If she communicated any of what she discussed with any attorney to a non client party such as the esteemed boyfriend privilege is dissolved on the matter revealed.
Also any advice on the commission or planned commission of an illegal act is also not privileged.
Personally I think claiming privilege would be real risky here since the attorney in question doesn’t appear to have a NJ license or if he does, he’s not acted ethically in his ex parte communication so it’s not a good scenario for him.
Just to add on, they would also have to turn over anything exculpatory in their possession.
Thank you!
Just wondering…if JK is not licensed to practice in NJ, then there is nothing they can do to him for his “ex-parte” communication with Sceusi. Correct?
I mean, they can’t really sanction him or bring him up for an ethics issue before the NJ bar association, since he doesn’t belong to that bar association. So can they slap him with some other kind of charge?
And I can just seem him claiming, “Oh, gee. I’m not an attorney in your state and I didn’t know that wasn’t appropriate.” I would also not be surprised if the NJ court system did nothing more than rap his knuckles with a ruler. 
He does have a paying job. LK pays him.
When I was watching an episode of Law and Order last week, I noticed they did not identify the defendant in the courtroom by an article of his clothing. Lol.
How can a Convo with a lawyer be privileged if he’s not licensed to practice where you are or where your illegal activities or your “harm” came about?
That sounds like an uncomfortable position to be in.
any communication where you provide legal advice can be a privileged communication, even if you could not legally represent someone in a given state. There’s cases where you can be admitted pro hac vice by permission of the court on your out of state law license if it makes sense.
Even bad legal advice is still privileged, unless it falls under the exception to privilege. Or the conversation was witnessed by another person eg the person claiming privilege didn’t want it to be private before but now is claiming it should be.
So, if RG was present?
How does recording the Convo effect the idea of it being private?
But even with pro hac vice, don’t they have to be associated with a NJ attorney? NC they do.
If RG was present and the lawyer was not also representing him, then any conversation he was party to is not protected by privilege.
So, let’s assume for a second that JK was acting as LK’s attorney and not her dad, and that some expectation of privilege exists. Do you think we’ll see some kind of evidence for that soon, or will LK, through her attorney just keep randomly throwing it out there and hoping it sticks?
While they may not be able to do anything to JK legally, it sure doesn’t look good for him in a civil suit. That said, any involvement any of them had with Taylor is a serious issue since Taylor apparently did not disclose the contact. That will definitely hurt Taylor during an investigation. Add LK’s claim that he handed her his notes is entirely inappropriate since, if he did, he didn’t also give them to Bikinkas for Barisone. How LK thinks those notes will help her in a civil trial is fantasy.
Nagel may also be investigated for representing persons he has not given notice he represents.
This entire thing, from how the cops handled everything (more Kanarek influence?) until now is a giant sh$tshow the whole world will soon know about. It is beyond unethical.
Interesting thought since Lauren Kanarek has threatened to contact the IRS on others…
Do you suppose the IRS knows about RG’s income? Heck, does the IRS know about Lauren’s income?
Whoever posted a few days ago in regard to a flurry of new conspiracies got it right.
Thank you! I thought that to be the case but ianalirl.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
