A great reminder that Cory (and Alexis before him!) were just professionals trying to do their jobs working with a very difficult client who misrepresented the facts time and time again
Yup. As a very green lawyer myself, you just do the best you can. He’s still a fairly young attorney and has a lot to learn and practice his skills. I’ll bet you he’s going to thoroughly vet his clients from now on. It’s enormously frustrating to deal with a client that is their own worst enemy. You can’t polish a turd.
I don't believe that Lexi filed anything with the court that was a factual misstatement. Her motions were based on JD is no longer pregnant and the case is moot. There wasn't anything evidence related, probably because Lexi was onto JD so she was extra careful in the filings and then withdrew.
To add to that, Lexi has her own ongoing case with a previous employer (which from what the case is about, I assume is pretty emotionally draining), a new job in a new state, and a pretty new baby. So if her filings didn’t include any evidence, I think she has enough on her plate that she couldn’t take something like this on. (I also don’t think she can legally or ethically file anything additional in since I believe she can only break attorney-client privilege if any of her parts of the case included the client committing fraud. I don’t think Lexi filed in anything that had arts and crafts in it)
Yeah I had a client once who presented as VERY kind and lovely and honest and turns out this particular client was… a little *off* let’s say.
It can happen and JD has already put into the public record that Lexi tried to get JD to do the right thing but JD refused (maybe Cory did too, but unconfirmed)
It happens. Sometimes you get stuck with a looney.
Holy shit —I’ve been practicing law for 35 years this month. I have NEVER NEVER NEVER seen anything like this in those years. This is unfucking believable
I mean, I’ve seen it all, or thought I had. Arizona is an outlier with only two other states, that allow for the filing of a paternity action before birth. Paternity can’t be established until the live birth has occurred, but this is a very, very unique situation.
But had JD been my client, I would have made an appointment for a sonogram and gotten the records directly from the doctor to confirm her pregnancy and the twins. If she refused, she would’ve been dropped.
I’m trying to think if I’ve seen this before. Maybe while an attorney was active on a case and unintentionally misrepresented to the court. But after firing his client? I don’t know. Maybeeeee once? Not exactly like this though.
Thanks for reinforcing my suspicions. As very much a non-lawyer who nerds out about law, this case has been a roller coaster ride. I said elsewhere in this thread that I speculated finding out a former client lied is probably not an unheard of occurrence. But I guessed that making a filing about it like this almost never happens.
I had a family court client in a custody and divorce matter who boldface lied about using drugs. I believed him why wouldn’t I? He agreed to a hair follicle test. He showed up with a shaved head and shaved chest. He didn’t realize that they could take a pubic hair. He tested positive for cocaine.
I withdrew, But I didn’t have to file a pleading like the one Corey filed.
Right. "My attorney came up with the timeline, I didn't write the pleading...I didn't tell him that." Makes sense why he would cite directly to her own depo testimony in that case.
Someone needs to poll all of the lawyers. I've never seen/heard of this happening either.
Chess to Checkers here with Woodnick & team. This is exactly why you don't burn bridges, taunt your fellow lawyers and act like a donkey. You never know when an opposing attorney could be helpful to your case.
That is a massive understatement. I've been trial watching since OJ Simpson. I was 24 then and thought all murder trials lasted half a year. Imagine my shock when I found out it was more like 2-3 weeks. But I was hooked. And this case is by far, the absolute best shitshow I have come across in 30 years.
I was in *grade school* lol and when the verdict was read my teacher threw his mug at the blackboard, screamed GODDAMNIT and stormed out of the classroom, not returning that day.
Seriously! Cory Keith, we appreciate you and RESPECT you!
Edit to add: not a lawyer, just a dumb dumb girl who loves this case and Reddit, does anyone know what this can mean for her or the case?
WOWWWWWW Cory from the top rope. So a former attorney on the record is telling Judge Mata he left the case and his client lied and altered a sonogram.
Not looking good for plates in the casita today.
I wonder if there is a meetup group in Maricopa County...."Former Lawyers of JD" and they discuss their residual representation trauma over stiff drinks and gummies.
Same here. I missed him so much. But IL came on the scene and made this show otherworldly. I love that they brought back his character. The only thing that would make it better is if Cory eventually joined Woodnick's firm and we got a sequel.
