Dapper or other Lawyers; thoughts on NCAA stuff

[texacane]

I think you're on to the real problem for the NCAA and MEP. ..... first some background.

The whole point of a bankruptcy proceeding, overseen by federal judges, is the regulated division of a debtor's (shapiro's) assests for the benefit of creditors. (BTW the joke is that God was institutionalized for having delusions of grandure that he was a federal judge, routinely no sunshine with these judges, they take the process most seriously.)

anyway, there are rules governing who gets paid first out of the bankruptcy estate, i.e. the debtor's remaining assets. as you would expect, if you're a federal practitioner, the IRS and lawyers working the bankruptcy, pretty much, have priority in getting paid over other creditors... kinda to first pay for the overhead: courthouse, judges and a lawyers who would routinely not get involved on the debtors' behalf without assurances of getting paid.

bankruptcy depositions are attended by lawyers, in this case lots of them, lawyers for the creditors (include the government here) and MEP for the debtor (shapiro). the true purpose of the depositions is to see: is there any money to be devided, if so - who gets it, and in what order. (remember all the lawyers get paid to attend these depositions from the estate, they are first in line, most likely ahead of scammed victims!

At this point both MEP and the gal (Julie?) from the NCAA who authorized payments to MEP are lawyers. (and I bet neither the NCAA lawyer nor MEP are licensed in NJ where the federal Bankruptcy is pending.)

the payments were made to MEP, representing a litigant in a federal proceeding, to secure testimony (deposition testimony from wirnesses) related to an NCAA investigation (most certainly not a natural part of the bankruptcy proceeding, or the ncaa would have just ordered a transcript - public record- of the routine testimony.) in fact, the NCAA most certainly gave MEP specific questions, specifice marching orders germane to the investigation and not the bankruptcy, otherwise why are they hiring her, and paying her.

here's the real problem....and apart from any conflict of interest claims...1) the money that will be spent to pay the other lawyers, the debtors' lawyers, who attended the depostions conducted for the NCAA, not for puposes of the bankruptcy, will be paid from the debtor's (SHAPIRO'S) remaing assets, funds that should rightly go the victims of shapiro's ponzi scam. THAT MONEY WILL BE PAID INSTEAD TO CREDITOR'S (VICTIM'S) LAWYERS WHO HAD TO ATTEND DEPOSITIONS CONDUCTED TO OBTAIN INFORMATION FOR THE NCAA!!! 2) when deposition begin counsel identify themselves and who they represent, for the record, MEP did not advise the court or opposing counsel she was at the deposition on behalf of the NCAA, the NCAA was and is not a party to the proceeding. 3) the deposition of peewee allen (which i read) really IMO nothing to do with the bankruptcy, in fact the depo covers activities when golden was coach, long after Shapiro had been jailed and his assets siezed by the government. (and again, if the deposition was covering bankruptcy matters why does the NCAA ave to pay $20,000 of NCAA membership funds to MEP??)

The last link....Lawyers have an ethical duty of candor to the court, lawyers are officers of the court and as such are obligated as a condition of licensure to be candid with the court. (IIRC correctly, didn't MEP already have a run in with the federal court, and a federal judge in the southern district of florida for candor related issues?)

The federal judiciary in NJ should be, behind the scenes, going global ape **** over the misuse of its process and debtor funds at the request of an NCAA lawyer with the knowing complicity of MEP, an attorney with past issues.

to the extent the specifics of whatthe NCAA told or asked MEP to, and why, do become public record, the more the NCAA is on the hook for it's breaches of ethics and candor.

these fedral judge have independant remedies, remedies independant of the state bars' sanctions involving two lawyers.

As anyone who practices before them knows, these federal judges can be pretty "vigorous" when their courts have been misused and misled, and the legitimate purposes of the proceedings subverted, and victim-debtors' assests wasted.

If the NCAA has brain one it wants this thing over quietly.

