Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Kenneth Miller Losing A Lawyer!

Expand Messages
  • Robert Baty
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR VERMONT Docket No. 2:12-CV-00184-wks JANET JENKINS, for herself : and as next friend of ISABELLA
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 20, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
      FOR VERMONT

      Docket No. 2:12-CV-00184-wks

      JANET JENKINS, for herself :
      and as next friend of
      ISABELLA MILLER-JENKINS 
      a/k/a ISABELLA MILLER, 
      Plaintiffs 

      v.:

      KENNETH MILLER, et al. 

      MOTION TO WITHDRAW

      AND NOW comes Joshua M. Autry, Esquire (herein after Counsel)
      and respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT petitioner’s
      motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth Miller.

      1.

      Brooks G. McArthur, Esquire of Jarvis, McArthur& Williams, L.L.C.,
      will still represent Defendant in this matter.

      2.

      A conflict has arisen in the representation of Defendant by Counsel
      and therefore Counsel request leave to withdraw as counsel.

      3.

      There will be no prejudice to the Defendant because Attorney
      McArthur is already familiar with his case.

      4.

      There will be no delay in the case as Attorney McArthur has already
      been serving as counsel for Defendant.

      5.

      Counsel has spoken with Defendant Miller and Attorney McArthur
      and both concur in Counsel’s request for leave to withdraw as
      counsel.

      WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable
      Court grant him leave to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth
      Miller.

      Respectfully Submitted:
      Date: November 15, 2013
      /s/ Joshua M. Autry
      Joshua M. Autry, Esquire
      Clymer, Musser & Conrad, P.C.
      Lancaster, PA 17603

      ----------------------------------------------------------

    • bucksburg
      Autry was his out-of-state constitutional expert; McArthur the local counsel. If this case is going anywhere, he s going to need another constitutional expert.
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 20, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        Autry was his out-of-state constitutional expert; McArthur the local counsel.  


        If this case is going anywhere, he's going to need another constitutional expert.


        Mr. Buck



        ---In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, <rlbaty@...> wrote:

        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
        FOR VERMONT

        Docket No. 2:12-CV-00184-wks

        JANET JENKINS, for herself :
        and as next friend of
        ISABELLA MILLER-JENKINS 
        a/k/a ISABELLA MILLER, 
        Plaintiffs 

        v.:

        KENNETH MILLER, et al. 

        MOTION TO WITHDRAW

        AND NOW comes Joshua M. Autry, Esquire (herein after Counsel)
        and respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT petitioner’s
        motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth Miller.

        1.

        Brooks G. McArthur, Esquire of Jarvis, McArthur& Williams, L.L.C.,
        will still represent Defendant in this matter.

        2.

        A conflict has arisen in the representation of Defendant by Counsel
        and therefore Counsel request leave to withdraw as counsel.

        3.

        There will be no prejudice to the Defendant because Attorney
        McArthur is already familiar with his case.

        4.

        There will be no delay in the case as Attorney McArthur has already
        been serving as counsel for Defendant.

        5.

        Counsel has spoken with Defendant Miller and Attorney McArthur
        and both concur in Counsel’s request for leave to withdraw as
        counsel.

        WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable
        Court grant him leave to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth
        Miller.

        Respectfully Submitted:
        Date: November 15, 2013
        /s/ Joshua M. Autry
        Joshua M. Autry, Esquire
        Clymer, Musser & Conrad, P.C.
        Lancaster, PA 17603

        ----------------------------------------------------------

      • Robert Baty
        Daniel, I was most interested in what the alleged conflict was between the lawyers. As far as Kenneth Miller is concerned, the only question in the civil suit
        Message 3 of 4 , Nov 20, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Daniel,

          I was most interested in what the alleged conflict was between the lawyers.

          As far as Kenneth Miller is concerned, the only question in the civil suit is going to be how much.

          As a secondary or tertiary matter, there may be questions, constitutional and otherwise, as to how much they can get Kenneth to give up on the others.  If they ever get to the stage where Kenneth is deposed, with immunity protection, it will be interesting to see how hard the judge comes down on him and his contempt of court.  I figure he got off rather easy in the criminal case by just claiming he wasn't going to talk and so the judge let him walk...after only a week in the pokey.

          It continues to shape up as a years' long case; Kenneth may very well serve his 3 years in jail and be released before the civil case gets very far to a final resolution.

          Sincerely,
          Robert Baty


          To: Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com
          From: bucksburg@...
          Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:07:16 -0800
          Subject: [M & B] RE: Kenneth Miller Losing A Lawyer!

           

          Autry was his out-of-state constitutional expert; McArthur the local counsel.  


          If this case is going anywhere, he's going to need another constitutional expert.


