ADVERT RATE

The publisher of Pointblanknews.com, Jackson Ude has suffered another setback in the defamation suit brought against him by the Executive Secretary of the Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board (NCDMB) Simbi Wabote, at a United States court.

Between 2021 and January 28, Ude has reportedly lost all seven motions he instituted through his counsel in the court, seeking to upstage the plaintiff (Wabote).

NAIJA LIVE TV gathered that the most recent dismissal of Ude’s motion took place on Thursday, January 27, at the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, whereby Judge Joseph Leeson Jr. issued another order (ECF 100) denying Ude’s request for reconsideration.

The court stated that it made its first ruling on the merits of the argument and finds no misconduct from Wabote or his attorneys.

The recent order came after Benneth O. Amadi, lawyer to Ude, on Wednesday, January 26, filed ECF 99, an appeal requesting the reconsideration of the court’s prior ruling that Wabote and his attorneys have not committed any misconduct regarding discovery or any alleged banking accounts.

Advertisement

The appeal by Ude was contained in a letter dated January 26, 2022, signed by Amadi and addressed to Honorable Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., United States District Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 504 West Hamilton Street, Suite 3401, Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101.

The letter obtained by NAIJA LIVE TV is with the title: “Re: Wabote v. Ude C.A. No. 5:21-cv-02214-JFL. Defendant’s request for a Reconsideration of this Court’s erroneous decision, Dkt. #98, on Defendant’s Request, Dkt. #91, for: Sanctions against the Plaintiff and his Attorneys for committing fraud on the court, for perjury and for acting in subornation of perjury in this case. Alternatively, Defendant requests for an order of this court mandating the Plaintiff and his attorneys to appear and show cause why they should not be held in contempt and/or sanctioned by this court.”

The letter asked Judge Leeson, Jr., “to take a second look at, and to reconsider, and prevent the manifest error and prejudice in the erroneous denial of the Defendant’s request for sanctions and/or for an order to show cause against the Plaintiff and his counsel, Dkt. #91.

“The reconsideration is respectfully necessary because the court committed a manifest error of law or fact to the detriment and prejudice of the Defendant and the honest administration of justice in this case.”

Ude’s counsel argued, among other things, that without considering the defendant’s letter on its merits, the court denied the defendant’s said letter, Dkt. #91, on the incorrect belief that the defendant did not consult with the plaintiff before filing the letter.

Amadi stated that the plaintiff was duly consulted several days before the filing was made, submitting that the purpose of the “motion to reconsider is “to correct manifest errors of law or fact or present newly discovered evidence.”

According to him, “Respectfully, my investigations still reveal, among other things, that those Bank Accounts associated with Plaintiff at the Zenith Bank of Nigeria and the Fidelity Bank of Nigeria are still presently active, and still being operated to his benefit.

“This court is respectfully asked not to take the deceitful and fraudulent conducts of Plaintiff Wabote in this case for granted. It is noteworthy Plaintiff never revealed the existence of these bank accounts.

“But when their existence was discovered and revealed by the Defendant, Plaintiff started engaging in further fraudulent conducts to frustrate the honest administration of justice in this case, to the detriment and prejudice of the Defendant. Reconsideration of this court’s 1/20/22 ruling, Dkt. #98, is humbly requested in the interest of the honest administration of justice and to prevent manifest injustice.”

However, the judge dismissed the motion for lacking merit, denying the defendant’s letter-request, ECF No’s. 99.

The judge explained that “The Court denies Ude’s letter-request to reconsider because he has not shown an intervening change in the law, the availability of new evidence that was not available when the Court issued its Order dated January 20, 2022, see ECF No. 98, or the need to clear error of law or fact to prevent manifest injustice. See Max’s Seafood Café ex rel. Lou-Ann, Inc. v. Quinteros, 176 F. 3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 1999).

“Contrary to Defendant’s assumption, the Court did not deny Defendant’s prior requests (ECF No’s. 90 and 91) for technical reasons only.

“The Court denied his request for sanctions after it considered the merits of the parties’ letter-briefs and oral arguments. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44–45 (1991) (explaining that district courts have the inherent power to decide whether sanctions are imposed or not).”

Recall that NAIJA LIVE TV reported on the 21st January that the US court sitting in the United States Eastern District of Pennsylvania had on Thursday, 20 January 2021, in a court order ECF 97, granted the plaintiff’s (Wabote) request by stating that Ude (Defendant) must sit for an additional deposition and must answer to all questions that he is asked.

The court also ruled that Ude must answer all questions surrounding PointBlankNews.com, especially the identities of its reporters and editors who worked on the said defamatory story.

The court equally ruled that Wabote and his attorneys have not committed any perjury or fraud and have acted properly throughout the litigation and discovery process.

To Advertise or Publish a Story on NaijaLiveTv:
Kindly contact us @ Naijalivetv@gmail.com
Call or Whatsapp: 07035262029, 07016666694, 08129340000

Comments

comments