TNA did not, however, immediately sign the retainer letter, Randazza wrote to Gruvits in late June 2011 stating, “You will recall that I am not conflicted out of representing another client against [TNA].”

Source and Full Document, Case Filing
http://ia801505.us.archive.org/20/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.156.0.pdf

How in the WORLD is Marc Randazza still a Lawyer? WOW

Bankruptcy Cry Baby Victim Marc Randazza. RANDAZZA has me, Crystal Cox the Biggest Creditor in this CASE, yet I have no Rights and my LAWSUIT against him, as my former attorney is simply FROZEN. Marc Randazza, attorney, has used the Nevada Bankruptcy courts as a tool to violate the rights of his former clients, and to STOP legal action again him.

"Debtor’s misguided criticisms of the IAA are an example of Debtor’s attempt to portray himself as a victim"

Source and Full Motion
http://ia801505.us.archive.org/20/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.155.0.pdf


SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT BY CREDITORS EXCELSIOR MEDIA CORP., AND LIBERTY MEDIA
HOLDINGS, LLC TO DETERMINE NON-DISCHARGEABILITY OF DEBTS

"III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Defendant Randazza is the former in-house General Counsel of E/L. Randazza was employed as E/L’s General Counsel continuously from June, 2009 until August 2012.

8. Excelsior is a sister company to various entities including Liberty and Corbin Fisher. Corbin Fisher is an on-line entertainment website and brand name whose intellectual
property is owned by Liberty. Excelsior is a film production company that creates videos for the Corbin Fisher brand.

E/L has consistently endeavored to and succeeded at conducting its business in a principled and professional manner. E/L relocated its headquarters from San Diego, California to Las Vegas in February 2011.

9. Randazza also relocated from San Diego, California to Las Vegas in 2011 to continue his employment relationship with E/L. Randazza markets himself as a “specialist” in First Amendment and intellectual property law, particularly with regard to the adult entertainment industry.

10. E/L and Randazza became acquainted while Randazza was an associate at a firm specializing in First Amendment related legal work in Florida. E/L later decided to hire a General Counsel. Randazza pursued and accepted the position. Randazza drafted an employment agreement, which was executed by the parties in June, 2009 (“Employment Agreement”).

Randazza at no time advise Plaintiffs that they should seek independent counsel to review the agreement even though Plaintiffs were obviously unrepresented. During the course of his
employment with E/L, Randazza was an integral part of E/L’s management and, along with several other executives, participated in making many of E/L’s major corporate decisions.

11. The primary reason E/L decided to hire a General Counsel was to ensure its intellectual property was protected. One of the most significant challenges faced by E/L and all companies in the film and entertainment industry is the illegal downloading and sharing of content/videos produced by E/L. However, Randazza was tasked with handling all of E/L’s legal  matters.


A. THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

12. Pursuant to the Employment Agreement, Randazza was to wind down his private practice during his first 90 days of employment and become E/L’s full-time General Counsel.

13.  Section “6.C” of the Employment Agreement permitted Randazza to continue to provide professional services to a “limited number of outside clients” during non-working hours if such work did not present a conflict of interest for E/L. Contrary to his obligations under the Employment Agreement and without the knowledge of E/L, Randazza continued to aggressively grow his private practice during his employment after becoming E/L’s General Counsel.

14. Randazza’s compensation consisted of an annual salary of $208,000. Randazza also included in the Employment Agreement the unique arrangement of a nondiscretionary bonus of 25% of any settlement funds paid to E/L.

15. At the time of the execution of the Employment Agreement, the parties contemplated that Randazza would be handling all of E/L’s legal matters independently. Instead, Randazza began to utilize his own firm, Randazza Legal Group (“RLG”) and various outside counsel to assist in E/L’s legal matters.

16. The Employment Agreement also required that E/L provide Randazza with a laptop computer and PDA/phone, which were to be primarily used for E/L business with only occasional and incidental personal use permitted. The Employment Agreement further provided that such equipment was not to be used for professional services rendered to other clients.

17. The Employment Agreement provided for severance in the amount of 12 weeks of salary if E/L were to unilaterally terminate Randazza in the fourth year of employment or later.

There is no severance obligation if Randazza resigned or was terminated for cause.

