Here’s what I’ve learned about lawsuits so far: they take a really, really long time.
We’re still in the preliminary phase, discussing procedural issues. We have not gotten to the actual case. You may recall the Gina filed a motion to dismiss the case in Massachusetts, where I live, arguing that it can’t be brought there because she lives in Illinois.
We filed an Opposition to Gina’s motion. You can find the brief here:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/27713670/Tuteur-20130405_Opp_to_MTD_with_Exhibits.pdf
The issues in it are technical so I won’t bore you with the details. I’ll share the part that I understood, which is a footnote:
Defendant’s vitriol has not stopped; it has only expanded into this forum. Throughout Crosley-Corcoran’s Memorandum of Law filed in support of her Motion to Dismiss, Defendant calls Dr. Tuteur “mean,” and a “bully.” Of course, others call Dr. Tuteur a life-saver. Those who understand the risks of homebirth, including many mothers who have lost their babies unnecessarily, recognize that she is committed to protecting innocent infants from grave danger – and unsuspecting parents from a lifetime of grief. They understand that Dr. Tuteur’s use of real life examples of publicly reported preventable homebirths deaths is a powerful tool toward averting future homebirth tragedies. It is nothing short of ironic that Defendant’s Memorandum focuses on Dr. Tuteur’s “bullying” tactics when, in fact, Crosley- Corcoran’s conduct was replete with threats, intimidation, and aggression. Although Crosley-Corcoran attempts to create a sympathetic image of herself as an unsophisticated “student and mother of three young children” attacked by the “bully” Dr. Tuteur, the facts paint a very different picture.
As further set forth in Dr. Tuteur’s Motion to Strike and Memorandum filed in support thereof (Dkt. #s 15, 16), the Defendant’s self-serving rhetoric and ad hominem attacks against Dr. Tuteur are
designed to distract this Court from the underlying legal issue in this dispute: The Defendant’s unlawful use of provisions of the DMCA as a sword to suppress Dr. Tuteur’s legitimate right to publish content on the Internet.
So many Civ Pro flashbacks reading this. Kudos to your fabulous attorneys. It was very well researched, written, and argued. It almost makes me miss writing these types of things. Almost.
I’ve been waiting for this. Reading now. I’m so glad you were able to find the screenshot from 2011 directly refuting TFB’s claim that she didn’t know that you live in MA.
Holly crap. I have missed reading your blog for a while now. I am sorry to hear you are having this trouble.
Meanwhile the poor poor Gina shops around at Ikea and drives her brand new Ford….
Amy, please keep up this fight. There are lots of people out there watching this, and the outcome will hopefully show that these nutjobs can’t file DMCA notices to silence their critics.
Thanks for the update!
the Defendant’s self-serving rhetoric and ad hominem attacks against Dr. Tuteur are designed to distract this Court from the underlying legal issue in this dispute: The Defendant’s unlawful use of provisions of the DMCA as a sword to suppress Dr. Tuteur’s legitimate right to publish content on the Internet.
Yup. If you lose on the jurisdiction, I hope (selfishly) that you’ll file in Illinois.
I really don’t see how she can hope to prevail on the law, given her ill-advised boasting about what she was doing. It’s interesting that so many people who have no dog in this fight and couldn’t care less about homebirth, midwives, or birth in general are excited about this case.
Ms. Crosely-Corcoran is so used to being able to suppress dissenting opinions in her tiny realm that she forgets that attempts at actual censorship in the real world are prohibited by actual laws.
That last paragraph needs to be copied at the top of every article you publish about this lawsuit. I’m a poor, stay at home mom, student, etc of two young babies. That has not, to my knowledge, yet exempted me from following the law nor served as a get-out-of-jail free card. Also, it disgusts me that she pretends to be a feminist and then acts as if her status as a poor little ol’ nursing “mama” should earn her enough sympathy votes to throw out a lawsuit. I cannot imagine a man daring to claim that a case against him should be thrown out of court because he’s got kids. Last time I checked moms with small children are still responsible for their own actions.
For someone that claims to be a feminist she is so anti feminist it is almost comical. She is definitely a study in contradictions.
I am so glad you are continuing to persue this case; I’d wish you luck but you have the truth on your side so you don’t need it. I don’t always agree with you but I damn well believe you have the right to tell the truth on your own blog.
Thanks!