I wish more judges would do what this federal judge did when he got a complaint from Lance Armstrong that was full of invective and boilerplate instead of genuine legal and factual claims: He threw it out. Armstrong filed the suit in hope of quashing doping charges against him.
Sam Sparks, of United States District Court, chastised Armstrong’s lawyers for submitting a lengthy complaint filled with allegations that “were totally irrelevant to Armstrong’s claims.”
Sparks said in his order that the court was left to presume that the allegations “were included solely to increase media coverage of this case, and to incite public opinion against” the antidoping agency and Travis Tygart, the agency’s chief executive, who is also named as a defendant.
“This court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong’s desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through 80 mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims,” Sparks said.
The judge added that Armstrong could refile his case within 20 days, but only if he limited his pleadings to information that was legally relevant to his case.
This is actually one of the hallmarks of lawsuits filed by wingnuts. Every complaint I’ve ever read from Larry Klayman or from the Thomas More Law Center has consisted of about 90% political rhetoric, with very little in the way of actual legal or factual claims. If more judges did this, that kind of thing would start to go away.
26 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
slc1
July 13, 2012 at 10:05 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Maybe what should be done is to impose sanctions against lawyers who file frivolous actions.
Reginald Selkirk
July 13, 2012 at 10:17 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Quite aside from the legal questions, this reads like a piece of fiction. The names of the major characters are Lance Armstrong, Sam Sparks and Travis Tygart. Those are some good sounding names.
Compuholic
July 13, 2012 at 10:39 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The judge Sam Sparks seems to have a very refreshing way of dealing with lawyers like this. My personal favorite is the following document:
http://goo.gl/J7kPA
I so would have liked to see the lawyers face when he recieved this order.
Ben P
July 13, 2012 at 10:43 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I think it’s worth mentioning that the judge only dismissed the complaint without prejudice and the 80 page complaint was re-filed as a 25 page complaint a day later.
I doubt this had any real impact on the large law firms Armstrong hired. However, if I was Armstrong I would be questioning my choice of counsel. I can virtually guarantee the firms he has hired are billing by the hour, and they billed all the time necessary to prepare an 80 page complaint, only to have it tossed, then they’ll bill time to revise and pare down the complaint to the 25 page version they subsequently filed.
festersixohsixonethree
July 13, 2012 at 10:53 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I don’t believe these inflated filings will cease until lawyers no longer charge by the 1/10th of an hour.
Bronze Dog
July 13, 2012 at 11:24 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
When you say that, it makes me wonder if they have a secret underground crime lab and a closet full of capes.
Marcus Ranum
July 13, 2012 at 12:12 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:
Maybe what should be done is to impose sanctions against lawyers who file frivolous actions.
Like maybe burning them at the stake?
slc1
July 13, 2012 at 12:15 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Marcus Ranum @ #7
Well, Shakespeare did write the the first order of business was to kill all the lawyers.
democommie
July 13, 2012 at 2:56 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m not a fan of Lance Armstrong. The U.S. anti-doping agency is a fucking joke.
James Sensenbrenner (I’m no fan of his, either) offers this:
http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=303025.
The USADA seems to be part Carrie Nation and all assholery.
Homo Straminus
July 13, 2012 at 5:55 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Bronze Dog: I initially misread your comment as “…a closet full of apes.” And I thought, “Well, that’s certainly an evocative, if unusual, lair accessory.”
But capes. Capes. Yes, much more sense.
timpayne
July 13, 2012 at 6:09 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Bastille Day would be the perfect time for Tour de France to tell USADA “va te faire foutre.” Tygart and his band of sanctimonious attention whores have no authority whatsoever to “strip” Armstrong of his Tour de France wins.
Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven
July 13, 2012 at 6:38 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
…what the fuck is this about?
democommie
July 14, 2012 at 12:11 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“…what the fuck is this about?”
This is about Travis Tygart and the USADA going after high profile athletes in sports like cycling which has, no doubt, it’s share of nasty cheatin’ scum–instead of U.S. MLB,NBA,NFL and NHL players who are engaged in the same sorts of behavior.
It would have been nice to see Tygart get his ass handed to him by Clemen’s lawyer.
