Michael/ Lauren civil trial update February 9

[SuzieQNutter]

@trubandloki

KM is talking about the sitcom that was on TV last night. Nothing to do with the Barisone case.

LOL I had that bit figured out. I meant what is being painted at the Courts? as KM was saying what is reality to what is on TV.

[3PonyFarm]

@eggbutt, with the next Krol hearing 49 days away, is the EIM going to attend? Do you think we could get away with summerweight robes maybe packing winter ones just in case?

Also, since we probably won’t be allowed to bring our shovels inside, do we leave them outside under the shrubs like @Knights_Mom courthouse or just leave in the car.

Finally, do you think we would have time for a brunch or possibly a late lunch depending on the hour? Drinks of course in either case.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Long_Time_Lurker

So I may be dense and certainly IMNAL but I am not sure what bus you are suggesting he is being thrown under. I thought they were trying to get the countersuit dismissed? How is that related to RG?

They’re trying to get the countersuit dismissed on the grounds that the countersuit does not name the correct people as responsible for the alleged misdeed. If RG was equally responsible, or more responsible, than LK for making the recordings, that complaint should name him as well as LK as defendants.

In a civil action, the jury first determined the percent liability attributed to each party, then determines the monetary award. If RG was the prime mover in making the recordings, Deininger can’t sue just LK in order to offset the award MB will owe LK.

Normally if a defendant wishes to assert or impugn the guilt of another they bring them into the case to do so by impleading them.

The plaintiff is under no obligation to name every single person responsible for something happening/not happening.

If a defendant believes someone else is responsible they should implead that person into the case. In this case the defendant in the countercuit is asserting another party bears responsibility but they don’t implead them. I could be wrong but to me that renders their statement inconsequential and meaningless. Why assert another if you’re not going to bring them into the case?

An example would be a car accident where Car A is rear ended by and sues Car B. Car B turns around and asserts Car C rear ended them thus pushing them into Car A so Car C bears the responsibility for all.

If Car B asserts that Car C caused it all they have to bring Car C into the case. It’s not up to Car A to do so and doesn’t disqualify Car A’s case in any way if Car B fails to bring in Car C. Car B is still responsible.

But LKs lawyers don’t want to impugn other people or make them defendants. They want the counter suit dismissed, and they’re using the grounds that Deininger is not suing the people who are allegedly responsible.

In your example, car B did in fact read end Car A.

Yes in my example Car B is LK and Car A is MB. I’m referring to the countersuit.

It may be true that LKs lawyers don’t want to impugn RG (because that’s what LK tells them to do) but that in no way means that’s a legitimate excuse!! So what if LK doesn’t want to. This ain’t Burger King so she doesn’t get to have it her way.

And who is car C?

If it was RG who placed the recording devices, he was the one who directly harmed MB.

Your example is a different case in which C indirectly caused harm to A via hitting B. I don’t see how RG indirectly caused harm via LK, if he was the one placing the recording devices.

You need to go back and read what the counter claim is about if you are insisting that whomever actually installed the recording device is the only person who is liable here.
It is very clear that is not the case.

[eggbutt]

@3PonyFarm

@eggbutt, with the next Krol hearing 49 days away, is the EIM going to attend? Do you think we could get away with summerweight robes maybe packing winter ones just in case? We should pack robes for all occasions!

Also, since we probably won’t be allowed to bring our shovels inside, do we leave them outside under the shrubs like @Knights_Mom courthouse or just leave in the car. We should leave all the shovels safely on the bus so no one gets the wrong idea!

Finally, do you think we would have time for a brunch or possibly a late lunch depending on the hour? Drinks of course in either case. I opt for brunch, lunch, dinner and evening snack with appropriate beverage choices throughout the day. Perhaps Deininger/Silver/Bilinkas can get permission for us to bring a samovar into the courtroom!

I do think we should determine a color theme so we are easily recognized by the media!

[3PonyFarm]

Mr. S’s motion will be decided on 2/3.

I like this new judge so far! He’s fast!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

You need to go back and read what the counter claim is about if you are insisting that whomever actually installed the recording device is the only person who is liable here.

I’m not “insisting” that, or even asserting that.

[3PonyFarm]

That sounds good! My sign was going to read “treat or release” but maybe I’ll just chant it instead.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

You need to go back and read what the counter claim is about if you are insisting that whomever actually installed the recording device is the only person who is liable here.

