Matthew Weiss deemed vexatious litigant + reminder to watch what you say and how you TCPA litigate
- Peter Schneider
- Aug 26
- 6 min read
Updated: Sep 21
The litigants driving my watch how you litigate stories and watch what you say stories probably wouldn't realize the articles are addressing their choices, but they are still drive-slowly-by-while rubbernecking worthy.
As these stories go, Mr. Matthew Weiss's choices, and his escape from any really meaningful consequences, bear a closer look. As always, lets start with the background, and for that I'll pull from the original motion and the magistrate judge's report and recommendation in Docket 36. Buckle up, it's really something.
On December 3, 2022, Plaintiff entered into a Retail Instalment Contract and Security Agreement (“RIC”) for the purchase of a 2014 Dodge Charger bearing Vehicle Identification Number 2C3CDXAG3EH252404 (the “Vehicle”) from Orlando Car Depot LLC (the “Dealer”). Westlake financed Plaintiff’s purchase of the Vehicle. Plaintiff alleges that Westlake violated the TCPA during the servicing of the RIC “by using robo dial and ai technology to harass me on my cell after being told I am on the federal dnc and they need to add me to their internal dnc.”
Plaintiff is a prodigious litigant. This is one of nine federal court cases initiated by Plaintiff in 2023 and 2024, and one of 86 state court cases since December 2023 . . . After filing a lawsuit, Plaintiff fails to appear at scheduled hearings, thereby resulting in his cases being dismissed for failure to prosecute, voluntarily dismisses his own claims, or has his cases dismissed . . . Plaintiff fully understands that this tactic—“file, dismiss, and refile”—imposes costs on litigants and, in fact, Plaintiff wields it as a threat . . . Plaintiff also threatens real harm. For instance, he has told counsel “you will personally pay for that.” . . . “This can end, or be the most costly mistake of this corrupt banks history, making israel [sic] vs iran [sic], ukraine [sic] vs russia [sic] look peaceful.” . . . Plaintiff suggests or overtly threatens physical harm, stating, “If all else fails, i [sic] have one last solution to ensure justice gets served and lessons are taught that will be impossible to be forgotten [sic],”
Mr. Weiss sued Westlake four times in two months, and later the same year even sued Westlake's attorney!
In deciding if a litigant is vexatious, a court often looks at four factors.
the litigant’s history of litigation and in particular whether it entailed vexatious, harassing or duplicative lawsuits
the litigant’s motive in pursuing the litigation, e.g. does the litigant have an objective good faith expectation of prevailing
whether the litigant is represented by counsel
whether the litigant has caused needless expense to other parties or has posed an unnecessary burden on the courts and their personnel
whether other sanctions would be adequate to protect the courts and other parties
The court found the five factors tipped toward vexatious litigant but really Mr. Weiss's unhinged emails are what put this case on par with the other booby prize winners:
Well the case that you wasted $500 in filing fees and $5,000 in legal fees to move in breach of contract was dismissed WITHOUT prejudice by the judge. Now we will refile in small claims, along with the 18 other claims including several breach of contracts, fcra, fccpa, fdcpa, fdupta, ftc holder, slander/libel/defamation, and more. Since you dont want to consolidate all into one claim, we can have 18 separate claims. Now my offer is going to be $15,000 minimum PLUS full refund per ftc holder rule for the fraud contract to be unwound. Lets keep going!!!
Furthermore, i have been on social media and following the 40+ westlake lawsuits against people, and teaching people about the fcra, tcpa, illegal debt collection practices [right or wrong, most judges reallllly don't like it when non-lawyers educate/encourage more litigation], and your case loads about to climb by the hundreds. Lastly, about to secure a new westlake loan under a business to keep my teeth in this corrupt company to hold them accountable if we dont resolve the 15+ claims and counting . . . Few more cases hit the docket. I have 11 more ready to file soon. 8 already in motion between arbitration and court . . . Filed more cases, waiting to hit the docket Westlake, better get out your checkbook, this is going to be a very long costly ride . . . Now going on social media to help people sue because many have been victims and dont know how easy it is to enforce their rights
So are you ever going to call to discuss this and try to resolve or we just going to file endless motions back and forth, 20+ cases, and your client wastes tens of thousands on useless motions and games instead of a resolution. Also the car, when are they spending thousands to skip trace and hire repo to take the car that is severely damaged, vandalized, stripped, and worthless?
