MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Fiesta01

Still catching up on today, but going back to Nagel’s motion if I may. He states that MB was found guilty of attempted murder. Period. That is a lie. Can there be repercussions for him lying like this in a legal document?

Well, he didn’t say exactly that, did he? There were more words to the sentence, weren’t there?

What he meant was what I’ve been saying: that the verdict MB received (NGRI) indicates that the jury as fact finders determined that the prosecutor established beyond a reasonable doubt that all elements of the case required to find him guilty of attempted murder with the exception of intent, given that the defense met its burden of proof in establishing that he was insane.

She was shot, and based on the verdict in the criminal case, it was determined that he shot her.

[ekat]

@SpicyPRE

Assuming LKs funds are in a trust, would that keep them safe/preserved should she lose

It would depend on the language of any trust, really.

But if she were to move anything out of said hypothetical trust it could become fair game.

Imagine a scenario, if you will, where all 3 defendants are granted judgments against her.

Then, money that is garnishable becomes available. It could be a race to the courthouse for those three defendants to garnish said funds, which could lead to further litigation, especially if she disputes the garnishments. A never ending circle of suck, if you will.

[SpicyPRE]

so basically other than her attorney/s fees, she has nothing to lose. Other than confirming for the world that she and her family as grifters…

[ekat]

@SpicyPRE

so basically other than her attorney/s fees, she has nothing to lose. Other than confirming for the world that she and her family as grifters…

Maybe? We really don’t know, do we? And…judgments will hang around forever.

So, say she buys an expensive horse a couple years from now. Really expensive. If I had a judgment against her I’d go to court to force her to sell said horse to pay towards her judgment.

[Syrynx]

Good lord who does that?

I know you’d mentioned this multiple times KM but I’d completely forgotten the text and how unhinged it was.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@ekat

It would depend on the language of any trust, really.

But if she were to move anything out of said hypothetical trust it could become fair game.

Imagine a scenario, if you will, where all 3 defendants are granted judgments against her.

Then, money that is garnishable becomes available. It could be a race to the courthouse for those three defendants to garnish said funds, which could lead to further litigation, especially if she disputes the garnishments. A never ending circle of suck, if you will.

So let’s say, hypothetically, that Silver, who is representing SGF, is being paid for by SGF’s insurance company right now.

How would we expect the insurance company to behave following the trial, if the decision went in SGF’s favor, and if LK was ordered to pay all of SGFs legal expenses? If there was an ongoing challenge garnishing funds released from LKs trust fund… is that something an insurance company would spend money on in order to aggressively pursue potentially recouping legal expenses? Or would an insurance company more likely decide not to bother with the expense?

Essentially… I’m pondering the long term implications of someone launching a lawsuit against a party with deep pockets. Might that boomerang on her? Deep pockets can afford to pursue recouping all their legal fees, over a long period of time.

[LiberalSnowflake]

@cutter99

@LiberalSnowflake

You win the Interwebz today @LiberalSnowflake!!!

Thank you, boom tish, I’m here all week!

I thought it was very appropriate, but the saddest consequence is that a fairly decent and good man was driven legally insane, and has been in jail for three years, all as a part of some convoluted “3D chess game” played by a woman who treats the world as her own personal litter-box - and that was his consequence of being unlucky enough to make her acquaintance.

[ekat]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

So let’s say, hypothetically, that Silver, who is representing SGF, is being paid for by SGF’s insurance company right now.

How would we expect the insurance company to behave following the trial, if the decision went in SGF’s favor, and if LK was ordered to pay all of SGFs legal expenses? If there was an ongoing challenge garnishing funds released from LKs trust fund… is that something an insurance company would spend money on in order to aggressively pursue potentially recouping legal expenses? Or would an insurance company more likely decide not to bother with the expense?

Hypothetically it would depend on their motivation and the dollars involved entirely. For a real world example, take a look at Amber Heard’s case (I know, I know). Her insurance paid attorneys, and after she was found to have acted with malice, they are now pursuing her for that $$. Different state, different fact scenario entirely. I just bring it up to show it’s possible they might feel compelled to pursue.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@ekat

Hypothetically it would depend on their motivation and the dollars involved entirely. For a real world example, take a look at Amber Heard’s case (I know, I know). Her insurance paid attorneys, and after she was found to have acted with malice, they are now pursuing her for that $$. Different state, different fact scenario entirely. I just bring it up to show it’s possible they might feel compelled to pursue.

That’s an interesting example, for sure.

I wonder if insurance companies are pretty darn skilled, legally speaking, when it comes to following up on judgements and collecting what they are owed…

I would imagine many have long term relationships with specialized attorneys who are quite skilled in this particular area.

