The first domino has fallen!

On Tuesday, May 26, 2020, the Appellate Commissioner issued its ruling on the attorney’s fees related to the defeated appeal brought by Doc’s Dream, LLC., et al.

 

The award was for sixty thousand, five hundred twenty and twenty-five cents ($60,520.25). This represents 100% of the amount requested by Dolores Press, Inc., et al. The Appellate Commissioner explained that the reason for this ruling was due to Doc’s Dream counselors, Carlos Leyva and Linda McAleer, failure to rebut the reasonableness of the amount requested. Doc’s Dream argued that Dolores Press was not entitled to attorney’s fees but did not oppose the amount. As stated previously, the appellate court ruled that Dolores Press is entitled to its reasonable attorney's fees. This left the Appellate Commissioner the burden of finding the reasonableness of the fees. The Commissioner decided that the amount requested by Dolores Press’ attorneys was reasonable.

 

Furthermore, the order will be served on the district court and shall amend the appellate court’s mandate. But it also means that the same arguments, from the original Motion for Attorneys Fees brought by Dolores Press, will be used by the district court judge to determine the reasonableness of those fees. Considering that Doc’s Dream did not argue the reasonableness, it’s not unlikely that we will see a similar decision, granting Dolores Press 100% of its requested fees.

 

I have speculated before: did Leyva and McAleer inform Doc’s Dream, et al. about this potential outcome. That they could lose, and that attorney’s fees could be awarded against them and that if their attempt to “free the teaching” failed, they would be subject to a copyright infringement lawsuit? Basing my speculation upon the arguments brought by Doc’s Dream; I can safely say, no. Doc’s Dream had no idea that this could happen. But what is more surprising is that it doesn’t appear the attorneys had any idea that this could happen. They didn’t even argue the reasonableness of the fees requested. They placed all of their eggs in the basket that the lower court would deny Dolores Press’ request and that would be the end of the matter. But any reasonable person had to know that an appeal was possible if not likely.

 

As noted, this is only the first domino to fall. The next one will likely be a much larger domino and it will fall with a loud crash; the determination by the lower court over Dolores Press’ attorney’s fees. That is the large three hundred seven thousand-dollar ($307,000.00) request. There is a Christian saying: “Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won't he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace.” It does not appear that Doc’s Dream, through its leader Robinson, has heeded his own creed’s advice.

 

Again, I ask; is this the reason Robinson fired his attorneys? It certainly wouldn’t be a bad reason. This would be a very reasonable assumption based upon the track record of Leyva and McAleer. They lost the declaratory action, the appeal of the declaratory action, the attorney’s fees for the appeal, they had the entire requested amount awarded to Dolores Press because they never argued the reasonableness, they lost the copyright infringement appeals, the district court attorney fees request, which they may lose the entire amount requested, and now they are looking at a Motion for Summary Judgment that the parties intend to proceed pro se against a formidable opponent. An opposing counsel who has caused nothing but defeat to Doc’s Dream. But there are those on the internet talking amongst themselves in chat rooms and forums, who still think that Doc’s Dream is winning in the action. They write so passionately as though they understand something the onlooking audience cannot see. But they are misguided at best, deceived at worst.

One particular member of a google group forum may be intending to bring the next legal showdown. This person claims to have personal knowledge of Dr Scott. That he can refute the claims made by Dolores Press and Melissa Scott. He claims that he was a personal confidant of Dr. Scott. But this is only in internet chat rooms. I wonder if this person, who was not listed as an affiant within the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Doc’s Dream, only an unsworn letter from this person to Dolores Press’ attorney was included as evidence (another questionable action by Leyva and McAleer). But will this person be able to keep up his version of Dr. Scott’s history, comments, desires, wishes, etc. while under oath when he is deposed by Dolores Press’ attorney, Kevin J. Leichter? What about at trial? Considering this person appears to be picking a fight with Dolores Press and Melissa Scott, telling them about his plans to use Dr. Scott’s teaching in a personal pet project within the Library of Congress and insinuating that they cannot stop him from proceeding. I’d say that this is a challenge. What this individual may want to consider is, Doc’s Dream, LLC., Patrick Robinson, Bobbi Jones, and Truth Seekers, Inc. now owe over sixty-thousand dollars ($60,000.00) for their action against Dolores Press and Melissa Scott and that seems to be only the first domino. The total cost will be calculated after attorney’s fees are decided in the district court and of course the copyright infringement case, which offers an award of up to one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000.00) per infringed work. Judging by this individual’s claims about how many works he has, this could be spelling disaster for his economic future, especially with the clear intent to infringe he displays with each new writing.

 

Check back for the next update, which I will write about when the court makes its decision.