Connect with us

U.S.

Trump Curse Comes Back For Depp: Ex-Lawyers Sue Him Back

Published

on

(Via Deadline)

Still wrestling in the courts with his former business managers over millions, home foreclosures and claims of excess, Johnny Depp now finds himself at the legal receiving end of one of Hollywood’s biggest lawyers in a $30 million sword fight that is sure to take some of the cheer out of his Christmas.

Less than two months after the thrashing Pirates of the Caribbean star dragged his old attorney Jacob Bloom and his Bloom Hergott Diemer Rosenthal LaViolette Feldman Schenkman & Goodman LLP firm into the battle with The Management Group with a malpractice suit, the lawyers have sued back.

“Bloom Hergott has been damaged, and continues to be damaged, to the extent the parties’ fee agreement is not enforced and Cross-Defendants have not paid the reasonable value of the legal services that Bloom Hergott provided to Cross-Defendants, in an amount to be proven at trial, plus interest,” said a cross-complaint from Bloom and the firm filed last week in LA Superior Court against Depp and his corporate entities. The firm provided Depp with legal representation for decades and up to July of this year, according to the cross-complaint.

Claiming that there never was a “statutorily prescribed written contract” with his long time lawyer, Depp’s October 18 suit declared that “instead of protecting Mr. Depp’s interests, Defendants engaged in misconduct for their own financial benefit and violated some of the most basic tenets of the attorney-client relationship, all to Mr. Depp’s serious financial detriment, causing Mr. Depp substantial economic harm.”

At the same time as launching their cross-complaint, Bloom and his firm have also answered that scathing accusation by basically pronouncing the actor his own worst enemy. “The events and happenings alleged in the complaint, as well as ensuing injuries and losses, if any, were proximately caused and contributed to by the negligence, fault, and misconduct of Plaintiffs and/or their agents and representatives (whose acts, conduct, and/or omissions are chargeable to Plaintiffs),” said the now canned Depp attorneys to the seemingly financially tight Murder On The Orient Express cast member.

Johnny Depp’s DC-based lawyer Adam Waldman did not respond to request from Deadline for comment on the latest sets of filings.

While a further dunking for Depp, the cross-complaint and response shouldn’t be that big a surprise, as back in late October reps for Bloom and the firm said that they saw things differently than “Mr. Depp and his counsel on the law and the facts, and intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously.”

It also follows the pattern of the TMG dust-up after the actor first sued his old long time biz mangagers in a $25 million lawsuit back in January.

Soon afterwards, TMG filed a cross-complaint of their own against Depp in response to his suit that proclaimed that the actor’s spending habits were the real cause of his apparently shrinking bank accounts and he owed them over $500,000 in unpaid commissions. As the second of many shots the two sides have taken against each other since, that cross-complaint damningly detailed an opulent lifestyle of homes all over the world, lavish art collections, cars, boats, plus the $3 million Depp spent to launch the ashes of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson out of a cannon in 2005 and the $2 million he pays out every month on day-to-day expenses.

As the bile blew in both directions, TMG brought out a big cannon on November 8 and filed an action for judicial foreclosure against Depp. The dramatic move was to force the sale of five City of Angels properties owned by Depp run trusts to help repay a $5 million loan that TMG claim they made to the strapped actor in December 2012.

Right now, the next benchmark in this matter with Bloom and his firm is a case management conference pencilled in for March 16, 2018. However, if the love of litigation that this case and the TMG case has shown, is any roadmap, expect more paperwork salvos to be shot across the respective bows before then.

Jacob Bloom and his firm are being represented in this dust-up with their ex-client by Kurt Peterson, Peter Kennedy and Matthew Wrensahll of LA’s Reed Smith LLP.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Opinion

News flash! Women’s Lives Now More Than Bearable

Published

on

This is a contentious time for feminism. In the age of #MeToo, Time’s Up, and the Weinstein effect, just a few of the many products of the fourth-wave feminist movement, women are continuing to push forward a certain narrative about men and the Western culture’s effect on women in general. It seems as if the conversation surrounding women and gender equality has seeped into virtually every realm of life: politics, culture, religion, and even medicine and technology. Fourth-wave feminists are expressing their distrust in men in many ways…celebrities are calling out sexual predators in front of public audiences, politicians are using sexual assault as a political tool, and students are marching and demonstrating. Corporations, eager to jump on the “let’s make a political statement” bandwagon, are even using sexual assault as a marketing tool, spouting controversial messages about toxic masculinity and the like. A prime example is the recent Gillette ad, which garnered more than 19 million views on YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

