It’s only a small thing, but they’ve always had “legally” before “residing” in every other document, but it might just be an accident that they’ve left it off …
15 Likes
I see no reason the defense attorneys should jump through hoops to give the Kanareks a damn thing until her righteous parents comply with months old subpoenas! Of course the Kanareks apparently still believe the universe revolves around them. Remarkable ain’t it?
30 Likes
Regardless of any preparations, Lauren’s ego and obsession with fantasy and drama will always cause her to embellish, exaggerate and reinvent history. Remember she said she can’t control her multiple personalities!
9 Likes
At first glance I misread that as “can’t afford” her multiple personalities. Lol.
6 Likes
Since the attorney represents LK, they defend on her behalf. So in a sense they are requesting on LK’s behalf, through the attorney.
10 Likes
You did fine!
Thank you!
A few thoughts:
1). This is weird
2). So, GAS requests something on March 8 (Deininger and Bilinkas were in court that day…), waits till the 9th for a response (?) and then requests the court to order them to give them stuff 4 business days later? All of a sudden he’s impatient?
3). How is the Krol appeal even remotely relevant to the liability for what happened on August 7, 2019? GAS sure didn’t provide any legal basis for its relevancy.
4). How fast did he actually expect Mr Deininger to lay hands on the appellate brief that he likely did not write (see notes about appellate lawyers on the GFM) and isn’t public record, if it were actually relevant and discoverable?
5). So, the SGF stuff. I need to make sure I’m following this here. On March 1, GAS told the court that his client, Lauren Kanarek, shouldn’t have to answer questions re: her “provocation” because she’s already answered everything. Mr Silver, on behalf of SGF responds with, we don’t think so, and would like to go ahead and question her ourselves, per the long standing rules of discovery, and here’s a couple examples of questions we are going to ask.
Now GAS is saying we need more info about that stuff my client has already answered.
6). I’m looking forward to the responses.
Edited to add all the current pleadings here for reference…
GAS Mot to Compel 031523.pdf (1.3 MB)
SGF Opp to GAS Mot To Compel 032323.pdf (643.4 KB)
MB Opp GAS Mot to Compel 032323.pdf (696.4 KB)
GAS RES to OPP 032323.pdf (893.2 KB)
58 Likes
Anybody know what the proceeding scheduled with the mediator is? Usually it says case management conference, but this time says proceeding.
1 Like
Oh wow Ekat. I read it, but it didn’t compute in my mind that GAS was asking for information related to MB’s Krol appeal.
This is very weird. And concerning.
Do we know if a hearing actually happened yesterday on other pending issues?
12 Likes
I saw that too, and wondered what to make of it. And is this business as usual, or does it mean there may be movement with respect to mediation?
I’m so glad someone started this thread. I was having withdrawals. Thanks ekat for the great explanation, as always.
49 Likes
If I had to guess, based on the past in this case and what has been explained to us about NJ’s Motion cycle, my guess would be No, just like I wouldn’t expect one on the 31st necessarily for this new motion.
It’s just as likely the mediator wants to get these discovery issues moving along as anything else. One last shot to see if they can resolve all the outstanding issues (Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek’s outstanding subpoenas, Lauren Kanarek’s deposition issues, etc…) before the judge makes his rulings.
That is purely a guess, though.
17 Likes
Since we have a new thread on the latest filings, I BEG everyone to ignore the postings of two individuals whose only objective is to argue, argue and get the thread shut down. Most of us want to know what is happening and have logical and reasonable discussions. Let’s just continue on with no “meaninglessness” distractions. It just drives me crazy when you have the same old, same old hundreds of times over. They never stop!
71 Likes
-
The Krol hearing is relevant because MBs and SGFs defense have made it relevant. They are arguing that LK through her provocations has some fault tor MBs mental condition. If that’s their argument, his state of mind in the weeks leading up to the shooting, his mental state immediately after the shooting, and the evolution of his mental state in the last 3.5 years is all relevant. If the defense dropped the claim that LK caused or contributed to MBs delusional state, the Krol material would not be relevant.
-
Stone has said that LK should not be questioned further on her provocations because the provocations were discussed in the criminal trial in order to illustrate MBs state of mind, but are irrelevant for the civil case, because the provocations do not provide a justification for MB shooting her. SGF answered that they want to purse provocations not focused in the trial to show that the provocations contributed to his mental state. Stone is saying, OK, what are the specific provocations that you think contributed to his mental state and you wish to pursue?
Stone is responding to the recent filings of the defense.
3 Likes
Whether or not Judge Taylor erred in the initial commitment hearing has nothing to do with anything you typed out.
That’s not really what Stone is saying, or what Silver said, either.
Wrong. This motion is not a response to anything filed by the defense. It’s a brand new motion asking for new things not previously before the court.
53 Likes
@ekat Is the motion also asking for an unredacted copy of the heavily redacted document that was included in SGF’s motion? I’m referring to paras 8-13?
5 Likes
You summoned them lol
30 Likes
I found that request very interesting as well.
It seems to me like Lollypop may be nervous about how many prior incidents involving bad behavior, cyber stalking and harassment, etc, are about to come back to haunt her, and she wants to prepare for the deposition and try and argue to limit these issues.
I find it remarkable if no one really warned her that her ENTIRE past would come under glaring scrutiny during discovery in a civil suit that she brought.
22 Likes
She was warned, even here.
26 Likes
I expected MB Lawyers to have that file on hand and send it the second it was asked for, just to contrast with how long it has taken them to not supply discovery.
7 Likes
For the lawyers on the thread With respect to the request that SGF hand over all the research on prior incidents that LK bullied people online: are attorneys obligated to provide such information for discovery if it was a result of research they have conducted ? Is that work product?
I laughed out loud at the impatience GAS has with the discovery requests while trying to delay pretty much everything related to this suit.
I’m eager to see how the judge handles the issues before him.
20 Likes
