Barisone/Kanarek Legal Filings (Public Record)

Yes, it’s me again, starting a new thread about LK and MB. I was told about a post on Dressage Hub’s FB page yesterday and was intrigued about what she posted. So, I looked at the website she referenced and was amazed at all the information there, especially court case #LCV2020530535, which has many accusations against LK. Many of the recent filings are from LK’s legal team requesting all of MB’s assets be frozen or placed in a trust so he can’t sell anything. You’ll need to read the documents your self to see all the twists and turns but in a nutshell, LK didn’t provide any evidence to satisfy her case, and it was denied today (last entry posted below in this post).

Here is the link to the NJ Court website listing all the documents: https://portal.njcourts.gov/webcivil…046F-_x9GhQvAU No login required. Search “Civil Cases” by Barisone, Michael, which will take you to a page with one item listed. Click on the blue docket and you will be taken to the entire list of documents.

ORDER THIS MATTER having been brought to the Court by Order to Show Cause application made by the plaintiff, LAUREN KANAREK (“Plaintiff”), on notice to all parties, seeking preliminary relief in the form of (a) an Order appointing a special financial agent to ensure that the assets of defendant MICHAEL BARISONE (“Barisone”) are not dissipated pending the outcome of this litigation, (b) enjoining Barisone from transferring assets absent permission from the courtappointed special fiscal agent, and © granting such other relief as may be deemed equitable and just (the “Application”); and papers in opposition having been filed on behalf of Barisone; and the Court having held oral argument on March 20, 2020; and the Court having considered the papers submitting both in support and opposition to the application, as well as the oral arguments of counsel; and, for good cause shown, IT IS on this __ day of March, 2020, ORDERED the Application shall be and hereby is denied, without prejudice, for the reasons stated by this Court on the record; and it is further ORDERED that a true and correct copy of this Order shall be served upon all counsel of record within 7 days. ________________________________ WILLIAM J. McGOVERN III, J.S.C. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

Snippitt from LCV2020530535:

“FACTS Facts relevant to Mr. Barisone’s opposition to this application are set forth in two documents, namely: (a) Mr. Barisone’s Answer With Counterclaim filed in this action on or about March 2, 2020; and (b) my certification filed and served in opposition to the Order to Show Cause. Those documents are incorporated herein by reference. This is no ordinary case, and Ms. Kanarek is no ordinary “plaintiff.” Ms. Kanarek has a significant criminal history (including criminal assault), a history of drug use, a history of stalking, harassing, and threatening violence against people with whom she is in conflict, and a history of firearms use that includes shooting at people and/or their personal property. See Counterclaim at ¶¶ 3-17, part of the ANSWER, Exhibit A to the Deininger Certification. She was living essentially as a squatter on a horse farm where Mr. Barisone operated his world-class, Olympic level, dressage equestrian training facility. Id. Through discovery provided to Mr. Barisone’s attorneys by the Morris County Prosecutor’s Office, there are 10,000s of pages of rants on social media by Ms. Kanarek through which she harassed and even threatened harm against people, including Mr. Barisone and the people in his employ and care on the horse farm. Indeed, there are in excess of forty (40) CD/DVD disks of materials if social media postings, text messages, interviews, Kanarek medical records (including, I am advised, records supportive of Mr. Barisone’s defense and counterclaims), and the like, through which Mr. Barisone will defend against Ms. Kanarek’s claims here and through which Mr. Barisone will pursue his counterclaims against Ms. Kanarek. The counterclaim allegations tell the story of how Ms. Kanarek stalked, harassed and threatened Mr. Barisone, intentionally inflicting upon him emotional harm and distress of such magnitude that she cause the incident to occur. See Counterclaim at ¶¶ 3-17, part of the ANSWER, Exhibit A to the Deininger Certification. The counterclaim allegations assert that this was part of an established pattern of conduct by Ms. Kanarek against people she wanted to manipulate and/or destroy. Id. The pleadings now before this Court demonstrate that the material facts are in dispute, and in dispute for good and material reasons.”

20 Likes

Wow!

I can’t access those documents because I have an older computer.

Appreciate your posting the info!!

6 Likes

Can someone please let me know when the movie comes out on Netflix, please?

