celeb news NY Senator ends Dr. Luke’s Case, Files Brief in Support of Kesha

[TomTom]

6 hours ago, Alfred said:

Unfortunately both sides suffered pain and financial losses.

Luke hasn't suffered anything except a Katy Perry album he couldn't produce, but of course you would pretend otherwise 

5 hours ago, Tropical said:

I've always figured Luke's entire plan is just to completely drain Kesha of every penny

Exactly!

[SmittenCake]

13 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

 

 

progress 

[TomTom]

UPDATE:

 

Dr. Luke has just responded to all the amicus briefs filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Hoylman's.

 

Unsurprisingly, he opposes every one of them and spends multiple pages on downplaying Senator Hoylman's brief in particular.

 

First, Dr. Luke argues that "Senator Hoylman's personal intent is entirely irrelevant to the question of the intent of the legislative body, as a whole".

 

Spoiler

 

Second, he accuses Senator Hoylman of "undermin[ing] fundamental separation of power principles" and "legislat[ing] by fiat" with his amicus brief.

 

Spoiler

 

Third, he says his word should carry no weight because Senator Hoylman drafted other statutes which contain an express retroactivity provision (unlike this one), so he would allegedly be aware of how to properly draft a retroactive statute.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Fourth, he says his brief is invalidated by the fact that it was submitted by the lawyers of Kesha's former lawyer Mark Geragos whom Luke is also suing for defamation (besides Kesha), purportedly underlining some sort of "hidden agenda" by Senator Hoylman.

 

Spoiler

 

Collectively, he accuses all amici of "placing inappropriate political pressure on, and straining the resources of, a private tort plaintiff through the piling on of voluminous “amicus” argumentation from prominent non-parties and law firms with no knowledge of the underlying facts or legitimate interest in the outcome of this lawsuit".

 

Spoiler

 

Link: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=VFxYDE4tgMOGayz/auKpWg==

Edited April 22, 2022 by TomTom2288

[Johnny Jacobs]

What does it mean tho? 

[TomTom]

4 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

UPDATE:

 

Dr. Luke has just responded to all the amicus briefs filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Hoylman's.

Billboard article:

 

 

4 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

Unsurprisingly, he opposes every one of them and spends multiple pages on downplaying Senator Hoylman's brief in particular.

 

Response from Senator Hoylman:

 

Quote

In a statement to Billboard, a spokesperson for Sen. Hoylman pushed back: “As the prime Senate sponsor of the bill, Senator Hoylman’s views are centrally relevant to whether the 2020 statute’s drafters intended the statute to apply retroactively and are amply supported by the legislative history, which the court can always consider.  The plaintiff’s assertion otherwise is simply ridiculous.”

 

4 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

Fourth, he says his brief is invalidated by the fact that it was submitted by the lawyers of Kesha's former lawyer Mark Geragos whom Luke is also suing for defamation (besides Kesha), purportedly underlining some sort of "hidden agenda" by Senator Hoylman.

 

Response from Mark Geragos's lawyers:

 

Quote

In a statement to Billboard in response to the brief, Ellyde R. Thompson — a partner at Quinn Emanuel and the lead attorney on Sen. Hoylman’s brief — refuted the suggestion of impropriety.

 

“Our firm has First Amendment and defamation law expertise and that is why we were selected to represent Senator Hoylman in this separate matter,” Thompson wrote. “The brief itself shows the credibility of Senator Hoylman’s position.”

 

Edited April 22, 2022 by TomTom2288

[TomTom]

 

 

Edited April 23, 2022 by TomTom2288

[keshasfillers]

1 hour ago, TomTom2288 said:

 

 

 

[TomTom]

Luke's lawyers are calling out Senator Hoylman's tweets in support of Kesha in their just-filed opposition brief 

 

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=qCrua1l8hl4y/YeTboAZ0A==

[TomTom]

UPDATE:

 

5 days ago, Senator Hoylman introduced a new bill to the New York Senate Judiciary Committee that "relates to strategic lawsuits against public participation".

 

Among other things, the draft amendment makes clear that New York's amended anti-SLAPP statute was supposed to apply retroactively by replacing the "shall take effect immediately" language of the current version (which the appeals court in Kesha's case interpreted as not being retroactive) with the addition "and shall apply to actions pending on or filed on or after November 10, 2020".

 

The bill justification states that this change is necessary "because the Appellate Division in Gottwald v. Sebert held otherwise".

 

So, even if Kesha loses her pending motion to reargue or appeal the dismissal of her counterclaim (as part of which Senator Hoylman's and the other three amicus briefs were filed), this decision would be nullified if this bill gets approved by the New York Legislature.

