Righthaven's Crusade Against 20-year Veteran Nurse Gets Worse

Wronghaven!—Righthaven Calls Veteran's Motion Seeking Attys' Fees for Suit Mistakenly Served Upon Her: An Effort to "extract blood money"

Denise Nichols Fights for Veterans

via mal contends—Few attorneys and defendants who have dealt with Internet troll, Righthaven LLC and its attorney, Shawn Mangano, are surprised by their duplicity and blatant abuse of process of the federal court system.

Now, Righthaven just dove deeper into the pond scum in its vendetta against an Air Force nurse (my former co-defendant), a veteran fighting for her life against Gulf War Syndrome, and life-threatening ailments--believed by this medical professional to be exacerbated by Righthaven's frivolous federal lawsuit for $150,000 and attorneys' fees.

Though veteran Denise Nichols persists in her work of helping fellow veterans, Righthaven won't halt its legal efforts against her.

Righthaven served Nichols, of Denver, Colorado, with a federal complaint earlier this year that was ordered to be dismissed on April 20 by federal Judge Gloria M. Navarro.

The complaint, in a reflection of the often shoddy work of Attorney Shawn Mangano and Righthaven generally, fails to mention Denise Nichols in the text of the complaint, even once.

Subsequent bad-faith negotiations by Righthaven ensued in which Righthaven tried to induce Nichols to sign a press release with language describing how generous and thoughtful Righthaven is to veterans and the disabled, a la the case against North Carolina blogger Brian D. Hill.

After dismissal negotiations failed, Righthaven was forced to terminate its suit against Nichols May 6 or face Judge Navaro again.

Nichols then filed a motion for $1,600 in attorneys' fees that she paid to Attorneys John Arsenault of Colorado and Mike Kimbrell of Nevada. Even these facts are disputed by Righthaven.

Both attorneys agreed the Righthaven suit lacked any merit as a defendant is of course to be mentioned in a complaint if she is accused a tort.

Reads Nichols' motion is part: "The Complaint, which was served upon defendant, Denise Nichols, on 03/23/2011, is predicated upon a likely Rule 11 violation as the plaintiff admits the complaint fails to mention the defendant in the text of the complaint, as indicated in the plaintiff's summary report (filed April 18) for the April 20 hearing at which your Honor ruled the case was to be dismissed."

In a Court filing this week, Righthaven responded by saying of Nichols' motion "it is nothing short of an attempt at trying to extract blood money in the form of an attorney's fee award to which she is not entitled."

Righthaven's position is that Nichols is not entitled to recoup attorneys' fee though she was served with a complaint that does not mention her.

Nichols, who had to appear by telephone at an April 20 federal Court hearing from a DC Veterans' Medical facility, continues her fight for her life and those of her fellow veterans.

Nichols said yesterday she is composing her response to Mangano and Righthaven's outrageous "blood money" charge and will file it this weekend.

Maj. Denise Nichols (ret), Vietnam era and Gulf War veteran, retired nurse, MSN, retired US Air Force Flight Nurse Clinical specialist in cardio-vascular nursing, served on the nursing faculty of several universities around the country.

"I think Righthaven has this backwards. Righthaven and Mangano are after blood money. They are harming people and lying about it. The idea that I, along with other prevailing defendants, are after 'blood money' for Righthaven's mistakes and abuse is absurd," said Nichols today.

Veteran Nurse Seeks Attorneys' Fees from Righthaven

Denise Nichols is seeking $1,600 in attorneys' fees and costs and any other relief the Court deems just from Righthaven which served her with a civil complaint that failed to mention her in the text.

"Righthaven and Attorney Mangano admitted in Court they made a mistake in serving on me a complaint that fails to even mention my name. So, I should pay for their mistake? No. They should pay full attorneys' fees and costs, and that's giving these people a break," said Denise Nichols. "What should happen is Shawn Mangano should be slapped with a Rule 11 violation that sanctions lawyers for misrepresenting facts in federal Court. How can it be reasonable and diligent for attorney Mangano to file with the Court a complaint he has admitted was a mistake? Mangano needs to be stopped."