18. The Employment Agreement also includes a governing law provision stating “[t]his Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to conflict of laws.” Randazza was able to reside virtually anywhere he wanted. Initially, Randazza lived and worked in San Diego, California. However, Randazza relocated to Las Vegas, Nevada in June 2011, just as few months after E/L relocated its headquarters.

19.  At Randazza’s request, E/L hired Erika Dillon (“Dillon”), a paralegal. Dillon was employed by E/L as a paralegal at the time of Randazza’s resignation. Dillon left her employment after Randazza’s resignation at Randazza’s request B. ISSUES ARISE BETWEEN E/L AND RANDAZZA

i. Randazza’s Non-E/L Work

20. As noted above, under the Employment Agreement Randazza was obligated to wind down his private practice during the first 90 days of his employment with E/L.

21.  After becoming E/L’s General Counsel, however, Randazza kept adding clients to his practice, RLG, and over the period from October 2009 through August 2012, he billed over 1,643 hours to clients for work unrelated to E/L (and not including pro bono work). This amounts to an average of 47 hours per month.

During Randazza’s employment at E/L, he never billed less than 14.5 hours in a given month to other clients and in many months he billed between 50 and 90 hours to such clients. During the period from September 2011 through January 2012, Randazza billed 390.65 hours to non-E/L and non-pro bono clients, an average of over 78 hours per month.

This pattern of extensive and increasing work for non-E/L clients is evidence that Randazza had no intention of winding down his private practice as required by the Employment Agreement.

22. During his employment with E/L, including during the period from September 2011 through January 2012, E/L paid Randazza’s full salary and benefits, including bar dues in multiple jurisdictions.

ii. Randazza’s TNAFlix Relationship

23. Randazza, through RLG, represented Liberty in a lawsuit that he filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California against TNAFlix (“TNA”) (Case. No. 10-CV-1972-JHA-POR) alleging that TNA (a file-sharing website) infringed Liberty’s copyrighted works (the “TNA Matter”). Valentin Gurvits, Esq. (“Gurvits”) of the Boston Law Group, LLP (“Boston Law”) represented TNA.

24.   In December 2010 and January 2011, Randazza and Gurvits negotiated a settlement of the TNA Matter. During the course of those negotiations, Gurvits raised a concern about his client (TNA) being sued by other copyright owners in the future based on the same or similar allegations made by Liberty against TNA in the TNA matter.

In an email dated December 7, 2010, Randazza advised Gurvits that he “could largely prevent other plaintiffs from entering the fray.”

25. According to Randazza, Gurvits wanted to pay Randazza a “fee” of $5,000 in order to conflict Randazza out of future cases against TNA. In an email dated December 22, 2010, Randazza responded to Gurvits’ offer as follows:

As far as conflicting me out of future cases, that will require significantly more than $5,000. In fact, I have someone waiting in the wings with a $50k retainer right now. Naturally, I’m in a strange ethical bind, as your offer to conflict me out of future cases against your client is something that would benefit my current client. Accordingly, I would be willing to be conflicted out of cases against TNA, but that $5k figure has to come up. Either that, or you can give [Liberty] what they asked for, and I’ll conflict myself out for a token payment
 26. Randazza and Gurvits continued to discuss the prospect of conflicting Randazza out of future cases against TNA during the course of negotiating a settlement of the TNA Matter.

For example, on January 11, 2011 Randazza wrote in an email to Gurvits:

Keeping me out of the TNA game is a little more complicated.
If your client wants to keep me personally out of the TNA game, then I think that there needs to be a little grave for me. And it has to be more than the $5k you were talking about before, I’m looking at the cost of at least a new Carrera in retainer deposits after circulating around the adult entertainment expo this week. I’m gonna want at least used BMW money.

In order to conflict me out of future matters, I suggest this:

Your firm retains me as “of counsel” to you. I get $5k per month (for six months) paid to me, from you (TNA will reimburse you, I presume). I will render advice on TNA and TNA only, and I’ll be Chinese walled from your other clients so that other conflicts are not created.

*******************************

That way, I’m adequately compensated for my loss of major potential work, and I’m conflicted out of acting adversely to TNA.

