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.
