Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony

ponderingturtle said:
Like Trump ever pays anyone entirely for the work they do for him. Remember the Moto of the House of Trump is "A Trump never pays their debts"
Click to expand...

Indeed so!

Trump even bragged about not paying his various employees and subcontractors while he was campaigning.
 
Crossbow said:
If that is the case, then Trump can sue Cohen for damages.

However, Trump is still obligated to pay Cohen for the work that Cohen did for Trump.
Click to expand...

:eye-poppi

I literally just explained that it was a defense to fee claim.

here is another source that says wrong

Mystified why people that have no idea what they are talking about say things like hOwEvEr, TrUmP Is sTiLl oBlIgAtEd tO PaY CoHeN FoR ThE WoRk tHaT CoHeN DiD FoR TrUmP
 
The Big Dog said:
Hi! Wrong!

Not only is breach of a lawyer's fiduciary duty a basis for legal malpractice, a defense for a fee claim, but also can require disgorgement of fees.

Ulico Casualty Company v Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker et al. (1st Dept, 2008).
Click to expand...

Where did he breach his fiduciary duty? Client confidentiality doesn't involve illegal acts that your client requested of you. It doesn't involve refusing a plea bargain based on such acts, especially those acts that are documented - previously lying to congress on one's client's behalf
 
The Big Dog said:
That is odd, are you suggesting that my citation to a leading New York court decision on disgorgement was correct?

Perhaps you could regale us with your counter-analysis?

Looking forward to it!
Click to expand...

Still waiting for an answer

Shalamar said:
My favorite part is when Cohen is listed as one of histories worst sinners for.. betraying Trump. He's literally worse than say.. pedophile priests!
Click to expand...

Take it up with dante...

hoo boy....:rolleyes:
 
The Big Dog said:
Hi! Wrong!

Not only is breach of a lawyer's fiduciary duty a basis for legal malpractice, a defense for a fee claim, but also can require disgorgement of fees.

Ulico Casualty Company v Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker et al. (1st Dept, 2008).
Click to expand...

I don't dispute that a breach of duty is a basis for legal malpractice. What I am asking is where Cohen breached his duty and why.
 
Crossbow said:
If that is the case, then Trump can sue Cohen for damages.

However, Trump is still obligated to pay Cohen for the work that Cohen did for Trump.
Click to expand...
From what I've read Cohen isn't suing for nonpayment of his own legal services, but for legal bills he incurred representing Trump. His claim is the Trump organization agreed to indemnify him.
 
jimbob said:
Where did he breach his fiduciary duty? Client confidentiality doesn't involve illegal acts that your client requested of you. It doesn't involve refusing a plea bargain based on such acts, especially those acts that are documented - previously lying to congress on one's client's behalf
Click to expand...

Surreptitiously tape recording his client without their consent or disclosure
breaching attorney client privilege without the clients' consent
monstrous conflicts of interest

Attorneys cannot waive attorney client privilege just because they committed numerous crimes and want to sell out their clients to keep their asses out of jail

C'mon folks, I get that TDS is debilitating, but the Michael Cohen should get paid theory that is being floated here is astounding.

You can hate Trump with every fiber of your being and still realize that Cohen seeking fees is idiotic.

Or not,
 
The Big Dog said:
Surreptitiously tape recording his client without their consent or disclosure
Click to expand...
Legal in New York, and sensible when dealing with Trump. After all, if the conversations were privileged attorney-client conversations and legal, the evidence wouldn't be admissible.

breaching attorney client privilege without the clients' consent
Click to expand...
Where specifically? Illegal instructions are not privileged.
monstrous conflicts of interest
Click to expand...
Cohen was within his rights to reach a plea deal concerning his illegal activities, including those illegal activities that involved Trump
Attorneys cannot waive attorney client privilege just because they committed numerous crimes and want to sell out their clients to keep their asses out of jail
Click to expand...
And again, you are asserting he breached attorney-client privilege, but haven't given an example of a privileged conversation that he has disclosed. Given Cohen's general level of legal competence, I would be unsurprised if he did, but am unaware of any examples.


C'mon folks, I get that TDS is debilitating, but the Michael Cohen should get paid theory that is being floated here is astounding.

You can hate Trump with every fiber of your being and still realize that Cohen seeking fees is idiotic.

Or not,
Click to expand...

I said that I can accept the hypothetical situation where Trump asked Cohen for work that was not illegal.

I don't know about the indemnity clause.
 
