The Unknown Podcast - Attorney Bruce Matzkin and What The Hale$

The Unknown Podcast – Episode 23: The “Bad Neighbors” Case and the Fight Against Frivolous Lawsuits
In this riveting episode of The Unknown Podcast, hosts Michael Volpe and Richard Luthmann sit down with attorney Bruce Matzkin to discuss one of the most controversial legal battles currently playing out on YouTube—the case of Jeremy Hales v. Preston & Cook. What began as a neighborhood dispute in Otter Creek, Florida, has exploded into a high-profile lawsuit that has gripped social media, exposed the tactics of internet personalities, and raised serious questions about legal abuse in the digital age.

The Players in the Drama
The case involves YouTube personality Jeremy Hales, who runs the popular channel “What The Hale$”, which has nearly a million subscribers. Hales built his following by producing treasure-hunting and storage auction videos but recently shifted to drama content about his so-called “bad neighbors.”

His neighbors, Lynette Michelle Lacey Alexis Preston and John Cook, became the targets of his videos after moving in across the street from his Florida property. The case escalated when Hales accused them of harassment, defamation, and extortion, claiming that they put up signs falsely labeling him a rapist​
.

Bruce Matzkin Steps In
Attorney Bruce Matzkin represents Preston and Cook. He argues that Hales’ lawsuit is nothing more than a weaponized legal attack, designed to cripple his clients financially while boosting Hales’ YouTube engagement​
.

Matzkin describes how Hales’ legal claims have already been partially dismantled, with a judge dismissing the extortion claims while allowing defamation and tortious interference claims to proceed​
. The real fight, according to Matzkin, is not just about legal technicalities but about exposing how online personalities use lawsuits as content generation tools.

The Origins of the Lawsuit
The Signs That Sparked the Fire
According to Hales’ complaint, the dispute began in May 2023, when handwritten signs accusing him of being a rapist appeared around Otter Creek​
.

However, Matzkin challenges the authenticity of the evidence, raising several key points:

No immediate photographs of the signs exist, despite Hales’ associates claiming they found them early in the morning.
A handwriting expert has concluded that the signs were likely written by Hales himself, rather than by Preston or Cook​
.
Hales used the signs to secure a protective order in Ohio, even though the signs allegedly appeared only in Florida​
.
Matzkin believes that Hales staged the incident to manufacture drama, turning a minor dispute into a full-scale social media spectacle.

The Bad Neighbors Narrative
After the signs incident, Hales ramped up his attacks, releasing a series of videos on his YouTube channel depicting Preston and Cook as dangerous criminals.

He alleged that they moved across the street solely to harass him.
He accused them of extortion, claiming they tried to blackmail him into giving them financial benefits​
.
He encouraged his fans to take sides, leading to a flood of online harassment against Preston and Cook​
.
However, the court did not find enough evidence to support the extortion claims, and the judge dismissed those counts​
.

The Legal Battle: A Frivolous Lawsuit?
Weaponizing the Courts for Content
One of the most explosive revelations in the interview is Hales’ alleged motive for the lawsuit.

According to Matzkin, Hales admitted in a YouTube livestream that:

“When I sue in court, a lawsuit isn’t to win. The lawsuit is to bankrupt my opponent, to cost them financial burden.”

Matzkin argues that this is textbook legal abuse—where lawsuits are filed not to seek justice but to harass and financially exhaust opponents​
.

Challenges in the Case
Matzkin and his legal team have raised several critical defenses:

Defamation Requires Publication

Matzkin points out that there is no proof that anyone besides Hales’ associates ever saw the signs​
.
Without clear evidence of publication, the defamation claim becomes shaky.
Tortious Interference? Or Free Speech?

Hales claims Preston and Cook “interfered” with his YouTube business by posting negative content about him.
However, Hales’ business is literally built on YouTube drama, and his own content has repeatedly discussed the case, likely increasing his revenue​
.
The Residency Question

Matzkin filed a 12(b)(1) motion, challenging whether Hales truly resides in Ohio, as he spends significant time in Florida.
If Hales is actually a Florida resident, then the lawsuit loses federal jurisdiction​
.
YouTube’s Role in Modern Legal Warfare
A broader theme of the interview is how YouTube influencers exploit lawsuits for content.

Hales monetized nearly every aspect of the legal case, producing multiple videos about it.
Other YouTubers, including Larry Foreman (“The DUI Guy”) and Megan Fox, have amplified the story, often portraying Preston and Cook in a negative light​
.
Litigation is becoming entertainment, with legal conflicts turned into YouTube sagas that generate ad revenue.
Matzkin warns that this trend is dangerous, as it turns real people’s lives into clickbait.

The Future of the Case
As the episode concludes, Matzkin lays out his next moves:

Motion for Summary Judgment
Arguing that Hales’ defamation claims lack evidence​
.
Motion for Sanctions
Accusing Hales of bringing a frivolous lawsuit to harass his clients​
.
Potential Countersuit
Preston and Cook may file a lawsuit against Hales for cyberstalking and harassment, using federal anti-cyberstalking laws (18 USC § 2261A)​
.
Luthmann and Volpe agree that this case could set a precedent for how courts handle YouTube-driven lawsuits in the future.

Final Thoughts: A Case That Defines Internet Law?
Matzkin calls the Hales v. Preston & Cook case a defining legal battle of the digital age:

It tests the limits of free speech on social media.
It highlights how influencers use lawsuits as business strategies.
It exposes how litigation can be weaponized for harassment.
As The Unknown Podcast continues to cover this evolving case, listeners are left wondering:
Will courts recognize and punish the abuse of legal systems for content creation, or will influencers continue using lawsuits as their next viral stunt?