Many women are also writing about feminism. One example of this is an article, written last year in celebration of International Women’s Day, that has been circulating on social media for the past few months. The article, entitled “100 Easy Ways to Make Women’s Lives More Bearable” and authored by Dani Beckett, has been shared more than 300,000 times since its publication in March 2018. While we would not exactly call it “viral,” it is no secret that the article’s contents are becoming increasingly normalized, currently believed by a meaningful number of female millenials. Beckett’s article was published in Broadly, a subset of Vice Media, a digital media and broadcasting company that launched Vice, the Canadian-American print magazine that gave rise to Broadly. Broadly, a heavily leftist channel catering to women and designed to “provide a space for us to understand, express, and navigate our identities as we define who we are and where we’re headed next,” has quite a solid readership.

After I kept encountering the article on Facebook for several months, I figured it was probably worth a read, but before reading it, I could not help but linger on the title. How to make women’s lives more…bearable? Bearable means tolerable, able to be endured, not even touching the realm of pleasurable or happy. The title implies that women in this country are struggling so much that someone desperately needs to make their lives “more bearable.” In a country where the vast majority of workplace fatalities befall men, the chief victims of non-fatal violence are men, men make up three quarters of all murder victims, women are outperforming men at all levels of education (they even outnumber men at most medical schools), women win custody battles, and women legally win half the earnings and belongings in a household, apparently women’s lives are not yet bearable enough. I was confused, but intrigued, and proceeded to make my way down the long list of male-targeted demands, some of which are too good not to highlight.

The article is written in an incredibly patronizing tone, as if men in America need to be taught that forcing sex upon a woman is probably not a good idea, as if they apparently grew up in a society that conditioned them to rape. The first item on Beckett’s list is, “Before explaining something to a woman, ask yourself if she might already understand. She may know more about it than you do.” Well, is that not general logical advice for anyone? I know the point is to call men out for supposedly always trying to explain things to a woman, but if you are versed in the basic tenets of communication, then it must be the case that you know not to prematurely lecture someone on a topic you suspect they are already well-versed in, regardless of their gender. And let us suppose this is not the case and you have a habit of being didactical when not needed. Well, then this advice should certainly go for everyone, not just men. The point is, gender has nothing to do with it. There is no evidence that men are somehow more likely than women to try to explain something to women, simply because they are women, before considering whether those women might actually understand the topic. Fourth-wave feminists are pushing the narrative that men inherently feel entitled and better than women, so they feel it necessary to always explain things to a woman without thinking if she might already understand. It is a dangerous and baseless narrative to push forward. While it was certainly true fifty years ago when male professors would not even call on their female students in lecture, today, men DO listen to women, whether they like it or not. By virtue of the professional empowerment of women, which has become normalized in Western society, men listen to women explain things to them every single day. Consider this: women now hold 49% of total faculty positions in American colleges and universities. Women lecture, and men listen.

Beckett then states, “Related: Never, ever try to explain feminism to a woman.” Well, what if she’s wrong? Beckett would tell you, “Trust women. When they teach you something, do not feel the need to go and check for yourself. And especially do not Google it in front of them.” So, if she’s wrong, it doesn’t matter. No one cares about facts anyway. Women are so privileged that they now also have the right to be wrong and to lie without getting called out. This is an important reminder of “Believe all women,” the Left’s mantra during the infamous Kavanaugh controversy. If you feel the need to check something JUST because the person who explained it to you is a woman, then maybe you need to treat your misogyny and perhaps Beckett’s list is actually for you. But we live in a society where women are leaders in every sphere – politics, business, medicine, science, the law. At this point, men get it. The need to overpower women, of which remnants will perhaps always exist, has largely dissipated through the years as evidenced by the fact that women now control 60% of the wealth in the United States, for example. If men are such misogynists, why are they collectively not fighting tooth and nail to tear down successful women? Certainly some are, but it’s virtually impossible to prove patriarchy-enforcing men outnumber matriarchy-enforcing women. Instead of acknowledging that, fourth-wave feminists are resorting to feelings, as opposed to facts, to craft their man-hating narrative. What’s more, they are lowering their standards for women.

