Righthaven litigation costs rise with latest ruling

A federal judge today rejected a request by Righthaven LLC that a hearing set for Thursday in Denver be called off – a move that may further weaken Righthaven’s precarious financial position.

The Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer has been trying to revive its litigation campaign while warning it may have to file for bankruptcy because of a lack of settlement income combined with continuing legal expenses.

Now, Righthaven may face unplanned expenses to arrange for representation during Thursday’s hearing – on top of legal fees for drafting a motion unsuccessfully asking that the hearing be called off.

Early today, the company objected to a motion by defense attorneys in one of its Denver Post cases that resulted in the scheduling of the hearing.

The attorneys for defendant Leland Wolf and the It Makes Sense Blog last week filed a motion asking that Righthaven be barred from dissipating its assets. That way, their chances of getting paid would improve should they prevail in the case and the court award them legal fees.

The Wolf case is the one in which Senior U.S. District Judge John Kane in Denver is expected to decide if Righthaven had standing to sue in 33 open cases in Colorado.

Righthaven’s standing to sue under its first lawsuit agreements with Stephens Media LLC, owner of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, was rejected by four federal judges in Las Vegas this summer.

Righthaven’s standing was rejected because while Righthaven claimed to own the copyrights at issue, the judges found the R-J remained in control of the material at issue. Copyright lawsuit plaintiffs must control the material they sue over, the judges ruled.

Righthaven is hoping one of the Nevada judges will revive its standing to sue over R-J material under an updated lawsuit contract with Stephens Media.

In the Colorado case, in the meantime, Righthaven complained Wolf’s attorneys’ motion for a preliminary injunction barring the disgorgement of Righthaven assets was filed in violation of Kane’s practice rules.

Those rules require parties to "confer" with each other before filing such motions.

"Defendant’s counsel engaged in absolutely no meaningful efforts to confer before filing the motion," Shawn Mangano, one of Righthaven’s outside attorneys, charged in his brief today.

Wolf is represented by Randazza Legal Group in Las Vegas as well as the Denver firm Contiguglia Fazzone P.C.

Wolf’s attorneys said in response to Righthaven’s filing today that they made reasonable and good faith efforts to confer with Righthaven before filing the motion and noted they "have found good faith negotiation with Righthaven unavailing in the past."

Kane sided with Wolf today, writing in an order that the hearing will proceed.

"I will consider plaintiff’s objections at that time, but plaintiff should be prepared to proceed on the merits of defendants’ motion," Kane wrote in his order.

The ruling came as Righthaven awaited a ruling from U.S. District Judge Philip Pro in Las Vegas on its request that he stay his order requiring Righthaven to pay defendant Wayne Hoehn’s $34,045 in legal fees. That payment was supposed to be made today, and it wasn’t clear when Pro would rule on the stay request.

The no-warning lawsuits against Wolf and Hoehn were among 275 filed by Righthaven since March 2010.

Share