Stone is sking for any documents Silver has pertaining to the Lexis Nexis case, not the LexisNexis report itself.
If Silver has any such documents and withholds them despite being specifically asked for them in discovery, Stone will be able to challenge their introduction as evidence later.
I’m guessing that LK and crew want to be ready to answer questions on the harassment claims.
But, the problem lies in: when you’ve harassed SO MANY people, you don’t know how many have been found by the defendant. “Can you show me what [of the hundreds] you found?”
Good lord.
Maybe they tracked down the young girl LK followed around and videoed in that store.
Basically, this is what it is…
To build on this, the judge should recognize that MBs stay at the facility is not punishment and be careful to not do or allow anything that appears punitive or treads on his rights to privacy.
Yeah, I know, his track record ain’t great…
Vous ja de
The judge has already ruled that the next Krol hearing will not be closed.
She has posted video of her riding in lessons several times since the trial, including as recently as this winter. As well she has made public posts boasting about riding better than ever and working at a higher level than previously. If she wants to appear “broken” she’s not doing a great job.
To recap where the suit is at:
Lauren Kanarek’s deposition is scheduled for April 13th.
On March 1st, GAS filed a motion requesting the court to bar the defendants from questioning her about her role (or to use GAS’s word “provocation”) in this mess, flying in the face of accepted discovery rules and procedures when someone brings a suit.
SGF and MB responded, pointing out how this flies in the face of accepted practice and derails their ability to defend themselves.
This motion could be ruled on at any time. However, the court could decide to wait until after that case management proceeding thingy on March 28th.
Meanwhile, even though GAS doesn’t want his client questioned about her provocation, on March 15th, he requested some docs from SGF that go to the heart of her behavior.
He also weirdly requested MB to produce a copy of confidential, sealed records from MB, who does not have the authority to release sealed records, nor does his attorney.
On March 23rd, SGF and MB responded, pointing out the many improprieties of his requests.
Not to be outdone, GAS filed one more document on March 23rd that, in essence, says I want this stuff anyways.
That issue can be decided at any point from March 31st on.
And, that’s where we are.
Edited to change ignore to release. Sorry.
Thanks–makes sense.
Earlier point being though that Ronald appears to be one of the “names on the door”.
Thanks and no I am not a litigator. I tried to pull from the website.
Quite possibly. Maybe they will do what Nagel did with Andrew (last name escapes me) and Deininger did with Bilinkas, and file a supplemental entry of appearance if he’s going to work on the case too.
On March 1, Stone filed a motion asking that SGF be barred from asking LK about incidents of alleged harassment, on the grounds that even if such harassment existed, it did not provide a justification for MB to shoot LK, and was therefore irrelevant.
MB and SGF responded, opposing the motion.
Given that MB and SGF are opposing the motion and intend to question LK about the alleged incidents of harassment, Stone then requested of SGF any documents in their possession concerning the “North Carolina” incident, and asked SGF to identify the “other incidents” SGF was referring to.
Stone initially made this request via email. Silver replied via email that plaintiff was not entitled to the material.
Stone followed up by asking the judge to decide whether plaintiff was, or wasn’t, entitled to the material, if there is any documentation beyond the LexisNexis report.
Stone requested the confidential filings and pleadings by MB in the criminal case. Deininger did not respond to the email request, forcing Stone to file a motion a week later. Deininger responded to the formal motion, saying that Stone had not made the correct formal request, but also claiming that he had turned over the material in July 2022. It seems unlikely that the confidential pleadings were contained on the hard drive Deininger delivered to Nagel.
There has been some silly discussion that Nagel turned over “the file” not to Stone, but to JK, who is not the plaintiff and not a party to the case, who nefariously withheld some of the information from Stone.
If Deininger had responded cooperatively to Stones email request, a number of these filings could have been avoided. It looks like Deininger wants to operate in a way that maximizes his billable hours. That’s more filings for the amusement of COTH readers, but more strain on the defendants finances.
I would imagine there is at least one current poster who is familiar with the “North Carolina” incident. Hasn’t it already been discussed in these threads?
To be fair - Ronald Morgan is a principal in the firm Kirsch, Stone, & Morgan P.A., so I would assume his name is on the door.
(Sorry, catching up after being at the gym.) 
It is so hard for me to understand how people can not get that Krol hearings have nothing to do with the criminal trial and an appeal that appears to not be at all about anything to do with Michael, and everything to do with Taylor would even slightly apply to Lauren Kanarek.
I also do not get why people do not get how that when something is sealed by the court that it can not just be handed off to someone who has no association with it.
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
