Litigation Update - Safety Shot Authorized to Serve Notice of Motion for Default Judgment Upon Capybara Research and Igor Appelboom by Public Disclosure and Press Release
- None.
- None.
Insights
From a legal standpoint, the ongoing lawsuit between Safety Shot, Inc. and the Capybara Defendants, including Accretive Capital d/b/a Benzinga, represents a significant event that could have material implications for Safety Shot's business operations and financial health. The issuance of a Certificate of Default indicates that the defendants have not responded to the lawsuit within the given timeframe, which may suggest either a strategic decision or an inability to mount a defense. If Safety Shot is granted a default judgment, it could potentially receive damages or injunctive relief that may impact its financial statements and operational strategies.
The legal process of serving defendants via alternative means, such as email, X accounts and public disclosures, is a relatively recent development in the legal field, reflecting the modern challenges of serving entities that operate primarily online or have no fixed physical address. This case could set a precedent for similar future cases, affecting how companies approach litigation strategy and risk management.
From a financial analysis perspective, the lawsuit's progression to a potential default judgment stage could be a double-edged sword for Safety Shot, Inc. On one hand, a favorable judgment may provide financial compensation that could bolster the company's earnings and improve investor sentiment. On the other hand, the costs associated with ongoing litigation are often substantial and can drain resources, reflecting negatively on the company's financial performance in the short term.
Investors and analysts will be closely monitoring the outcome of the March 15 hearing for any indications of potential financial impact. The ability of Safety Shot to successfully navigate the legal system and enforce any judgment awarded will be critical in assessing the company's management effectiveness and operational resilience.
From a market perspective, the legal action undertaken by Safety Shot, Inc. against Capybara Research and Benzinga is likely to influence investor perceptions and the company's reputation in the market. The outcome of the lawsuit, especially if it results in a default judgment in favor of Safety Shot, could send a strong message to the market about the company's aggressive stance on protecting its interests.
However, it is also important to consider the potential reputational risks associated with such legal disputes. Prolonged legal battles can cast a shadow over a company's public image, potentially affecting consumer and investor confidence. Market analysts will evaluate the broader implications of this lawsuit on the company's brand equity and future market positioning.
JUPITER, FL, March 12, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- On December 5, 2023, Safety Shot, Inc. (Nasdaq: SHOT) (“Safety Shot” or the “Company”) announced that it filed a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Safety Shot, Inc. v. Capybara Research et. al., Case No. 1:23-cv-10728-JSR (the “Action”), against Defendants Capybara Research (“Capybara”), Igor Appelboom (“Appelboom,” together with Capybara, the “Capybara Defendants”) and Accretive Capital d/b/a Benzinga (“Benzinga,” together with the Capybara Defendants, the “Defendants”).
On December 22, 2023, the Company filed a motion to alternatively serve the Capybara Defendants its summons and complaint by email pursuant to Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On December 26, 2023, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, The Honorable Jed. S. Rakoff, entered an order granting the Company’s motion. The Company’s counsel at The Basile Law Firm, P.C. attempted to serve the Capybara Defendants by email. However, in response to the Company’s motion and the order, the Capybara Defendants undertook steps to intentionally evade proper service by deleting their respective email addresses.
Because of the evasive behavior exhibited by the Capybara Defendants, on January 8, 2024, the Company was required to file a second motion for alternative service in which the Company requested authorization to serve the Capybara Defendants through their respective X accounts, through Capybara’s website’s contact page, by newspaper publication and through a public disclosure and press release. On January 10, 2024, an order was entered granting the Company’s second motion for alternative service, ECF 24 (the “Order”).
On January 16, 2024, the Company filed a Form 8-K and press release attempting to serve the Capybara Defendants (the “January Form 8-K”). On February 6, 2024, the Company filed a Form 8-K/A (“February Form 8-K/A”) amending and rectifying an error in the upload of the Company’s complaint as Exhibit 99.3 to the January Form 8-K. Upon the filing of the February Form 8-K/A, the Capybara Defendants were provided the Constitutional requirement of actual notice of the Capybara Action pursuant to Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Pursuant to Rule 12(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Capybara Defendants’ time to appear and serve an answer to the Company’s complaint expired on February 27, 2024. On February 28, 2024, the Clerk of the Court for the Southern District of New York issued a Certificate of Default as to the Capybara Defendants.
Further, on December 29, 2023, the Company properly served Benzinga a summons and its complaint. Pursuant to Rule 12(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Benzinga’s time to appear and serve an answer to the Company’s complaint expired on January 19, 2024. On January 29, 2024, the Clerk of the Court for the Southern District of New York issued a Certificate of Default as to Benzinga. As such, all Defendants to the Action are in default.
On February 28, 2024, the Court expanded the authorization granted to the Company in the Order, permitting Plaintiff to serve notice of a motion for default judgment upon the Capybara Defendants via a Form 8-K disclosure and press release. On March 6, 2024, the Company filed an ex parte motion for default judgment against the Defendants, ECF 36 (“Motion for Default Judgment”).
On March 15, 2024, the Company will make its motion before the Court for an order granting the Company’s Motion for Default Judgment against the Defendants pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Motion for Default Judgment will be heard on March 15, 2024 at 9:00 A.M. at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, Courtroom 14B.
This press release, as well as the Form 8-K filed in tandem onto the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval system, hereby provides the Capybara Defendants with proper notice of the Company’s Motion for Default Judgment pursuant to the Order of The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff and Local Rule 55.2(c) of the District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Investor Contact:
Phone: 561-244-7100
Email: investors@drinksafetyshot.com
FAQ
What lawsuit did Safety Shot, Inc. file?
When did Safety Shot file a motion for alternative service?
When did the Capybara Defendants' time to appear and serve an answer expire?
Where will the motion for default judgment be heard?
How can investors contact Safety Shot, Inc.?