Judge: Ms Perez, I read this transcript and you were given orders to proceed with discovery on the bankruptcy case and I read here things which have nothing to do with the case I am presented with and everything to do with something from an organization called the NCAA. Now as an officer of the court, you want to explain to me how looking for Mr. Shapiro's receipts for a few drinks he says he bought for University of Miami athletes has anything to do with recovering the close to $1 billion dollars we are charged with finding? Take your time, I wouldn't want you to be accused of abusing your authority as an officer of the court.

Perez: Uh….

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

awesome stuff tex

 

[hcanes100]

Tex, good post. Judges are vindictive mofos, they don't forget.

 

[umhurricano]

Maybe my previous posts weren't clear, but I think you nailed what I was trying to say, Tex, and that I am actually in agreement with Franchise and Sugar.

The basis of my point was that if you asked the NCAA and Shapiro whether each had a problem with Ms. Perez commingling the others proceedings, they would say no because Shapiro wants to take Miami down (as he has stated) and the NCAA appears to be on a witch hunt against us. There are much broader conflicts in the case that have to do with several other parties and the legal ethics rules.

Franchise, I am not an attorney but have a JD, so I probably know just enough to be completely wrong. Sugar, since I am not a barred attorney you don't ever have to worry about not hiring me as your legal counsel.

 

[CandyCane]

TEXACANE - great point about all the legal expenses the NCAA caused the other litigants (claimants) in the bankruptcy proceeding. Didn't MEP havea legal responsibility to name her client to the court as well?

 

[The Franchise]

Good stuff, Tex. You explained exactly what I was referencing in regard to the abuse of the bankruptcy proceedings by the corrupt NCAA and Pig ***** Perez being the real jackpot in this case. The conflict of interest thing is pretty minor compared to the fraud they perpetrated on the bankruptcy court and creditors.

 

[CaneSuger]

I think you're on to the real problem for the NCAA and MEP. ..... first some background.

The whole point of a bankruptcy proceeding, overseen by federal judges, is the regulated division of a debtor's (shapiro's) assests for the benefit of creditors. (BTW the joke is that God was institutionalized for having delusions of grandure that he was a federal judge, routinely no sunshine with these judges, they take the process most seriously.)

anyway, there are rules governing who gets paid first out of the bankruptcy estate, i.e. the debtor's remaining assets. as you would expect, if you're a federal practitioner, the IRS and lawyers working the bankruptcy, pretty much, have priority in getting paid over other creditors... kinda to first pay for the overhead: courthouse, judges and a lawyers who would routinely not get involved on the debtors' behalf without assurances of getting paid.

bankruptcy depositions are attended by lawyers, in this case lots of them, lawyers for the creditors (include the government here) and MEP for the debtor (shapiro). the true purpose of the depositions is to see: is there any money to be devided, if so - who gets it, and in what order. (remember all the lawyers get paid to attend these depositions from the estate, they are first in line, most likely ahead of scammed victims!

At this point both MEP and the gal (Julie?) from the NCAA who authorized payments to MEP are lawyers. (and I bet neither the NCAA lawyer nor MEP are licensed in NJ where the federal Bankruptcy is pending.)

the payments were made to MEP, representing a litigant in a federal proceeding, to secure testimony (deposition testimony from wirnesses) related to an NCAA investigation (most certainly not a natural part of the bankruptcy proceeding, or the ncaa would have just ordered a transcript - public record- of the routine testimony.) in fact, the NCAA most certainly gave MEP specific questions, specifice marching orders germane to the investigation and not the bankruptcy, otherwise why are they hiring her, and paying her.

here's the real problem....and apart from any conflict of interest claims...1) the money that will be spent to pay the other lawyers, the debtors' lawyers, who attended the depostions conducted for the NCAA, not for puposes of the bankruptcy, will be paid from the debtor's (SHAPIRO'S) remaing assets, funds that should rightly go the victims of shapiro's ponzi scam. THAT MONEY WILL BE PAID INSTEAD TO CREDITOR'S (VICTIM'S) LAWYERS WHO HAD TO ATTEND DEPOSITIONS CONDUCTED TO OBTAIN INFORMATION FOR THE NCAA!!! 2) when deposition begin counsel identify themselves and who they represent, for the record, MEP did not advise the court or opposing counsel she was at the deposition on behalf of the NCAA, the NCAA was and is not a party to the proceeding. 3) the deposition of peewee allen (which i read) really IMO nothing to do with the bankruptcy, in fact the depo covers activities when golden was coach, long after Shapiro had been jailed and his assets siezed by the government. (and again, if the deposition was covering bankruptcy matters why does the NCAA ave to pay $20,000 of NCAA membership funds to MEP??)

