Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Richard Harlem at his sleaziest...


Received a letter today from attorney Richard Harlem, son-of-a-judge representing plaintiffs in the Mokay litigation, see my blog post "the Mokay saga", you can also word-search this blog for "Mokay" and "Richard Harlem".

It appears that Mr. Harlem is nervous as to the upcoming trial at the beginning of April of this year.

Because with his letter, Mr. Harlem returned to me witness checks that I provided together with service of subpoenas on Mr. Harlem's clients and one employee (now a former employee) in 2012, when the trial was scheduled for August 2012.

Then Judge Becker recused, the trial was scheduled for November 2013.

Then Richard Harlem's "trial counsel" allegedly got sick 3 weeks before the jury trial date, but I got notified only 3 days prior to the trial date.

The trial was adjourned without a date over my vigorous objections.

The trial was then scheduled for May of 2014.

Once again, right before the trial Richard Harlem's "trial counsel" allegedly got sick again, and again, over my vigorous objection, the trial was adjourned without a date - and that is, after my husband and I were sanctioned for delaying litigation!

Mr. Harlem was not even supposed to have witness checks for his clients, he should have passed them over to his clients and to the employee at the time of service back in 2012.

For 3 years he keeps the checks that were not meant for him, and on the eve of trial, returns them to me with a claim on behalf of his clients called as hostile witnesses, and even on behalf of his former employee, that the checks were not cashed (naturally, since Richard Harlem withheld them from their addressees), that they are "stale" now and that  I need to re-issue new checks now.

It is interesting actually to ask Mr. Harlem a question - why did he withhold the checks?

Why did he return the checks to me, especially the check meant for Richard Harlem's former employee, one month before the trial while the trial date was set in early January?

Why did Mr. Harlem never notify me before the trial dates in November of 2013 and in May of 2014 that the checks were never cashed?

And, by the way, why does that matter?

The law provides for giving the witnesses the money for mileage, and I did.  If the witnesses chose to throw that money into the garbage or not to cash the check - that is their problem and certainly does not entitle them not to come and testify, or for a re-issue of the checks now.

And if those witnesses do not come to testify claiming the "stale checks", I will certainly move to hold them in contempt of court - together with Mr. Harlem who was apparently actively trying to filibuster their testimony.

No comments:

Post a Comment