MakeMeFweaky Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Britney Spears is requesting former federal prosecutor Mathew Rosengart represent her in her ongoing conservatorship battle. He has reportedly agreed to it. Now all that's left is for the judge to sign off on the motion. TMZ reports Britney already signed a legal doc stating her desire to hire Rosengart - the first step in dissolving the conservatorship. Rosengart has represented Steven Spielberg, Ben Affleck, Jimmy Butler and Sean Penn. Via TMZ: "Rosengart has now agreed and will appear remotely during a court hearing Wednesday, asking the judge to appoint him." "The catch 22 is that Britney cannot sign contracts of any substance without the approval of her conservator, Jamie Spears, the man she wants out." They add: "Rosengart will make the argument Britney has a Constitutional right to the lawyer of her choice. Defendants in criminal cases have a Constitutional right to an attorney, but a conservatorship is not a criminal case. Thing is ... it's not a civil case either. It's a hybrid ... somewhere in between." Rosengart will argue that Britney is entitled to due process, which includes the right to a lawyer of her choosing. He'll also argue that it's absurd for Jamie Spears to have the power to deny Britney's decision because Rosengart's sole purpose is to help her evade her father's control. Removing Jamie is the first step in ridding Britney of the conservatorship. Britney wants this done without yet another evaluation, however TMZ believes this will be a tough sell to the judge as there are "several dozen medical professionals have weighed in regularly over the years she has a mental illness that makes a conservatorship necessary." Related: 2 Link to comment
Z-dawg Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Someone post the text don’t want to give them not even a click 🖕🏻 4 1 Link to comment
s&m Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 It's basically the same information that the NY Times reported 2 1 Link to comment
Super Mods SlayOut Posted July 13, 2021 Super Mods Share Posted July 13, 2021 Basically they said he’s going appear remotely and argue that Britney has the capacity to retain him for services. Not much else that we don’t already know. Link to comment
Steel Magnolia Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 LAWYER SHE WANTS AGREES TO REP HERAppears In Court Wednesday To Mount Fight 7/13/2021 12:28 PM PT "Britney Spears has decided who she wants as her lawyer to end the conservatorship, and the attorney has now agreed and will appear in court Wednesday -- arguing she has a right to the lawyer of her choice ... TMZ has learned. We broke the story ... Britney signed a legal doc stating her desire to hire the mega law firm of Greenberg Traurig, LLP to represent her in her effort to boot Jamie Spears from the conservatorship -- the first step in attempting to end the conservatorship altogether. As we reported, Britney had her sights set on hiring a partner in the firm -- former federal prosecutor Mathew Rosengart, who reps a slew of celebrity clients, including Steven Spielberg, Ben Affleck, Jimmy Butler and Sean Penn. Multiple sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ ... Rosengart has now agreed and will appear remotely during a court hearing Wednesday, asking the judge to appoint him. The catch 22 is that Britney cannot sign contracts of any substance without the approval of her conservator, Jamie Spears, the man she wants out. We're told Rosengart will make the argument Britney has a Constitutional right to the lawyer of her choice. Defendants in criminal cases have a Constitutional right to an attorney, but a conservatorship is not a criminal case. Thing is ... it's not a civil case either. It's a hybrid ... somewhere in between. We're told Rosengart's argument goes like this ... Britney is entitled to due process, which includes the right to a competent lawyer, and a judge would be hard-pressed to conclude Rosengart doesn't have the legal chops to rep her. What's more ... he'll argue it's absurd for Jamie Spears to have the power to disapprove Britney's choice, because the very purpose of the representation is to get him out of the conservatorship. As we reported ... getting Jamie out is the first step in ending the conservatorship, which has been in place for more than 13 years. The real battle will come if and when there's a motion to end the conservatorship. Britney said in court last month she wanted that done without further medical evaluation, but that's a tough sell to the judge because several dozen medical professionals have weighed in regularly over the years she has a mental illness that makes a conservatorship necessary. We reached out to Rosengart for comment ... so far, no word back." Link to comment
Jadedkitten Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 We already know the New York Times told us 4 3 Link to comment
Moscow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 I want to understand one thing, after Britney's testimony - people are dropping like flies - people are speaking out about Jamie and her experiences with Britney - family is getting a lot of hate - why Jamie is still not able to drop this? What's the part I am not able to understand - Britney has stopped performing and won't perform until and unless Jamie is removed - no hard flow inflow of income? Why he is still fighting this? It's really absurd at this point. 1 Link to comment
PokemonSpears Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 47 minutes ago, MakeMeFweaky said: but that's a tough sell to the judge because several dozen medical professionals have weighed in regularly over the years she has a mental illness that makes a conservatorship necessary. wasn't TMZ the ones telling she had never been diagnosed with anything, but they were just medicating her because she had "bipolar like symptoms" ? 4 Link to comment
