Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat

Finally, the court has ruled on all the pending motions.

Will continue to update here.

11152022 Rulings on Motions.pdf (596.3 KB)

11152022 Order for Schell to produce forensics .pdf (415.1 KB)

Interesting.

The background stated by the judge in the civil case states that the matter arises out of a criminal case, and the judge summarizes the outcome of the criminal case as having found that LK was shot multiple times at point blank range, with a verdict that Barisone was “found guilty of attempted murder” but “not criminally responsible due to insanity”.

@ekat and @lazaret, since both of you have taken the position that nothing in the criminal trial carries over to the civil case, and insisted that of course Barisone’s defense lawyers would relitigate whether he shot her, can you comment on this?

Will the defense lawyers immediately file motions saying what you’ve been saying: “No, no, no! Nothing in the criminal trial carries over! There is absolutely no evidence that he shot her! The plaintiff must prove that Barisone shot her! We have all sorts of additional evidence that the bad judge in the criminal trial did not allow!”

It was my prediction before and my prediction now that the issue of whether “he shot her” will not be relitigated. Are you still predicting that it will be relitigated?

@Knights_Mom Did you see the judge summarizing the background as Barisone having been found “guilty” of attempted murder, although not criminally responsible due to insanity?

Good news, ladies. I think we can stop the back on forth on that one! The judge has spoken! Whew.

As always, IANAL.

The judge is WRONG as that verdict does not exist in NJ. I am sure this will be corrected. Positive in fact.

Judges are wrong all the time. I know because I’ve corrected many errors on their part.

I assure you that the instant I read it, I knew it was an error on the judges part, just like the judge writing shots were fired at RG by MB where that verdict was NOT GUILTY.

So maybe you should hold off on your happy balloon order from Party City.

[Rel6]

If LK had filed after July 2021, MB would not have been able to assert any time-barred claims as counter claims. So yes, if she had waited over a year to file he would not have been able to assert that claim. The risk to her is that some of her claims may also have been barred - I don’t know the statute of limitations on what she is asserting.

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom

The judge is WRONG as that verdict does not exist in NJ. I am sure this will be corrected. Positive in fact.

Judges are wrong all the time. I know because I’ve corrected many errors on their part.

I assure you that the instant I read it, I knew it was an error on the judges part, just like the judge writing shots were fired at RG by MB where that verdict was NOT GUILTY.

So maybe you should hold off on your happy balloon order from Party City.

The judge was also wrong in the location I posted a screen shot of above, that "Plaintiff’s Mother argues that Defendant Barisone’s subpoena is overly broad… ".
Kirby Kanarek has filed NOTHING in response to her subpoena. And since has no lawyer representing her, no one has filed anything on her behalf. Lauren’s lawyer, on behalf of Lauren said the subpoena was over broad.
So clearly the law clerk for this judge is quite sloppy in many places.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat

Finally, the court has ruled on all the pending motions.

Will continue to update here.

11152022 Rulings on Motions.pdf (596.3 KB)

11152022 Order for Schell to produce forensics .pdf (415.1 KB)

Interesting.

The background stated by the judge in the civil case states that the matter arises out of a criminal case, and the judge summarizes the outcome of the criminal case as having found that LK was shot multiple times at point blank range, with a verdict that Barisone was “found guilty of attempted murder” but “not criminally responsible due to insanity”.

@ekat and @lazaret, since both of you have taken the position that nothing in the criminal trial carries over to the civil case, and insisted that of course Barisone’s defense lawyers would relitigate whether he shot her, can you comment on this?

Will the defense lawyers immediately file motions saying what you’ve been saying: “No, no, no! Nothing in the criminal trial carries over! There is absolutely no evidence that he shot her! The plaintiff must prove that Barisone shot her! We have all sorts of additional evidence that the bad judge in the criminal trial did not allow!”

It was my prediction before and my prediction now that the issue of whether “he shot her” will not be relitigated. Are you still predicting that it will be relitigated?

@Knights_Mom Did you see the judge summarizing the background as Barisone having been found “guilty” of attempted murder, although not criminally responsible due to insanity?

Good news, ladies. I think we can stop the back on forth on that one! The judge has spoken! Whew.

As always, IANAL.

The judge is WRONG as that verdict does not exist in NJ. I am sure this will be corrected. Positive in fact.

Judges are wrong all the time. I know because I’ve corrected many errors on their part.

I assure you that the instant I read it, I knew it was an error on the judges part, just like the judge writing shots were fired at RG by MB where that verdict was NOT GUILTY.

So maybe you should hold off on your happy balloon order from Party City.

Interesting.

It’s gratifying that you pronounce that the judge is wrong just the way you say I’m wrong.

Wake me up when the judge issues his correction.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat

Finally, the court has ruled on all the pending motions.

Will continue to update here.

11152022 Rulings on Motions.pdf (596.3 KB)

11152022 Order for Schell to produce forensics .pdf (415.1 KB)

Interesting.

The background stated by the judge in the civil case states that the matter arises out of a criminal case, and the judge summarizes the outcome of the criminal case as having found that LK was shot multiple times at point blank range, with a verdict that Barisone was “found guilty of attempted murder” but “not criminally responsible due to insanity”.

@ekat and @lazaret, since both of you have taken the position that nothing in the criminal trial carries over to the civil case, and insisted that of course Barisone’s defense lawyers would relitigate whether he shot her, can you comment on this?

