30 May 2013

KingCast Sees "Deadbeat Dad" eMusic CEO Adam Klein Trial Day Two in Child Support Malpractice Lawsuit: Daralyn Khan v. Eric Karp.

April 2014 Update:

This dirty motherfucker is no longer with eMusic and switched jobs and is doing so in a way to avoid paying child support/insurance benefits. More to come.

How did the Impounded documents make it to trial and why are they relevant?
Answer: The Documents from the closed, impounded custody case resulting from Adam Klein fighting fatherhood got there by and through Lee Levine's office because I went to the Middlesex Courthouse to meet Ms. Khan and another Court observer as Ms. Khan discovered that Defendant Karp and his attorney Joseph Berman are using documents they obtained through deceit and deception!  

I believe this conduct is unethical and I may file a complaint with the Board of Bar Overseers (BBO) on it. They will probably make it go away but it must be done nonetheless: Nan Sauer is an attorney with whatever permutation of Lee, Levine Bowser's office is called these days. Prior to that she was a law clerk at Middlesex Probate, possibly during the time that Registrar cum felon John Buonomo was busy robbing the place blind. So she knows full well that only the parents should be having access to the closed case files in cases from 1992 that were automatically impounded. More on this later. Now Lee Levine helped Spencer Kagan in his ascension to the bench after Gus Celluci had tapped him for the position but Kagan had a pending lawsuit and ethics issues and he arguably lied about those on his application. Judge Kagan presided over Ms. Khan's case and took the legally enforceable opinion that was adverse to her (and adverse to Defendant Karp) in finding palpable ambiguity in the Agreement drafted by Karp. See Karp Affidavit, infra

Nan Sauer went to the courthouse on 28 May 2012 and apparently illegally obtained copies of two negative orders by putting in an appearance as "pro se." She did then forward these orders for use by Attorney Berman, as he would have had no legal access to these documents. That's pretty sleazy, but then what did you expect, we're dealing with Middlesex Probate Court after all.

Here's the fun part: I predicted this a year ago, in April of 2012 in this Journal Entry. Here's an excerpt:
Now Denner's office has apparently reneged on a promise it made a long time ago to amend the complaint against Karp, and my little birdy tells me that all of these guys -- including Attorney Rivers -- pictured, right -- are discussing her legal malpractice case. Why Rivers? He has no horse in this race, and if anything should be called as her witness against Karp....
So Lee, Levine --- who used to take up residency in this journal -- is so pissed off at Ms. Khan and the exposure this case has generated that they will go to any unethical length they can think of in order to try to stain Daralyn Khan when none of this would have happened if their felonious, sexually-harassing client had honored his Agreement.


Zurich... is large and in charge in front of the Courthouse.
And as Defendant Karp's insurer, they do not value Ms. Khan.  

Today's movie will be up late night, but I'm sure the key players will be waiting and watching. They always are.

Here is Day One.

Here's some food for thought: How did Eric Karp get hold of recent documents in an impounded case? He resigned as her counsel a long time ago. So depending on the timeframe either one of her subsequent counsel like Jeffrey Denner (another snake) gave it to him or he went in to Court and got it himself even though he should have already filed his withdrawal. But if he had filed his withdrawal then he would not have had access to the document. The Court cannot simply say "some of this is relevant" if a document was illegally obtained there could be sanctions issued against the offending attorney right. Right. At least that's the way it is supposed to happen. Note: We now know how the documents were obtained, through sleaze and deception by and through a licensed attorney, i.e. Nan Sauer, supra.

Today is interesting because the Court admonished at the outset that this is not about Adam Klein and his bad actions. I don't have an exact quote but that was the gist of it. The problem is, however, his bad actions and complete neglect of his daughter directly influenced the causes and courses of action that Daralyn Khan had to take in order to protect the interests of their daughter. Furthermore, the Defendant, knowing Klein's propensity for fraud and deceit and slow payments, should have had a raised state of awareness so as to avoid giving Adam Klein any loopholes.... which again is entirely consistent with his own Affidavit as noted in yesterday's movie and journal entry linked, above.

So on my ride home I thought more about today's events vis a vis my knowledge of much of the entire case and the judges involved, i.e. Dilday, Kagan and Gibson, but more on that momentarily. First I shall complete my thoughts on Adam Klein's criminal nature and other arguably nefarious and unfatherly conduct:

First, he is a known, convicted felon for charges that were issued well into his adult, professional life. That should tell a practitioner of reasonable experience on Actual, Heightened Notice right ab initio

Second, as noted in yesterday's courtroom summary Adam Klein fought paternity on three (3) different levels, including a scientific test. Apparently he believed Ms. Khan to be a bit of a slut, when in point of fact he should be looking in the mirror relative to his sexual harassment of one Aimee MacCormac in the eMusic lawsuit that settled five (5) months ago. Be that as it may, it is yet another indicator that Adam Klein should be approached with substantial care.

