Did you read #15??? Heather is already involved in an Alienation of Affection suit now??? Did I read that rigth?????
That's how I read it.....makes it hard not to form an opinion about someone.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Did you read #15??? Heather is already involved in an Alienation of Affection suit now??? Did I read that rigth?????
Did you read #15??? Heather is already involved in an Alienation of Affection suit now??? Did I read that rigth?????
Did you read #15??? Heather is already involved in an Alienation of Affection suit now??? Did I read that rigth?????
Just to get it right:
Ms Metour is the correct spelling.
This is HUGE...someone's head is gonna roll!
I'm very new at this and certainly not well versed in law, but the motion to disqualify seems like a good argument--among other things.
How about #14, second sentence...that Ms. Cooper had an extramarital affair?
How about #14, second sentence...that Ms. Cooper had an extramarital affair?
Ok, wait, I think I get it after reading further.
So...........he wants Nancy's attorney disqualified because she knows the 'dirt' on ole Brad. She MAY be called as a witness to testify about stuff that isn't disputed, ie he's a fit parent (part of her divorce info), eventhough it's basically privileged, IF it's not disputed she can testify to it.
Am I getting this right?
On the other hand, she knows the dirt, and since he'd most likely contest that part, she couldn't testify about that because it's privileged. He want's to insure that she doesn't use the 'dirt' knowlege against his client but anything good said about him by her late client, he wants that brought out.
Ok, I get it. Double Lawyer Speak.................Skirt around the bad behavior of the client and only tell the good things. Hide behind the law.
gotcha!
I think
fran
http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/07/23/3257372/Motion_to_disqualify.pdf
They crossed out the name. Ut oh.
Saw that....first I've heard of it. Didn't read like there was anything to back that up.
Yeah, they had to throw that in. I got it but don't believe it. IF it's true, I don't care.
Nancy is a victim and what she did didn't deserve a death sentence.
It's Brad I'm concerned with. He's the one having the continued affair. He made it look like the affair was "OLD" and from what we've seen and heard, it was ongoing
IMHO, that attorney filed that motion to make the victim look bad.
That's just me.
But, I get it. Brad is AFRAID of what this attorney knows about HIM.
Just my opinion
fran
Yeah, they had to throw that in. I got it but don't believe it. IF it's true, I don't care.
Nancy is a victim and what she did didn't deserve a death sentence.
It's Brad I'm concerned with. He's the one having the continued affair. He made it look like the affair was "OLD" and from what we've seen and heard, it was ongoing
IMHO, that attorney filed that motion to make the victim look bad.
That's just me.
But, I get it. Brad is AFRAID of what this attorney knows about HIM.
Just my opinion
fran
Too late, thanks to you! :clap:
Speculation about the passports......
The passports were found in NCs car.
OK you and many here just don't get it... since I was married to a person who cheated let me explain something to you people. NC is a no fault state... meaning infidelity weighs ZERO in custody cases. I know this for fact for I went through it. I have 50/50 physical custody of my boys and she was the unfaithful one. I assure you outside of having proof of being a bad parent. Cheating is not weighed in for child custody.
From what I read earlier, it's my understanding that on one hand they want her disqualified because she previously represented the victim and has inside information she should not have.....................on the other hand, they want this information to use as a defense.
So, he wants his cake (information) and eat it too(disqualify the information from the other side by disqualifying the attorney of record)
Colore me
fran