Would this civil court DDoS scheme work?

[RIGHT]DDoS: Distributed Denial of Service. What happens when a large number of machines attempt to connect to a single machine (or much smaller group of machines) within a very short timeframe.

See also: Death by a thousand cuts.[/RIGHT]

The Brotherhood Of Zips and Others loses a court case and its leadership is found to have been criminally negligent in a number of cases relating to dead followers in cheap motel rooms. The same judge heard a number of the cases and handed down harsh penalties, always with some speechifying from the bench. The BOZOs didn’t like that, and thought I’m gonna get that boy.

A short time after the last case is buttoned up, the judge gets sued for violating the civil rights of a specific person whose religion he insulted. He isn’t being sued by the leadership; he’s being sued by one of the thousand-plus rank-and-file BOZOs (they franchised across the country). Then he’s sued again for the same reason. And again. And again. Et seq. Et seq. Et seq. Et seq.

Given that this isn’t multiple actions by the same person, and every single litigant except one would deny it is one action involving a huge number of people, is there any way to make the mosquitoes stop drawing blood?

Isn’t that something along the lines of how $cientology operated, or were they just filing never-ending different lawsuits against their critics?

What is to stop the court from recognizing what’s going on and just rejecting all those suits as frivolous? It won’t take some clerk long to stamp “DENIED” on all those attempted suits - the fact that someone submits some paperwork doesn’t necessarily mean that they actually get their day (or two, three, etc) in court, does it?

That’s my question right there, really: Assuming it’s one suit per person against this judge, what kind of legal switch would have to be tripped to deny the new potential litigants the ability to bring their new suits against this person into a court of law?

The first case would be tossed on summary judgement for some reason - most likely a judge cannot be sued for simply doing his duty. Any subsequent cases - initially put on hold until the first case is finished - would then be tossed by precedent. Appeal and you get an appeal court ironcald precedent.

I’m sure the cases would be tossed on their lack of merits once they were brought before a judge. My whole point here is that bringing thousands upon thousands of these baseless suits against one person is an effective harassment if he has to defend himself against every single one.

I would think lack of standing is also in play