Third, Adam Klein repeatedly late-paid. See above.

Fourth, Expert Witness Stephen Kuzma made a valid point in noting that the malpractice exists, ipso facto because of Defendant Karp's own Affidavit, which is of course an Admission per FRCP 801(d)(2) and I'm sure by the same stateside code in MA whatever it is. The Affidavit stressed the intent of the parties in that it did not have a finite end to the term unless there was a VALID COURT ORDER pursuant to litigation or negotiation/mediation. But Judge Spencer M. "Boobies" Kagan determined that  there was ambiguity and he resolved the matter adversely to Plaintiff Khan precisely because of the clauses at issue herein. 

But prior to that, guess what? In attempting to mitigate her damages, Ms. Khan had tried to bring a case against Adam Klein way back in the Day, but Judge Dilday ruled the Court did not have jurisdiction and refused to review the Drivers' License and voting records that to me clearly show that Adam Klein lied about his residency, surprise surprise. The documents are here
Next Spencer Kagan had the case for another two years and issued adverse rulings without disclosing that Khan's opposing counsel Lee Levine & Bowser were instrumental in getting him to the Bench because he had pending litigation/disciplinary issues, and that's a fact, Jack. He eventually recused and then Judge Dorothy Gibson got the case and it took another two years for anything to happen, so it's not as if Ms. Khan has sat on her hands here. 

It's not surprising she can't work much more than she has because she's had to fight a legal army --- and the Courts -- for Justice.


Anonymous said...

I cannot believe this is going on in a Massachusetts courtroom. What a waste of the taxpayers money to have a case of this nature go to trial. Insurance companies have lots of money for settlements and should have made a decent settlement offer to this lady to keep this case out of the court system at the expense of the taxpayers.

Christopher King said...

Khan v. Klein Day Three Preview: Probategate and a Bar Ethics Complaint.

Christopher King
1:38 PM (8 minutes ago)

to Michaele, elund, cwagner, new_info, bmc, tg, aa, rjm, Conor, mj, dbrophy, alumnae, trohani, development, gjensen, bbrizendine, cflageolle, ccolligan, agordon, sbarile, JdeJesus, chernandez, cyork, kjurawan, websitehelp

Yes, indeed it is. Now I know why Defendant Karp would not answer my question in the hallway.


Why am I not surprised? I have seen big time well-connected lawyers get away with all matter of illegalities in several states as a lawyer and as a journo. Attorneys Karp and Berman had absolutely no legal right to several documents in question, so they used a strawman and prior law clerk of the Middlesex Probate Court from a law firm on a case other than the one at trial to get them, and she apparently listed herself as pro se to do so. Her sole purpose at the Middlesex Probate Courthouse on 28 May 2013 (trial day) was to act as agent of Defendant Karp, who had no goddamn right to these documents are we clear? At least that much is unambiguous, right

Wherefore, I am reporting all of you to the BBO with a copy of today's movie.

As to whether the Court allows any of this material in is question for the Court and reviewable on appeal (See generally Prescott v. Register of Probate 395 Mass 274 (1985) but I would hate to think that Her Honor would grant imprimatur to these back alley sleazeball tactics. It is axiomatic in criminal proceedings that illegally-obtained "evidence" should not be used. See Commonwealth v. Picardi, 401 Mass 1008 (1988). I am not certain how things should have proceeded in this civil context, perhaps a Motion should have been filed back in the day, per Commonwealth v. O'Brien 27 Mass App. Ct. 184 (1989), I don't know. What I do know is that using a straw man to obtain the documents is shady at best.

Having observed the Middlesex courthouse yesterday I know everyone there is talking about and watching this case. And they are not the only ones.

I'm back to finishing today's movie production, but first a ride on the Triumph to clear the head from all of this sleaze. Everyone needs a break. But to my review of this case over the past six (6) years, Daralyn Khan never got hers.

Apparently John Buonomo sets the tone for how things work around here, nice. Just a bunch of criminals in suits and ties, basically. The same as Adam Klein, and that's a fact.


Christopher King said...

Christopher King
2:30 PM (0 minutes ago)

to Michaele, elund, cwagner, new_info, bmc, tg, aa, rjm, Conor, mj, dbrophy, alumnae, trohani, development, gjensen, bbrizendine, cflageolle, ccolligan, agordon, sbarile, JdeJesus, chernandez, cyork, kjurawan, websitehelp
And I'm not done with you yet:

I will look for the sound clip from what I recall as Defendant Karp on redirect from Attorney Berman, discussing Lee, Levine and he says

"They are a formidable foe.... and you can trust them when they say they are putting something forward, they have integrity, blah blah blah."

In point of fact Karp was probably in bed with these creeps all along. They are not his foe. They are trying to protect him and slice up Ms. Khan.... when did it turn like that.... or was it like that all along, I wonder.

I'm pretty sure I still have that wonderful video file. I'll guess you have to stay tuned, as I am sure you will.

Best regards,