Hard disagree. It’s the kind of arguement, especially if some or all of his counsel in the bankruptcy hearings are carry-overs from the lawsuits, that are likely to get them sanctioned and/or referred for disbarrment.
Heck, it’s the kind of thing that could turn them from co-counsel to co-defendant in a fraud case against Jones if the prosecutor thinks they are helping him hide his money.
The argument you presented isn’t “borderline.” If Jones’ lawyers in the bankruptcy proceedings are the same as the lawsuits, they disrespected the courts in multiple jurisdictions by not responding in any way to both lawsuits and subpoenas. To then claim those suits should be functionally thrown out? That’s malpractice.
As a reminder, these are the same lawyers who refused to abide by court-mandated discovery then accidently sent opposing counsel not only what was requested but privileged information. It was a miracle they haven’t been sanctioned for that. Yet.
No. What are we, 8?
This isn’t “a dog ate my client’s homework” or even just a fishing expedition procedural objection. The strategy you’ve outlined isn’t just stupid, it’s harmful. Even if it’s rejected, if a judge takes it seriously, it could cause incredible damage to the tort and bankruptcy systems.
Think it through: if your idea is even slightly successful, it becomes a strategy for any defendant looking at a the likelihood of huge verdict. Just shift assets to a different entity, don’t participate in the trial, get a huge judgement against you, then declare bankruptcy and pay a pittance instead of the full judgement by making this claim.
It’s so dangerous to the system that the judge should make an example of Jones and his team if they attempt it.
I did say “if these are the same lawyers.” Good to see the clarification, though.
Alex Jones says he won’t be paying off those verdicts
That makes it all the sweeter when they take away his money.
Like this?
and this.
both were Linklater (another Austinite) films.
I agree with this. I hope Crowe & Dunlevy, which is a reputable firm, refuses to make this argument. The fact the judgement was default shouldn’t affect whether it can be discharged. The fact the judgement was default because of Jones and his counsel treating the entire thing like a joke, insulting and threatening the judges, and generally treating the entire legal system with contempt should factor in.
I haven’t seen much from any reputable attorney discussing the issue, much less one versed in the very complicated field of bankruptcy, but from what I have found, it sounds like judgements do not usually get discharged.
Edit to add: the linked article doesn’t discuss this specific issue, but I like Liz Dye and she has some info on the situation
Certainly not on BB BBS.
You’re the one who presented it here, though. You must have thought it had enough interest and merit to bring it up. Or maybe you did that to rile people up? I think there’s a term for that…
Oh, I’m a reputable attorney. 
But I also know I need to stay in my lane. Bankruptcy is not my area and I won’t pretend it is! Too many people don’t understand that an attorney is an expert in a few areas, which might help with a few more, but that leaves hundreds of areas where they DKS.
You don’t get to appeal default judgements and you can’t vacate ones without a reasonable excuse for default. “I’m being an uncooperative douchecanoe” is not a reasonable excuse.
But you repeat yourself. 
As I recall, Jones was cycling his lawyers frequently.
He probably beats Trump as a client from Hell.
“… have you tried turning the law off and on again?”
That would have been a good link to provide in your initial post…or any post thereafter…throughout the thread.
Otherwise, it makes it seem like you read it 5 minutes before you just posted it. Crazy, I know…
Looking at the article, it appears to be describing what is technically possible without going into likelihood (it, in fact, fastidiously avoids such questions). I do not think that there is any reason to believe that such an argument would prevail, especially since two separate courts in two separate states made these decisions independently of each other.
I am not a lawyer, and I understand very well that there are a large number of areas of law that people can specialize in… But I think everyone has a very distorted view of being a lawyer, thanks to shows like Law and Order… They think that’s what you ALL do, but I’d guess that most lawyers do not practice criminal law at all…
Then why are we talking about it as though it is a real possibility?
I hope he ends up driving a Tesla.