Clearly, men and women are different, no matter what radical feminists want you to believe. But even though they are different, every society is founded upon a standard set of basic principles and values that every human, regardless of identity, should be obligated to follow in order to preserve civility. Lying does not all of a sudden become okay for a woman if it’s not okay for a man because women should not get special privileges. That is why Dani Beckett is also mistaken in suggesting “Be kind to women in customer service positions. Tip them extra.” Because they are a woman? This sentiment points directly to the pinnacle of feminists’ hypocrisy. Feminists want women to be treated equally, which naturally entails holding them to the same standards as men. Regardless of whether you are a woman or a man, if you don’t do your job well, then you should not be tipped extra. Regardless of whether you are a woman or a man, your customers should be nice to you if you do your job well because that’s the right thing to do.

Next on Beckett’s list is a whole compilation of demands centered around how to describe women. She states, “Examine your language when talking about women. Get rid of ‘irrational, dramatic, bossy, and badgering immediately.” This implies that women cannot be any of these things, which they most certainly can. Or perhaps it implies that they can be some or all of these things but they should not be called out for it, which once again, means that according to Beckett, we should hold women to a lower standard. Let’s be clear, women should not get free passes just because they are women and their ancestors have suffered through years of misogyny and oppression. If feminists want true equality, then they should not be cutting women slack and lowering their standards for women out of pity. Women are perfectly capable of meeting those standards. Pushing forward women’s rights legislation should not be done out of a need to prop up identity politics. Women deserve equal rights not because they are women, but because they are humans.

If that was not enough, Beckett certainly has more! “Never comment on a woman’s body,” she says. When describing women positively, men should say she is “talented,” “clever” or “funny,” but not “gorgeous” “sweet” or “cute.” Men also cannot call her unique, and “unlike other girls” because all girls are awesome. Long gone are the days when it was flattering for a woman to be told she has a nice physical appearance. And long gone are the days when men were allowed to make their physical attraction, the very basis of biological reproduction, known to women. I am assuming Beckett wants men to assign more value to women than their physical appearance, which is understandable, but assigning more value to personality and assigning some value to physical appearance are not mutually exclusive acts. A 2017 study published in Evolutionary Psychological Science found that most women are likely to choose physical attractiveness over personality and intelligence in potential partners. For a group of people who supposedly hate double standards, fourth-wave feminists sure do love double standards.

And now we arrive at the scariest portion of Beckett’s list: the postgenderism demands. Beckett states, “If you read stories to a child, swap the genders. Cast women in parts written for men. We know how to rule kingdoms, go to war, be, not be, and wait for Godot.” Right, and that is exactly why the parts of Katniss Everdeen, Hermione Granger, Wonder Woman, Lara Croft, Daenerys Targaryen, Mulan, and many, many more have been written. To show that women can indeed rule kingdoms, go to war, and do pretty much anything. Fourth-wave feminists are called “fourth-wave” because they are not the first. The women of the past have already proven that women are powerful and can rule kingdoms. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel by going to extreme measures (i.e. swapping genders) to show something that everyone, barring exceptions, already knows. Perhaps, then, the point of swapping genders is not so much to normalize powerful, masculine women. It is, in fact, to get rid of gender roles altogether. My prediction is that postgenderism will pave the way for fifth-wave feminism.

So why is one article like this one so important? It’s maybe just the opinion of one woman. Except it’s not. Between 70 and 80 percent of college women currently identify as feminists. The contents of Beckett’s article are at least somewhat representative of the mentality of young women in America today, even if some shy away from the label “feminist.” I fear that this association we have started to develop between feminism and fourth-wave values, some of which are exemplified in this article, will only become stronger until, eventually, first and second-wave feminists are shut out entirely. Women who are pro-life are shut out entirely. Women who want other women to be held accountable are shunned and considered anti-feminist. Criticizing obesity, pointing to false allegations of sexual assault, challenging the misconceptions surrounding the pay gap, holding conservative views about female sexuality, and acknowledging core differences between men and women will become wholly incompatible with any definition of feminism. Women should be encouraged to be strong, not feed their victimization complexes. Women should be encouraged to listen to other women, even if they disagree. Fourth-wave feminist indoctrination should not be something we stand for if we want to actually help gender equality.