It probably is unpleasant to have lawyers like that on your tail for years on end, trying to squeeze you for any funds they can …

[Syrynx]

I’m curious and have thought this before when hearing about long drawn out cases.

How long will an attorney work for a client when part (or all?) of their compensation is based on the award? Practically, how does that work after a retainer is consumed?

Note: I’ve only hired attorney’s for real estate transactions and estate work which were short time spans with predictable amounts.

[ekat]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

I wonder if insurance companies are pretty darn skilled, legally speaking, when it comes to following up on judgements and collecting what they are owed…

Some have in-house attorneys to do exactly that.

[Mersidoats]

@Ambitious_Kate

She was squealing about the NJ farm being sold. She had said, too, on SM that she would get that farm. It was her plan.

I missed that part. Talk about showing your hand. That may be the reason that Ruth Cox sold her shares in Don Divone - keep the horse safe. She’s tangled up in all of this, too.

Is there legal precedent for seizing livestock as assets in civil cases like this?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Ambitious_Kate

I wonder if Nagel knew these deadlines had come and gone and neglected to file motions. I wonder if he audaciously encouraged (perhaps by agreeing with) the Ks to ignore these requests: “let them find the documents themselves”. I frankly can’t feature what he was thinking by letting this all happen.

Question: in the end does it matter? He made the defence mad, they’ll get their discovery anyway, but not before they had to work double time for it? I mean, did this really hurt LK, beyond making her look squirrely? Which she is anyway? Or is tit all part of the prosecution’s disdain for the defence ? Why?

What difference would it make if the plaintiffs lawyer “made the defence mad”? The entire process is adversarial from start to finish.

[cutter99]

@LiberalSnowflake

@cutter99

@LiberalSnowflake

You win the Interwebz today @LiberalSnowflake!!!

Thank you, boom tish, I’m here all week!

I thought it was very appropriate, but the saddest consequence is that a fairly decent and good man was driven legally insane, and has been in jail for three years, all as a part of some convoluted “3D chess game” played by a woman who treats the world as her own personal litter-box - and that was his consequence of being unlucky enough to make her acquaintance.

Quoted this because it is the truth, and cannot be liked enough!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@ekat

All very good points to consider. Often one considers contemplating those risks and rewards before filing the suit. Now that you’re in the thick of it, it could become more sunk cost quickly.

Yup… most people definitely ponder the worst case scenario before starting down a legal road like this.

But… in November of 2019, I think we can all agree that the Ks thought:

1. MB would take a plea deal related to his criminal charges

Therefore…

2. It was very likely that LK could get some sort of civil suit payout/settlement from an insurer…

Now? Now the risk vs. reward calculations with respect to continuing with the lawsuits is VERY different.

Any guesses on the total legal bills LK might be stuck with if her suits were dismissed right now, with prejudice, and she was ordered to pay opposing parties’ fees?

How would MB having taken the plea deal on the two counts wrt LK been materially different from the NGRI verdict? Can he escape civil liability for having shot her based on the insanity?

[jvanrens]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Shoulda woulda coulda…

My DH’s favorite thing to say in hindsight.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

How would MB having taken the plea deal on the two counts wrt LK been materially different from the NGRI verdict? Can he escape civil liability for having shot her based on the insanity?

Pleading guilty to something =/= to four acquittals.

None of which has absolutely any bearing on a new case, and in fact, is usually excluded.

Plaintiff starts at zero to prove her case. I wish her luck.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

How does a lien on your residence make it hers? It doesn’t. It just means you can’t sell it without satisfying a judgement someone has against you.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Ambitious_Kate

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

didn’t really see the whole “the Ks want one of his farms” angle earlier in this saga… but now? Now I see it. Crystal clear. You laid it out quite well here.

Early on, Lauren’s atty filed a request to freeze assets on MB specifically pointing out that the farm in NJ was being sold. The judge laughed. Why? He hasn’t had any judgement against him. He can do whatever he wants wirh his assets. She showed her hand right there. She didn’t mention any investments, or retirement, or bank funds, or offshore accounts. She was squealing about the NJ farm being sold. She had said, too, on SM that she would get that farm. It was her plan.

That’s not how I remember it.

Filing to prevent a defendant from hiding or divesting assets prior to the resolution of a civil case must be boringly standard.

I also did not see SM posts where she said she would “get that farm”. Not KMs, not MBs.

[downen]

Can just for one day, everyone stop replying to CH and HH? I’m so tired of the same old arguments being rehashed!