More filings and counter filings in Sid's frivolous lawsuit against Duke

Well Sid has been at it again. He filed his response to Duke's response. In many ways, these two litigants deserve each other. It's sort of pot calling the kettle black sort of litigation. However, Duke does have the law and equity on its side. Sid did file this case once, he lost on the merits. Now he wants to do it again, just exactly the same way. What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and expecting a different result. That's Sid. For the good of all litigants, we cannot allow endless re-litigation of the same claims over and over again.

Walt-in-Durham

Judge Schroeder has also weighed in.

As you may recall, Sid filed suit against Judge Schroeder. After making some ridiculous charges against Schroeder, it turns out Sid just named him to keep Judge Schroeder from hearing his latest case. Well, now, Judge Schroeder has weighed in.

Walt-in-Durham

Duke seeks sanctions against Sidney Harr

Well, as predicted Duke has filed a motion for sanctions under Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Here is Duke's warning letter to Sidney. And, here is Sid's reply to Duke's warning. Under Rule 11 practice, the party seeking sanctions must notify the opposing party and try to resolve the issue before seeking sanctions. Sid seems to go out of his way to make Duke look good. his reply is non-responsive to the point of being rude. He is judgment proof, but I suspect Duke is looking to get an order prohibiting Sid from filing any more litigation without first obtaining permission of the court.

Walt-in-Durham

Sid responds to Judge Schroeder

Well, Sid Harr has filed his response to Judge Schroeder's 12(b)(6) motion. Sid doesn't even pretend to give a legal reason for why his case should proceed. He just complains that he doesn't have access to the federal court law library. Of course he ignores the fact that he can use the State Supreme Court law library just down the street or he can use the county law library. Of somewhat more merit is Sid's argument that indigent litigants are denied access to justice because they cannot afford an attorney. Except that Sid is on record elsewhere as saying he trusts no attorneys because they are all out to protect Duke University. A part of what he calls the carpet bagger jihad.

Harr responds to NC.

Harr has filed his response to the State of North Carolina's 12(b)(6) motion. You can read it here. Not a well reasoned response. Sid, as usual blames everyone but himself for this mess. I was particularly amused by his assertion that he could not use the federal court law library, implying it's the only one in town. The Supreme Court's library is open for him to use. Of course if he did that, he wouldn't have the excuse. Worse, he claims that somehow he should be able to have a research assistant. More laughs.

Harr v. Duke, et. al 12(b)(6) memos

Here is Duke's 12(b)(6) memo for all to read. Here is Judge Schroeder's 12(b)(6) memo for all to read. Here is North Carolina's 12(b)(6) memo for all to read.