32 Likes

More from another file:

“2. Upon information and belief, Kanarek is not a resident of Morris County, New Jersey but, rather, lives a transient lifestyle in which she resides in many locations including, but not limited to , from time to time, Morris County, New Jersey. 3. Kanarek has a criminal history which, upon information and belief, includes a charge and/or conviction for criminal assault. 4. Kanarek has a history of illegal drug use including, upon information and belief, heroin. 5. Kanarek has a history of tortious and/or criminal, antisocial behavior, including but not limited to stalking; bullying; threats of harm, injury, and mayhem against persons she chooses to target; threats against public figures; gaslighting; fraud; false reports; and other behaviors which are harmful, injurious, and destructive to the people she victimizes. 6. Upon information and belief, there is a dozen or more families, persons and businesses in the United States who were victimized by Kanarek through abuse, stalking, crime, and/or other forms of serious abuse, prior to August 2019 when Kanarek turned her sights upon Barisone. 7. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek was and remains a significant user of various forms of social media including Facebook through which, upon information and belief, Kanarek has more than 10,000 Facebook “Friends,” messenger communication contacts, chats, and like online activities (collective, whether on Facebook and/or other platforms, “Facebook”). 8. For purposes of causing personal injury to Barisone, his business, injury to his good name and reputation, and/or injury to the like interests of Barisone’s girlfriend and other people close to Barisone (collectively, the “Barisone Family”), Kanarek perpetrated a campaign against Barisone and the Barisone Family, which included, without limitation, Kanarek’s utilization of Facebook to publish, promote, and disseminate statements, accusations, and falsehoods that were explicitly threatening; explicitly and/or implicitly threatening injury and violence; causing the subject to be stalked; causing the subject to be bullied; harmful; deceptive; deceitful; false; causing the subject serious and severe emotional pain and distress; harming the subject’s good name and/or reputation; causing the subject to be “destroyed”; harming the subject’s family and friends; and/or that otherwise were grossly inappropriate, harmful, and/or injurious. 9. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek’s purpose was to cause injury, pain, distress, and upset of a severe and significant nature. 10. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek’s acts, actions and omissions were perpetrated maliciously, intentionally, recklessly and/or negligently. 11. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek’s wrongful acts, actions, and omissions included, for example, making false accusation of child abuse, false accusations of animal abuse, false accusation of insurance fraud, false reports to agencies providing child-protective-services, and other falsehoods through which her intention was to cause harm. 12. For example, Kanarek harassed Barisone by utilizing technology to “bug” (i.e., unlawfully eves drop) upon private conversation Barisone was having; and/or, alternatively, harassed Barisone for purposes of causing him severe and significant emotional distress by claiming that she had unlawful eves-dropping of Barisone’s residence and/or business for purposes of stalking him and Barisone Family members. 13. As another example, Kanarek threatened physical violence and harm by and through her internet posting that her “weapons [were] hot” (a phrase indicating that she had a firearm, loaded with ammunition, and its chamber hot) and she was coming for Barisone and/or Barisone Family members. 14. At the time she made that threat, Kanarek was known to be familiar with firearms, to have claimed and/or actual access to a firearm, and to have used a firearm in the past for purposes of shot at her boyfriend and/or his motorcycle while she was in a fit of rage. 15. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek had a duty to Barisone and the Barisone Family members to refrain from stalking, harming, harassing, threatening, threatening-with-violence, demeaning, injuring, and/or damaging the persons Kanarek was victimizing (including, most notably, Barisone). 16. At all times relevant hereto, Kanarek materially breach her duty(ies) to Barisone and the Barisone Family members, through the acts, actions, and omissions referenced above. 17. As a direct and proximate result and consequence of Kanarek’s wrongful acts, actions, and omissions, Kanarek cause injury to Barisone including but not limited to: (a) placing him in fear for his life and physical wellbeing; (b) placing him in fear for the lives and physical wellbeing of Barisone Family members; © placing him in fear for the lives and physical wellbeing of Barisone’s business staff, clients and the horses owned and/or boarded by Barisone at his dressage farm; (d) emotional distress, including emotional distress with physical manifestations; (f) traumatic stress; (f) emotional breakdown; (g) post-traumatic stress; (h) battered-person-syndrome; (i) psychiatric ailments and eventual breakdown; (j) destruction of his state of mental peace, tranquility, enjoyment and stability; (k) injury to his business; (l) injury mental state; (m) unlawful invasion of his privacy; (n) property damage; (o) irreparable harm; § financial harm; (q) physical harm; and ® other injuries.”

Above from LCV2020428787

23 Likes

Interesting that she shot at her boyfriend on his motorcycle in a fit of rage according to the papers. Also of note, the heroin abuse. I thought something was off looking at her last newspaper pic. Functional abusers are full of surprises and covers like shooting up between the toes or get this - I read some shoot up in the eyeballs!

That’s hardcore stuff right there. So many nasty bits of dirt. I’m so glad this didn’t happen at my barn!

Court cases can be brutal. All sorts of unintended bits of a person’s history pops out to be seen by the world.

