Back in August I reported that the parents of two Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya, filed a lawsuit Hillary Clinton for wrongful death,
alleging the 2012 attack "was directly and proximately caused" by the
then-secretary of state's mishandling of government secrets. I my post (here) I suggested the allegations in the complaint would be very difficult to prove and that there was a chance the case would be considered a frivolous lawsuit, in which case it should be dismissed and the lawyer should be
sanctioned.
Now, a new report published in Politico (here) provides an interesting update on the story. The judge who had been assigned the case decided to set aside and send the case back for reassignment. It turns out the attorney who filed the case wanted that specific judge (a long time Clinton critic) and apparently tried to manipulate the system in order to get him. According to the story, Clinton's lawyers filed a motion arguing, among other things that the plaintiffs' lawyer has a history of "judge shopping" and the judge gave up the case.
This new development adds to my concern over the plaintiffs' lawyer. Did he first file a frivolous lawsuit and then try to manipulate the system in order to shop for the judge he wanted? Will there be a hearing to discuss these questions? Will the new judge impose sanctions? Stay tuned...
No comments:
Post a Comment