The USADA is McCarthyite.
dingojack
July 14, 2012 at 2:33 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Demo – ‘… but, but they’re doing it too! - And they’re doing it inside the house!’ isn’t much of an argument against prosecuting Mr Armstrong.
If the USADA has (allegedly) creditable evidence against an American athlete, let it present that evidence to be tested in an American court (as the USA agreed to do in order to compete in the first place)*.
If the evidence stands up** then the fact that he broke the rules he agreed to follow (ie he violated his contract) has been proven, the punishment: strip him of his medals (ie the reward of that contract).
If the evidence doesn’t, then don’t.
If enforcing of the rules of a sport is ‘McCarthyite’ then what’s your preferred option? The old American sporting standard: ‘Winning isn’t everything – it’s the only thing’?
Dingo
—–
* timpayne – Would you prefer each country handle the prosecution ‘in-country’? In this case, under which jurisdiction, Belgian or French?
[Also - luckily Lance didn't race in the 'Tour de Iraq' during Saddam's days - under local rules at the time, he might be in for the chop, literally.
But I'm sure some will argue that a half-dozen 15Mt nukes and a few burnings at the stake would have amply demonstrated America's commitment to fair-play and sportsmanship, right SLC?]
** I doubt the strength of the evidence against Lance Armstrong. If he can restrain himself (and hire a decent lawyer) I predict he’ll not be stripped of his medals. (IANAL).
timpayne
July 14, 2012 at 7:31 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Last I knew Dingo Jack, visitors to foreign countries, even Americans, are subject to the laws of the visited countries. Armstrong’s conduct while in France was subject to French law, and the rules of the ICU and the Tour. Where is it you think the US Congress or its semi-private kangaroo court, USADA, fits in?
democommie
July 14, 2012 at 8:05 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
dingojack:
The USADA is a PRIVATE company, masquerading as a gummint entity. Their primary revenue stream is from the TESTING that they do. By securing high profile “convictions” against people like Armstrong and their current actions involving Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao they look to scare others into complying with their demands.
The USOC (an organization that is at least as corrupt as the International OC and the U.S. Congress provide most if not all of the funding for USADA’s operations. If the “work” done by USADA is that fucking important it certainly should be done by an organization that HAS gummint authority. If it’s not that important it should not be done. The USADA, btw, considers themselves to be the arbiter of standards and insists that ONLY they are qualified to do the testing in the situations where THEY will be delivering the final verdict. It doesn’t pass the smell test.
N.B. I am not a Lance Armstrong fan.
slc1
July 14, 2012 at 8:25 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re dilngo the bingo @ #14
But I’m sure some will argue that a half-dozen 15Mt nukes and a few burnings at the stake would have amply demonstrated America’s commitment to fair-play and sportsmanship, right SLC?]
Yawn.
dingojack
July 14, 2012 at 8:35 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Demo – I never said you were for (or against) Mr. Armstrong, and, for the record, I am neither.
[declaimer: IANAL]
Secondly, people take anabolic steroids for all sorts of reasons. Some people take them to counter-act muscle wasting diseases, or to recover from trauma, or because they want to change their sex, or for lots of reasons I can’t even guess at*. Does this make these people criminals?
Taking steroids is criminally stupid but not criminal in itself. What we are taking about here is not a criminal case at all, but essentially one of company law, the government of no country ‘owns’ the Tour, it is a private race that has private rules. Did Mr Armstrong break the rules he was contracted to abide by?
Also on the question of jurisdiction, I am not familiar with the rules, but does the Tour have qualifying races? If so where are these races held? If** he was breaking the rules in the Tour, it would be likely that an incremental enhancing agent would have been taken during these too. Should he be tried in these other countries too, multiple times for, essentially, the same crime?
Dingo
—–
* Perhaps the steroids were to counter act the damage of aggressive chemotherapy, or for some other legitimate medical reason. We don’t know.
** And that’s a big ‘if’. Nothing has been proven or disproven at this stage.
dingojack
July 14, 2012 at 8:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – Aww, did a little light ribbing hurt your tiny little feelings diddums? Awwwww.
Dingo
—–
PS: Since you’re so tired, perhaps you should go to bed. It’s past your bedtime anyway. :)
slc1
July 14, 2012 at 9:01 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re dingojack @ #19
Not a bit of it. And it’s 9:03AM, EDT at the moment.
democommie
July 14, 2012 at 10:14 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
dingojack:
I concede your premises. However, USADA IS McCarthyite. USADA is not a U.S. government agency and they have NO jurisdiction, legally, to try or convict anyone, of anything.