How utterly sad. And of course, no one deserves to be shot.

27 Likes

so for those who don’t want to read all that ^^^^
what does it say?

1 Like

On this thread, post #5 gives the most insight. It is worth the read…basically what others have said on these threads all this time but maybe a bit more forcefully.

11 Likes

That’s a whole lot of accusations there.

The counterclaim allegations tell the story of how Ms. Kanarek stalked, harassed and threatened Mr. Barisone, intentionally inflicting upon him emotional harm and distress of such magnitude that she cause the incident to occur.

Unless she had a loaded gun aimed at him at the time that he shot her, it still wouldn’t justify him pulling that trigger.

7 Likes

Apparently this is part of their defense:

“As a direct and proximate result and consequence of Kanarek’s wrongful acts, actions, and omissions, Kanarek cause injury to Barisone including but not limited to: (a) placing him in fear for his life and physical wellbeing; (b) placing him in fear for the lives and physical wellbeing of Barisone Family members; © placing him in fear for the lives and physical wellbeing of Barisone’s business staff, clients and the horses owned and/or boarded by Barisone at his dressage farm; (d) emotional distress, including emotional distress with physical manifestations; (f) traumatic stress; (f) emotional breakdown; (g) post-traumatic stress; (h) battered-person-syndrome; (i) psychiatric ailments and eventual breakdown; (j) destruction of his state of mental peace, tranquility, enjoyment and stability; (k) injury to his business; (l) injury mental state; (m) unlawful invasion of his privacy; (n) property damage; (o) irreparable harm; § financial harm; (q) physical harm; and ® other injuries.”

12 Likes

I read that. I think it’s a stretch considering that she didn’t do any physical harm to anyone. Yeah, I think her actions were beyond reasonable and instigated confrontation, but I don’t think it rises to the level that they’re making it out in that paragraph.

9 Likes

@Jenerationx yes, lots of legalese here but it sure shoots down her “I’m so innocent” defense.

31 Likes

I believe this is still all in the realm of civil litigation?

That would mean these accusations are being mustered to show why the judge should not grant LK’s request to freeze MB’s assets. Apparently these arguments did the job. Her request was denied.

These arguments may give us some indication of the direction of argument in the criminal trial. But the debate there may be more narrowly focused. I think you get to throw out alot more dirt in a civil litigation and see where it sticks.

Nevertheless this certainly answers one hotly debated COTH topic, which was: can cray cray social media come back to bite you? And the answer is a resounding YES!!!

36 Likes

TA

If I read this correctly, the long quote in post #1 is written by the judge who denied, without prejudice, her lawyers’ request that that court control his assets, while the quotes in posts #2 and #5 are from pleadings written by Barisone’s lawyer.

ETA The excerpt in post 1 is the order that the defense lawyer is PROPOSING as the ruling the defense wants; note that the “proposed order” is not signed by the judge.

1 Like

He probably has a civil claim, or counterclaim, against her. If she harassed and threatened him, and destroyed his good name prior to the shooting, he has every right to file a civil claim against her.

I’m a lot less inclined to believe that his filing a civil case against her for damages related to harassment is indicative of what the defense will argue in the criminal trial.

If you are horribly harassed and defamed, the appropriate remedy is to sue in civil court for damages.

If you are horribly harassed and defamed, the appropriate remedy is NOT shooting your harasser.

4 Likes

Not that I want her coming after me next - but I actually heard about the heroin thing from a friend of a friend when the shooting first happened. I’ve left that part of it out any conversations here up til now, but now that it is out there…

I’ve said before when discussing legal cases here, that I believe that many people who sue in civil court don’t realize how all of their past, including medical records may be subject to discovery. We were sued in civil court over a car accident and all of the plantiff’s medical records (and I mean ALL) were sent to our lawyer and us. There is stuff in there that I’m sure he never thought would be subject to discovery and I can never un-see.

22 Likes

Some addicts also shoot up under their nails or into their nail beds.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17117106 Summary of an intraorbital injection of heroin and what went wrong.

”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹Very sad.

2 Likes

So if he needs to sell his assets to afford his criminal defense wouldn’t that take precedence over the potential of having the assets available if she wins money from him in a civil suit?

I would think the criminal suit and the ability to use his assets to defend himself would trump the civil suit. I wonder if this varies by state. Also thinking of OJ and his criminal and civil suits.

8 Likes

This right here is why I personally was surprised that LK would have filed a civil suit before the criminal trial. With her “extensive” background in the law and her father being a lawyer, you would have thought they would have waited.

15 Likes

Well, there are “attorneys” and then there are “lawyers”. Wonder what background she has.

6 Likes