Read on Twitter
Good evening, followers of litigation hijinx:
There's an interesting - I think that's the word - filing by Lin Wood in a NY defamation case. I'm getting up to speed on the case now; I'll have a summary of the situation and a thread on Lin's filing starting in just a few minutes.
There's an interesting - I think that's the word - filing by Lin Wood in a NY defamation case. I'm getting up to speed on the case now; I'll have a summary of the situation and a thread on Lin's filing starting in just a few minutes.
Ok - here's the situation.
The case in question is La Liberte v Reid. It's a defamation case involving statements that made a couple of years ago. The case was initially dismissed, but the 2nd Circuit dismissed last year and discovery is just starting. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7932663/la-liberte-v-reid/
The case in question is La Liberte v Reid. It's a defamation case involving statements that made a couple of years ago. The case was initially dismissed, but the 2nd Circuit dismissed last year and discovery is just starting. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7932663/la-liberte-v-reid/
As far as I can tell from reviewing the record, there was a hearing on Jan 11th that must have been quite a thing. The defense counsel apparently raised Lin's seditiontreasonweaseling with the court, and some...discussion appears to have ensued.
The defense asked for, and received, a briefing schedule for a motion to revoke Lin's pro hac vice in the case.
For the nonlawyers: Lin's not admitted to practice in NY and has to get case-by-case permission to appear from the court.
For the nonlawyers: Lin's not admitted to practice in NY and has to get case-by-case permission to appear from the court.
The defense filed their motion seeking - in essence - to kick Lin's tail back to Georgia so hard that he'll have the momentum to get past South of the Border on his first tank of gas.
That and the supporting affidavit are here:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.63.0.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.64.0.pdf
That and the supporting affidavit are here:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.63.0.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.64.0.pdf
Lin just filed his reply. Before I dive into that, we should probably skim through those first two documents so we've got a rough idea of what Lin is replying to.
We'll start with the memorandum and go through quickly.
We'll start with the memorandum and go through quickly.
The table of contents sets out the high points well, and suggests that this is a document I'll be referring to for a thing I'm working on that discusses performative frivolous suits.
The overall theme seems to be that if lawyers had uniforms, Lin would be a disgrace to his and please make us stop having to deal with him.
It also makes it clear that the factual allegations in question exclusively involve Lin's post-election batshittery.
It also makes it clear that the factual allegations in question exclusively involve Lin's post-election batshittery.
Even the fourth point, which is the only one that involves conduct in this case, deals with Lin's apparent antics at the Jan 11th hearing, and specifically what he told the court at that hearing.
The background section is sending the message that Lin isn't essential to this case - that it was his former partners/coworkers (the precise status is disputed) who did all the work.
The next several pages, which I'm skipping, set out the legal standard. The court specifically directed briefing on this point, so no surprise at the detail level. But not something we need to review now.
I watched a bunch of that rally. Lin was legitimately scaring the hell out of me during it. He was tiptoeing right up to the incitement line, and he did it more than once. If Sidney hadn't followed up by boring the crap out of the crowd I don't know what would have happened.
Some overreach here, potentially - but there's no doubt that Lin was absolutely one of the people who is morally, if not legally, responsible for the seditious conspiracy of January 6th.
And, yes. There is blood on Lin Wood's hands.
(I'm going to start jumping through and just looking for parts likely to be of particular interest to the court.)
Such as this, which involves the hearing last month:
Such as this, which involves the hearing last month:
The court may also be somewhat concerned about Lin's deranged attacks on the judiciary - like this:
Or this:
And it looks like Lin was trying to dodge responsibility for the Kraken - to the point of throwing Sidney Powell under a bus - which is interesting.
It also makes me wonder if Lin is as unwell as I previously thought.
The lies to the court seem to be just that. And the decision to pick the best three is a good call.
Ok - so that's what Lin is responding to. Let's look at what he has to say. We'll refer to the affidavit submitted with this motion when/if we have to, but I'm not going through it separately.
As before, I'm mostly going to skip over legal argument about the standards. I'll focus on what Lin has to say for himself.
I should note that he had 25 pages (as I read the scheduling order, and he's only used 10). That could be either good or bad.
Also: link to the filing. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.66.0.pdf
Also: link to the filing. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.66.0.pdf
If Lin is allowed to stay on this case (and revoking PHV is not the norm) this will be why. Judges tend to focus on their own courtrooms and not on things that didn't happen in front of them.
Credit where due, this is reasonably good argumentative writing.