27. On January 12, 2011, Randazza apparently discovered that he was ethically prohibited from discussing limitations on his right to practice law during the course of settlement negotiations on behalf of a client, and sent an email to Gurvits saying that he could no longer discuss it, saying: “But I’m certain now that such an arrangement is unethical, in the terms we’ve been discussing it.” Nevertheless, Randazza recommended finding “some other way of addressing [TNA’s] interests,” and stated as follows:

Like I said before, if TNA wants to hire me *after* settlement, on terms that we discuss *after* settlement, then my phone line will be open.

However, it seems that if we place any part of a “buyoff” as a condition of settlement, then all four of us could wind up in bar trouble. I’m certainly not risking it.

28. On February 1, 2011, Liberty signed a Settlement Agreement and General Release of Claims (the “TNA Settlement Agreement”) under which Liberty agreed to dismiss its claims against TNA without prejudice in exchange for payment of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00).

The next day (February 2, 2011) and before Randazza had even received the signature of Gurvits’ client on the TNA Settlement Agreement and the sameday that Randazza received the settlement  payment from TNA, Randazza sent an email to Gurvits asking if TNA wanted “a retainer letter form [him].”

29.   On February 11, 2011 Randazza emailed Gurvits a draft retainer letter from TNA to sign, which required a $36.000.00 retainer to be paid at the outset of the representation and deemed to be earned upon receipt. TNA did not, however, immediately sign the retainer letter, Randazza wrote to Gruvits in late June 2011 stating, “You will recall that I am not conflicted out of representing another client against [TNA].”

Source and Full Document, Case Filing
http://ia801505.us.archive.org/20/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.156.0.pdf

How in the WORLD is Marc Randazza still a Lawyer? WOW

Sue Sue Sue. Chill Speech Chill Speech. First Amendment Attorney, Law Firm Randazza Legal Group LOVES to SUE people to SILENCE them. And all in the Name of Free Speech. Meanwhile he hides behind a bankruptcy court in Cox v. Randazza, with NO end in sight.

Porn Blogger Mike South aka Michael Strother THREATENS to Sue Monica Foster. oH and for FREE with us of Unconstitutional, Unethical attorney Marc Randazza of Rabid Randazza Legal Group.

There are so many people that Marc Randazza has offered to represent for FREE to Silence Free Speech that exposes him. oh and to RETALIATE. Meanwhile he does not even have the stamina to stay in legal cases with us, he has to HIDE in bankruptcy court while doing FREE legal work out of unethical SPITE.

So, this Guy,  Mike South aka Michael Strother, calls himself a PIMP and then threatens to Sue others who call him a Pimp too? WTF



"How in the hell would Randazza Legal Group attorneys (who've already filed one fraudulent lawsuit against me in regards to Jennifer Randazza's attachment to organized crime) and Michael Strother explain the above to a Judge? In addition how will Randazza Legal Group explain to a Judge that they are offering their legal services pro-bono to self labeled PIMPS (who are not owners and/or operators of legal brothels in Nevada) - all in effort to silence individuals who have opted to share the truth about sex trafficking and the adult entertainment industry?

According to wikipedia and many other sources - a pimp is a sex trafficker.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_trafficking 

Definition of “PIMP” according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary: a criminal who is associated with, usually exerts control over, and lives off the earnings of one or more prostituteshttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pimp

I will not be apologizing to Mike South aka Michael Strother. In addition, he will not be suing me for "libel", as his entire proposed lawsuit has no legitimacy or merit.

I encourage you all to read and sign this petition I wrote, just a day prior to Mike South aka Michael Strother's lawsuit threat: https://www.change.org/p/michael-weinstein-aids-healthcare-foundation-differentiate-illegal-prostitutes-from-legitimate-pornstars"


Source of Above

Mike South aka Michael Strother has threatened to sue me for my stating what he's labeled himself as - a PIMP
On August 13, 2016 veteran porn blogger Mike South aka Michael Strother stated that he would take Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group's offer to sue me (apparently Randazza offered his legal services to Strother pro-bono). Strother indicated that he would sue me for "libel" because I claimed that he is a pimp and involved in sex trafficking.

Source of Above

I wonder what Marc Randazza's Creditors think of all his Pro Bono legal cases he offers and takes, and all in the name of REVENGE and nothing to do with Justice or making money to pay off his CREDITORS. 

Marc Randazza Bankruptcy

Randazza vs. Crystal Cox Free Speech Suppression Case Docket