Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 12:35 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09

The following was posted by Hal Bogner on the USCF Issues Forum.

Earlier today, Judge Patel heard Whitney Leigh argue for Susan Polgar's
motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger in the California
lawsuit brought by USCF and Randy Hough against Ms. Polgar and Gregory
Alexander. She issued two rulings in the course of the hearing.

Also present in the courtroom were Mr. Alexander's public defender in
the related criminal matter pending against him, as well as the
mediators, who had filed notice one week ago that they had given up
attempts to bring about a settlement. The back rows of the courtroom
were completely full; in addition to various attorneys for other cases
also on the docket, there was a visiting class of law students observing
the session. They got their money's worth.

Mr. Leigh attempted to argue that Mr. Kronenberger had several "key
conflicts", one being that he was both "hired to investigate" at the
outset, and now "represents directors in conflict", to which Judge Patel
expressed that it was up to Plaintiffs to decide whether or not any
conflicts existed or were of concern. Mr. Leigh responded that his
client, Ms. Polgar, had standing of some sort that mattered (we'll need
to wait for the transcript for details like this, as I could not note
down every last thing said), "as a member" - drawing an immediate
interjection from Judge Patel, who said "she was a member" (with
emphasis on "was"). Mr. Leigh said "that will be disputed."

As Mr. Kronenberger presented a description of the decisions of the
Delegates made in Indianapolis, Judge Patel jumped in when he described
Ms. Polgar's having been expelled, asking "And Mr. Truong?" Mr.
Kronenberger confirmed this, described the unanimous ratification of
past board actions and the denial of indemnification for Ms. Polgar, and
then complained of the fact that Mr. Leigh had appeared before Judge
Patel two days later, and yet failed to bring these actions to the
attention of the Court.

Having heard enough from both sides, Judge Patel denied Ms. Polgar's
motion to disqualify Mr. Kronenberger, stating clearly that parties have
the right to decide who will represent them, and that she would likewise
not have granted a motion to disqualify Mr. Leigh, had one been brought
by USCF. She also made clear that it was not nice to put a judge in the
position of having to decide which attorney was lying to her, and
decried the bickering, the excessive filings and briefings - all over a
case that should be small, and which is costing USCF all kinds of money,
here and in other places. She chided both attorneys about the expense of
the battles, looking first to Mr. Kronenberger ("who purports to
represent USCF") and then Mr. Leigh ("whose client is no longer even a
member").

She then made clear that the case was going where it should be, which is
Texas. Sitting a little ways to my right on the front bench in the back
of the courtroom, Mr. Alexander's attorney's jaw dropped, and she sat
agape for the next several minutes, as Judge Patel made clear her
decision to transfer the case to Judge Cummings' court.

Mr. Leigh became rather agitated, and tried to break in to debate the
decision, but that led nowhere. At one point, Mr. Leigh - who is built
like an NFL linebacker - stopped shifting back and forth and crossed his
arms over his chest, and Judge Patel stopped in mid-sentence and told
him "don't stand there like that - I know what this [crossing and then
uncrossing her own arms] means". Mr. Leigh tried to argue that Ms.
Polgar had withdrawn her motion to transfer the case to Texas
previously, and pointed to the criminal case against Mr. Alexander being
in this same courtroom, but Judge Patel said she had concluded that the
criminal case can stay in SF and the civil case to to Texas, and that
would be fine. Finally, she told Mr. Leigh no more arguing, and he made
one last try to have "time to write..." - and Judge Patel interrupted
"...a brief? No! No more."

Mr. Alexander's criminal counsel appeared and raised the issue of his
having no counsel in Texas, and having a motion before the Court for a
stay of the civil case with respect to him. Judge Patel replied that the
motion is now before Judge Cummings.

A transcript should be available within one week, and perhaps sooner.

I presume that - barring a successful motion to reconsider or appeal -
that Ms. Polgar will now need to retain defense counsel in Texas, and
that USCF's plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Kronenberger, and defense counsel,
Dennis Moriarty and Kristina Velarde, will no longer need to appear in
California.
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 04:34 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 9
Default Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09

On Sep 29, 7:35*am, MrVidmar wrote:
The following was posted by Hal Bogner on the USCF Issues Forum.

Earlier today, Judge Patel heard Whitney Leigh argue for Susan Polgar's
motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger in the California
lawsuit brought by USCF and Randy Hough against Ms. Polgar and Gregory
Alexander. She issued two rulings in the course of the hearing.

Also present in the courtroom were Mr. Alexander's public defender in
the related criminal matter pending against him, as well as the
mediators, who had filed notice one week ago that they had given up
attempts to bring about a settlement. The back rows of the courtroom
were completely full; in addition to various attorneys for other cases
also on the docket, there was a visiting class of law students observing
the session. They got their money's worth.

Mr. Leigh attempted to argue that Mr. Kronenberger had several "key
conflicts", one being that he was both "hired to investigate" at the
outset, and now "represents directors in conflict", to which Judge Patel
expressed that it was up to Plaintiffs to decide whether or not any
conflicts existed or were of concern. Mr. Leigh responded that his
client, Ms. Polgar, had standing of some sort that mattered (we'll need
to wait for the transcript for details like this, as I could not note
down every last thing said), "as a member" - drawing an immediate
interjection from Judge Patel, who said "she was a member" (with
emphasis on "was"). Mr. Leigh said "that will be disputed."