          Mr. Buck



          ---In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, <rlbaty@...> wrote:

          UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
          FOR VERMONT

          Docket No. 2:12-CV-00184-wks

          JANET JENKINS, for herself :
          and as next friend of
          ISABELLA MILLER-JENKINS 
          a/k/a ISABELLA MILLER, 
          Plaintiffs 

          v.:

          KENNETH MILLER, et al. 

          MOTION TO WITHDRAW

          AND NOW comes Joshua M. Autry, Esquire (herein after Counsel)
          and respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT petitioner’s
          motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth Miller.

          1.

          Brooks G. McArthur, Esquire of Jarvis, McArthur& Williams, L.L.C.,
          will still represent Defendant in this matter.

          2.

          A conflict has arisen in the representation of Defendant by Counsel
          and therefore Counsel request leave to withdraw as counsel.

          3.

          There will be no prejudice to the Defendant because Attorney
          McArthur is already familiar with his case.

          4.

          There will be no delay in the case as Attorney McArthur has already
          been serving as counsel for Defendant.

          5.

          Counsel has spoken with Defendant Miller and Attorney McArthur
          and both concur in Counsel’s request for leave to withdraw as
          counsel.

          WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable
          Court grant him leave to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth
          Miller.

          Respectfully Submitted:
          Date: November 15, 2013
          /s/ Joshua M. Autry
          Joshua M. Autry, Esquire
          Clymer, Musser & Conrad, P.C.
          Lancaster, PA 17603

          ----------------------------------------------------------


        • bucksburg
          Oh that s right, this is the civil case. No need for a constitutional lawyer on that one; burden of proof is a lot lower and it really all comes down to jury
          Message 4 of 4 , Nov 21, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            Oh that's right, this is the civil case. No need for a constitutional lawyer on that one; burden of proof is a lot lower and it really all comes down to jury selection.


            For that he should hire a former prosecutor; they're the only ones with much jury selection experience.


            Mr. Buck



            ---In maury_and_baty@yahoogroups.com, <rlbaty@...> wrote:

            Daniel,

            I was most interested in what the alleged conflict was between the lawyers.

            As far as Kenneth Miller is concerned, the only question in the civil suit is going to be how much.

            As a secondary or tertiary matter, there may be questions, constitutional and otherwise, as to how much they can get Kenneth to give up on the others.  If they ever get to the stage where Kenneth is deposed, with immunity protection, it will be interesting to see how hard the judge comes down on him and his contempt of court.  I figure he got off rather easy in the criminal case by just claiming he wasn't going to talk and so the judge let him walk...after only a week in the pokey.

            It continues to shape up as a years' long case; Kenneth may very well serve his 3 years in jail and be released before the civil case gets very far to a final resolution.

            Sincerely,
            Robert Baty


            To: Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com
            From: bucksburg@...
            Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 11:07:16 -0800
            Subject: [M & B] RE: Kenneth Miller Losing A Lawyer!

             

            Autry was his out-of-state constitutional expert; McArthur the local counsel.  


            If this case is going anywhere, he's going to need another constitutional expert.


            Mr. Buck



            ---In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, <rlbaty@...> wrote:

            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
            FOR VERMONT

            Docket No. 2:12-CV-00184-wks

            JANET JENKINS, for herself :
            and as next friend of
            ISABELLA MILLER-JENKINS 
            a/k/a ISABELLA MILLER, 
            Plaintiffs 

            v.:

            KENNETH MILLER, et al. 

            MOTION TO WITHDRAW

            AND NOW comes Joshua M. Autry, Esquire (herein after Counsel)
            and respectfully requests this Honorable Court GRANT petitioner’s
            motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth Miller.

            1.

            Brooks G. McArthur, Esquire of Jarvis, McArthur& Williams, L.L.C.,
            will still represent Defendant in this matter.

            2.

            A conflict has arisen in the representation of Defendant by Counsel
            and therefore Counsel request leave to withdraw as counsel.

            3.

            There will be no prejudice to the Defendant because Attorney
            McArthur is already familiar with his case.

            4.

            There will be no delay in the case as Attorney McArthur has already
            been serving as counsel for Defendant.

            5.

            Counsel has spoken with Defendant Miller and Attorney McArthur
            and both concur in Counsel’s request for leave to withdraw as
            counsel.

            WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable
            Court grant him leave to withdraw as counsel for Defendant Kenneth
            Miller.

            Respectfully Submitted:
            Date: November 15, 2013
            /s/ Joshua M. Autry
            Joshua M. Autry, Esquire
            Clymer, Musser & Conrad, P.C.
            Lancaster, PA 17603

            ----------------------------------------------------------


          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.