I went back and edited the post, you’re absolutely right about that. Wasn’t intended as name dropping, I just wasn’t thinking clearly. It was absolutely a mistake on my part.
5 Likes
Personal injury cases are on contingency but not other civil cases.
5 Likes
Lapse in judgement. I’m going back through to edit the posts.
2 Likes
Passover is pretty important as well
7 Likes
Interesting. Thanks for better informing me 
1 Like
which probably has since changes as well
1 Like
That is interesting.
3 Likes
Is this considered personal injury? How does one distinguish between a personal injury and something else when it is like this?
2 Likes
Good morning. I just looked at the original pleading again, and this is definitely a personal injury case. LK is claiming injuries and damages caused by the actions and/or negligence of the defendants. Meanwhile, MB a is counterclaiming his damages and injuries were caused by actions of LK.
Other civil cases can include stuff like family law, evictions, other real estate stuff, copyright infringement, probate, etc…
Re: the other question about starting out as contingency and then moving to fees: (I am not a lawyer) I have worked with lawyers who have contingency retainer language that includes stuff about excessive expenses for experts and discovery. And I have seen, on a few occasions, an attorney gets a good look at initial discovery, determine that the case has a snowball’s chance in hell of succeeding, and try to get client to drop. And when said client refuses, that’s when lawyer will pull out that retainer agreement and say, ok, you need to put up money for xyz if you want me to make a case.
My gut tells me the plaintiff’s attorney in this suit is in it for the tv appearances as much as anything (so he can call another jury insane, maybe).
I am watching the filings to see what happens, because there’s that May 22 date when discovery is supposed to commence again, but MB has his next court appearance on May 17, and participating in discovery and participating in treatment, in my mind at least, are kind of at odds.
13 Likes
Good lord, if he had kept digging, he might have found another 19,000 pages!
7 Likes
I may be misunderstanding what is involved in “discovery”, but can you elaborate on this idea, that it may be at odds with his treatment?
If you mean it could be traumatizing to review everything again, well I wonder couldn’t it also serve as a form of therapy, in that going back over everything is done with a counselor involved who helps him use it to reconcile what happened, why, and how to think about it?
.
4 Likes
I’m assuming deeper diving has been done however, in preparation for the civil suit?
3 Likes
If LK’s legal team pushes for deposing him, making him relive this whole nightmare under their (hostile) questioning, in her presence, for example that would be far different than working through it in a therapy setting. It just, to me, feels icky for lack of a better word. We’re talking about an attorney who went on Court TV after the verdict and said he was faking, and perpetuated a fraud on the court. He’s going to be ruthless questioning MB.
11 Likes
Civil attorneys can be brutally ruthless.
8 Likes
Absolutely. I think it’s safe to assume Mr D will be equally ruthless questioning LK in a deposition.
14 Likes
No doubt about it.
6 Likes
Seem to me that an attorney who would publicly describe a jury as “insane” for reaching a particular verdict would not be viewed with much favor by the Bar or judicial ethics commissions. And wouldn’t that therefore raise the bar a bit for said attorney’s future courtroom endeavors? IOW, if a judge knew an attorney had contempt for the jury system (and therefore the U.S. legal system in general), wouldn’t said judge not be too inclined to look with favor upon that attorney if deciding on a case for said attorney? (I am thinking of the way Taylor seemed to indicate a certain bias against Bilinkas - and yeah, I guess judges are supposed to be impartial, but Taylor certainly didn’t appear that way.)
Edited because I want to make it clear that Bilinkas in no way impugned the jury system like Mr. (forgot his name) did.
10 Likes
LK’s freedom isn’t resting on mental health experts telling the court she’s not a danger to herself or others. I mean, her ability to withstand Mr D’s questioning could be fatal to her civil suit, but it’s not going to cause a setback that keeps her in the system, so to speak. That’s my concern with MB, and why I could see another delay in discovery.
13 Likes
In the courtroom, sure. I can see those comments playing in the mind of a judge. But in a deposition there’s no judge. Just the parties, their lawyers, and a court reporter/recorder to memorialize the deposition. The lawyers can object to questions for the record, but unless they do something super egregious, there’s no judge to rule on it, and nothing to stop it.
5 Likes
Couldn’t other parties be questioned first? Plus can he be ordered to show up for a deposition if he is still waiting to be transferred or has been transferred?
3 Likes