USADA is a for profit company, a company whose CEO, Travis Tygart, is a grandstanding piece of shit.
This:
http://www.xtri.com/features/detail/284-itemId.511714298.html
gives some background on Tygart.
He is NOT a public official but the head of a private, for profit, company. His judicial robes would have been purchased, like his appointment to any court from some online store.
Lance Armstrong is a collossally egotistical individual (an afflicition he shares with Tygart, imo). He may well be GUILTY. If his reptuation is to be ruined and his career ended it should not be by someone with as strong confirmation bias as has been exhibited by Twitgart and his private company.
dingojack
July 14, 2012 at 10:52 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Demo (& everyone else) – sorry, I didn’t mean to get on anyone’s wick here. Yes the USADA is a private company, but I’m assuming that Mr Armstrong signed some kind of agreement that they would investigate any breaches of the rules vis-a-vis drugs.
Mr Armstrong could tell them to get stuffed and fight it out in regular court, if he wishes to, as could the USADA. But somehow I doubt they will.
This is kind of like Sharia courts, a private arragement about private rules.
Does it suck – oh yes. But Mr Armstrong is an adult and can make his own descions, no matter what I, or anyone else, thinks of them.
Dingo
—–
PS: I neither defending nor accusing the USADA either.
It’s their party and they can cry if they want to.
dingojack
July 14, 2012 at 10:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – still tired at 9am? Maybe more coffe is needed.
:) Dingo
——-
PS: Look, I apologise if I offended you, I didn’t intend it to be a serious attack on you, merely a wry comment in your direction. Sometimes I like to gently tease people, more often than not I offend them ’cause I’m a idiot. I’m sorry.
democommie
July 14, 2012 at 1:28 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
dingojack:
USADA is pressing to have this decided in arbitration–and they largely control that process, start to finish.
The USDoJ has passed on prosecution of this case, because they don’t think they can get a conviction (this is not to say that they think Armstrong is innocent).
The USADA is basically saying that they will allow testimony by witnesses who may have serious conflicts of interest and cherry pick the DoJ’s discovery to slant the case in the direction their bias leads them.
There is not a scintilla of doubt that Mark McGwire, Andy Pettit, Roger Clemens, numerous NFL players and other professional athletes have used banned substances. Those players have not been stripped of their various awards (Clemens has 5 Cy Young Awards, iirc).
I’m still drilling down, trying to find some information on Tygart–his personal life seems to be devoid of, well, anything. He lives in Colorado Springs which is home to a number of severely puritanical KKKristianists (well, in actuality, their puritanical condemtation is of OTHER’s behavior, not their own) and I’m trying to find out which one he’s connected to.
There are a number of genuinely good folks that are concerned about ending the use of banned substances in sports–I just don’t see Tygart as one of them.
democommie
July 14, 2012 at 1:35 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
dingojack:
I did not perceive your comments to be a personal attack. I’ve been characterized by some people–snivelling, gasbag assholes, the lot of them–as being somewhat acerbic. Where they come up with that, I’ll never know.{;>)
“I so would have liked to see the lawyers face when he recieved this order.”
I’m not convinced that Armstrong AND his lawyers didn’t know exactly what they were doing in publishing that manifesto. It’s already gotten considerably more press than a shorter, less pungent “brief” might have engendered. The people that hate Armstrong will not be swayed but a lot of things that would never be allowed in a trial transcript are out there in the ether,from which they cannot be recalled.
slc1
July 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re dingojack @ #23
No need to apologize, in no way, shape, form, or regard am I offended. It is my position that the internet is a tough place where no quarter is asked or given. Anyone who can’t take the heat should get out of the kitchen. Anyone who dishes it out, like I sometimes do, must be prepared to take it in return.
Relative to Lancelot Armstrong, it should be noted that it is my information that he has passed every drug test he has taken during his cycling career. The argument is that he took drugs that could not be detected by the technology available at the time. That’s not good enough, at least in this country where guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is, at least theoretically, the standard. The testimony of admitted cheaters like Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis ain’t going to do the job in court if Mr. Armstrong has a competent attorney representing himself.