Nichols' Rule 11 complaint refers to the federal Court Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions rules.

"I say good for Denise Nichols. She's carrying the ball right now on behalf of all veterans and the Internet community. Mangano's negligence is blatant in Denise's case; but when you consider the systemic, organized fraud he has perpetrated on the Court on the matter of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, it's clear justice demands the Court act against not just Righthaven; but also Mangano for failing to meet his responsibilities as an attorney under Rule 11. He fought Denise Nichols the whole way, instead of just admitting his mistake and owning up to it, apologizing to the Court and the veteran, Denise Nichols whom honestly is likely to be alive, no thanks to Mangano," said Michael Leon.

Nichols says she was lucky her attorneys charged her so little out of respect for the injustice of her case, though Righthaven proved unwilling to negotiate a settlement on the case that was terminated on May 14. -- Civil Action No 2:10-CV-01672-GMM-LRN

Reads Nichols' motion is part: "The Complaint, which was served upon defendant, Denise Nichols, on 03/23/2011, is predicated upon a likely Rule 11 violation as the plaintiff admits the complaint fails to mention the defendant in the text of the complaint, as indicated in the plaintiff's summary report (filed April 18) for the April 20 hearing at which your Honor ruled the case was to be dismissed."

Said Nichols, "The point is until victims stand up to Righthaven, then this will continue. And the victims that have gone through untold amounts of stress then have to hire attorneys to fight. It is a situation that the courts and judges need to pay attention to but also legislators who need to hold hearings and to possibly review the law as passed to review if changes to the law are necessary. All these steps to protect Freedom of speech and fair use."

Wronghaven goes down again!

Updated: "Party Denise Nichols terminated per [43] Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. (ASB)"
Righthaven Internet troll serves complaint that fails to mention defendant, now says defendant fails to negotiate in good faith in dismissal talks

In a bizarre turn of events, Righthaven LLC is now requesting a dismissal with prejudice of its own complaint in order to avoid paying the attorneys' fees of Denise Nichols, a retired Air Force nurse who served in the Vietnam War era and the first Gulf War.

Righthaven says in a motion filed May 5 that the defendant, Nichols who is battling Gulf War illness as a patient and advocate and is demanding attorneys' fees and costs, is refusing to negotiate in "good faith."

In an April 20 hearing, Judge Gloria M. Navarro of the federal District Court for Nevada ruled that the case against Nichols would be dismissed, and the only point to be decided was whether the absurd case would be dismissed with or without prejudice.

To understand this case, consider this hypothetical.

Suppose I file a complaint against you, the reader. I fail to mention you, the reader, in the complaint; but I demand $150,000 and plaintiff attorneys' fees and costs from you anyway. You then hire defense attorneys, but when you demand attorneys' fees and costs in negotiations for the defense of the absurd complaint, I say you are failing to negotiate in "good faith."

That's Righthaven's position. Negotiations have proven futile.

Nichols even volunteered in negotiations to give Righthaven a non-disclosure clause so it would not look as foolish as it does today. Righthaven rebuffed the offer in April.

The stress of the federal lawsuit on Nichols and her family is intense and ongoing. "I just want this to go away. And I want to be made whole for what I paid my attorneys. Righthaven refuses," said Nichols this morning.

Righthaven claims the motion and its negotiations "accurately (reflect) its desire to dismiss this action against Nichols in view of her extensive prior military service to the Untied (sic) States of America and in view of her apparent medical condition."

Righthaven cares about veterans and the disabled? This contention is what legal experts refer to as: Bullshit.

"These people have extended no courtesy to any defendant, veteran or disabled. That's the truth of the matter," said Nichols. "Where was the concern for negotiating for the straight-to-court federal suit filed in the first place? I'm still shaking my head. I want to get out of this alive and whole. But will Righthaven play ball?"

No, Righthaven is asking for the case to be dismissed with prejudice (meaning roughly it would be difficult for Righthaven to bring other similar suits), but is saying the defendant is refusing to negotiate in "good faith" because of Righthaven's refusal to consider paying Nichols' attorneys' fees and costs.

The absurd becomes real.

That's crazy? No, that's Righthaven.