The last link....Lawyers have an ethical duty of candor to the court, lawyers are officers of the court and as such are obligated as a condition of licensure to be candid with the court. (IIRC correctly, didn't MEP already have a run in with the federal court, and a federal judge in the southern district of florida for candor related issues?)

The federal judiciary in NJ should be, behind the scenes, going global ape **** over the misuse of its process and debtor funds at the request of an NCAA lawyer with the knowing complicity of MEP, an attorney with past issues.

to the extent the specifics of whatthe NCAA told or asked MEP to, and why, do become public record, the more the NCAA is on the hook for it's breaches of ethics and candor.

these fedral judge have independant remedies, remedies independant of the state bars' sanctions involving two lawyers.

As anyone who practices before them knows, these federal judges can be pretty "vigorous" when their courts have been misused and misled, and the legitimate purposes of the proceedings subverted, and victim-debtors' assests wasted.

If the NCAA has brain one it wants this thing over quietly.

Judge: Ms Perez, I read this transcript and you were given orders to proceed with discovery on the bankruptcy case and I read here things which have nothing to do with the case I am presented with and everything to do with something from an organization called the NCAA. Now as an officer of the court, you want to explain to me how looking for Mr. Shapiro's receipts for a few drinks he says he bought for University of Miami athletes has anything to do with recovering the close to $1 billion dollars we are charged with finding? Take your time, I wouldn't want you to be accused of abusing your authority as an officer of the court.

Perez: Uh….

My only question is how much can this be blamed on the NCAA, and how much of the responsibility lies with Perez?

Unfortunately, from what you've said above, I would think Perez bears the brunt of the responsibility. She's the officer of the court. She's the one who should have turned the NCAA down, but failed to do so. Is the NCAA really expected to know how to walk on eggshells through a bankruptcy proceeding?

Perez is the one who should have known there was a potential conflict of interest. They should have taught her that in law school.

 

[texacane]

to follow up...don't think these problems, now that they have come out from under the rock they shared with the NCAA and MEP, are not dawning (in their full magnitude) on both the NCAA investigator/lawyer (Julie?) who hired MEP, and MEP herself . and, you can tell by the way they've squirmed and prevaricated in the press:

(the following is based upon press reports, the accuracy of which is almost always questionable, but...here goes.......)

when payment story first broke Mep claimed, according to reports, that she was paid (the amount was first undisclosed) she said the $ WAS FOR PHOTOCOPYING!!!!!! seriously? c'mon MEP, you do photocopying?

then the story widens, she got five figures from the NCAA, for photocopying? no one is gonna believe that. but the financial records were then being made available to Emmert who's no doubt asking "really? twenty thousand dollars from my investigative staff to MEP, to an attorney, for copies? What happened to kinkos? "

Meanwhile , MEP gets interviewed by the press, concerning a potential conflict of interest in her legal representation - as between the interests of the NCAA and SHAPIRO (Hey MEP a practice pointer: "no comment" is most always a great answer at this point, unless you're trying to talk you way out of your immedeate concerns of a conflict of interest or you were simply self-promoting in the media...oh, wait.) Mep goes on to say there was not a conflict of interest because the legal interests of the two parties (NCAA and Shapiro) were the same.

MEP and the NCAA obviously had not gotten their story straight at this point, or MEP would have said "Conflict? couldn't be. I only provided the NCAA with photocopies. hardly legal representation, is it?" but MEP didn't say this. She said, no conflict in the legal interests (of my clients.)