The next several pages, which I'm going to skip over, are also solid writing. Either this was drafted by Lin's co-counsel here, or Lin really had little to do with the writing on the Kraken cases.
Honestly, and credit where due, that wasn't clownshoes. I haven't read it closely and there are likely to be some things I'm missing, but on first impression it's good legal writing.
It puts and keeps the focus of the brief on his client and his client's case before this court.
It puts and keeps the focus of the brief on his client and his client's case before this court.
The argument section also starts out well. And linking this to the client and the client's interest is likely to be a compelling argument.
The "lip service" line was unnecessary. But the Sotomayor quote looks like a good choice. (We'll see if it really was when the reply brief comes in.)
This bit starts well, but then goes downhill rapidly.
You would be hard-pressed to find a judge who wasn't viscerally disturbed by the events on Jan 6th. Minimizing Lin's role instead of confronting it isn't IMO the best choice.
You would be hard-pressed to find a judge who wasn't viscerally disturbed by the events on Jan 6th. Minimizing Lin's role instead of confronting it isn't IMO the best choice.
Nor is entirely ignoring, at least in the brief, the allegations that Lin lied to *this* court. That's the dog that didn't bark in the night.
That's apparently going to be delt with in Lin's affidavit, so let's have a look at that. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.66.3.pdf
The opening is routine, but while I can't put a finger on my exact reasons, I'm already starting to suspect that Lin's co-counsel wrote the memorandum. The feel of the writing is different.
Paragraph 4 strikes me as potentially problematic, given the signature block in the linked filing from earlier in this case - Wilson isn't identifying himself as being with a separate firm, and has an email address associated with Lin's firm, not his own. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.25.0_1.pdf
MEGAYIKES
I'm just....
Yeah, co-counsel wrote the competent thing.
I mean...I....
Y
I
K
E
S
Yeah, co-counsel wrote the competent thing.
I mean...I....
Y
I
K
E
S
I don't think claiming to have evidence of serious crimes perpetrated by the Chief Justice is a good way to avoid losing phv standing.
But I do think it's why the memorandum of law was drafted to not engage with anything Lin says in this declaration at all.
But I do think it's why the memorandum of law was drafted to not engage with anything Lin says in this declaration at all.
I don't think saying that you have credible evidence supporting criminal acts by Georgia officials is the best strategy either.
Very not the best strategy.
Very not the best strategy.
Also, co-counsel 100% wrote the memorandum of law that goes with this filing. Which is absolutely why the memorandum has zero references to Lin's affidavit.
"There are lots and lots of puppy tweets on my Twitter and only very few Tweets that could be used as evidence of seditious conspiracy" is also maybe not the argument you want to go with.
Legally, Lin's tweets were probably protected. That said, simply denying direct involvement isn't necessarily the best course of action. Nor is suggesting that we don't know what really happened.
The first screenshot is the paragraph from the Reichman Declaration. The second is Lin's response.
YIKES.
Not an ideal response. At all.
YIKES.
Not an ideal response. At all.
Same goes here.
Also, a defamation lawyer asserting that he is in possession of undisclosed evidence of criminal wrongdoing is an interesting strategy.
Also, a defamation lawyer asserting that he is in possession of undisclosed evidence of criminal wrongdoing is an interesting strategy.
The fact that they're using the word "peacefully" is somewhat undercut by the timing - it was very clear at that time that the entry was anything but peaceful.
These paragraphs are basically just more examples of Lin trying to evade trouble. Given that Lin had the "where we go" thing in his Twitter bio, I think he's lying in paragraph 15, but that pales in comparison to the prior nuttery.
And in comparison to these further examples of Lin's unlawful carnal knowledge of a can of cashews, peanuts, pecans, and walnuts.
Also, judges just totally love it when you stroll into their courtroom - especially when you're doing it as a guest - and trash other judges.
It's an argument with the innate aerodynamic properties of the average elephant.
It's an argument with the innate aerodynamic properties of the average elephant.
Oh
my
my
And - just when I thought I was done, I looked at ¶ 35 of the Reichman Declaration. It appears that the transcript of the Jan 11th conference is an exhibit.
Guess what I'm downloading right now.
Guess what I'm downloading right now.
OK - the transcript is here. It's short.
And a bunch of it is discovery stuff that's not relevant to this. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.64.13.pdf
And a bunch of it is discovery stuff that's not relevant to this. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819/gov.uscourts.nyed.422819.64.13.pdf
Oh my.
