What to do about frivolous lawsuits

We're a litigious society and meritless lawsuits must be punished.

Randall Shochet recently brought an absurd lawsuit

On the last episode of The Unknown, Richard Luthmann and I spoke with Ray Bonecrusher about a frivolous lawsuit which was recently been filed, though not yet served. It was filed by attorney Randall Shochet on behalf of his client, Jeremy Hales.

Shochet’s lawsuit, which claims ten people conspired to defame his client, may redefine frivolous. Some of the defendants are mentioned by on-line names.

With others, Shochet only knows the state they live in.

This suggests Shochet and his client Jeremy Hales don’t know where these people live to be served, but this is only the beginning of the problems. Shochet suggests that calling his client a “psychopath” and “money hungry” is defamatory.

In fact, Hales is on video talking about money a lot.

Even if he wasn’t, referring to someone as “money hungry” is an opinion, which is protected. Hales also objected to being called a psychopath.

Imagine if every time someone was called a “narcissist” or psychopath online, they could sue. Everyone would sue.

Hales and Shochet even claimed that emails- which they called public- were defamatory.

An email is not public, as anyone who’s used an email will know. While you can be sued for an email, the damages are limited since the people who received it are limited.

Yet, Shochet relies heavily on emails as the basis of his lawsuit.

That’s because he’s reaching: a frivolous lawsuit.

As someone who has dealt with a frivolous lawsuit, I have some experience in these matters.