GRYDER WINS - $1.2M Defamation Case Reversed

Weird, nothing comes up from this year except a page listing wild content creator lawsuits.
 
If I read the appeals court document correctly, due to bad wording on the request for alternative service, the summary judgement was reversed. Means he has to go to trial now.

SH: Use his name and judgement appeal in the search terms. Should come up with the appeals court order issued on the 24th of this month.
 
Appellate decision can be read here.

Not quite a “WIN.” Basic procedural issue. The appellate court determined he wasn’t properly served so the default judgment against him was improper. Now the case goes back to the trial court where it proceeds normally*.


(* to the extent anything involving Gryder is “normal.”)
 
Craig said:
If I read the appeals court document correctly, due to bad wording on the request for alternative service, the summary judgement was reversed.
Click to expand...
Hmmm.

"the affidavit of non-service was devoid of any information to support that Gryder could probably be found where the process server had attempted to serve him.

The affidavit of non-service here indicates the opposite of what Rule 106(b)requires. "

Doesn't seem like mere bad wording to me. It looks like a failure to serve as required by law. I can't see that any wording that was not perjurious could have corrected that.

But maybe that is indeed bad wording?

I didn't find the "Judgment" but this document contains a "Conclusion" that states the judgment.


Searching on the case number turned it up. 02-23-00434-cv
 
I dunno. I think there is a place in this world for Monday morning Youtube quarterbacks to pontificate about aircraft accidents. I find Gryder to be reasonable most of the time. The alternative is everyone shuts up for fear of being sued like this and we learn nothing from these accidents.
 
JoeInCT said:
I dunno. I think there is a place in this world for Monday morning Youtube quarterbacks to pontificate about aircraft accidents. I find Gryder to be reasonable most of the time. The alternative is everyone shuts up for fear of being sued like this and we learn nothing from these accidents.
Click to expand...
Pro tip: It isn't his Monday morning quarterbacking that makes him so disliked.
 
JoeInCT said:
I dunno. I think there is a place in this world for Monday morning Youtube quarterbacks to pontificate about aircraft accidents. I find Gryder to be reasonable most of the time. The alternative is everyone shuts up for fear of being sued like this and we learn nothing from these accidents.
Click to expand...
Couple other guys that are far more reliable and don't have to make up **** to be first.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Appellate decision can be read here.
Click to expand...
Thank you!
midlifeflyer said:
Not quite a “WIN.” Basic procedural issue.
Click to expand...
Shocking that he'd call it a win. :rolleyes:
midlifeflyer said:
The appellate court determined he wasn’t properly served so the default judgment against him was improper. Now the case goes back to the trial court where it proceeds normally*.
Click to expand...
:popcorn:
midlifeflyer said:
(* to the extent anything involving Gryder is “normal.”)
Click to expand...
I think my "favorite" thing I've seen in a Gryder court transcript was when they went briefly off the record, and then the judge came back on and said he'd been spoken to by building security and that "Mr. Gryder came into the building and had on his person an item that is not permitted in this building. And when he was told to check it in with the guard and leave it there and pick it up on his way out, he ran off and came up here."

At which point the judge lectured him about why courthouses have security and then instructed Gryder to go back down to security and check his "item" with them, and:

JUDGE BENKIN: And, Mr. Gryder, it's up to you, but I would suggest that an apology is in order.
MR. GRYDER: I apologize, Your Honor.
JUDGE BENKIN: Don't apologize to me, apologize to those people downstairs.
MR. GRYDER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE BENKIN: Keep that on the record, please.
(Whereupon, a short recess was taken.)

JoeInCT said:
I dunno. I think there is a place in this world for Monday morning Youtube quarterbacks to pontificate about aircraft accidents. I find Gryder to be reasonable most of the time. The alternative is everyone shuts up for fear of being sued like this and we learn nothing from these accidents.
Click to expand...
The problem is, Gryder does come off as reasonable at first glance, but after you've looked at what he says, what he does, or had a discussion with him directly, you realize that he's actually full of crap. I mean, the guy has literally gone to an accident site and stolen evidence. He legitimately knows plenty about aviation, but he thinks he knows everything about everything.

And that's not to say that he has nothing to contribute to the aviation safety conversation. He does have some good ideas too, but they're awfully hard to separate from the complete BS, and so I can't say I would recommend anyone listen to him.

There is definitely a place in this world for pontificating about aircraft accidents. Even if we don't know the actual cause, it's good to put ourselves into those situations and think about how we would have reacted and things we could have done better. That informs our own flying and makes us better pilots*.

FWIW, I don't think I've heard of any of the other channels ever getting sued. Only Gryder "pontificates" to the point of defamation.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Shocking that he'd call it a win. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I'm of the opinion that Dan is a scumbag ambulance chaser on the basis of his actions on youtube as well as the multiple issues working their way through the courts. I'm amused that there is one mod here that seems to like him and keeps shutting down Dan threads, but I suppose that's another subject.

Having stated my bias: Dan absolutely won. Having a judgement set aside (summary or not) is absolutely a victory. Let him have his victory lap. This isn't close to being over.
 
172andyou said:
I'm of the opinion that Dan is a scumbag ambulance chaser on the basis of his actions on youtube as well as the multiple issues working their way through the courts. I'm amused that there is one mod here that seems to like him and keeps shutting down Dan threads, but I suppose that's another subject.
Click to expand...
Really? I've not seen any get shut down, and there's plenty still open... I would imagine that if there are threads getting shut down they're probably ones where something potentially lawsuit-worthy got in. :dunno:
172andyou said:
Having stated my bias: Dan absolutely won. Having a judgement set aside (summary or not) is absolutely a victory. Let him have his victory lap. This isn't close to being over.
Click to expand...
Won the battle, maybe, but I doubt he'll win the war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top