MB CIVIL SUIT UPDATE #10 K’s Request to Adjourn (delay) DENIED 11/01/22

[skydy]

@ekat

Maybe the judge will feel like letting all that slide. That will definitely be interesting to see.

@ekat Do you suppose that the Judge will look kindly upon people that have ignored subpoenas and then can’t be bothered to show up in any manner, to a hearing on a motion to hold them in contempt? Do you think he’ll let that slide? If so, N.J. judges must be much more forgiving than most.

[Knights_Mom]

@skydy

@ekat

Maybe the judge will feel like letting all that slide. That will definitely be interesting to see.

@ekat Do you suppose that the Judge will look kindly upon people that have ignored subpoenas and then can’t be bothered to show up in any manner, to a hearing on a motion to hold them in contempt? Do you think he’ll let that slide? If so, N.J. judges must be much more forgiving than most.

Until we see more from this judge it’s hard to predict. While judges often rule differently from eachother, they usually rule similarly/consistently to themselves. And vaguely to eachother.

Just like horse show judges. Once you watch them in action for a bit, it’s easier to predict their preferences and triggers.

[skydy]

Yes I do understand that. However, ignoring a subpoena and a motion hearing for contempt shows a lack of respect for the law. Most judges do expect more than that. Thus my question to @ekat.

[ekat]

@skydy

Yes I do understand that. However, this is a matter of basic respect for the law, which most judges do expect. Thus my question to @ekat.

I do agree with @Knights_Mom though. Yes, there’s basic respect for the law. And I can tell you exactly how half a dozen judges I know would rule, which would not be favorable to the K’s. But, what this judge will do will I think be interesting to see, since we haven’t really had this exposure yet.

And, maybe Nagel, or O’Connor or whoever is arguing from that firm is far more skilled in oral arguments than writing briefs. That’s the other component too. We haven’t heard what they are all going to say yet.

This is why I’m really hoping we can watch.

[skydy]

The explanations by Nagel et al will be either fascinating or quite lame. It will take some extraordinary legal gymnastics to explain their filings in this case.

To me it seems that this judge goes by the book to a certain extent, at least as far as ex parte communications are concerned.

[ekat]

@skydy

The explanations by Nagel et al will be either fascinating or quite lame. It will take some extraordinary legal gymnastics to explain their filings in this case.

To me it seems that this judge goes by the book to a certain extent, at least as far as ex parte communications are concerned.

Agrees. He did go by the book there.

I can’t fathom what Nagel, et al, could say, which is the biggest reason I want to watch.

I think it’s also noteworthy that, although it was a different judge at the time, LK, the plaintiff, had to be compelled by the court to provide her interrogatories back before the court entered the stay.

In other words, she hasn’t willingly complied with discovery in any phase yet, and that history may have some impact.

[anon6923113]

@LexInVA

The Kanarek strategy has been delay, obfuscate and obscure, and non-compliance from the get-go. I have a feeling there are reasons for this, the most obvious of which is the depletion of Michael Barisone’s financial resources, which would cause his legal defense to collapse, but also to get to a point where it becomes too costly for the other players to continue with the game, driving them to payoff The Circle of Kanarek or go to the negotiation table for a settlement

This.

This this this.

[Knights_Mom]

Know that I’ve witnessed the most ridiculous statements actually prevailing in a court.

I’ve also seen them utterly fail.

I remember this child support case. I was in the courtroom as the clerk. The judge wanted proof of income by the dad. Dad didn’t bring any. He sat like RG in the chair and was utterly disrespectful sitting there in his weed leaf T shirt.

The judge asked him what he did for a living. He says he’s a drug dealer. I sat up in eager anticipation of the floor show. So the judge isn’t in the mood to be played. Asks him if he’s good at it and does he sell a lot. The guy says he’s the best. Judge asks how much he sells. Long story short, support was set according to the income the guy said he made with his lucrative drug dealing business.

[skydy]

One can hope. What I know of judges (from my attorney friend) is that they, as a rule, don’t like time wasters nor do they appreciate sloppy papers or bizarre behavior by litigants.

It will be an interesting hearing. I don’t think there has been an answer to my question about the public access to the Zoom hearing. Will a member of the public be able to watch?

[MHM]

@Knights_Mom

The judge asked him what he did for a living. He says he’s a drug dealer. I sat up in eager anticipation of the floor show. So the judge isn’t in the mood to be played. Asks him if he’s good at it and does he sell a lot. The guy says he’s the best. Judge asks how much he sells. Long story short, support was set according to the income the guy said he made with his lucrative drug dealing business.

WOW.

[ekat]

@skydy

It will be an interesting hearing. I don’t think there has been an answer to my question about the public access to the Zoom hearing. Will a member of the public be able to watch?

According to Mr Deininger, yes. Somebody posted the link upthread.

[ekat]

@Knights_Mom

The judge asked him what he did for a living. He says he’s a drug dealer. I sat up in eager anticipation of the floor show. So the judge isn’t in the mood to be played. Asks him if he’s good at it and does he sell a lot. The guy says he’s the best. Judge asks how much he sells. Long story short, support was set according to the income the guy said he made with his lucrative drug dealing business.

That is the best!

[Ambitious_Kate]

@skydy

It’s very odd to ignore a subpoena. It’s even more odd not to attend or be represented at, via Zoom or otherwise, a motion hearing where a Judge will be deciding whether or not to hold them in contempt.

It’s really odd that they’ve left the country. I mean, honestly! Can you imagine how much doo doo they are actually in, that they have left the actual country, having been asked ro account for themselves? What in the world is happening?

[skydy]

Does “to the extent that the proceedings are open to the public” mean that they definitely are open to the public?

I took that sentence to mean that the K’s should be treated as any member of the public would be, without favor.

[MHM]

@Ambitious_Kate

It’s really odd that they’ve left the country.

But did they?

[ekat]

@skydy

Does “to the extent that the proceedings are open to the public” mean that they definitely are open to the public?

I took that sentence to mean that the K’s should be treated as any member of the public would be, without favor

I took it to mean they could watch right along with the rest of us.

I guess we will find out Friday.

[skydy]

Thanks. You have experience with the legalese and I don’t, so I’ll take your interpretation.

[ekat]

@skydy

Thanks. You have experience with the legalese and I don’t, so I’ll take your interpretation.

It could just be wishful thinking because I really want to watch!

[eggbutt]

@skydy

I don’t think there has been an answer to my question about the public access to the Zoom hearing. Will a member of the public be able to watch?

I don’t think anyone has an answer and probably won’t until we either see it open on the court site or not.

[eggbutt]

I wonder if Sceusi rules in SHF and MB’s favor if Nagel will call Sceusi “insane”?