Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Lin Wood / Questions for the FBG lawyers


Recommended Posts

A Maryland judge won’t allow Mr Wood to represent Carter Paige in a defamation suit.

"The conduct of Mr. Wood, albeit not in my jurisdiction, exhibited a toxic stew of mendacity, prevarication and surprising incompetence," Judge Craig Karsnitz wrote.

Karsnitz said that he is required to "ensure that those practicing before me are of sufficient character, and conduct themselves with sufficient civility and truthfulness," particularly when out-of-state counsel is selected. Wood is based in Georgia.

Noting Wood's involvement in the Trump campaign's unsuccessful efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election, the judge wrote that he became concerned after reviewing the decisions made in lawsuits Wood filed in Georgia and Wisconsin courts.

Is this why all the white shoe forms ran away from representing Trump or Trump causes in the 60+ cases they lost about voting irregularities? Please explain in layman terms why it would have been a bad idea to try to promote nefarious claims of voter fraud.

(sorry for not asking earlier, I was on vacation for a few months)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm admittedly unsure if I'm entirely following you, but generally a lawyer has an ethical obligation not to knowingly bring a frivolous lawsuit/cause of action. While that's a pretty low bar, a judge making such a finding (usually accompanied by a bar complaint) would likely bring a lawyer into hot water with the corresponding bar association and sanctions, including up to disbarment, would be possible. 

 

ETA: It's also probably just really bad from a PR perspective.

Edited by Zow
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

A Maryland judge won’t allow Mr Wood to represent Carter Paige in a defamation suit.

"The conduct of Mr. Wood, albeit not in my jurisdiction, exhibited a toxic stew of mendacity, prevarication and surprising incompetence," Judge Craig Karsnitz wrote.

Karsnitz said that he is required to "ensure that those practicing before me are of sufficient character, and conduct themselves with sufficient civility and truthfulness," particularly when out-of-state counsel is selected. Wood is based in Georgia.

Noting Wood's involvement in the Trump campaign's unsuccessful efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election, the judge wrote that he became concerned after reviewing the decisions made in lawsuits Wood filed in Georgia and Wisconsin courts.

Is this why all the white shoe forms ran away from representing Trump or Trump causes in the 60+ cases they lost about voting irregularities? Please explain in layman terms why it would have been a bad idea to try to promote nefarious claims of voter fraud.

(sorry for not asking earlier, I was on vacation for a few months)

Wood went pretty far beyond just representing Trump. Even before he started calling for executions on social media. 
 

I think most white shoe firms already avoided Trump for two main reasons. One, he lied to everyone, including his lawyers; and two, he has a history of not paying his bills. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Wood went pretty far beyond just representing Trump. Even before he started calling for executions on social media. 
 

I think most white shoe firms already avoided Trump for two main reasons. One, he lied to everyone, including his lawyers; and two, he has a history of not paying his bills. 

Yeah the latter would be my biggest concern frankly. No chance me or my firm would take his case without a very sizable retainer that cleared. 

 

We'd then likely have a meeting to decide whether we even wanted to take it in terms of being publicly associated with him. 

Edited by Zow
Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a pretty specific situation.   He wasn't admitted in Maryland, so he was seeking limited admission under pro hac vice rules.  Under those rules, in part because you aren't subject to the discipline rules of the state bar in which the case is being heard, you are supervised by a local attorney who is responsible for your conduct and you are required to comply with all ethical rules of the state.   This gave the Maryland judge wide latitude to deny or revoke his limited admission.   

As far as why other firms refused to take on these frivolous cases, I assume it is because they didn't need the publicity and they may have even respected their obligations under Rule 11 and similar state rules requiring pleadings to be brought in good faith.   Since the campaign itself was paying the bills in most cases, I don't think it was a matter of payment.   Trump was only the named individual in a select few cases, including his attempted intervention in the Supreme Court case.   Most of the others it was the campaign, which has sufficient war chests.  I also don't think it was a matter of Trump lying, since all of those cases would have come down to expert witnesses and Trump's individual testimony about what he thought about the election would have been irrelevant.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, the rover said:

This was a pretty specific situation.   He wasn't admitted in Maryland, so he was seeking limited admission under pro hac vice rules.  Under those rules, in part because you aren't subject to the discipline rules of the state bar in which the case is being heard, you are supervised by a local attorney who is responsible for your conduct and you are required to comply with all ethical rules of the state.   This gave the Maryland judge wide latitude to deny or revoke his limited admission.   

As far as why other firms refused to take on these frivolous cases, I assume it is because they didn't need the publicity and they may have even respected their obligations under Rule 11 and similar state rules requiring pleadings to be brought in good faith.   Since the campaign itself was paying the bills in most cases, I don't think it was a matter of payment.   Trump was only the named individual in a select few cases, including his attempted intervention in the Supreme Court case.   Most of the others it was the campaign, which has sufficient war chests.  I also don't think it was a matter of Trump lying, since all of those cases would have come down to expert witnesses and Trump's individual testimony about what he thought about the election would have been irrelevant.

This is the best answer so far as to why the judge did what he or she did in this situation. 

 

I interpreted your question to be more so why wouldn't certain firms take his case. 

Edited by Zow
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
1 hour ago, -fish- said:

it's hard to believe Lin Wood can get crazier.

