You have to admire the naked chutzpah of Paul Kamenar's complaint to the AGC...
The last two paragraphs read as follows:-
"After receiving Ms. Kaplan's written response and these documents, further investigation may include interviews with Ms. Kaplan, members of her firm, Ms. Carroll, Reid Hoffman and Dmitri Melhorn.
We reserve the right to supplement this complaint with additional facts and arguments."
He's writing it as though he is a presiding counsel in a case against Ms. Kaplan and that such a situation grants him the right to take a deposition. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that's how a bar complaint works. I think that if he has any evidence he is entitled to submit it to the relevant bar and invite them to investigate. If the bar decides it needs evidence, it is for the bar to decide what is needed and how and where to obtain it. If the bar decides it needs to interview parties, it is for the bar to decide who it needs to interview and what questions it needs to ask.
Yet here Mr. Kamenar is writing to the bar along the lines of, "Don't you fret, don't you worry your pretty little heads about this. What I share here is more than enough evidence to strip Roberta Kaplan of her law license - and if by strange fate it isn't, why you just tell me and authorize me to go get that evidence for you and you'll get it lickety-spit. I'll gladly be your investigator, even though I'm based in DC and this is a New York State complaint.
Love and cuddles [sic], Paul D. Kamenar."
I mean... Why bother going to the trouble of having the bar *investigate* this complaint? Mr. Kamenar (Esq.) clearly believes that Ms. Kaplan guilty, so that's enough, right? Right?
I thought the money had already been put in a trust or escrow account of some sort so it would be available to Carroll when all the legal arguments had played out. All the legal arguments have played out. Whoever oversees that account needs to write her a check.
First, big fan long time listener/reader. Query - Assume during her deposition, E. Jean Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan was present, wouldn’t Kaplan have a responsibility to correct the record then, or shortly thereafter. Request a break, review with Carroll and correct.
Or is this a situation where Kaplan has taken fees, but Carroll didn’t know? Is it implied that Kaplan failed to communicate case funding to her client
You have to admire the naked chutzpah of Paul Kamenar's complaint to the AGC...
The last two paragraphs read as follows:-
"After receiving Ms. Kaplan's written response and these documents, further investigation may include interviews with Ms. Kaplan, members of her firm, Ms. Carroll, Reid Hoffman and Dmitri Melhorn.
We reserve the right to supplement this complaint with additional facts and arguments."
He's writing it as though he is a presiding counsel in a case against Ms. Kaplan and that such a situation grants him the right to take a deposition. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that's how a bar complaint works. I think that if he has any evidence he is entitled to submit it to the relevant bar and invite them to investigate. If the bar decides it needs evidence, it is for the bar to decide what is needed and how and where to obtain it. If the bar decides it needs to interview parties, it is for the bar to decide who it needs to interview and what questions it needs to ask.
Yet here Mr. Kamenar is writing to the bar along the lines of, "Don't you fret, don't you worry your pretty little heads about this. What I share here is more than enough evidence to strip Roberta Kaplan of her law license - and if by strange fate it isn't, why you just tell me and authorize me to go get that evidence for you and you'll get it lickety-spit. I'll gladly be your investigator, even though I'm based in DC and this is a New York State complaint.
Love and cuddles [sic], Paul D. Kamenar."
I mean... Why bother going to the trouble of having the bar *investigate* this complaint? Mr. Kamenar (Esq.) clearly believes that Ms. Kaplan guilty, so that's enough, right? Right?
Sheesh.
PAY UP YOU IGNORANT RAPIST FUCK!! Enough is ENOUGH already!!
I thought the money had already been put in a trust or escrow account of some sort so it would be available to Carroll when all the legal arguments had played out. All the legal arguments have played out. Whoever oversees that account needs to write her a check.
OMG, the tRump is insane. YOU LOST YOU IDIOT, LET GO.
She just got paid!monkeys!H
e howler minkees!
tRump will do ANYTHING to avoid being a loser. LOSER
E. Jean Carroll was the FIRST woman to successfully hold the demented pedo POS Trump legally liable in court for sexual abuse. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations, https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a736li6-mGw]
Not fake you sick prick.
Ha, they don't have a chance. Kaplan is so much smarter.
She won this legal battle fair and square. It took seven years.
Is Roberta related to the judge??? Keep it in the family.
First, big fan long time listener/reader. Query - Assume during her deposition, E. Jean Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan was present, wouldn’t Kaplan have a responsibility to correct the record then, or shortly thereafter. Request a break, review with Carroll and correct.
Or is this a situation where Kaplan has taken fees, but Carroll didn’t know? Is it implied that Kaplan failed to communicate case funding to her client