I’m not “insisting” that, or even asserting that.

What word shall we use to describe your posts that say that then? Suggesting?

Because you have clearly posted that more than once at this point.

But go for it, like the whole police report thing, pretend you now meant to say something else. We are used to it.

Do you have no thoughts on your favorite poster once again not answering their subpoena?

[Knights_Mom]

@SuzieQNutter

@Knights_Mom

The staff would never paint. Painting is a big deal and it’s done on weekends typically by special city contractors. There’s a pallette of Benjamin Moore paint. About a choice of 6 different colors.

I’m totally lost. What is being painted?

In the TV show the judge and staff are painting the courtroom.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Long_Time_Lurker

So I may be dense and certainly IMNAL but I am not sure what bus you are suggesting he is being thrown under. I thought they were trying to get the countersuit dismissed? How is that related to RG?

They’re trying to get the countersuit dismissed on the grounds that the countersuit does not name the correct people as responsible for the alleged misdeed. If RG was equally responsible, or more responsible, than LK for making the recordings, that complaint should name him as well as LK as defendants.

In a civil action, the jury first determined the percent liability attributed to each party, then determines the monetary award. If RG was the prime mover in making the recordings, Deininger can’t sue just LK in order to offset the award MB will owe LK.

Normally if a defendant wishes to assert or impugn the guilt of another they bring them into the case to do so by impleading them.

The plaintiff is under no obligation to name every single person responsible for something happening/not happening.

If a defendant believes someone else is responsible they should implead that person into the case. In this case the defendant in the countercuit is asserting another party bears responsibility but they don’t implead them. I could be wrong but to me that renders their statement inconsequential and meaningless. Why assert another if you’re not going to bring them into the case?

An example would be a car accident where Car A is rear ended by and sues Car B. Car B turns around and asserts Car C rear ended them thus pushing them into Car A so Car C bears the responsibility for all.

If Car B asserts that Car C caused it all they have to bring Car C into the case. It’s not up to Car A to do so and doesn’t disqualify Car A’s case in any way if Car B fails to bring in Car C. Car B is still responsible.

But LKs lawyers don’t want to impugn other people or make them defendants. They want the counter suit dismissed, and they’re using the grounds that Deininger is not suing the people who are allegedly responsible.

In your example, car B did in fact read end Car A.

Yes in my example Car B is LK and Car A is MB. I’m referring to the countersuit.

It may be true that LKs lawyers don’t want to impugn RG (because that’s what LK tells them to do) but that in no way means that’s a legitimate excuse!! So what if LK doesn’t want to. This ain’t Burger King so she doesn’t get to have it her way.

And who is car C?

If it was RG who placed the recording devices, he was the one who directly harmed MB.

Your example is a different case in which C indirectly caused harm to A via hitting B. I don’t see how RG indirectly caused harm via LK, if he was the one placing the recording devices.

Sorry. Not how this works. At all.

[Sdel]

I see we also now know that RG’s renovation wasn’t just hanging drywall, and directly contributed to MB’s eviction.

[Knights_Mom]

Without a license

[Sdel]

I guess we know now why all of LK’s posts about how JK negotiated that deal were gasp deleted and why RG’s LLC was abandoned.

[3PonyFarm]

@ekat, you were right, Mr. D just filed too.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

But go for it, like the whole police report thing, pretend you now meant to say something else. We are used to it.

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

You need to go back and read what the counter claim is about if you are insisting that whomever actually installed the recording device is the only person who is liable here.

I’m not “insisting” that, or even asserting that.

What word shall we use to describe your posts that say that then? Suggesting?

Because you have clearly posted that more than once at this point.

But go for it, like the whole police report thing, pretend you now meant to say something else. We are used to it.

Do you have no thoughts on your favorite poster once again not answering their subpoena?

As with the police report, I said what I meant to say.

If you misinterpreted it, that’s on you.

[ekat]

@3PonyFarm

you were right, Mr. D just filed too.

MB Contempt KK Round 2 011823.pdf (5.1 MB)

[SuzieQNutter]

I am disappointed. I wanted the answer to be that all the lawyers and vacuumers were painting a mural.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

I sure wish something would come out about Jonathan Kanarek (@Inigo-montoya) and Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1) not answering their subpoenas.

I wish my wishes came true like yours did today.

[jvanrens]

His footnotes are always good for a read too. Never thought that I’d enjoy a footnote.

[eggbutt]

For the courtroom!