PokemonSpears Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, Prachi said: I want to understand one thing, after Britney's testimony - people are dropping like flies - people are speaking out about Jamie and her experiences with Britney - family is getting a lot of hate - why Jamie is still not able to drop this? What's the part I am not able to understand - Britney has stopped performing and won't perform until and unless Jamie is removed - no hard flow inflow of income? Why he is still fighting this? It's really absurd at this point. he's just out of his mind, he's sick of power 1 Link to comment
Moscow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 minute ago, PokemonSpears said: he's just out of his mind, he's sick of power Still I don't understand, I mean think about it - guy is old, world has turned against him, he has so much to loose - soured his relationship with Britney - I just don't get this. Link to comment
TakeYourHand Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Yes so my question is how? It’s clear to me that the reason she isn’t allowed to choose her own lawyer is because of the fees. They don’t want her spending her own money. She is clearly of sound mind. She only receives 2000 a week probably on a card with restrictions. How is she going to pay a lawyer? Or is this a Pro Bono situation? Link to comment
Onyxgirl17 Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, TakeYourHand said: Yes so my question is how? It’s clear to me that the reason she isn’t allowed to choose her own lawyer is because of the fees. She only receives 2000 a week probably on a card with restrictions. How is she going to pay a lawyer? Or is this a Pro Bono situation? That should be illegal, her money (not allowance) needs to be used for securing her representation. Jamie can spend 2 million of her money in a year to protect his interests. the guy knows he’ll get paid once he wins Link to comment
Britney4President Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, Prachi said: I want to understand one thing, after Britney's testimony - people are dropping like flies - people are speaking out about Jamie and her experiences with Britney - family is getting a lot of hate - why Jamie is still not able to drop this? What's the part I am not able to understand - Britney has stopped performing and won't perform until and unless Jamie is removed - no hard flow inflow of income? Why he is still fighting this? It's really absurd at this point. Bc he’s a narcissist Link to comment
TakeYourHand Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 5 minutes ago, Onyxgirl17 said: That should be illegal. Jamie can spend 2 million of her money in a year to protect his interests. I mean I agree but personal feelings aside, how is she going to afford a lawyer? In my opinion it’s part of the reason why she hasn’t been appointed one of her choice. Lawyers are expensive and why waste money they’re trying to steal on someone who will fight against them? It’s all about the money. I just truly wonder how she’s going to afford it. I bet lawyers have offered Pro Bono left and right once this went public. I don’t know her restrictions though and if she’s had any opportunities to actually chat with this guy. Link to comment
Moscow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 minute ago, Aep said: Bc he’s a narcissist I know he's a sick man, but I am just baffled with this everything has come to light, Ronan Farrow has exposed him so I don't know what's stopping him to drop this. Link to comment
PokemonSpears Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, TakeYourHand said: Yes so my question is how? It’s clear to me that the reason she isn’t allowed to choose her own lawyer is because of the fees. They don’t want her spending her own money. She is clearly of sound mind. She only receives 2000 a week probably on a card with restrictions. How is she going to pay a lawyer? Or is this a Pro Bono situation? attorneys aren't paid from her allowance, but from her estate, if the court approves the fees. Ingham was not paid less than 2000 The reason why she wasn't allowed to chose counsel, was because supposedly she wasn't mentally capable to do so 1 Link to comment
Moscow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, TakeYourHand said: Yes so my question is how? It’s clear to me that the reason she isn’t allowed to choose her own lawyer is because of the fees. They don’t want her spending her own money. She is clearly of sound mind. She only receives 2000 a week probably on a card with restrictions. How is she going to pay a lawyer? Or is this a Pro Bono situation? This is a brilliant question - someone please answer this. Link to comment
Moscow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 minute ago, PokemonSpears said: attorneys aren't paid from her allowance, but from her estate, if the court approves the fees. Ingham was not paid less than 2000 The reason why she wasn't allowed to chose counsel, was because supposedly she wasn't mentally capable to do so Okay, makes sense to me thanks! Link to comment
TakeYourHand Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 minute ago, PokemonSpears said: attorneys aren't paid from her allowance, but from her estate, if the court approves the fees. Ingham was not paid less than 2000 The reason why she wasn't allowed to chose counsel, was because supposedly she wasn't mentally capable to do so Yes but her father controls her estate so if a judge approves this, wouldn’t her father have to as well? That’s his job. Link to comment
s&m Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 minute ago, TakeYourHand said: Yes but her father controls her estate so if a judge approves this, wouldn’t her father have to as well? That’s his job. No Link to comment
Recommended Posts