100thEagleScout Posted December 4, 2021 Share Posted December 4, 2021 13 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said: Yikes! At $500K per (or five years in the hoosegow, pokey, slammer, etc.) that could potentially bump up the victim fund. But, I believe, since this is a federal court, monies from fines imposed only go to the US Treasury, and, so, only Congress could direct the disposition of those penalties to fund the fund. Good luck with that! Literally, an Act of Congress. Don’t forget that it needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and something about the Feds is they only take cases they are almost certain to win. You may see a few get caught if their stories are off and were signed by a lawyer but I think it’s more likely they’d go unpaid and uncharged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted December 4, 2021 Share Posted December 4, 2021 From Tim Kosnoffs Twitter EISENBERG ROTHWEILER harassing survivors who voted to Reject to change their votes. Judge needs to stop this. There is an audio recording of a call from an Eisenberg attorney calling an AVA claimant in Oklahoma who voted to reject the plan trying to persuade him to change his vote. I did not know how to copy the recording but it is shocking to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
100thEagleScout Posted December 4, 2021 Share Posted December 4, 2021 Just now, johnsch322 said: From Tim Kosnoffs Twitter EISENBERG ROTHWEILER harassing survivors who voted to Reject to change their votes. Judge needs to stop this. There is an audio recording of a call from an Eisenberg attorney calling an AVA claimant in Oklahoma who voted to reject the plan trying to persuade him to change his vote. I did not know how to copy the recording but it is shocking to hear. I just saw this as well. I will say these lawyers also sound super unprofessional. People need to start firing their lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnsch322 Posted December 4, 2021 Share Posted December 4, 2021 3 minutes ago, 100thEagleScout said: I just saw this as well. I will say these lawyers also sound super unprofessional. People need to start firing their lawyers. If what Eisenberg and his firm is doing is unethical/illegal (not sure) I wonder if a claimant or group of claimants can sue his firm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattR Posted December 5, 2021 Share Posted December 5, 2021 I moved a sub thread that had little to do with the actaual court case to 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 And with that....voting deadline extended two weeks. If you thought calls from an attorney were about to come to an end, you were wrong. If you wanted time to get a ballot and change your vote, you've got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 51 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said: And with that....voting deadline extended two weeks. If you thought calls from an attorney were about to come to an end, you were wrong. If you wanted time to get a ballot and change your vote, you've got it. Did they push out all dates 2 weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 54 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: Did they push out all dates 2 weeks? Not exactly. Voting report is 1/6, confirmation hearing still 1/24 start, various objection deadlines altered slightly. BSA spoke about reserving the right to challenge reporting requests. Sounds like they may not want to report out where the $3500 elections came from as applied to Council. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 Oh, oh. Don't look know, but E.R. just got their hinder lit on FIRE. Two clients who consented to TK presenting their communications from E.R. with the court, unsealed and unredacted, just went live and addressed the court. Wow. "The roof. The roof. The roof is on FIRE!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 5 minutes ago, ThenNow said: Oh, oh. Don't look know, but E.R. just got their hinder lit on FIRE. Two clients who consented to TK presenting their communications from E.R. with the court, unsealed and unredacted, just went live and addressed the court. Wow. "The roof. The roof. The roof is on FIRE!!" Could you explain? Is the judge upset? Was this during the hearing or just the docket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 3 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: Could you explain? Is the judge upset? Was this during the hearing or just the docket? The motion being heard is E.R.'s effort to seal TK's deposition, specifically the clients' emails/texts/etc. The clients appeared to emphatically confirm they made clear, knowing and informed waivers of the attorney/client privilege. They were adamant they want the communications illustrating the browbeating and serial Plan support communications from E.R. to be made public. Does that explain it? Judge's issue went to whether the waiver was "sufficiently informed as to potential downsides." The clients made it clear it was. I bet she denies the motion to seal. My non-litigator's guess. Ruling will be tomorrow at a TBD hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 First ... I'm shocked that the judge allowed the voting to push out but the objection dates to remain. That doesn't seem right. I remember she questioned the old dates as being a tight timeline between vote & confirmation ... this smells a bit fishy. Second ... ER sounds like he is very concerned if this is released ... I wonder what he is hiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYCVAStory Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 The judge is trying to do everything possible to eliminate arguments at confirmation. So, this deletes "we didn't have enough time." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 Let's face it. This whole thing has been ripe for legal abuses from day one, especially with some of the major players. Again, we need to overhaul the legal processes in this country, as far too often, the cases get hijacked by certain individuals who are not known for high integrity, including bringing in questionable claimees. Justice is not well served if it has a constant dollar sign on it.l JMHO of course. And it does not just relate to this fiasco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted December 6, 2021 Share Posted December 6, 2021 5 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: Second ... ER sounds like he is very concerned if this is released ... I wonder what he is hiding. E.R. Being the Eisenberg Rothweiler firm. (Anyone else notice that autocorrect changes Ken’s surname to Rottweiler? I just report the news, I don’t make it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts