The Lawsuits Thread

Discuss the latest Johnny Depp news, his career, past and future projects, and other related issues.
User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Oct 18, 2019 4:31 pm

None of Johnny’s discovery requests:motions nor interrogatories etc to AH were uploaded.

justintime
Posts: 1566
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:16 pm

Lbock wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 4:31 pm
None of Johnny’s discovery requests:motions nor interrogatories etc to AH were uploaded.
Stupid question, but is that worrisome?
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:23 pm

Lbock wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 4:31 pm
None of Johnny’s discovery requests:motions nor interrogatories etc to AH were uploaded.
I don’t think they are usually filed with the court unless you need to file a motion to compel them to supply something

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:27 pm



Depp’s attorney, Robert Gilmore of Stein Mitchell, countered that the Oscar-nominated actor “has owned his past struggles.” Gilmore argued that Heard’s lawyers are on a fishing expedition.


After the hearing, another one of Depp’s attorneys, Benjamin Chew with Brown Rudnick, said they would comply.
“We look forward to discovery,” he said.



justintime
Posts: 1566
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:39 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by justintime » Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:36 pm

Thanks, Lbock.

Apologies. My blood is boiling at the moment. Thought maybe this should be here in entirety:
Courthouse News Service
Johnny Depp Ordered to Hand Over Medical Records to Ex-Wife
October 18, 2019 JOAN HENNESSY FacebookTwitterEmail

FAIRFAX, Va. (CN) – Johnny Depp’s lawyers describe the actor as upfront about his past substance abuse, a man with nothing to hide. That may be more true than ever after a Virginia judge ruled Friday that he must give his ex-wife’s attorneys access to medical records related to his alcohol and drug use.

Lawyers for Amber Heard, co-star of the 2018 blockbuster movie “Aquaman,” contend that Depp has refused access to records they need to help the actress fight her ex-husband’s $50 million defamation lawsuit.

Depp, 56, sued Heard, 33, in March over a 2018 editorial published in The Washington Post in which Heard wrote of the repercussions she faced after speaking out about domestic abuse. While she never named Depp, he claims the editorial was clearly about him and sought $50 million in damages. The complaint was filed in Fairfax County, Virginia Circuit Court because The Post is printed there.

Heard has claimed Depp was violent during their marriage and that his outbursts were inextricably intertwined with substance abuse. But Depp has so far refused to produce communications with his doctor about such abuse, according to a Sept. 27 memo filed by Heard’s lawyers supporting her motion to compel.

In his lawsuit, Depp charged that Heard threw a vodka bottle at him and that it struck the middle finger on his right hand and shattered the bones. This is the sort of charge Heard’s lawyers seek to counter.

“Ms. Heard deserves the right to test those allegations,” her attorney, Benjamin Rottenborn with Woods Rogers, said in court Friday.

Depp’s attorney, Robert Gilmore of Stein Mitchell, countered that the Oscar-nominated actor “has owned his past struggles.” Gilmore argued that Heard’s lawyers are on a fishing expedition.

But Fairfax County Chief Judge Bruce White ruled from the bench in favor of Heard’s motion to compel Depp to produce the relevant records and documents, saying her lawyers should have access to them.

After the hearing, another one of Depp’s attorneys, Benjamin Chew with Brown Rudnick, said they would comply.

“We look forward to discovery,” he said.

Another member of Heard’s legal team, Roberta Kaplan of Kaplan Hecker & Fink, said they are “very pleased” with the ruling and called Depp’s discovery arguments “nonsensical, as if he were the one being sued.”

“But it is Mr. Depp who started this lawsuit on the theory that Ms. Heard somehow made up all the abuse that forced her to obtain a restraining order against Mr. Depp back in 2016,” Kaplan said in a statement. “Now that the facts in his own lawsuit are making him uncomfortable, Mr. Depp wants to hide evidence commonly understood to be connected to incidents of domestic violence: his decades-long abuse of drugs and alcohol, his past history of violence, and medical records showing among other things the laundry list of prescription medications he takes daily and injuries from his drug-induced rages.”

Heard’s court filing from last month notes that Depp’s attorneys said at a Sept. 13 hearing that the actor “has nothing to hide.” But the memo claims that, in addition to the medical records, he has also not produced “evidence of violence, abuse, or destruction of property with his other romantic partners.”
1. Kaplan repeatedly plays fast and loose with her insinuations that Johnny HAS a “past history of violence”. Either put up or shut up - to what “past history of violence” are you referring? For Kaplan to keep framing comments to the press this way is slander. Why is she being given a pass on this behavior?

2. The last paragraph is presumptive: How can he produce something that doesn’t exist? Guess they’re used to doing that . . . or they think they’re being clever - if he responds in any way, he is acknowledging existence and/or occurrence.

