20 thoughts on “Look away! Its bad, very bad…….”

  1. Obviously this is the type of “lawyering” one must expect from the disciples of the Gauthier/Houghtaling firm. Freaking nuts.

  2. It seems safe for me to presume the Martins have passed the same information along to the ODC. Based on this presumption, if the ODC hasn’t made any decision before the filing of this suit, I wouldn’t expect any before the end of this suit.

  3. Looking at the cast of characters and Abel’s E&O policy is being sued. Sad part is that E&O are usually “claims made” policies which are valid only for claims filed and noticed to the insurer during the policy year. Understandably one of the bigger deficiencies in our law with respect to insurers – illusory coverage comes to mind – as well as defeating the basic proposition that insurance covers the victim,. not the insured – but unless Abel has a decidedly odd policy, Martins best hope Abel has some cash – perhaps some of that which Abel used to make good on his back due IRS, du verstanden?

  4. Come on Doug….you have to save some of these good old songs for when the DMR boys get theirs!!! Don’t use them all up!!! (Wink Wink)

  5. Gonna’ need some Super 8 fan cheering in the above legal football game fo’ sure

    Give me a D, give me a I, give me a S, give me a B, give me a A, give me a R, give me a M and give me a E, give me a N and give me a T–

    What does it spell : D I S B A R M E N T !!! One more time butt louder, D I S B A R M E N T

    Flunked and Waggled’s definition of disbarment- n. 1.The inability of an Abel to file anymore frivolous lawsuits or briefs; as in the disbarment of a lawyer as possibly opined by ODC due to malpractice and /or unfair, dishonorable criticism of the Court or fellow officers of da’ Court including Da’ JUDGE heself.

    Holy Moly Lightinin’, dey may bees comin’ after yous too one day – Da’ Kingfish

  6. Given a malpractice claim against an attorney in Louisiana is subject to one year preemption, from the date the client knew or should have known, and the latest date of error would appear to have been spring of 2012, I am wondering if the claim is predicated on the Martin appeal? Even so, the law does seem clear, knowing of a malpractice, such as the filing of a RICO, during the pendency of the case is enough to start the clock running – and there’s no contra non valentum to rescue you.

    1. I’m referring to, of course, the claim for recovering costs under defamation in the RICO matter. The primary claim, the failure to prosecute timely and competently the claim against Fidelity, does also suggest time problems.

  7. To the SLABBED Nation: All of us hope that Abel gets what is coming to him. BUT: Don’t forget that Plattsmier (SPIT!), the “Chief Disciplinary Counsel”, is DEGENERATE CRIMINAL SCUM and VERMIN. I’ll be happy to quote you “Chapter in Verse” if you wish. And he’s going to get what’s coming to HIM. Ashton O’Dwyer promises. AROD.

    1. Precisely, Ashton, all of Platt’s protestations to the contrary, it is obvious that he is called in to provide protective cover for those “connected” and probably helps out in squashing competition, much as does any government regulatory agency. A more pithy way of characterizing his actions is to say that he is called in to cover up the cat shit.

  8. You just know there’s a slander/libel/copyright/fashion counter suit of some kind that’s going to be crafted. As long as he keeps the ball in the air in the CDC, it’s my belief the ODC won’t step in unless they find he is a threat of some kind.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *