By now, I am sure you have heard all the jokes about the lawsuit filed by Rep. Devin Nunes. If not, here is the bottom line: Rep. Devin Nunes has sued Twitter, some satire Twitter accounts, and a real political commentator for a variety of "offenses" including defamation based on allegations that anyone with a basic understanding of the law should know would not support a claim for defamation. He is asking for $250 million in compensation. The defamation claim is frivolous.
Of course, frivolous lawsuits are not new, but this is the same Devin Nunes who co-sponsored the Discouraging Frivolous Lawsuits Act and who once voted for a House Amendment "to express a sense of Congress that free speech should be protected."
But, my question for the readers of this blog is this: if the claims are so obviously frivolous, what was the lawyer who filed the complaint thinking? Are the rules (both in civil procedure and professional responsibility codes) not enough to discourage filing of frivolous complaints?
For a detailed analysis of the complaint, go to TechDirt.
You can read more comments in ABA Journal, and The Daily Beast.
For the jokes I mentioned above, you can go here, and here for some examples.