Maybe I overestimated when I said "a bunch" is discovery stuff.
The discovery stuff ends and the Lin stuff begins on Page 5.
Of 27.
Maybe I overestimated when I said "a bunch" is discovery stuff.
The discovery stuff ends and the Lin stuff begins on Page 5.
Of 27.
Also, and as a reminder - this conference is happening on Jan 11th, so it's pretty soon after the Capitol insurrection and a reasonable point for defense counsel to have learned things.
The defense counsel clearly came prepared for this, and, in fairness, it's clearly an ambush. That's not a strategy that always plays well.
This is clearly something that the defense has put some time into at this point - they're well-prepared. The fact that they are doing this without prior warning of any kind is not -
- let me put it this way: I think Lin should be suspended. And I think this is a bad look.
- let me put it this way: I think Lin should be suspended. And I think this is a bad look.
And, seriously, dropping something like this from ambush and finishing the ambush with the "we think tattling is our ethical duty" doesn't improve the look. Even a tiny bit.
I'm not saying, to be clear, that it shouldn't be brought up.
I'm not saying, to be clear, that it shouldn't be brought up.
But dumping a prepared speech like this into a conference without warning instead of filing a motion and giving Lin a fair chance to respond is really rubbing me wrong.
OK, to be fair, this does help some and I'll dial back some of the earlier critique. But only some.
And it looks like Lin's immediate response to the Judge was less than candid. Considerably less, in fact.
Aside from the "reliable information" line, the level of the crazy isn't at record-high levels here, although the description of the suits and events is a bit...creative.
The needle is kicking up a bunch here, though - both on the crazy and on the three-dot creative descriptions of the suits.
And ramping up. Quite a bit.
Also, anyone who thinks that advocating for a violent insurrection against the civil authorities is "consistent with...the teachings of Jesus Christ" is Biblically illiterate.
This is certainly not helping him much here. At all.
Honestly, if he'd stopped at "what I said was protected," that might have ended the whole thing more or less on the spot.
Honestly, if he'd stopped at "what I said was protected," that might have ended the whole thing more or less on the spot.
And the phrase "color revolution" is --- ohboy.
Implying, in any way, that there's a conspiracy behind the accusations that you've gone farther off the rails than the Wreck of the Old 97 is another not-really-great idea.
Same for asserting that opposing counsel are out to get you because of a political agenda. (Although, in fairness, Grossly Inappropriate Larry Klayman has been doing that for decades with little in the way of consequences.)
And cutting off the judge's attempt to cut off your deranged rant so you can continue to rant is also not a great choice. At all.
And I don't know who the hell Mr. McRae is, but he just got steamrollered too. Lin was clearly on a roll.
It wasn't a particularly well-controlled roll, but it was a roll. One reminiscent of Wile-E just after another Acme delivery.
It wasn't a particularly well-controlled roll, but it was a roll. One reminiscent of Wile-E just after another Acme delivery.
Also, it looks like technical difficulties meant that there was an extra audience starting here.
Looks like they may have arrived right after the nick of time, though - because it seems to be settling back into routine. (The break might have helped.)
And - yes - that's everything of immediate interest. (The rest of the transcript was discovery scheduling, that kind of thing.)
Impressions:
I was ready to see the defense slammed for trying to take advantage of the situation, but Lin talked me out of that and may have talked everyone, including the judge, out of that.
If Lin gets booted, he's only got himself to blame.
I was ready to see the defense slammed for trying to take advantage of the situation, but Lin talked me out of that and may have talked everyone, including the judge, out of that.
If Lin gets booted, he's only got himself to blame.
Seriously, if he had just been able to more-or-less stick to what was in the memorandum of law, both in the hearing and in his affidavit, the worst that likely would have happened would probably have been a mild slap on the wrist and a "don't do this in my court, got it?"
And there was a non-zero chance of the defense getting bopped a bit for gamesmanship.
Now?
Now?
I think the best Lin can hope for is the slap on the wrist, a substantial benchslap is entirely possible, and it's not out of the question that the PHV gets revoked.
Judges often dislike acting based on conduct in other courts, but there's sufficient crazy in all of this to make a sane judge wonder if Lin will stay even moderately on the rails during the rest of this case.
No idea what will happen, but it looks like there's an early March hearing. Between the response brief on the 16th and that, we'll have a better idea.
Assuming that Georgia doesn't suspend him on an interim basis before then, anyway - that could complicate things a tiny bit.
/fin
/fin