Well the NCAA investigator/lawyer i bet would have loved to tell MEP at this point: HEY, *****! STFU!!!! tell them! it was only photocopies!! but MEP IMO , is now more concerned about the adverse publicity and a possible state bar conlict investigation. so she defends the immedeate point of attack, hey no conflict in legal interests of my clients (NCAA and Shapiro) they have the same legal interests. so she tells the press, or so they report.

meanwhile back at the NCAA, they must be thinking this stupid byatch is telling the world we hired her to represent us and participate on behalf in a lega proceeding, and we're telling the world (and maybe EMMERT!) we paid her for copies......oooooohhhh sheeeat.

So when the press then asks the NCAA "what's up with MEP? and why was all that (now we know 20K) moolah paid her, the NCAA then says: "well that's attorney client privilege." (simmilar to the privilege we always have with kinkos when ordering the copying of legal transcripts. sarcasm here.)

I think they first threw this attorney client claim out publically 1) to tell MEP STFU! and 2) to give MEP some reason why MEP should not have to tell someone, i.e., the bar, the bankruptcy judge, debtor litigants, the U (this list is not exhaustive) exactly what the NCAA told MEP when they hired her what the NCAA was looking for, and whythey were still looking, how they then viewed the state of the investigation, and what they felt they could not then prove!!! surely they had these discussiions when they hired her! I'd like to know the answers to these questions and more. Must have been some concerns to the NCAA tas hey gave MEP $20,000.00 of the associations' funds to get something.

So, i got a great idea!! lets have MEP and the iNCAA nvestigator/lawyer air all this **** out at the heaing on infractions!! with the bakruptcy judge and state bar in the wings, all listening, taking notes. OOOOHH! Remember the NCAA was party to MEP's conduct before the bankruptcy court and the NCAA/investigator is, was a lawyer who should have known better.

This NCAA investigation/case, if the NCAA has brain one, settles, by agreement, of the parties without a hearing. That's my guess, because i'd kinda like to have a hearing....love to get some answers.

 

[SmokeyRone]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

The NCAA came and stated they had to have an investigation into their own inner workings due to fraudulent BS. Then they hired a "private investigative firm" to clean up the mess and low and behold nothing happened? GTFOOH! Lawyer scum is going to lawyer scum...

I get the sneaking suspicion this dude doesn't like lawyers.

or he is one

LOL, yep. My opinion is similar, and I'm a recovering lawya

 

[The Franchise]

Tex, I haven't studied this particular issue, as I've never been presented with it or researched it. But perhaps you have, so I'll put it out there. Is the attorney/client privilege invokable if the client was using the attorney for an illegal purpose? I have a feeling it isn't just based on my own intuition. Seems to me like a colorable argument could be made that the NCAA was using Pig ***** Perez to gain information that had nothing at all to do with the bankruptcy proceeding and was fully engaged with her in perpetrating a fraud on the court. They can't pin it on her and claim she went renegade because they were clearly complicit in the fraud.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

The NCAA came and stated they had to have an investigation into their own inner workings due to fraudulent BS. Then they hired a "private investigative firm" to clean up the mess and low and behold nothing happened? GTFOOH! Lawyer scum is going to lawyer scum...

I get the sneaking suspicion this dude doesn't like lawyers.

or he is one

LOL, yep. My opinion is similar, and I'm a recovering lawya

Smokey's my hero. ***** argued in front of the Supremes, IIRC.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Tex, I haven't studied this particular issue, as I've never been presented with it or researched it. But perhaps you have, so I'll put it out there. Is the attorney/client privilege invokable if the client was using the attorney for an illegal purpose? I have a feeling it isn't just based on my own intuition. Seems to me like a colorable argument could be made that the NCAA was using Pig ***** Perez to gain information that had nothing at all to do with the bankruptcy proceeding and was fully engaged with her in perpetrating a fraud on the court. They can't pin it on her and claim she went renegade because they were clearly complicit in the fraud.