Continue Reading

U.S.

Republicans Are Weak, Spineless, & Complicit In The Death Of America

Published

on

While Americans continue to be hurt by stagnant wages, internet censorship, and being replaced by automation & migration…. the House of Representatives spent the entire day arguing about what Representative Steve King never said.  Read that again:

The House of Representatives spent the entire day arguing about what Representative Steve King never said.

The Failing New York Times creates yet another fake news story to frame Rep. King as a white supremacist.  Republicans salivated eagerly to be the first in line to denounce King.

I shouldn’t be surprised.  These are the people who refuse to go to bat against internet censorship even when it hurts their own campaign’s ability to win elections.  They refuse to build a wall.

For some reason, the party is taking the lead from 2012 loser (cannot be emphasized enough: loser) Mitt Romney and a California cuckservative is the House Minority Leader.

These are our leaders?  If so, expect to lose bigly in 2020 and beyond.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Second Chance Voters’ Campaign in Florida To Help Felons Vote and Get Jobs

Published

on

Today a new campaign is officially launching in Florida for encouraging Felons to vote, increasing their opportunity through jobs, and lessening the stigma around the issue of felons voting. The ‘Second Chance Voter Campaign’ is lead by experienced Councilman Steve Nadine. With an official launch on their website here at www.SecondChanceVoters.org , you can see the intent of the organization and goals set forth.

Karyn Turk of Red America Radio and Populist Wire is also a leading effort in the campaign, she says

“Although many of us were not for, Amendment Four, before it passed. As Republicans it is of extreme importance that we motivate these voters. This new population is a great opportunity for the GOP. We must work with these voters to educate them on republican candidates and important initiatives”

The Press Release States:

Second Chance Voters is led by Steve Nadine. Steve previously served as a County Commissioner and City Councilman and has also served on Alabama’s Sentencing Commission. These experiences have given him a unique and highly qualified credible resume especially in light of his status as an ex-felon and who served his time and probation.

Second Chance Voters will also be a proactive in leading the efforts to work with local and state leaders to effectively and efficiently implement the important components of The First Step Act:

Second Chance Voters will focus their efforts on the following:

Registering ex-felons and their families to vote.

Creating workforce development programs to provide employment opportunities.

Working with Local and State Leaders on tax incentives and tie-ins with economic development organizations to educate and train those incarcerated in local, state and federal prisons, a step critical to reducing recidivism.

Proving guidance on prison, probation and prosecution reform after the First Step Act is implement.

Creating outreach programs for at risk ex-felons and those who are scheduled to be released.

Conducting research on how The First Step Act reforms will effect local, state and federal prosecution and how it will impact the currently under-funded prison systems.

Launching a “Reforming from Within” initiative which will focus on how vitality important it is to educate the ex-felon and those set to be released that this is their Second Chance to proactively participate in their communities and that they can exercise those rights through voting.

Educating the public about the stigma and discrimination faced ex-felon including efforts to ban “checking the box.” These include the many jobs and professions from which they are restricted.

Lobbying in all states that currently restrict ex-felon voting rights.

A lot of what this Campaign is doing is holding politicians like newly elected Governor Rob Desantis to not hold up this right for Felons who have completed their sentence, fine, and probation. It’ll make sure the rights of Felons are restored as soon as possible, as close to the original intent of Amendment Four. This is going to empower any individual who takes it upon themselves to get their rights that had been previously been disenfranchised.

Founder of the Campaign, Steve Nadine is no newcomer when it comes to politics and especially this issue. Steve has an extensive record as the he was at the forefront of the battle to give rights to ex-offenders. He was most important in creating the ‘Jump Start’ program which offered jobs and opportunities to juvenile offenders who were completed a military-style boot camp.

This will be a great way to not only help felons get on their feet but help realize their larger role in a Democratic society that has left them out of the process.

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.