Handshoe v. Abel

Filing 94

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 84 Motion for Return of Service Fee Paid, Motion for Sanctions. Signed by District Judge Keith Starrett on 2/8/2016 (scp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DOUGLAS HANDSHOE
V.

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14-CV-159-KS-MTP

DANIEL G. “DANNY’ ABEL and
CHRIS YOUNT

DEFENDANTS

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Chris Yount’s (“Yount”) Motion for Sanctions
and Return of Service Fee Paid (“Motion for Sanctions”) [84]. After considering the submissions
of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion is not well taken
and should be denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Douglas Handshoe (“Plaintiff”) is the publisher and owner of Slabbed New Media,
LLC. On February 13, 2014, Plaintiff published a blogpost entitled “Very disturbing child welfare
issues raised in 24th JDC case,” which included an image obtained from the then-unsealed case
Yount v. Steitle pending in Louisiana court. The image was allegedly drawn by a minor child. On
February 18, 2014, Defendant Chris Yount (“Yount”), through his lawyer Defendant Daniel Abel
(“Abel”), obtained a court order in the pending Louisiana case and served it upon Plaintiff’s web
host in Texas in order for the post to be taken down.
In response, on February 21, 2014, Plaintiff published another post titled “Ready, Willing
and unAbel: A Super 8 Motel Legal Department Update.” This post contained a hyperlink to the
same image as the previous post. On February 28, 2014, Plaintiff received a Digital Millennium

Copyright Act (“DMCA”) takedown notice from his web host, which was issued after Yount and
Abel, on behalf of the minor child, represented that the image infringed on the child’s copyright.
On March 20, 2014, Abel filed a defamation suit against Plaintiff on behalf of Yount and on
behalf of an unnamed minor child. (See Louisiana Petition [27-1].) On July 28, 2014, the Louisiana
court dismissed the defamation suit under Louisiana’s anti-SLAPP statute. On September 17, 2014,
Abel filed an appeal on Yount’s behalf with the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On November 6, 2014, Abel was suspended from the practice of law. On January 20, 2015,
Yount filed his appellate brief pro se.
Plaintiff filed the current action with the Court on April 10, 2014, against Yount and Abel.
All claims in this case have been dismissed as of January 8, 2016. Yount now brings his Motion for
Sanctions [84], seeking sanctions against Plaintiff and a return of his service of process fee.
II. DISCUSSION
Yount’s request of his service of process fee has no basis in law other than as an additional
sanction against Plaintiff. Therefore, the Court will analyze the entire motion as a request for
sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.
Rule 11(c) provides for a “safe harbor” provision that requires a party to serve a motion for
sanctions on the opposing party twenty-one (21) days before filing it with the Court. Yount’s
Motion for Sanctions [84], filed on January 12, 2016, references actions taken by Plaintiff on
January 6, 2016, just six days prior to the filing of the motion. It is therefore apparent that Yount
could not have possibly served the motion on Plaintiff the twenty-one (21) days before filing it with
the Court, as required by Rule 11(c). His Motion for Sanctions [84], then, is procedurally barred
and must be denied.

2

III. CONCLUSION
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Yount’s Motion for Sanctions [84]
is denied.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 8th day of February, 2016.

s/ Keith Starrett
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3