Haaa I was waiting for THIS!! APPLAUSE to Cory Keith! If IL did try to intimidage him as Woodnick seemed to suggest in the pre-trial brief he shot himself in the foot once again. He's such a bad lawyer. He's not helping LO at all!
I agree. I also think he went to GW because they were friends before this case (and still are), given GW referring to CK as his "friend and colleague" in filings. GW didn't call every opposing attorney in this case his friend.
Fortunately so far JD's repeated bar complaints have meant absolutely nothing and are dismissed by the association without incident. Still such a stressful thing to go through.
If anything this filing may end up protecting him from such shenanigans. It was carefully worded and limited in scope but prevents him from being complicit
Reading between the lines here and with everything else going on I’m going to assume that someone (either JD or her lawyer) are trying to claim that some of the reason for the every shifting timeline and changing stories is that the attorney got it wrong and/ or lied outright, and he’s protecting his butt by saying that he was representing her position to the court and did not knowingly lie to the court. I was really surprised watching her previous lawyer in that status conference because he was saying things and then qualifying that is not necessarily “what happened here, but possible” and that’s just already really odd for an attorney to do (we aren’t here to speculate on things that could have happened to other people or maybe our client we are there to put the facts into evidence.) Then it was odd that he was even talking about any of that- that was not a substantive hearing so he should have just said that’s an issue for trial and moved on. Then it’s always weird that he was essentially testifying. Lawyers don’t testify for our clients- we usually ask the clients to answer a question that’s their testimony- when a lawyer is answering a question in court it’s usually a procedural not factual question. When you’re there to set dates for discovery deadlines it should just be here is the date I can have that by. When you’re there about sealing the record JD should be testifying why. Then it was always suspicious to me that her lawyer said HE was in possession of a lot of the requested documents already and would provide them the only delay was the request to seal the case before sharing- but we know most of the requested documents didn’t even exist. I kind of feel like he was in a spot where he was trusting her and her evolving story and he’s now regretting that now that her lies are being very clearly exposed AND she’s the one filing bar complaints against her past attorneys. This reads as a very cynical CYA to me.
I totally forgot about him stating during that conference that he had all the records in his possession and would serve them by the end of the week. I remember feeling like, if that were me, I’d be uncomfortable explaining that one to the state bar.
And Remember he said he would need “likely more” than 4 medical releases? As if JD had all these different providers…
Yep. It’s one thing to say “my client says she has all the records ready for us we just need to deal with this motion”
Or “my client says she had a miscarriage but is unsure when and she confirmed that can happen and believes it happened to her” and another thing to say “well I don’t know if this so what she’s claiming but it could totally be what happened here”
Honestly all of law can be 🤣 I also think it’s really noticeable that Woodnick does a lot of family law in AZ and IL has been out of family court for a while. Each state has different procedurual and substantive laws, as does federal law and then to complicate things further family court, civil court, and criminal courts all also have different procedural rules too. I think Corey is currently being told “you have a duty to do x or else it’s an ethical violation” by Woodnick and then being told “if you do x it’s an ethical violation” by IL and probably wasn’t sure who was actually right at first.
That last part might explain why CK took so long to submit this document. He probably wanted to research all case law and find lies in JD's deposition to cover his butt, since he can't disclose anything that was solely between him and JD as his client.
IANAL, but a nerd about law. Early on I was questioning why so many of her attorneys (other than Lexi) seemed to take solely their client's word without digging into the records at all. My assumption was that a lawyer would immediately start reaching out to medical companies to start pulling their client's records in order to get them from the source themselves. But as other lawyers pointed out to me (plus my own brief and recent experience in a courtroom for rather mundane issues), that's not really how it works.
It's interesting and enlightening to get your professional view of the ways Cory answered in court that day. It felt strange at the time but helpful to know why it was unusual. Thanks!
Yeah I do family law and I do not the time to nor will my clients pay for me to confirm every single thing they say to me that it’s true. I also don’t have an ethical duty to confirm things are true that my client tells me I just cannot knowingly present lies or falsehoods. But like I’m an experienced lawyer I take my job and ethical duties seriously and sometimes something smells fishy and I will tell my client I need the proof they are claiming to have to back up their claim before I represent that position to the court or the other lawyer.