So do you want to discuss settlement now that you illegally repoed the car violating the c holder in due course provision allowing payment to be withheld for fraud so we can end this relationship permanently? Or do we ramp it up and start filing the 20+ cases, a shit load of moons, tons of regulatory complaints and waste 6 figures for 2 years?
Either they agree get that false reporting off my report THIS week, agree to not ever falsely report it, and agree to remove that fraudulent balance from my name and agree it will not pursue frivolous sanctions from a bias judge which i will appeal, OR i will file the appeal on that and every case i dismissed, i will file the new lawsuit for the telephone violations, new lawsuit for the fcra breach of contract, new fcra lawsuit, lawsuit for violating ftc holder in due course, a lawsuit for illegal repo and not providing notice on how to get my property, when sold and such. This can end this week and we forever move on to save time and expense, or westlake can continue to act petty and break laws, and it will be in endless litigation in multiple court jurisdictions, some pro se, some with counsel, some in fed, some in state, some in small claims, some in florida, some in ny.
There was enough just in the emails to sink Mr. Weiss, but the 0-93 record finished him off.
#1 History and Motivation of Litigation
Plaintiff’s litigation history is lengthy, and his motive is quite clear. Plaintiff states himself in emails that he wishes to burden Defendant and the federal and state courts with endless litigation [Could have been avoided if he kept his mouth shut]. See Dkt. 32-3. Simply put, Plaintiff’s history of litigation is overwhelmingly vexatious, harassing, and duplicative. He has not been successful in any of the nine federal court cases or 86 state court cases [This is actually kind of an achievement. At least one of those cases had to have presented the opportunity for a default judgment and he failed there too]. He does not appear to have an objective good faith expectation of prevailing in any case he files. And this conclusion is reinforced by his repeated failure to appear at duly scheduled court hearings and abide by court orders.
#2 Representation by Counsel
This court didn't really use this factor, but other courts have given a plaintiff more of a pass if an attorney did the dirty work.
#3 Needless Expense on Parties or Unnecessary Burdens on Court
“One of the most important factors that the Court must consider in determining whether to issue a Martin-Trigona order is whether the litigant’s actions have caused needless expense to other parties or has posed an unnecessary burden on the Court and its personnel.” . . . I find this factor satisfied here. Plaintiff has engaged in a pattern of filing lawsuits and failing to appear at hearings or failing to adequately prosecute his claims resulting in his cases being dismissed. For each case filed, Plaintiff requires a response from the Defendants and the Court.
#4 Adequacy of Other Sanctions
Plaintiff’s cases have been dismissed. He has been directed to pay defendants’ costs and attorney’s fees.
The almost funny part despite his 0- 93 record, outside of the vexatious litigant designation, all Mr. Weiss was really hit with was a dismissal with prejudice of his current claim. He's mostly free to vexatiously litigate in other jurisdictions.
The district court judge rubber stamped the report and recommendation and Mr. Wiess is probably drafting his next lawsuit even as you read this.
Plaintiffs in civil cases generally want money because that is generally all you can get in a civil case. But you can't say the quiet parts out loud, and when you do, how you say them is very important. The Mr. Weiss show always ends poorly for the boor and the shocking think about this case is how it has gone on for so long without a more serious consequence to Mr. Weiss.
Got a Case Like This?
If you’ve had similar problems with telemarketers, debt collectors, or bankruptcy-related harassment, we might feature your story in a future blog post. Email your situation or legal filing to peter@nwdebtresolution.com or nathen@nwdebtresolution.com.
Are telemarketers bothering you in Washington, Oregon, or Montana?
I handle TCPA lawsuits in Washington State and Oregon, and may be able to help.
📞 Call: 206-800-6000 / 971-800-6000
📧 Email: peter@nwdebtresolution.com
Note: The opinions in this blog are mine (Peter Schneider) and do not count as legal advice. If you're thinking of suing over illegal robocalls or Do Not Call list violations, contact me for a legal consultation.
Comments