Duke and Duchess of Sussex All Legal Actions Part 2

[Curryong]

As I said I hope Sam folds her case.

But, if they do leave it for the last day, it's a lower tribunal in Tampa, governed by State court proceedings rather than Federal. So, they ammend/appeal or they request another 14 days, which is allowed.

Charlene Honeywell - Ballotpedia

Judge Honeywell served as a circuit court judge for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida until her elevation to the federal bench. She was nominated to the Thirteenth Circuit by former Governor Jeb Bush in 2000. Honeywell also served a four-year term on the Florida Federal Judicial Nominating Commission.[3]



Judge Honeywell who wrote the deposition dismissal is a member of the Federal judiciary.

Request Rejected

[sara8150]

It is now April the tenth. When Judge Honeywell dismissed Samantha Markle?s defamation suit against her half sister, she gave Samantha?s legal team 14 days to amend the bits that were left to amend. That was on March 30th. It is now April 10th, eleven days later.

Going to amend? They are certainly leaving it to the last minute IF they intend to do so. Couldn?t be that they can?t find anything Meghan has said in any interview that would amount to a lawsuit could it, lol? If so, then Samantha?s backers, if she has any, have lost many thousands of dollars.

Meghan dismissed case against her half sister Samantha I don?t think will have court case but judge says Meghan already win case!! I cant blame Meghan but Meghan had attorney of power for good reason

[sara8150]

I'm expecting that they'll file on the very last day.

I don't see Samantha being bright enough to pause, stop and really think about this, nor her lawyers.

I?m sure Meghan had attorney of their own and she can win case but she dismissed her case against her half sister Samantha for good reasons I don?t think Meghan will have court or NO!! But Meghan very private person

[sara8150]

As I said I hope Sam folds her case.

But, if they do leave it for the last day, it's a lower tribunal in Tampa, governed by State court proceedings rather than Federal. So, they ammend/appeal or they request another 14 days, which is allowed.

We have wait and see

[sara8150]

Charlene Honeywell - Ballotpedia

Judge Honeywell served as a circuit court judge for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida until her elevation to the federal bench. She was nominated to the Thirteenth Circuit by former Governor Jeb Bush in 2000. Honeywell also served a four-year term on the Florida Federal Judicial Nominating Commission.[3]



Judge Honeywell who wrote the deposition dismissal is a member of the Federal judiciary.

Request Rejected

Yes

[Curryong]

Well, it?s now the 14th of April 2023 and so far Samantha?s lawyers have not delivered an amended deposition in answer to Judge Honeywell?s dismissal of much of Samantha?s case. It is now fifteen days since she demolished most of what Samantha had to say, and her legal team were given fourteen days to assemble a new case. Good luck to Samantha and any financial backers as Meghan?s team will no doubt be back in the next weeks asking for costs to be awarded.

[changemhysoul]

Sam?s lawyers did refile (I?d quote Curry but unsure how to do it on mobile)

Looking over the filing?.she?s still grasping at straws. Anywho, I?m waiting for Meghan to turn around, hit her with the anti-slap, get the money and ruin Sam. She should take every penny she can because if Sam doesn?t care, she shouldn?t either.

[Curryong]

Yes, I?ve just read that report now, thanks change. She refiled with a few hours to spare. I haven?t read the amended file of course (Yet.) I?m longing for Emily Baker to get her mitts on it and have some more fun online. Apparently there are wild claims in these amended claims about Meghan ?demonising? her and saying she (Sam) was racist!

[wannable]

I wish she hadn't, but alas...here's the amended document

DocumentCloud

Source: Ellie Hall, download from Tampa, Fl. court posted via twitter
Ellie Hall is a senior reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in Washington, DC. Contact this reporter at ellie.hall@buzzfeed.com.
^Her profile

Just see the bottom of the document, the lawyer group.  As I said, the Republicans are behind Sam.  Just see the owner of the law firm IS
Who Is Peter Ticktin? Trump Lawyer  :teehee:

[Curryong]

So? The owner of Sam?s law firm is a Trump lawyer. That?s something to be really proud of I?m sure, lol! And the fact he?s a lawyer involved with the Orange One (who?s paying out a fortune in lawyers himself at the moment) didn?t prevent a federal judge from throwing out the vast majority of Ticktin?s underlings? case presented in Tampa.