As Mr. Kronenberger presented a description of the decisions of the
Delegates made in Indianapolis, Judge Patel jumped in when he described
Ms. Polgar's having been expelled, asking "And Mr. Truong?" Mr.
Kronenberger confirmed this, described the unanimous ratification of
past board actions and the denial of indemnification for Ms. Polgar, and
then complained of the fact that Mr. Leigh had appeared before Judge
Patel two days later, and yet failed to bring these actions to the
attention of the Court.

Having heard enough from both sides, Judge Patel denied Ms. Polgar's
motion to disqualify Mr. Kronenberger, stating clearly that parties have
the right to decide who will represent them, and that she would likewise
not have granted a motion to disqualify Mr. Leigh, had one been brought
by USCF. She also made clear that it was not nice to put a judge in the
position of having to decide which attorney was lying to her, and
decried the bickering, the excessive filings and briefings - all over a
case that should be small, and which is costing USCF all kinds of money,
here and in other places. She chided both attorneys about the expense of
the battles, looking first to Mr. Kronenberger ("who purports to
represent USCF") and then Mr. Leigh ("whose client is no longer even a
member").

She then made clear that the case was going where it should be, which is
Texas. Sitting a little ways to my right on the front bench in the back
of the courtroom, Mr. Alexander's attorney's jaw dropped, and she sat
agape for the next several minutes, as Judge Patel made clear her
decision to transfer the case to Judge Cummings' court.

Mr. Leigh became rather agitated, and tried to break in to debate the
decision, but that led nowhere. At one point, Mr. Leigh - who is built
like an NFL linebacker - stopped shifting back and forth and crossed his
arms over his chest, and Judge Patel stopped in mid-sentence and told
him "don't stand there like that - I know what this [crossing and then
uncrossing her own arms] means". Mr. Leigh tried to argue that Ms.
Polgar had withdrawn her motion to transfer the case to Texas
previously, and pointed to the criminal case against Mr. Alexander being
in this same courtroom, but Judge Patel said she had concluded that the
criminal case can stay in SF and the civil case to to Texas, and that
would be fine. Finally, she told Mr. Leigh no more arguing, and he made
one last try to have "time to write..." - and Judge Patel interrupted
"...a brief? No! No more."

Mr. Alexander's criminal counsel appeared and raised the issue of his
having no counsel in Texas, and having a motion before the Court for a
stay of the civil case with respect to him. Judge Patel replied that the
motion is now before Judge Cummings.

A transcript should be available within one week, and perhaps sooner.

I presume that - barring a successful motion to reconsider or appeal -
that Ms. Polgar will now need to retain defense counsel in Texas, and
that USCF's plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Kronenberger, and defense counsel,
Dennis Moriarty and Kristina Velarde, will no longer need to appear in
California.


Polgar's sponsor has such deep pockets that this shouldn't be a
problem for her.


  #3   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 05:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09

wrote:
On Sep 29, 7:35 am, MrVidmar wrote:
The following was posted by Hal Bogner on the USCF Issues Forum.

Earlier today, Judge Patel heard Whitney Leigh argue for Susan Polgar's
motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger in the California
lawsuit brought by USCF and Randy Hough against Ms. Polgar and Gregory
Alexander. She issued two rulings in the course of the hearing.

Also present in the courtroom were Mr. Alexander's public defender in
the related criminal matter pending against him, as well as the
mediators, who had filed notice one week ago that they had given up
attempts to bring about a settlement. The back rows of the courtroom
were completely full; in addition to various attorneys for other cases
also on the docket, there was a visiting class of law students observing
the session. They got their money's worth.

Mr. Leigh attempted to argue that Mr. Kronenberger had several "key
conflicts", one being that he was both "hired to investigate" at the
outset, and now "represents directors in conflict", to which Judge Patel
expressed that it was up to Plaintiffs to decide whether or not any
conflicts existed or were of concern. Mr. Leigh responded that his
client, Ms. Polgar, had standing of some sort that mattered (we'll need
to wait for the transcript for details like this, as I could not note
down every last thing said), "as a member" - drawing an immediate
interjection from Judge Patel, who said "she was a member" (with
emphasis on "was"). Mr. Leigh said "that will be disputed."

As Mr. Kronenberger presented a description of the decisions of the
Delegates made in Indianapolis, Judge Patel jumped in when he described
Ms. Polgar's having been expelled, asking "And Mr. Truong?" Mr.
Kronenberger confirmed this, described the unanimous ratification of
past board actions and the denial of indemnification for Ms. Polgar, and
then complained of the fact that Mr. Leigh had appeared before Judge
Patel two days later, and yet failed to bring these actions to the
attention of the Court.

