Dale Buczkowski a/k/a Derek Moneyberg v. Spencer Cornelia

Spencer Cornelia operates a YouTube channel (here) where he, among other things, examines various kinds of online lifestyle and moneymaking “gurus” who charge often huge amounts of money for a nebulous product. In late 2020, Cornelia received requests to do a video on financial “guru” Derek Moneyberg (real name Dale Buczkowski), who also had a reputation as a dating coach for the company Real Social Dynamics. After doing some research and speaking with dating coach John Anthony (real name John Mulvehill), Cornelia interviewed Anthony about his personal experience with Moneyberg and his evidence of the dubious quality of Moneyberg’s services, including deceptive and potentially unlawful business practices. Cornelia then published a few videos incorporating this interview.

In June 2021, Moneyberg sued Cornelia for defamation and unfair competition, though he did not sue Anthony, who actually made the majority of the statements at issue, until nearly a year later. After the parties went through the discovery process, Cornelia filed a special motion to dismiss under Nevada’s Anti-SLAPP statute, NRS 41.660.

After a hard fought case, Cornelia prevailed at Summary Judgment.  However, the Order was logically inconsistent .  The judge found that Cornelia could not have possibly committed defamation with actual malice.  This means that they were not made with knowing falsity nor a reckless disregard for the truth.  Accordingly, Moneyberg’s lawsuit was thrown out.  However, under the Anti-SLAPP analysis, the judge came to an inconsistent finding – that Cornelia’s statements could might not have been made with “good faith,” which under the Anti-SLAPP law, means “true statements, or statements made without knowledge of their falsehood.”  

Moneyberg appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, wanting his case reinstated.  (link) 

Cornelia cross-appealed, (link) trying to get the inconsistent decision on the Anti-SLAPP reversed. 

Moneyberg responded to that with his reply.  (link) 

And with the final word, we replied.  (link)

If you review the documents, you can see that Moneyberg’s arguments are desperate, confusing, inconsistent, and lack any real coherence.  But in a SLAPP suit, a well-funded plaintiff can convince some lawyer to make embarrassing representations.  After all, lawyers don’t usually work for free.  But fortunately in this case, the courts saw through the smoke and mirrors and free speech prevailed.  

The 9th Circuit held oral argument on December 9, 2025, and video is below.  

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed our win against Buckzkowski and he sought rehearing, which was summarily denied.  

Our client’s free speech rights were resoundingly affirmed.  

However, there was a twist.  The Ninth Circuit initially missed the fact that the Anti-SLAPP law requires a fee shift.  And we moved for rehearing on that narrow basis (link).  Moneyberg opposed in his usual way.  (link).  We replied (link) and while convincing a court to change its mind is not easy, we managed to do so.  (link)  

On reconsideration, the Ninth Circuit not only affirmed our client’s free speech rights, but overturned the lower court’s decision on the Anti-SLAPP law.  The lower court held that whole our client won on summary judgment, the Anti-SLAPP law did not apply.  The Ninth Circuit reversed that, clearing the way for our client to receive an award of attorneys fees and costs incurred in the defense.  (link) 

And… like a B-Movie Zombie, “Moneyberg” rises up and stumbles forward to try and get the mandate stayed. (link)  We opposed it, but we were willing to agree if he posted a bond for the fees he seems likely to have to pay.  (link)

See Lowkick MMA – BJJ Black Belt Derek Moneyberg Loses Five-Year Lawsuit Against YouTuber Spencer Cornelia (link)