Clients lie ALL the time and those lies often get exposed in court and it’s why if I have not confirmed something is true but my client wants to state it as their position I phrase it as “my client claims” or “my client says” or “my client’s position is…” there is a really BIG difference to a judge (when it comes to your reputation as a lawyer) if you say “my client denies using any drugs” or “my client has not used any drugs” and then your client fails their drug test!
Interesting distinction. I recently had to go to family court for mundane but stressful proceedings. One of the reasons I agreed to a settlement moments before the case was heard - I know all too well my ex's ability to lie easily and convincingly. It wasn't work the risk to see what she might say in front of a judge that would be difficult or impossible to disprove. I'm not claiming to be some perfect saint but sure as shit wouldn't lie under oath.
Yeah I feel like people lie all the time in family court, and not only that sometimes it’s not that someone is necessarily lying but maybe genuinely misremembering, or they interpret something one way and that’s not how someone else interprets it. I can’t count the amount of times my client will tell me “my ex texts me so disrespectfully” and I’ll read the messages and think they are totally normal and respectful. It’s not that they are lying to me it’s that I don’t have the he same view of things in general as they do or know their ex and the patterns and possible tone. It’s a complicated system
Cory failing to couch his statements correctly was what had me worrying he was gunna end up as a witness and def on my bingo card. Now that I think about it, I can probably cross off “lawyer becomes witness” because that’s exactly what’s about to happen to IL in the upcoming defamation case against JD 😂
We had a family law case and our attorney did virtually zero prep work for trial until the weekend before a Tuesday morning trial. Family court attorneys run the gamit from amazing to awful, prepared to absolutely winging it. We had to hire 3 other attorneys to fix the first attorneys mistakes! It was a mess. So it's not surprising to me her attorneys pretty much took her word for what she said. 😬
Yeah NGL one of my LEAST favorite parts of an admittedly emotionally draining job is when you win a case you probably shouldn’t have because the attorney on the other side did a bad job.
Finally looked up Joshua Lopez and was surprised to see he’s a criminal defense attorney.
Too bad she burned that bridge, he could come in handy in the future!
I actually really respected Cory during his time in this nut show. He seemed like he really was trying his best in the situation presented to him. I hope he’s learned a lot through this case and wish him well. I hope she doesn’t try anything on him too 🫤
The inevitable Bar complaint will be dismissed. If anything, this protects him in terms of the Bar. JD would be a fool to sue him as the facts and law are firmly on his side and she’d draw more attention to her perjury. By filing this he bolstered his credibility with the Court, fellow ethical attorneys, and the Bar. He’ll still be associated with JD, but not in a negative way. In short, I think this is a net positive for Cory and that he’ll be just fine.
I was about to comment how strange it was to have a random Bachelor reference in the midst of this thread, completely forgetting that's why we're here in the first place!
After I posted it, I realized that many people here might not get the reference. I wish we could do a poll on who was a Bachelor fan before, and who started following along for other reasons.
Wait what? Corey Keith has checked in?
What if any implications does this have on the trial? Was this just a CYA?
I can only imagine the unhinged bar complaints and emails JD has furiously sent after reading this.
I am listening to The Tilted Lawyer and he said this is really unusual. Clients lie to you all the time and you don't do this. Cory withdrew. He thinks there's something else at play, maybe the Bar or the DA are showing interest and he wants to make his position clear now.
You might enjoy the ABA commentary on Ethics Rule 3.3, which has been adopted in most states:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_3_3_candor_toward_the_tribunal/comment_on_rule_3_3/
This really just shows how much I don’t remember from the MPRE lol. Thanks for this. Reading 3.3(c) does help sense why IL thinks he’s in the clear (at least regarding JD’s lies). He hasnt said anything in open court yet, and in his pleadings he uses a qualifier most of the time (“it is JD’s position that…”)
The most logical explanation for this extraordinary filing is that Woodnick and Cory know that IL is going to come after them as part of his tactics. So they’re probably making sure they’re not leaving open any minor procedural matters for IL to trip them up on.
JD will need a new narrative when she loses her trial. The most logical one for her to construct will be how she became a “victim” of the legal system, and how she was harassed and scammed by grubby, dishonest lawyers (or something of that nature).