3. Also, the ruling, as presented here, seems to be very broad - just like the requests themselves were. Is there a specific time frame or event these doctor/patient communications are supposed to cover? “During the marriage” is the only time frame (with beginning and end dates - a total of eighteen months) referenced here, but in the original motions they spanned years. Was anything ever narrowed down or should Johnny’s pediatricians be dusting off their file cabinets?

4. What constitutes “relevant records and documents” from the court’s perspective? One legitimately might wonder when Kaplan runs off at the mouth citing Johnny’s “decades-long abuse of drugs and alcohol” (More slander.). What specific allegations is Heard challenging and what does she need to “test” those allegations? Is Kaplan expecting the Plaintiff to construct her case for her?

5. Kaplan has the audacity and non-existent moral compass to dismiss Johnny’s incontrovertible, court-submitted evidence as baseless allegations that implied “ . . . Ms. Heard somehow made up all the abuse that forced her to obtain a restraining order against Mr. Depp back in 2016.” Well, Ms. Kaplan, you got the last part right on the money: AH did indeed, “somehow”, make up all the tales of abuse she claimed in order to secure the TRO against Johnny in 2016. However, she couldn’t then, and has not to date, submitted one piece of admissible evidence to support her accusations.

6. Yes, Mr. Depp started this lawsuit - for good reason and with solid evidence. If Kaplan and Co. cannot make the effort, allocate the time, or assemble the expertise required to do the research necessary to isolate relevant and specific incidents that HER CLIENT feels may be in need of clarification or elaboration, then they should be compelled to do so or withdraw her requests. Mr. Gilmore was absolutely right to use the “fishing expedition” characterization. He wasn’t being flip or disrespectful - the only disrespect shown the court to date has been that of Ms. Kaplan with her amateurish, condescending shenanigans. Again, what specific allegations is the Defense challenging and what does she need (not want) to test those allegations? Only with those specifics pointedly referenced can the Plaintiff reasonably be expected to fill in gaps.

Sorry. I could go on and on, in circles no doubt. I found this ruling, as presented here, disturbing on many levels and not deserving of the respectful acquiescence given by Mr. Chew.
"Stay low." ~ JD
"I don't like it in here . . . it's terribly crowded." ~ Hatter
"There's something about Johnny that breaks your heart." ~ John Logan, ST
"Tear deeper, Mother." ~ Wilmot

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:34 am

Like Justintime and others, I've been appalled by her attorneys' blatantly untrue statements about JD throughout all these cases. It's permissible as "privileged" speech in legal proceedings per this article excerpt:
Can You Sue for Defamation During Trials?

In order for a statement to be considered libelous or slanderous, it must have been made without the assumption of privilege. A privileged statement means that the person giving the statement is free or duty-bound to state whatever he pleases in order to provide a full account of a situation.

Courtroom Privileges
Within the courtroom, most statements are covered under absolute privilege.

Witnesses. In any deposition or trial, a witness giving a statement must be able to speak his mind freely without fear of reprisal. As such, his statement is protected by the absolute privilege rule. For example, if a witness makes a statement that is untrue and malicious, the witness will be immune to a lawsuit for defamation; however, this privilege does not protect him from perjury laws or being held in contempt....

Attorneys. In order for an attorney to do his job, he needs to paint a picture for the judge and jury, which would be impossible to do if he is forced to paint around defamatory statements. As such, for the most part, if an attorney is preparing or actively involved in litigation on behalf of a client, he will be considered privileged. However, if an attorney knowingly slanders a client or other attorney outside the courtroom or after a trial, he may be subject to a defamation lawsuit.
And further on the topic of attorney misbehavior, a quote from Adam Waldman on the Brooks case that was moved to May 2020:
As soon as the evidence defeats Mr. Brooks in trial we will immediately launch malicious prosecution claims against his attorneys. What Mr. Brooks lawyer terms ‘scorched earth’ is actually known as ‘Justice.'

User avatar
Lbock
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 4:43 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Lbock » Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:22 am

Kaplan demanded an umbrella protective order. They finally came to an agreement for both sides which included all medical as being confidential

The ink is barely dry and IMO Kaplan has already violated the protective order: “records showing among other things the laundry list of prescription medications he takes daily” This very information should be protected & confidential. He has a right to medical care & not a basis to judge his character.