 

Kesha is changing the legal landscape just like Britney 

 

Link: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/s9239

 

[keshasfillers]

 

[TomTom]

UPDATE:

 

The NY Appellate Division has granted Kesha's motion to appeal the dismissal of her anti-SLAPP counterclaim to New York's highest court and accepted all amicus briefs that were filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Brad Hoylman's.

 

Kesha now has two pending appeals at New York's highest court as part of Dr. Luke's defamation lawsuit.

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=oPme1DiI2yOWeyy5xm6E2Q==

[gettsleazy]

[SmittenCake]

6 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

UPDATE:

 

The NY Appellate Division has granted Kesha's motion to appeal the dismissal of her anti-SLAPP counterclaim to New York's highest court and accepted all amicus briefs that were filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Brad Hoylman's.

 

Kesha now has two pending appeals at New York's highest court as part of Dr. Luke's defamation lawsuit.

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=oPme1DiI2yOWeyy5xm6E2Q==

 

6 hours ago, gettsleazy said:

I know Taylor Swift helped years ago (and she was the only one in the industry that did) I hope she financially helps K$ out again 

[fountain]

[keshasfillers]

10 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

UPDATE:

 

The NY Appellate Division has granted Kesha's motion to appeal the dismissal of her anti-SLAPP counterclaim to New York's highest court and accepted all amicus briefs that were filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Brad Hoylman's.

 

Kesha now has two pending appeals at New York's highest court as part of Dr. Luke's defamation lawsuit.

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=oPme1DiI2yOWeyy5xm6E2Q==

[TomTom]

On 6/28/2022 at 4:12 PM, TomTom2288 said:

UPDATE:

 

The NY Appellate Division has granted Kesha's motion to appeal the dismissal of her anti-SLAPP counterclaim to New York's highest court and accepted all amicus briefs that were filed in support of Kesha, including Senator Brad Hoylman's.

 

Kesha now has two pending appeals at New York's highest court as part of Dr. Luke's defamation lawsuit.

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=oPme1DiI2yOWeyy5xm6E2Q==

Preliminary appeal statement published on the website of New York's highest court:

 

 

https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Filings/2022/IID2822.pdf

 

Briefing to be completed by the end of October:

 

[loveisdead9582]

Fingers crossed for her. 

[Vermillion]

Wow 

[TomTom]

For the law nerds and Gottwald v. Sebert followers:

 

Today, a decision was issued in another NY defamation case called Isaly v. Garde filed by a biotech billionaire called Samuel Isaly who has supported Dr. Luke in multiple appeals of the Kesha case with amicus briefs (the one regarding whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive being one of them). The legal issues of the Sam Isaly lawsuit and the Dr. Luke lawsuit partially overlap.

 

The decision has stayed that lawsuit pending a decision by New York's highest court (the Court of Appeals) on Kesha's two pending appeals there (one of them being whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive) which has also happened in multiple other pending New York defamation lawsuits directly affected by Kesha's case, but what's interesting is that the judge discusses the respective decision and appeal in Kesha's case at length and his decision almost reads like a rebuke of the decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim.

 

On page 10-12, he:

• describes how Samuel Isaly has supported Dr. Luke multiple times through amicus briefs
• that the judge in the Sarah Palin v New York Times defamation lawsuit that was tried earlier this year (which was the first NY case to hold that the anti-SLAPP statute applies retroactively) wrote that: "Gottwald appears to be an outlier" (side-note: Amber Heard hired the New York Times lawyers from that case as appellate counsel for her pending appeal in the Johnny Depp case).
• mentions the proposed amendment that Senator Hoylman introduced to explicitly clarify that the statute applies retroactively
• cites two articles from law firms discussing the impact of the March decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim with quotes highlighting the numerous courts that decided the opposite
• emphasizes that "no court outside the [Appellate Division,] First Department's control adopted Gottwald".

He also ordered Samuel Isaly to file a copy of the decision by New York's highest court on Kesha's appeals in his own lawsuit within 10 days after it gets published.

 

This is just one elaborate example of the many, many courts and cases directly affected by and meticulously following everything that happens in Kesha's case, I could cite many more.

