K1/// All Lawyers - TCPA and 91a Deadlines

Just a brief primer on why we need to kill all lawyers. Probably. At least we should have a rebuttable presumption in favor of death, where they have due process to plead for mercy or something. Be subjected to some of the procedures they subject the rest of us to.

Just one small example that came up recently - I'm filing a TCPA motion to dismiss for a client. A TCPA motion is an early dismissal procedure when the bad guy files a lawsuit based on or in response to your exercise of a First Amendment right (essentially). The point of it is to provide a way to get rid of harassing lawsuits without too much attorney's fees, and in fact to recover those back from the bad acting Plaintiff.

Now, because the legislature is bad (becuase it's composed of lawyers, who are bad), they have been cowardly limiting the TCPA over the years. And because judges are bad (because they're lawyers, in fact often some of the worst. That's why they're judges, because they're complicit and part of the system, which is how they come to power), and cowards, they don't really like the TCPA, which is one of the few good procedural ideas the Legislature has had.

Because they don't like it, and might rule that the TCPA doesn't apply, it's best practice to file a 91a dismissal motion concurrently with your TCPA motion. It's not as strong a medicine, as attorney's fees are discretionary rather than mandatory, and it doesn't have a sanction mechanism, but it's better than being stuck in a harassing lawsuit with no recourse (shoutout to Parker County Judge Craig Towson, who has refused to dismiss for years a case where our client was sued based on statements she made to CPS about an abuse outcry made by her 3-year old (see title).

But get this - A TCPA motion has to be heard 60 days from the motion being filed. Ok, sounds reasonable enough (it's actually not, remember your local legislator is probably some idiot lawyer put into power by whatever corrupt local industry he represents, and has no idea of the implications of this procedural rule (all procedural rules generally serve to increase litigation expense and create a Byzantine system that helps the entrenched players). As we will see below, litigants don't even control what hearings are available, so this is actually an insane restriction that costs clients (lol, but who cares about the peasants anyways? (kill all lawyers)) thousands or tens of thousands of dollars.

A 91a motion, however, has to be heard 45 days from being filed (kill all lawyers).

Why does that matter? Well, you will want your motions heard on the same day, one because of cost of course (something lawyers and judges simply have no idea about and don't care about (kill all lawyers)), but two because you want your TCPA granted, and only your 91a in the alternative, because of the mandatory attorney's fees and the optional sanction, rather than then optional attorney's fees. And because the rules of procedure are actually insane (kill all lawyers), it's not as simple as the judge just ruling for the one that actually should be granted to fulfill the purpose of the law (dismiss suits that are simply for the purpose of harassment), it's actually granted according to technical procedural bs by which one you actually ask for as the movant, and then you ask for the other one only in the alternative

Or maybe not. Maybe that would be an abuse of discretion - no worries just spend 15k appealing that to the court of appeals, lol (kill all lawyers).

So really you have to get your TCPA heard within 45 days of it being filed, unless you could file the 91a 15 days earlier (but you really can't, because your 91a is mostly based on your TCPA, so if you have your TCPA done 15 days early then you could just file them both then, but then your putting your TCPA deadline at 45 days from service rather than 60 days from service. Speaking of which, another dumb question not answered by the statute - is it service of the petition or of a TRO? Who knows?!? lmao kill all lawyers)

But get this - The TCPA deadline can be reset by agreement (ok cool). The 91a cannot, at least according to my reading on the rule - 91a.3(c) "A motion to dismiss must be: granted or denied within 45 days after the motion is filed."

So what are the implications? Well, what happens if (hypothetically of course) you have only 2 hearing dates available, one where the bad guys already have a TI hearing scheduled (to continue their unconstitutional TRO granted by some drooling midwit who thinks you can just tell people to stop posting stuff online through a prior restraint, lmao the Republic is truly dead), the other 46 days (kill all lawyers) after the 91a was filed (which of course you only find out after you file. Or you could spend more attorney fee time checking all the hearing dates, all of which the court will say you need opposing counsel's agreement on, which they don't have to give.

Like actually go kill yourself. Literally insane.

If you're a lawyer and you don't see something wrong with this and think I'm being unreasonable, yea go fuck yourself, you fundamentally disgust me as a person and I have no respect whatsoever for you as a person on a moral level (insert human dignity caveat, of course, there is salvation in Jesus Christ, but you have to repent).

(Rebuttable presumption) Kill all lawyers.