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

 

[DMoney]

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

It's a very defensive move. They are admitting one wrong (the attorney-client relationship) to cover up another wrong (whatever they discussed).

The balance of power has shifted so dramatically that it's hard to imagine a clean outcome for the NCAA.

 

[The Franchise]

Tex, I haven't studied this particular issue, as I've never been presented with it or researched it. But perhaps you have, so I'll put it out there. Is the attorney/client privilege invokable if the client was using the attorney for an illegal purpose? I have a feeling it isn't just based on my own intuition. Seems to me like a colorable argument could be made that the NCAA was using Pig ***** Perez to gain information that had nothing at all to do with the bankruptcy proceeding and was fully engaged with her in perpetrating a fraud on the court. They can't pin it on her and claim she went renegade because they were clearly complicit in the fraud.

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

They might have thought that the claim of A/C privilege would shield them from having to disclose what they discussed with Pig ***** Perez, but to my point, I'm not so sure you can make that claim when the activity you are undertaking is illegal. So, they might have sunk themselves on the issue of her actually being their attorney, and they might wind up not having the A/C privilege to protect them.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Tex, I haven't studied this particular issue, as I've never been presented with it or researched it. But perhaps you have, so I'll put it out there. Is the attorney/client privilege invokable if the client was using the attorney for an illegal purpose? I have a feeling it isn't just based on my own intuition. Seems to me like a colorable argument could be made that the NCAA was using Pig ***** Perez to gain information that had nothing at all to do with the bankruptcy proceeding and was fully engaged with her in perpetrating a fraud on the court. They can't pin it on her and claim she went renegade because they were clearly complicit in the fraud.

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

They might have thought that the claim of A/C privilege would shield them from having to disclose what they discussed with Pig ***** Perez, but to my point, I'm not so sure you can make that claim when the activity you are undertaking is illegal. So, they might have sunk themselves on the issue of her actually being their attorney, and they might wind up not having the A/C privilege to protect them.

I get what they think they might accomplish by invoking the privilege, but I'd note that it's only _relevant_ in litigation.

And since the COI is a private dispute resolution organization, they are free to infer anything they want, including negative things, from any invocation of privilege in the context of discovery requests (assuming they even permit discovery in such proceedings).

Anyhow, all I'm saying is invoking that privilege in this context is a pretty defensive move. It's a bunker mentality move.

 

[texacane]

I think you're on to the real problem for the NCAA and MEP. ..... first some background.

The whole point of a bankruptcy proceeding, overseen by federal judges, is the regulated division of a debtor's (shapiro's) assests for the benefit of creditors. (BTW the joke is that God was institutionalized for having delusions of grandure that he was a federal judge, routinely no sunshine with these judges, they take the process most seriously.)

anyway, there are rules governing who gets paid first out of the bankruptcy estate, i.e. the debtor's remaining assets. as you would expect, if you're a federal practitioner, the IRS and lawyers working the bankruptcy, pretty much, have priority in getting paid over other creditors... kinda to first pay for the overhead: courthouse, judges and a lawyers who would routinely not get involved on the debtors' behalf without assurances of getting paid.

bankruptcy depositions are attended by lawyers, in this case lots of them, lawyers for the creditors (include the government here) and MEP for the debtor (shapiro). the true purpose of the depositions is to see: is there any money to be devided, if so - who gets it, and in what order. (remember all the lawyers get paid to attend these depositions from the estate, they are first in line, most likely ahead of scammed victims!