Having heard enough from both sides, Judge Patel denied Ms. Polgar's
motion to disqualify Mr. Kronenberger, stating clearly that parties have
the right to decide who will represent them, and that she would likewise
not have granted a motion to disqualify Mr. Leigh, had one been brought
by USCF. She also made clear that it was not nice to put a judge in the
position of having to decide which attorney was lying to her, and
decried the bickering, the excessive filings and briefings - all over a
case that should be small, and which is costing USCF all kinds of money,
here and in other places. She chided both attorneys about the expense of
the battles, looking first to Mr. Kronenberger ("who purports to
represent USCF") and then Mr. Leigh ("whose client is no longer even a
member").

She then made clear that the case was going where it should be, which is
Texas. Sitting a little ways to my right on the front bench in the back
of the courtroom, Mr. Alexander's attorney's jaw dropped, and she sat
agape for the next several minutes, as Judge Patel made clear her
decision to transfer the case to Judge Cummings' court.

Mr. Leigh became rather agitated, and tried to break in to debate the
decision, but that led nowhere. At one point, Mr. Leigh - who is built
like an NFL linebacker - stopped shifting back and forth and crossed his
arms over his chest, and Judge Patel stopped in mid-sentence and told
him "don't stand there like that - I know what this [crossing and then
uncrossing her own arms] means". Mr. Leigh tried to argue that Ms.
Polgar had withdrawn her motion to transfer the case to Texas
previously, and pointed to the criminal case against Mr. Alexander being
in this same courtroom, but Judge Patel said she had concluded that the
criminal case can stay in SF and the civil case to to Texas, and that
would be fine. Finally, she told Mr. Leigh no more arguing, and he made
one last try to have "time to write..." - and Judge Patel interrupted
"...a brief? No! No more."

Mr. Alexander's criminal counsel appeared and raised the issue of his
having no counsel in Texas, and having a motion before the Court for a
stay of the civil case with respect to him. Judge Patel replied that the
motion is now before Judge Cummings.

A transcript should be available within one week, and perhaps sooner.

I presume that - barring a successful motion to reconsider or appeal -
that Ms. Polgar will now need to retain defense counsel in Texas, and
that USCF's plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Kronenberger, and defense counsel,
Dennis Moriarty and Kristina Velarde, will no longer need to appear in
California.


Polgar's sponsor has such deep pockets that this shouldn't be a
problem for her.


Really?! Do tell us more.
  #4   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 06:08 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09

klgore wrote:
On Sep 29, 7:35 am, MrVidmar wrote:
The following was posted by Hal Bogner on the USCF Issues Forum.

Earlier today, Judge Patel heard Whitney Leigh argue for Susan Polgar's
motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger in the California
lawsuit brought by USCF and Randy Hough against Ms. Polgar and Gregory
Alexander. She issued two rulings in the course of the hearing.

...
A transcript should be available within one week, and perhaps sooner.

I presume that - barring a successful motion to reconsider or appeal -
that Ms. Polgar will now need to retain defense counsel in Texas, and
that USCF's plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Kronenberger, and defense counsel,
Dennis Moriarty and Kristina Velarde, will no longer need to appear in
California.


Thank you Brian (for real) for the continued updates. I appreciate
them.
Your last comment reminded me of something I've been wondering about
and haven't seen mentioned in a long while. Way back, PT supposedly
said he'd have an (EB) meeting anywhere except in CA. Has any of
the discovery from the current cases pointed to why that condition?


No so far, but I would expect him to be asked about this at his deposition.


At
least this venue change might be a positive for P/T in the long run
(?).


I think this is quite good from the USCF standpoint.


K

  #5   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 08:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 24
Default Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09

On Sep 29, 1:08 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
klgore wrote:
On Sep 29, 7:35 am, MrVidmar wrote:
The following was posted by Hal Bogner on the USCF Issues Forum.


Earlier today, Judge Patel heard Whitney Leigh argue for Susan Polgar's
motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger in the California
lawsuit brought by USCF and Randy Hough against Ms. Polgar and Gregory
Alexander. She issued two rulings in the course of the hearing.


...
A transcript should be available within one week, and perhaps sooner.


I presume that - barring a successful motion to reconsider or appeal -
that Ms. Polgar will now need to retain defense counsel in Texas, and
that USCF's plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Kronenberger, and defense counsel,
Dennis Moriarty and Kristina Velarde, will no longer need to appear in
California.


Thank you Brian (for real) for the continued updates. I appreciate
them.
Your last comment reminded me of something I've been wondering about
and haven't seen mentioned in a long while. Way back, PT supposedly
said he'd have an (EB) meeting anywhere except in CA. Has any of
the discovery from the current cases pointed to why that condition?


No so far, but I would expect him to be asked about this at his deposition.

At
least this venue change might be a positive for P/T in the long run
(?).


I think this is quite good from the USCF standpoint.


Right--poor wording on my part. I meant it could be one positive
thing
(PT might not be forced to go to CA) from an otherwise bad event.

K


K


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09 MrVidmar rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 5 September 29th 09 08:03 PM
Summary of Hearing Before Judge Patel 9/28/09 MrVidmar rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 5 September 29th 09 08:03 PM
Hearing Yesterday Before Judge Patel Mr.Vidmar[_2_] alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 12 April 14th 09 08:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017