Or still be in good standing with the bar (assuming he is). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dozer said:

If we have a military conflict.... Trump will be making the calls? Is that what I am hearing here?

it is difficult to grasp just how far detached from reality a person would have to be to believe lies this grandiose.

I doubt he actually believes this.  Isn't he just grifting?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Zow said:

Or still be in good standing with the bar (assuming he is). 

I saw something in the last week or so, where the state bar of Georgia released some of the claims against him - pretty crazy stuff.

 

(I think the disciplinary proceeding is still going on)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Chaz McNulty said:

I doubt he actually believes this.  Isn't he just grifting?

Oh yes! It’s a obviously a grift by Wood.

But the members of his audience believe him wholeheartedly. It’s those gullible sycophants that represent the danger brought on by Wood’s outrageous lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dozer said:

Oh yes! It’s a obviously a grift by Wood.

I would not be so sure.

 

Plaintiff is involved in a pending case with his former colleagues from L. Lin Wood, P.C. The former colleagues filed a verified complaint, in which they state that: a. Plaintiff began to display “erratic, abusive, and unprofessional behavior.” Plaintiff’s former colleagues averred that Wood was becoming “increasingly...hostile...and threatening

 

 Plaintiff threatened to beat one of his former law colleagues with a switch until “he couldn’t sit down for 20 ####### years.”

 

Plaintiff also threatened to “destroy” his former law colleagues and said about one of them specifically, “by the time I am through with [him], he’s going to wish all I had done was #### his wife.”

 

On a 3.5 hour teleconference, Plaintiff spoke nearly non-stop and offered to fight his former law colleagues to the death.

 

Plaintiff declared that he was doing God’s will; threatened to bring down the wrath of God; promised that Plaintiffs would be punished “at the discretion of Almighty God”; said “God Almighty told me to get you back to where you belong. Broke and essentially homeless

 

You all better get on  your knees and pray to Almighty God that He now asks me to show you mercy”; threatened “I will deliver a fiery judgment against you on earth. Who the #### did you think you were dealing with? You were screwing around with me, but I was someone else in disguise. You in fact have been screwing around with God Almighty....” Plaintiff said that he would “make sure that you never practice law again ever if you do not admit your sins, all of them by 10:30 a.m.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plaintiff voiced repeated concerns about his misconduct being disclosed, as he feared it would interfere with his supposedly imminent receipt of the Presidential Medal of Freedom and appointment as the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Plaintiff believed his appointment was forthcoming due to a prophesy he heard in a YouTube video and a conspiracy theory that Chief Justice John Roberts would be revealed to be part of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking ring and was being blackmailed by liberals to rule in their favor

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Plaintiff voiced repeated concerns about his misconduct being disclosed, as he feared it would interfere with his supposedly imminent receipt of the Presidential Medal of Freedom and appointment as the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Plaintiff believed his appointment was forthcoming due to a prophesy he heard in a YouTube video and a conspiracy theory that Chief Justice John Roberts would be revealed to be part of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking ring and was being blackmailed by liberals to rule in their favor

The level of insanity required to trick your brain into believing this.....is what is so hard for me to reconcile that this is anything other than a grift.

I don’t think even our Trumpiest Trumpers in the PSF believe this craziness.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I would not be so sure.

 

Plaintiff is involved in a pending case with his former colleagues from L. Lin Wood, P.C. The former colleagues filed a verified complaint, in which they state that: a. Plaintiff began to display “erratic, abusive, and unprofessional behavior.” Plaintiff’s former colleagues averred that Wood was becoming “increasingly...hostile...and threatening

 

 Plaintiff threatened to beat one of his former law colleagues with a switch until “he couldn’t sit down for 20 ####### years.”

 

Plaintiff also threatened to “destroy” his former law colleagues and said about one of them specifically, “by the time I am through with [him], he’s going to wish all I had done was #### his wife.”

 

On a 3.5 hour teleconference, Plaintiff spoke nearly non-stop and offered to fight his former law colleagues to the death.

 

Plaintiff declared that he was doing God’s will; threatened to bring down the wrath of God; promised that Plaintiffs would be punished “at the discretion of Almighty God”; said “God Almighty told me to get you back to where you belong. Broke and essentially homeless

 

You all better get on  your knees and pray to Almighty God that He now asks me to show you mercy”; threatened “I will deliver a fiery judgment against you on earth. Who the #### did you think you were dealing with? You were screwing around with me, but I was someone else in disguise. You in fact have been screwing around with God Almighty....” Plaintiff said that he would “make sure that you never practice law again ever if you do not admit your sins, all of them by 10:30 a.m.”

WTF. I wonder if he is suffering from some mental health issues. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Zow said:

WTF. I wonder if he is suffering from some mental health issues. 

So is the Georgia Bar...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Chaz McNulty said:

I doubt he actually believes this.  Isn't he just grifting?

Absolutely. He's smirking the smirk of a conman as he's saying all that stuff.

EDIT: Well, Zow's right -- can't rule out mental health.

Edited by Doug B
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dozer said:

The level of insanity required to trick your brain into believing this.....is what is so hard for me to reconcile that this is anything other than a grift.

I don’t think even our Trumpiest Trumpers in the PSF believe this craziness.

 

I disagree. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zow said:

WTF. I wonder if he is suffering from some mental health issues. 

Maybe he's just setting up a mental illness defense to both the defamation cases and disbarment hearings against him.   "I can't tell what's true, so you can't sue me for defamation for repeating what the voices in my head tell me to say."  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...