At this point both MEP and the gal (Julie?) from the NCAA who authorized payments to MEP are lawyers. (and I bet neither the NCAA lawyer nor MEP are licensed in NJ where the federal Bankruptcy is pending.)

the payments were made to MEP, representing a litigant in a federal proceeding, to secure testimony (deposition testimony from wirnesses) related to an NCAA investigation (most certainly not a natural part of the bankruptcy proceeding, or the ncaa would have just ordered a transcript - public record- of the routine testimony.) in fact, the NCAA most certainly gave MEP specific questions, specifice marching orders germane to the investigation and not the bankruptcy, otherwise why are they hiring her, and paying her.

here's the real problem....and apart from any conflict of interest claims...1) the money that will be spent to pay the other lawyers, the debtors' lawyers, who attended the depostions conducted for the NCAA, not for puposes of the bankruptcy, will be paid from the debtor's (SHAPIRO'S) remaing assets, funds that should rightly go the victims of shapiro's ponzi scam. THAT MONEY WILL BE PAID INSTEAD TO CREDITOR'S (VICTIM'S) LAWYERS WHO HAD TO ATTEND DEPOSITIONS CONDUCTED TO OBTAIN INFORMATION FOR THE NCAA!!! 2) when deposition begin counsel identify themselves and who they represent, for the record, MEP did not advise the court or opposing counsel she was at the deposition on behalf of the NCAA, the NCAA was and is not a party to the proceeding. 3) the deposition of peewee allen (which i read) really IMO nothing to do with the bankruptcy, in fact the depo covers activities when golden was coach, long after Shapiro had been jailed and his assets siezed by the government. (and again, if the deposition was covering bankruptcy matters why does the NCAA ave to pay $20,000 of NCAA membership funds to MEP??)

The last link....Lawyers have an ethical duty of candor to the court, lawyers are officers of the court and as such are obligated as a condition of licensure to be candid with the court. (IIRC correctly, didn't MEP already have a run in with the federal court, and a federal judge in the southern district of florida for candor related issues?)

The federal judiciary in NJ should be, behind the scenes, going global ape **** over the misuse of its process and debtor funds at the request of an NCAA lawyer with the knowing complicity of MEP, an attorney with past issues.

to the extent the specifics of whatthe NCAA told or asked MEP to, and why, do become public record, the more the NCAA is on the hook for it's breaches of ethics and candor.

these fedral judge have independant remedies, remedies independant of the state bars' sanctions involving two lawyers.

As anyone who practices before them knows, these federal judges can be pretty "vigorous" when their courts have been misused and misled, and the legitimate purposes of the proceedings subverted, and victim-debtors' assests wasted.

If the NCAA has brain one it wants this thing over quietly.

Judge: Ms Perez, I read this transcript and you were given orders to proceed with discovery on the bankruptcy case and I read here things which have nothing to do with the case I am presented with and everything to do with something from an organization called the NCAA. Now as an officer of the court, you want to explain to me how looking for Mr. Shapiro's receipts for a few drinks he says he bought for University of Miami athletes has anything to do with recovering the close to $1 billion dollars we are charged with finding? Take your time, I wouldn't want you to be accused of abusing your authority as an officer of the court.

Perez: Uh….

My only question is how much can this be blamed on the NCAA, and how much of the responsibility lies with Perez?

Unfortunately, from what you've said above, I would think Perez bears the brunt of the responsibility. She's the officer of the court. She's the one who should have turned the NCAA down, but failed to do so. Is the NCAA really expected to know how to walk on eggshells through a bankruptcy proceeding?

Perez is the one who should have known there was a potential conflict of interest. They should have taught her that in law school.

IIRC julie? investigator/attorney is, was, or will soon used to be, a lawyer herself, she joined MEP in MEP's actions before the bankruptcy court. she had to have studied legal ethics either in law school, studiying for the bar or both.

being an officer of the court is serious stuff, it is an obligation of more than just being truthfull, it is an obligation of repect to and for the processes of the judiciary. acting through another lawyer ought not to get julie? off the hook, IMO you can't hire another to subvert the puposes of a judicial proceeding and then claim that you didn't do it, the person you hired to do it is the one who should be held accountable. (the legal maxim in latin is "qui fecit per alium fecit per se" she who acts through aother acts for herself. Julie? knows, or should know this.

ps if you are the3 NCAA do you want to get into all of this in public??

