No doubt Team CR will resist that to the last breath … but oh boy, wouldn’t that be fun! IF we and the public gets to learn all that was said - not much chance of that, is there.
1 Like
Given all the transaction info CR team asked for in their interogatories (relative to AT’s other purchases/sales) I’d guess that AT’s lawyers could request info on CR sales transactions with valid reason. Not a lawyer here, but looking for trends and practices I believe.
2 Likes
^^^ Agreed. I think both sides can pretty much ask for anything during the discovery phase… The other side can protest to the judge then about why they shouldn’t have to disclose something, then the judge makes a ruling one way or the other. I think the judge still manages the discovery phase… even if it proceeds to a jury trial. I might be wrong though.
If one side casts a wide net and requests all sorts of extraneous stuff, the other side can as well. However… both sides will then endure extra legal expenses. Given that AT is a lawyer in real life, I would imagine she will be savvy about the whole discovery process, the tactics both sides use, and the risk of incurring ridiculous bills if you push too far.
1 Like
And that leads one to wonder if part of the discovery process is intended to be punitive. Elevating the time, inconvenience and especially the legal bills. Trying to out-chicken the other side.
Could it become a war of deep pockets, for the legal costs to continue the fight? Who would win? Especially considering that either or both sides may have outside help with the bills.
I am guessing that none of the attorneys are working on contingency - or maybe they are. AT may be an attorney but from what is posted here, she has outside representation. If AT wins, it could be quite a recovery amount.
1 Like
Discovery can be an exercise in intimidation - but only if the opposition can be intimidated. You ask for all this stuff to suggest that you know something compromising about it.
7 Likes
Wouldn’t that be dependent on the judge? If Alice Tarjan were to prevail in court, from what other’s have said she wouldn’t necessarily get the full amount she asks for.
With that said, are their guidelines that judges use to determine the award amount based on a percentage of what was in the original lawsuit? If Tarjan asked for a total of $4M over multiple counts(what was it, $500k per count), does she get the full amount for each count? Or can the judge decide to award a lesser amount?
I would imagine if AT wins, she would also win legal expenses as part of her damages.
She’s smart to have outside counsel. There’s an old saying, “Only a fool hires himself as a lawyer.”
3 Likes
She asked for a jury trial, so if it goes to trial, a judge won’t be deciding the award amount.
1 Like
But the judge can still reduce it, at his/her discretion.
As for the interrogatories, one can cast a really wide net, but what’s admissible in court is a different story entirely. Even if the discovery turned up pretty solid evidence that CR has done this before, it’s probably not coming in in this case.
1 Like
Yep that’s what I was coming to write. Prejudicial…
Sucks though when you’re on the defense (paralegal) of a not so nice guy (yes yes I know representing should mean we want them to get off, but seriously justice would be nice), know he’s done the same thing to three other people, and none of it is admissible on the merrits. Though I’m primarily familiar with military criminal court which can have some wonky discovery rules.
1 Like
Here’s a question for actual lawyers (I was simply clerical help)… If AT and her lawyers stumble upon multiple other problematic sales during the discovery phase, and those sales are deemed irrelevant and never brought to bear on her case… Is AT ethically bound as an officer of the court to hold that information in confidence? Or could she inform other people that they should be asking questions about their dealings with CR and pursuing their own action? The dressage world at that level is not exactly a huge community… My guess is AT would have preexisting relationships /friendships/contacts with many of CRs other clients past and present.
2 Likes
Not a legal expert at all - a question for those more in the know than I: would it be possible to submit paperwork of prior (unrelated) transactions under the argument that it establishes a common business practice/pattern of behaviour? Or would it still be inadmissible?
1 Like
Nope, I think it would still be inadmissible. Evidence of prior bad acts is inadmissible to show a propensity for that kind of behavior. So even if this lawsuit uncovered evidence that CR had done this before, AT’s attorneys can’t use that evidence to show that she is the kind of person who does this to clients. And for evidence of a routine practice to be admissible, it needs to be predictive conduct - basically, something that is so regular/routine (done almost unthinkingly) that it becomes habit. So that doesn’t fit here either.
2 Likes
Absent a gag order from the court, AT can tell her friends whatever she wants. The fact that she herself is an attorney is immaterial here. Her lawyers can’t go and tell their friends “here’s why you should never buy a horse from CR,” but AT isn’t bound by any confidentiality here.
1 Like
You know, this was really a flip deal, not a commission sale … except that CR failed to take the crucial step of taking ownership herself before the sale to the next party. Sloppy.
Maybe the discovery of the details of other deals is part of the intimidation tactic as well … Team AT primes Team CR to ask for boxes and boxes of discovery, which of course Team CR will do, with Team AT in happy expectation of being able to do the same right back. And then AT has the goods on CR’s business practices and on specific transactions. Maybe the whole point is that AT intends to share what she learns with parties who will be outraged, and there is a cascade of further troubles for CR.
All kinds of wormholes for CR to anticipate. Maybe CR begins to think twice about how to get out of this with as much skin, business and career still intact as possible? Maybe it’s no longer about the $600k uplift, money that can be spent at the speed of light, maybe it suddenly becomes more about the long-term future in the business with may future generous commissions and flip profits?
Although in the end, let’s face it, in that elevated market with very little legal accountability, people couldn’t care less about ethics. They want the best price on a quick sale, or else the best horse, and they will forgive any past misdeeds if they think they are getting it. They don’t see the seller’s $300k proceeds, they see the $900k price tag and figure “Awesome! CR can get that for my horse, too!” My guess is that CR’s business may actually increase with this ‘negative’ publicity.
1 Like
I have asked the questions several times here. Does the federation even care about these issues and if found guilty, would they or could they bring sanctions. The insurance fraud scandal certainly resulted in some changes and lifetime bannings
But the insurance fraud involved killing horses, yes ?
USEF has welfare rules, I don’t think they have rules relating to sales of horses.
1 Like
If our equestrian associations don’t have a provision for expelling convicted felons, IMHO they should. Reductio ad absurdum (that was just for the legal eagles in the reading audience) should a convicted murderer be allowed to be a member in good standing in the USEF, USDA or any of the other equestrian organizations? How about a child molester? Again, I specify convicted. The ground gets murky when you shift to accused and settled out of court situations, or accused and never went beyond that, or many rumors but no official action.
1 Like
Sports governing bodies regularly suspend and ban participants for their actions off the field (or out of the ring in this case), I don’t see why this should be any different IMO.