Even though she didn’t name the drugs, just that description of a “laundry list” is violation of the essence of the order. IMO

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 677
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Oct 19, 2019 12:07 pm

I agree. Kaplan is just like Heard. She doesn't know when to keep her mouth shut. So he takes a lot of prescription medications daily. So what? I know many people who have to take a lot of prescription meds. daily. Kaplan is a sleeze talking about the "truth" when Amber has no digital photos of any of her claims.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 677
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sat Oct 19, 2019 1:47 pm

It is no secret that Johnny came from a troubled childhood. He said that they just kept moving all the time and lived in over thirty places. Sometimes next door or across the street and he just stopped unpacking at one point. He was also abused by his mother for no reason. Spent most of his years locking himself in a room with his guitar to cope with things. It is also no secret that he had injuries on set such as the wheel rolling over his foot in POTC, injuries to his ribs filming The Lone Ranger and severe back issues filming POTC 4. He often talks about the "circus in his head" and with all those characters that he says still live inside him, I can't imagine how that feels or how he copes with it. From what I read, this is the reason Keith Ledger died...because he couldn't shake off the Joker when filming was done and he overdosed.

All that being said, if I had to live with Amber Heard I would be drinking and taking drugs too. We all know she is no saint who takes hissy fits when things don't go her way. Johnny has witnesses who saw her throw things at him and had to pull her off him on multiple occasions.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
Ruby Begonia
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:31 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Ruby Begonia » Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:26 pm

How 13 Weinstein Scandal Figures Come Out in Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey’s New Book ‘She Said’
Link to recent Variety article written by Gene Maddaus
Hurt
Roberta Kaplan

Kaplan is a co-founder of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, and has been a leading advocate for women in the #MeToo era. It is startling to find her, on p. 116, accompanying Weinstein to a meeting at the Times building. Kaplan was there to defend Weinstein from an entirely different scandal, in which the amfAR AIDS charity had agreed to help reimburse investors in a Weinstein musical. Kaplan, a well-known crusader on gay rights issues, told the Times reporters that their story would hurt AIDS patients, according to the book. Kaplan issued a statement clarifying her role: “Rodgin Cohen of Sullivan & Cromwell asked me to be part of a conversation regarding the AMFAR controversy. Since I was not adequately briefed on the specifics of the transaction, I explained that the only thing I could talk about was the challenging fundraising environment for HIV/AIDS organizations like AMFAR, which I knew well as a longtime member of the Board of GMHC, the oldest AIDS services organization in the country. At that time, I was completely unaware of the serious sexual assault, abuse and harassment committed by Harvey Weinstein or that it was then being investigated by the NYT and others. Had I known then what I know now, I never would have agreed to meet with Harvey Weinstein.”
Given Kaplan's error-filled first appearance before Judge White, jumping in on Depp v Heard seems to be a similar situation she may regret later.

User avatar
meeps
Posts: 3174
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:13 am
Location: Hiding in my imagination?
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by meeps » Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:06 am

Yeah, but that's good for Johnny - in a way ... Ms Kaplan doesn't seem so smart to me, and I think, that that will help him. On the other hand I would hate for people to say later "Yes, but if only Ms Heard had had a better lawyer, she'd have won" :nosmile:
If Ms Kaplan wants to be seen as a lawyer with a clear cause, she strives to promote, she should really research the people, she decides to work for better before saying yes to come aboard. By the time she entered this case it should have been pretty obvious to her, that AH is not to be trusted! And that she should rather have come down on Johnny's side.
In my not-at-all-humble, but actually rather biased opinion, that is :biggrin:

thiefcat
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:57 am
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by thiefcat » Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:58 am

Starting to get worried. The judge is giving so much access to Amber Heard.

https://www.thegeekbuzz.com/news/amber- ... tion-case/

User avatar
ForeverYoung
Posts: 677
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:25 pm
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by ForeverYoung » Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:39 am

They can get as much documents as they want but it still doesn't prove Johnny was abusive to Amber and this is nothing more than a sleezy smear campaign. If Kaplan wants to show the truth then let's see real photos with time and date stamps, not some fake picture she sold to the media.
“Growing old is unavoidable, but never growing up is possible."

User avatar
myfave
Posts: 6078
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: South
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by myfave » Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:24 pm

thiefcat wrote:
Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:58 am
Starting to get worried. The judge is giving so much access to Amber Heard.

https://www.thegeekbuzz.com/news/amber- ... tion-case/

I agree...
"Hello South Carolina" ...............*swoon*

User avatar
Chocolat
Posts: 9661
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Status: Offline

The Lawsuits Thread

Unread post by Chocolat » Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:57 pm

I agree with Forever Young regarding the new documents to obtain the medical records. Kaplan has nothing else of merit to use at trial. Their defense is so weak, it's laughable. So now they're looking for a needle in a haystack to use against Johnny. Once again,
Kaplan is using Amber Heard's sleazy tactic of publicly smearing Johnny's character any way she can. There is no way they can dismiss the real evidence Johnny has on Amber Heard. The real issue is that Amber Heard deliberately and maliciously defamed Johnny Depp in print which is libel and will be proven at trial. I believe, in the state of Virginia, the punishment is serious.
~ MAGICK HAPPENS ~
Through the years, for the many xoxo's, giggles & kindness...
thank you & love you Johnny.