 

[texacane]

TEXACANE - great point about all the legal expenses the NCAA caused the other litigants (claimants) in the bankruptcy proceeding. Didn't MEP havea legal responsibility to name her client to the court as well?

kinda, but the real problem was that her client, the NCAA was not a part to the bankruptcy, as far as I know. and Mep was conducting discovery (trying to obtain evidence) for a non party to the proceeding. had she told the court and opposing counsel what she was really doing, in all probability, she would not have been allowed to try to collect the evidence for the NCAA that she had been paid to try to collect. proper candor IMO in this case would have required fulll disclosure which would have ended her ability to serve her NCSSA client.... in simple focus that's why the whole thing stinks.

 

[ACKCANE]

This all looks good for us ... What's their side/argument?

 

[NoahZach]

Tex, I haven't studied this particular issue, as I've never been presented with it or researched it. But perhaps you have, so I'll put it out there. Is the attorney/client privilege invokable if the client was using the attorney for an illegal purpose? I have a feeling it isn't just based on my own intuition. Seems to me like a colorable argument could be made that the NCAA was using Pig ***** Perez to gain information that had nothing at all to do with the bankruptcy proceeding and was fully engaged with her in perpetrating a fraud on the court. They can't pin it on her and claim she went renegade because they were clearly complicit in the fraud.

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

They might have thought that the claim of A/C privilege would shield them from having to disclose what they discussed with Pig ***** Perez, but to my point, I'm not so sure you can make that claim when the activity you are undertaking is illegal. So, they might have sunk themselves on the issue of her actually being their attorney, and they might wind up not having the A/C privilege to protect them.

I get what they think they might accomplish by invoking the privilege, but I'd note that it's only _relevant_ in litigation.

And since the COI is a private dispute resolution organization, they are free to infer anything they want, including negative things, from any invocation of privilege in the context of discovery requests (assuming they even permit discovery in such proceedings).

Anyhow, all I'm saying is invoking that privilege in this context is a pretty defensive move. It's a bunker mentality move.

I think the assertion of a claimed privilege would have more to do with silencing Perez in the media and controlling disclosures now than having anything to do with litigation.

 

[texacane]

I'm confused here. A couple weeks ago, there were a lot of folks (AlexCane comes to mind) claiming that there was no Attorney Client privilege here because there was no Attorney Client relationship, and that that was the best fact going for the NCAA, because if there was an attorney client relationship then she would have been further conflicted w/r/t the bankruptcy case.

If the NCAA claims A-C privilege, it would seem to me they're acknowledging that relationship. In that case, they've put her out to dry on legal ethics issues. That can't be good for them. They might try to silence her, but they're threatening her also, and digging their own ditch in terms of their behavior.

Anyhow, that's what I thought I understood a week ago from the chatterers chattering around here.

It's a very defensive move. They are admitting one wrong (the attorney-client relationship) to cover up another wrong (whatever they discussed).

The balance of power has shifted so dramatically that it's hard to imagine a clean outcome for the NCAA.

complete agreemet with you D$. the shift is dramatic and clearly dirties the NCAA, can't imagine a clean outcome for the NCAA, who is supposed to be conducting an inquiry into the ethics of the U's recruiting practices!

E-sands, as to the question of A-C privilege, as back ground, A-C priviliege has two components: one is evidentiary in nature (has to do with what kind of evidence can be used in legal and quasi-legal proceedings over the objection of the client), and the other component is an ethical limitation on what kind of disclosures can be made by a lawyer who has learned things from a client during legal representation of the client. communications intended to commit, or used to commit a crime or fraud may not be subject to the operation of the privilege ("Hey, because you're my lawyer, you can't tell the cops how we planned how to rob a bank, and hide the evidence." NAH!)

I also agree with you that if the NCAA presses MEP to not disclose its communications with her, because of A-C privilege, it most certainly strenghtens the argument that the NCAA was her client, and throws MEP under the bus for her actions before the bankruptcy court......Ironically the NCAA AT THE SAME TIME throws itself under the same bus as it was in knowing complicity with MEPS conduct in subverting those proceedings. Lawyers supposed to be smart. Jeesh.

Agreed settlement or stinky stinky.