 

Link: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=yB8V316CAw7ESLTBLGbpmg==&system=prod

 

 

 

 
 


 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 6, 2022 by TomTom2288

[SmittenCake]

39 minutes ago, TomTom2288 said:

For the law nerds and Gottwald v. Sebert followers:

 

Today, a decision was issued in another NY defamation case called Isaly v. Garde filed by a biotech billionaire called Samuel Isaly who has supported Dr. Luke in multiple appeals of the Kesha case with amicus briefs (the one regarding whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive being one of them). The legal issues of the Sam Isaly lawsuit and the Dr. Luke lawsuit partially overlap.

 

The decision has stayed that lawsuit pending a decision by New York's highest court (the Court of Appeals) on Kesha's two pending appeals there (one of them being whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive) which has also happened in multiple other pending New York defamation lawsuits directly affected by Kesha's case, but what's interesting is that the judge discusses the respective decision and appeal in Kesha's case at length and his decision almost reads like a rebuke of the decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim.

 

On page 10-12, he:

• describes how Samuel Isaly has supported Dr. Luke multiple times through amicus briefs
• that the judge in the Sarah Palin v New York Times defamation lawsuit that was tried earlier this year (which was the first NY case to hold that the anti-SLAPP statute applies retroactively) wrote that: "Gottwald appears to be an outlier" (side-note: Amber Heard hired the New York Times lawyers from that case as appellate counsel for her pending appeal in the Johnny Depp case).
• mentions the proposed amendment that Senator Hoylman introduced to explicitly clarify that the statute applies retroactively
• cites two articles from law firms discussing the impact of the March decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim with quotes highlighting the numerous courts that decided the opposite
• emphasizes that "no court outside the [Appellate Division,] First Department's control adopted Gottwald".

He also ordered Samuel Isaly to file a copy of the decision by New York's highest court on Kesha's appeals in his own lawsuit within 10 days after it gets published.

 

This is just one elaborate example of the many, many courts and cases directly affected by and meticulously following everything that happens in Kesha's case, I could cite many more.

 

Link: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=yB8V316CAw7ESLTBLGbpmg==&system=prod

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 
 


 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the update. Even tho I'm going to have to read like 10 more times to understand what's going on 

[Jude]

Kim Petras lost?

[CroNich]

14 hours ago, TomTom2288 said:

For the law nerds and Gottwald v. Sebert followers:

 

Today, a decision was issued in another NY defamation case called Isaly v. Garde filed by a biotech billionaire called Samuel Isaly who has supported Dr. Luke in multiple appeals of the Kesha case with amicus briefs (the one regarding whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive being one of them). The legal issues of the Sam Isaly lawsuit and the Dr. Luke lawsuit partially overlap.

 

The decision has stayed that lawsuit pending a decision by New York's highest court (the Court of Appeals) on Kesha's two pending appeals there (one of them being whether the anti-SLAPP law is retroactive) which has also happened in multiple other pending New York defamation lawsuits directly affected by Kesha's case, but what's interesting is that the judge discusses the respective decision and appeal in Kesha's case at length and his decision almost reads like a rebuke of the decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim.

 

On page 10-12, he:

• describes how Samuel Isaly has supported Dr. Luke multiple times through amicus briefs
• that the judge in the Sarah Palin v New York Times defamation lawsuit that was tried earlier this year (which was the first NY case to hold that the anti-SLAPP statute applies retroactively) wrote that: "Gottwald appears to be an outlier" (side-note: Amber Heard hired the New York Times lawyers from that case as appellate counsel for her pending appeal in the Johnny Depp case).
• mentions the proposed amendment that Senator Hoylman introduced to explicitly clarify that the statute applies retroactively
• cites two articles from law firms discussing the impact of the March decision that dismissed Kesha's counterclaim with quotes highlighting the numerous courts that decided the opposite
• emphasizes that "no court outside the [Appellate Division,] First Department's control adopted Gottwald".

He also ordered Samuel Isaly to file a copy of the decision by New York's highest court on Kesha's appeals in his own lawsuit within 10 days after it gets published.

 

This is just one elaborate example of the many, many courts and cases directly affected by and meticulously following everything that happens in Kesha's case, I could cite many more.

 

Link: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=yB8V316CAw7ESLTBLGbpmg==&system=prod

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 
 


 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for this, im in awe of you. Now if you can please explain it to me as if I was a 5 year old.

[TomTom]

Oral argument at New York's highest court on April 18 (together with one other appeal by Kesha).

 

The epic showdown and most important day of the entire lawsuit will be live-streamed on Youtube.

[Ampersand13]

Thank you for keeping us updated Tom! I’m cautiously optimistic but also very very nervous

[Vermillion]

I second the thanks for the updates! I’ll be busy that day but please post and update that day for me to catch up!