Will the defense lawyers immediately file motions saying what you’ve been saying: “No, no, no! Nothing in the criminal trial carries over! There is absolutely no evidence that he shot her! The plaintiff must prove that Barisone shot her! We have all sorts of additional evidence that the bad judge in the criminal trial did not allow!”

It was my prediction before and my prediction now that the issue of whether “he shot her” will not be relitigated. Are you still predicting that it will be relitigated?

@Knights_Mom Did you see the judge summarizing the background as Barisone having been found “guilty” of attempted murder, although not criminally responsible due to insanity?

Good news, ladies. I think we can stop the back on forth on that one! The judge has spoken! Whew.

As always, IANAL.

The judge is WRONG as that verdict does not exist in NJ. I am sure this will be corrected. Positive in fact.

Judges are wrong all the time. I know because I’ve corrected many errors on their part.

I assure you that the instant I read it, I knew it was an error on the judges part, just like the judge writing shots were fired at RG by MB where that verdict was NOT GUILTY.

So maybe you should hold off on your happy balloon order from Party City.

Interesting.

It’s gratifying that you pronounce that the judge is wrong just the way you say I’m wrong.

Wake me up when the judge issues his correction.

Wake you up? Nah. I’ll just gloat.

[Rel6]

Genuine question - is there any chance the issue of whether MB shot LK gets issue precluded from being re-litigated? I have been assuming not given the civil/criminal and state difference, but now am curious. I’ve dealt with collateral estoppel before but this context is so weird.

[Knights_Mom]

@Rel6

Genuine question - is there any chance the issue of whether MB shot LK gets issue precluded from being re-litigated? I have been assuming not given the civil/criminal and state difference, but now am curious. I’ve dealt with collateral estoppel before but this context is so weird.

Honestly, I’m not sure. A trial litigator needs to chime in. But even then the law has enough wiggle room where it’s possible it can go either way. It’s a matter of convincing the judge it should or it shouldn’t using any applicable past case law.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

Wake you up? Nah. I’ll just gloat.

If it ever happens, I’m sure you would.

Ain’t gonna happen.

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

[Rel6]

Yes, absolutely. I’ll follow closely if someone makes the argument because I’m curious how that plays out now.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@Rel6

Genuine question - is there any chance the issue of whether MB shot LK gets issue precluded from being re-litigated? I have been assuming not given the civil/criminal and state difference, but now am curious. I’ve dealt with collateral estoppel before but this context is so weird.

Honestly, I’m not sure. A trial litigator needs to chime in. But even then the law has enough wiggle room where it’s possible it can go either way. It’s a matter of convincing the judge it should or it shouldn’t using any applicable past case law.

Both @ekat and @lazaret have “chimed in” on this issue, saying collateral estoppel does not apply here.

[Angela_Freda]

@Rel6

It adds another thing MB is alleging against LK. So he is now alleging she also violated NJ’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. I don’t remember all the original causes of action he alleged in the complaint, but this adds another.

Basically - if before he alleged 2 causes of actions (or legal theories for why she is liable to him), now he is alleging 3

But if, in the course of discovery, you learned this, even after statute of limitation had been reached… Seems ya can’t pursue something until you know about it… and he’s been incarcerated or in a mental institution those whole time, making that kinda challenging…

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Wake you up? Nah. I’ll just gloat.

If it ever happens, I’m sure you would.

Ain’t gonna happen.

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

You are welcome to do that.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

Should I cite the Judgement of Acquittal form? I think it is more legally binding than this document you are puffing your chest about. Or are you just ignoring that?

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

Should I cite the Judgement of Acquittal form? I think it is more legally binding than this document you are puffing your chest about. Or are you just ignoring that?

Sssshhhh don’t blow their buzz, man!

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom

Sssshhhh don’t blow their buzz, man!

Oops, sorry!

[Rel6]

Sure, there are arguments you can make about why the claim should be allowed even though it was time-barred. A claim being newly discovered is one of them.

[Knights_Mom]

@Rel6

Sure, there are arguments you can make about why the claim should be allowed even though it was time-barred. A claim being newly discovered is one of them.

Absolutely.

[Angela_Freda]

Thanks

[Sdel]

So, @lazaret or other legal types….

This early in the case, actual evidence isn’t being presented…correct? The judge hasn’t actually seen the substance to back up any individual claim or what happened at any given point in the timeline, yes? And whatever evidence he has seen it has only been evaluated under the lens of if it indicates discovery is warranted, corrrect? And he probably has not actually watched the criminal trial because it could induce bias, correct?

So, if that is the case, then the “background” language cobbled from one parties biased view of the case, doesn’t necessarily indicate any particular point of view from this judge at this time.

Another question, is anything appealable based lack of proper notice/representation/ex parte induced bias etc?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

Should I cite the Judgement of Acquittal form? I think it is more legally binding than this document you are puffing your chest about. Or are you just ignoring that?

I am aware and have never disputed that NGRI is an acquittal. It’s an acquittal based on the “not criminally responsible for his conduct due to insanity” part of the NGRI verdict.

@Knights_Mom has asserted that the judge is “wrong”, just like she has asserted Hut-Ho and I’ve been wrong on this. That’s what I’m puffing my chest about.

I have not heard back from @Ekat and @lazaret on whether they are still sure the issue of whether Barisone shot her will be relitigated, given what the judge has stipulated as the background of the civil case. .