The Big Dog said:
Surreptitiously tape recording his client without their consent or disclosure
breaching attorney client privilege without the clients' consent
monstrous conflicts of interest

Attorneys cannot waive attorney client privilege just because they committed numerous crimes and want to sell out their clients to keep their asses out of jail

C'mon folks, I get that TDS is debilitating, but the Michael Cohen should get paid theory that is being floated here is astounding.

You can hate Trump with every fiber of your being and still realize that Cohen seeking fees is idiotic.

Or not,
Click to expand...

And you'll defend Trump to the death.
 
jimbob said:
Legal in New York, and sensible when dealing with Trump. After all, if the conversations were privileged attorney-client conversations and legal, the evidence wouldn't be admissible.


Where specifically? Illegal instructions are not privileged.

Cohen was within his rights to reach a plea deal concerning his illegal activities, including those illegal activities that involved Trump
Click to expand...

Oh dear, recording client without notice or consent is a violation of the duty of loyalty.

The issue is not whether a court may find that they are not privileged, the issue is that it is not for the lawyer to decide that they were not privileged and offer them up as part of a pleas involving his own personal crimes that had nothing to do with Trump, which is exactly what he did. Resist until ordered to disclose, that is the lawyers' duty. This mutt was dead to rights on tax claims so he offered up his clients to take the heat off of himself.

That is exactly what lawyers should never do.
 
jimbob said:
Legal in New York, and sensible when dealing with Trump. After all, if the conversations were privileged attorney-client conversations and legal, the evidence wouldn't be admissible.

Where specifically? Illegal instructions are not privileged.

Cohen was within his rights to reach a plea deal concerning his illegal activities, including those illegal activities that involved Trump

And again, you are asserting he breached attorney-client privilege, but haven't given an example of a privileged conversation that he has disclosed. Given Cohen's general level of legal competence, I would be unsurprised if he did, but am unaware of any examples.

I said that I can accept the hypothetical situation where Trump asked Cohen for work that was not illegal.
I don't know about the indemnity clause.
Click to expand...

EXCELLENT JOB in destroying the flaw in TBD's analysis.

TBD should keep in mind that virtually NONE of the communications or documents seized by the FBI was deemed as fitting to the attorney client privilege.

From what has been reported, Cohen is suing Trump for not paying 1.9 million dollars in legal bills incurred by Cohen and for 1.9 million for assets that Cohen forfeited to the government.
 
The Big Dog said:
:eye-poppi

I literally just explained that it was a defense to fee claim.

here is another source that says wrong

Mystified why people that have no idea what they are talking about say things like hOwEvEr, TrUmP Is sTiLl oBlIgAtEd tO PaY CoHeN FoR ThE WoRk tHaT CoHeN DiD FoR TrUmP
Click to expand...

Trump promised to pay Cohen for the work that he did, so Trump should pay Cohen for the work that he did.

It is just that simple.
 
Crossbow said:
Trump promised to pay Cohen for the work that he did, so Trump should pay Cohen for the work that he did.

It is just that simple.
Click to expand...

That's NOT the issue. Cohen is claiming that Trump agreed to indemnify him. According to Cohen, Trump must fulfill that obligation.
 
Crossbow said:
Trump promised to pay Cohen for the work that he did, so Trump should pay Cohen for the work that he did.

It is just that simple.
Click to expand...

No it is not for reasons that I have explained and cited to already.

protip; a lawyer's entitlement to payment is subject to the Code of professional responsibility, and is not like crossbow's entitlement to get paid for walking the neighbors dog.
 
The Big Dog said:
Oh dear, recording client without notice or consent is a violation of the duty of loyalty.

The issue is not whether a court may find that they are not privileged, the issue is that it is not for the lawyer to decide that they were not privileged and offer them up as part of a pleas involving his own personal crimes that had nothing to do with Trump, which is exactly what he did. Resist until ordered to disclose, that is the lawyers' duty. This mutt was dead to rights on tax claims so he offered up his clients to take the heat off of himself.

That is exactly what lawyers should never do.
Click to expand...

Why? Do lawyers have to be loyal? I thought they had to be professional and act legally in their clients best interest.

I see no problem in recording a conversation that is not privileged, if it is legal to do so in that location.

Even if the conversation is privileged, given how Trump has had a reputation for disputing facts, it would seem prudent to record it in case he decided to sue based on his claims about the advice he received or instructions he gave.
 
acbytesla said:
From what I've read Cohen isn't suing for nonpayment of his own legal services, but for legal bills he incurred representing Trump. His claim is the Trump organization agreed to indemnify him.
Click to expand...

Thanks much for the additional data.

However, the real point is that Trump agreed to pay Cohen and now Trump is refusing to pay Cohen.

Therefore, once again Trump is showing himself to be nothing but a stupid, greedy, idiotic, liar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom