Jump to content

nthenwkiss

Fire
  • Content Count

    1,927
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Points

    19,210 [ Give ]
  • Feedback

    0%

Community Reputation

5,928 Solar Flare

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender Identity
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,769 profile views
  1. GT LAW will not fail, that firm is huge and we have nothing to worry about with them; also notice from the transcript that he always mentions that he is from GT; also in the documents filed, Rosengart is signing on behalf of GT LAW; and during those small recaps he does after hearings he says “my firm and I”. Trust me they want this to go well. I have first hand experience with that law firm with their Miami branch and you have no idea how big and powerful they are.
  2. I don’t think any of these are related, there is literally zero proof and not even enough reasons to believe that.
  3. seeing the way things are going justice will be served and that makes me SO happy; rosengart has A LOT of work to do and many years of work ahead.
  4. I personally believe it could’ve been overlooked in a different situation or person, but I feel like these people WANTED him disbarred and used this to send a message that they are not to be messed with.
  5. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_3_direct_contact_with_prospective_clients/ (a) “Solicitation” or “solicit” denotes a communication initiated by or on behalf of a lawyer or law firm that is directed to a specific person the lawyer knows or reasonably should know needs legal services in a particular matter and that offers to provide, or reasonably can be understood as offering to provide, legal services for that matter. (b) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment by live person-to-person contact when a significant motive for the lawyer’s doing so is the lawyer’s or law firm’s pecuniary gain, unless the contact is with a: (1) lawyer; (2) person who has a family, close personal, or prior business or professional relationship with the lawyer or law firm; or (3) person who routinely uses for business purposes the type of legal services offered by the lawyer. (c) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment even when not otherwise prohibited by paragraph (b), if: (1) the target of the solicitation has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by the lawyer; or (2) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment. (d) This Rule does not prohibit communications authorized by law or ordered by a court or other tribunal. (e) Notwithstanding the prohibitions in this Rule, a lawyer may participate with a prepaid or group legal service plan operated by an organization not owned or directed by the lawyer that uses live person-to-person contact to enroll members or sell subscriptions for the plan from persons who are not known to need legal services in a particular matter covered by the plan.
  6. One of the reasons for his disbarment reads: Case No. 08-0-10879 (Spears) On February 1, 2008, the Los Angeles County Superior Court issued a temporary conservatorship over Britney Spears (Spears). The court appointed James Spears and Andrew Wallet to act as co-conservators. Spears was represented by counsel. -3- On February 4, 2008, the same court issued an order stating that Spears was incapacitated. On February 6, 2008, the court ordered that the co-conservators had exclusive authority in relation to Spears’ care, as well as decisions regarding her legal representation. The court continued the conservatorship until February 14, 2008. On or about February 14, 2008, Respondent filed a notice of removal to federal court of the Spears conservatorship action. In the notice, Respondent stated that he was the attorney for Spears. Respondent, however, was not then the attorney for Spears and never had been. Respondent knew, was grossly negligent in not knowing, that he had not obtained consent to represent Spears. Spears incurred fees to defend against Respondent’s action. Count 2 - Section 6104 [Appearing for Party without Authority] Section 6104 states, "Corruptly or willfully and without authority appearing as attorney for a party to an action or proceeding constitutes a cause for disbarment or suspension." Respondent’s actions in appearing as counsel for Spears without any authority to do so, constituted a willful violation by him of section 6104. Count 3 - Section 6106 [Moral Turpitude - Misrepresentation] By falsely representing in the above removal papers that he was the attorney for Spears, when he knew, or was grossly negligent in not knowing, that this representation was not true, Respondent committed an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty and corruption in willful violation of section 6106.3 You can read the whole document here: https://members.calbar.ca.gov/courtDocs/08-O-10075-2.pdf
  7. I think this letter is the exhibit to his disbarment - the documents stating why he was disbarred said he solicited Britney Spears as a client; I think they are referencing this letter.
  8. Yes me too; but I think this is why he got disbarred; I think these are the exhibits to his disbarment - he was soliciting a client in this letter; or at least that’s what it looks like. When I think my heart can’t brake anymore, more things come up and I can’t help but wonder how is Britney Spears SO strong? This is horrible and I can’t believe how everyone literary everyone wanted to ruin her. I am so saddened; I don’t think any of this is reparable… even after she’s free I think it’s just too late. She’s been broken too many times. I just want to hug her really hard. Side note - we have to destroy Kaplan and Kevin ASAP.
  9. can someone do a reface of the topless pic with jamies face?
  10. I don’t think is that deep - personally. She evidently took the pictures and looks happy in them - and looks great too; but I’m not sure she’s calling the shots when it comes to her IG. Definitely if those got posted without her consent then it’s very disturbing.
  11. just here basically, and since free britney i follow some key players on twitter like that surprise witness and lisa, britney army etc. but i dont have a twitter account, i just lurk the hashtag. i dont have any social media - maybe just grindr if thats considered social media hahahahahaha. so im giving all of my love to breatheheavy since 2018 with an account - been lurking without an account since like 2010
  12. or something along the lines - i feel like wether or not she controls her IG there is definitely something going on behind the scenes; we just still don't know what it is. but there are some plot holes in this whole thing.
×
×
  • Create New...

We noticed you're using an ad blocker  :badthoughts_gun_kris_genner_thinking_debating:

Thanks for visiting Exhale! Your support is greatly appreciated 💜  

Exhale survives through advertising revenue. Please, disable your ad block extension to help us and continue browsing Exhale. 🙏

I've disabled ad block