[changemhysoul]

Samantha Grant is still on Twitter pushing this angle that Meghans kids are hers.

The more I see, the more I want Meghan to come down hard on the anti-slap laws and take everything she has.

[Curryong]

Samantha Grant is still on Twitter pushing this angle that Meghans kids are hers.

The more I see, the more I want Meghan to come down hard on the anti-slap laws and take everything she has.

So do I! Let this rubbishy court case be dismissed (sue for all costs) and get back after the Coronation to some sort of normal. What do you mean about Samantha saying Meghan?s kids are hers, though? Twitter is just revolting. People can say anything and get away with it.

[changemhysoul]

So do I! Let this rubbishy court case be dismissed (sue for all costs) and get back after the Coronation to some sort of normal. What do you mean about Samantha saying Meghan?s kids are hers, though? Twitter is just revolting. People can say anything and get away with it.

I?m still on mobile until I get my laptop issue settled so it?s my mistake. She?s implying that Meghan?s kids aren?t hers by saying that Meghan needs to show the kids, no one has seen the kids and that they need to prove the lineage by having the kids DNA tested.

[Curryong]

I?m still on mobile until I get my laptop issue settled so it?s my mistake. She?s implying that Meghan?s kids aren?t hers by saying that Meghan needs to show the kids, no one has seen the kids and that they need to prove the lineage by having the kids DNA tested.

Thanks, change. Oh, that old story that?s been around since the pregnancy with Archie! Twitter rubbish. And the kids have been seen intermittently since his christening photos. The last time was in the Netflix doco. Neil Sean, the gossipy showbiz so called reporter, keeps calling the kids ?mysterious? on the odd occasion I see his broadcasts. If the Sussexes did show their children a lot they would be inevitably accused by Samantha, Sean, Wootton and co of trying to push them out to make money out of them.   

[changemhysoul]

Thanks, change. Oh, that old story that?s been around since the pregnancy with Archie! Twitter rubbish. And the kids have been seen intermittently since his christening photos. The last time was in the Netflix doco. Neil Sean, the gossipy showbiz so called reporter, keeps calling the kids ?mysterious? on the odd occasion I see his broadcasts. If the Sussexes did show their children a lot they would be inevitably accused by Samantha, Sean, Wootton and co of trying to push them out to make money out of them.

I agree.

But the fact that she would even engage and spread this stuff. Get your money Meg.

[wannable]

Cameron Walker thread in reference to Harry's case with the Daily Mail Associated Newspapers Limited, although Harry's lawyers are using in today's hearing Prince William's win vs News Group Newspaper (Murdock group) as an example of why Harry should win his case vs the Associated Newspaper Limited.

https://twitter.com/CameronDLWalker/status/1650815602959761409

Harry's lawyers as can be seen in the thread mentioned William and Queen Elizabeth II as the first winning and the second allegedly verbally authorizing Harry to go after the Daily Mail (ANL)

[wannable]

For what it's worth, someone leaked this part of the 'today hearing' to Neil Sean 7 days ago. So that is his 50/50 source coming true (honesly I didn't believe it a week ago when he said H lawyers were going to disclose the W win)

[Curryong]

For what it's worth, someone leaked this part of the 'today hearing' to Neil Sean 7 days ago. So that is his 50/50 source coming true (honesly I didn't believe it a week ago when he said H lawyers were going to disclose the W win)

Sean picks up gossip from here there and everywhere, much of it incorrect. And why shouldn?t Harry?s lawyers speak about Will?s 2020 settlement. It?s part of the legal argument. The newspaper group?s lawyers keep protesting that Harry and the others are too late to stake a claim while at the same time insisting that the newspaper did nothing wrong! No, nothing wrong, that?s why they?ve paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in settlement of cases over the last twenty years!