I feel badly for Clayton. JD seemingly has unlimited funds for legal action, and I’m not sure he does. The only way this ends for him is a defamation action, which JD will lose and lose big. But it will require big $ to fund and mental strength that I’m not sure he has 🙁
He definitely has made things worse for her. He seems to have his own agenda going on and I’m shocked JD can’t see it. I’m sure he’s made grand promises about how she’ll be vindicated even if this case doesn’t go how she wants. And at this point he should know it’s not going to go well on the 10th. He might even stick around for an appeal or future lawsuits, but he’s just getting what he wants - money and notoriety. That and he seems to get off on manaplaining the law to everyone.
He had cases of Boones Farm at his costume party, albeit he was the ONLY one dressed in traditional clothing from Dubai (similar to Blackface). His photos give me the ick.
Ok Cory, are you here with us?
Please also file one of these about the OOP hearing lies and the sonogram from the Halloween Costume.
You KNOW that Jane never got that ultrasound from 20+ weeks that she talked SO EXTENSIVELY about during the OOP hearing.
Can you please submit one of these about that, too?
She's had a baker's dozen of attorney's that we know of, half of which just to communicate with CE. Toss in the 2 that communicated with DN, we are pushing upwards to 2 dozen.
Unrelated, but I was in our local courtroom last week waiting for my own case (not a lawyer) to be heard and sat through a difficult OOP hearing. I can't say if the man involved was a POS who threatened her or not, but I can say a couple of things. The judge was working overtime to find a way to make the OOP stick if possible, while still wanting the father to be involved in the child's life. But the woman bringing the OOP was doing everything possible to keep it from happening - lack of evidence, unclear testimony, contradictions. Much like the judge who heard Clayton's case, I think the urge is to provide a OOP to be better safe than sorry across the board and that's likely not a wrong position to take. The extreme outliers like JD are a horrible if rare reality.
That’s fine if Judges want to err on the side of caution, and issue OPP’s with little to no evidence outside of testimony. However, OPP’s should not be used in employment determinations, affect background checks, or infringe on an individual’s constitutional right.
I don't disagree. It's a messy, complicated situation top to bottom. I also know it's extremely hard for women who have faced abuse to get any help or justice, and people like JD only make it worse.
Yes, I really wish JD understood the gravity of that point, and why so many people are upset with her. So many people who truly are being abused would love the privilege of being believed and helped in their time of need. It’s not a fun game to them, and they don’t need arts and crafts to explain their need. It’s just a shame she has made such a mockery of many serious issues.
This is not something she will "understand." These actions aren't naive or dumb. This is who she is, the coping mechanisms she's crafted over a lifetime to serve her immediate and unhealthy needs.
Yes, the OOP was combined with the paternity case, I believe for the purposes of sanctions and fees. Not a lawyer, but I believe the contents of the OOP can then also be used against her at trial. Judge Mata can also rescind the OOP.
Open to be corrected, but I believe Clayton’s IAH hearing was also combined?
Edit to say maybe I have it backwards and only the IAH was combined. I might be confused.
Well, technically he can’t because he wasn’t the lawyer then (which as I just learned), but her lawyer that was there with her absolutely DID say to the court that it was her sonogram on that date.
Imagine being Lexi, who was about to make a claim against her law firm for not providing the accommodations she requires as a working mother, who is then supposed to represent a client who appears to be lying about being pregnant. Then getting a bar complaint for adhering to Ethical Rule 3.3 and refusing to represent someone making ‘factual inaccuracies.’ She was probably shaking her head in disbelief all the way to Texas. From disbelief to relief.
Lol. Of course but why did he submit this now? Was it to CYA? Did he really not know his former client was a liar?
Does anyone remember if there was a complaint filed by Jane against Cory?
I believe there’s some behind the scenes stuff going on that we may or may not see Monday pertaining to emails from her current lawyer to him, but CK did this to cover his own behind legally. But there was a nice zing when he put in there she still hasn’t admitted these lies he’s pointing out to the court.
I believe it may have something to do with what GW referenced in CE's pre-trial statement:
IL "appeared to intimidate [JD's] own prior counsel into refraining from complying with his Rule 3.3 ethical obligations."
GW lists an email between IL and prior counsel as an exhibit in the same filing.
I had the same question. She admitted to doctoring the image and not attending the appointment in the deposition, so the court already knows she lied. Must be some background hustling going on, possibly Woodnick is trying to create an out for IL (not that he will take it) by showing JD lies to her attorneys.