[Curryong]

Rupert Murdoch?s media business secretly paid Prince William a ?very large sum of money? to quietly settle a phone-hacking claim, according to new court filings. The Prince of Wales received the previously undisclosed payment in 2020 after bringing a legal claim against the owner of the Sun and the News of the World. Details of the settlement were given in legal documents submitted by his brother, Prince Harry, as part of his own legal battle with the publisher, which returns to the high court on Tuesday.

Harry told the court his attempts to seek an apology from Murdoch?s company over phone hacking were carried out with the approval of his grandmother the late Queen Elizabeth II. The royal claims there was a secret agreement struck between royal family and ?senior executives? at Murdoch?s company at some point before 2012. As part of this supposed deal the princes would delay legal proceedings against the newspaper group in return for receiving an apology at a later date.

Harry said the royal family did this after being scarred by the ?Tampongate? incident when the Sun obtained a recorded phone call between Prince Charles and Camilla while the couple were having an affair in the 1980s. Harry said the royal family was desperate to avoid a repeat of this coverage. The filings state: ?The reason for this was to avoid the situation where a member of the royal family would have to sit in the witness box and recount the specific details of the private and highly sensitive voicemails that had been intercepted by [the News of the World royal reporter] Clive Goodman. The institution was incredibly nervous about this and wanted to avoid at all costs the sort of reputational damage that it had suffered in 1993 when the Sun and another tabloid had unlawfully obtained and published details of an intimate telephone conversation that took place between my father and stepmother in 1989, while he was still married to my mother.?

Harry says News UK failed to uphold its side of the secret agreement when he sought this apology in 2017. He claims meetings were arranged involving Rebekah Brooks, the chief executive of Murdoch?s News UK, and Robert Thomson, the global head of Murdoch?s global News Corp business, but they went nowhere.

As a result, Harry decided to launch legal proceedings against the publisher of the Sun and the News of the World. He alleges the company targeted him with widespread illegal activity for much of his life, including hacking his voicemails and illegally obtaining personal information in the name of journalism. Many of Harry?s allegations relate to claims of illegal behaviour at the Sun while Brooks was editor in the 2000s. News Group Newspapers insisted there is no secret agreement.

[From The Guardian]

Why is Prince Harry back in court over phone-hacking claims? | Prince Harry | The Guardian

[wannable]

Harry says News UK failed to uphold its side of the secret agreement when he sought this apology in 2017.

Ohhhh! I see now.

[PrincessOfPeace]

William and Catherine's phones were hacked much more than Harry's. William had every right to seek a settlement.

[wannable]

Yes, I agree, what I didn't know, according to The Guardian anti monarchist media website, they are stating the Harry DID receive a secret settlement (like WIlliam) but he is not satisfied because the word ''apology'' wasn't included in the secret settlement.

[HistoryGirl2]

I personally find it inappropriate for any working member of the royal family to receive a settlement from a media corporation without it being publicly announced.

Them wanting to avoid court is perfectly understandable and if a settlement is warranted, then so be it, but I do not think that it should have been kept secret.

If the royal family wanted to stay out of court, then the suit never should have been initiated. A secret deal (no matter what the amount) is corrosive to public trust.

[wannable]

So far it's a partial disclosure of the secret agreement. We don't know IF Prince William donated it to charity, direct transfer from the victimizer to the charity of W choice. I say this because the Princess of Wales ordered her France win to a charity, there's a precedent in that 'family unit'. IOW In the Princess case, the court order indicated that the victimizer had to publicly disclose the money transfer to Kate's charity of choice directly, not the Foundation, to make it fully transparent.

The same in reference to Harry with the alleged claim of The Guardian, he also had a secret agreement, but the word ''apology'' wasn't added to what at that time, 2017, court order, had to have added an apology.

[HistoryGirl2]

^And I believe that is the correct way to handle it. It doesn?t really matter to me whether William donated the money to charity or not (although I would see it as the right thing to do), it?s the fact that it wasn?t disclosed at the time. Any money received by a working member of the royal family from a corporation?for any reason?should be disclosed to the public in a timely manner.