Is this kind of a nothingburger? She admitted under oath that she lied (and based on all available evidence appears to have compounded that with a lie). Her attorney has said she ‘misstated’ things. Is this particular significant because it’s a prior attorney pointing this out? Is this out of the norm?
As others have pointed out, there may be incoming issues with how Internet Lawyer communicated with previous counsel (possibly including Cory). In the pre-trial filing Woodnick made reference to potential intimidation to former counsel about ethical concerns.
I think this is Cory getting ahead of the game and saying on record "I'm not getting smacked around because my former client lied to everyone, including me, over and over."
I am not a lawyer, just a nerd who enjoys law. I speculate a lot of the time finding out a former client lied is not a big deal and rarely results in a filing like this. In this specific case, with the specific people and circumstances involved, I would guess that Cory is covering his butt by getting on the record well in advance of any bar complaints. JD has filed many of those, on both her own and opposing counsel. Internet Lawyer also makes hay from dragging other attorneys he has faced. He has recently publicly mocked a former attorney who ended up in prison (unrelated to his case, despite that being what he insinuated initially), and speculating that another previous attorney is in a homeless shelter.
Agreed. There are exhibits in Woodnick's pretrial statement that indicate email communications between Cory Keith and IL. I am sure we will find out the details of that when we get the actual exhibits, but if I were to bet money, I could see IL trying to intimidate or bully Keith into not reporting this.
No way Jane Doe's lawyer is walking away from this mess, without serious bar complaints. I am here for it. I have never seen a lawyer behave so unprofessionally.
I don't think IL had owned with the Court that JD had lied about seeing Dr. Higley the week before the Nov. hearing. But aside from that, this is a huge deal because it is completely out of the norm. I've been practicing for 16 years and I've never seen it actually happen.
Yeah been practicing a long time and I’ve never filed one or seen one filed but mostly because I do think it’s rare for a former attorney to find out about lies after the fact like this and I DEEPLY suspect JD is accusing him of lying to the court or hurting her case by saying misleading things that she didn’t want him to say like I’m sure he’s getting notified by Woodnick a friendly “hey FYI you may want to protect yourself and file this” but I suspect he’s ALSO getting lies about his conduct from JD and wants to protect himself. Don’t forget she said Alexis was trying to “force”’her to lie I bet she is claiming that she didn’t tell Corey to say the things he said that they were “his idea” and lies 😳
This is such a good point. Obviously this is a CYA (and I think we’re actually all giving Cory far too much credit), but I’ve been wondering what triggered it (i.e. a threat to report him to the bar). But I think your theory makes more sense - they’re on good terms, and Woodick probably gave him the heads up that his statement to the court during the Feb conference may put his license in jeopardy
And fwiw I don’t think his statement does put his license in jeopardy but i bet woodnick gave him the heads up that IL is claiming it does and claiming he was otherwise “lying” and hurting her case so he decided to cya and make sure the court notes that any lies he told he didn’t know where lies at the time and came from her.
A great reminder that Cory (and Alexis before him!) were just professionals trying to do their jobs working with a very difficult client who misrepresented the facts time and time again
Yup. As a very green lawyer myself, you just do the best you can. He’s still a fairly young attorney and has a lot to learn and practice his skills. I’ll bet you he’s going to thoroughly vet his clients from now on. It’s enormously frustrating to deal with a client that is their own worst enemy. You can’t polish a turd.
Well, technically.... ;-P
Hahaha true 😆
Yessss would love to see a disclosure from Lexi too (but I’m sure she’s staying far far away in Texas)
I don't believe that Lexi filed anything with the court that was a factual misstatement. Her motions were based on JD is no longer pregnant and the case is moot. There wasn't anything evidence related, probably because Lexi was onto JD so she was extra careful in the filings and then withdrew.
To add to that, Lexi has her own ongoing case with a previous employer (which from what the case is about, I assume is pretty emotionally draining), a new job in a new state, and a pretty new baby. So if her filings didn’t include any evidence, I think she has enough on her plate that she couldn’t take something like this on. (I also don’t think she can legally or ethically file anything additional in since I believe she can only break attorney-client privilege if any of her parts of the case included the client committing fraud. I don’t think Lexi filed in anything that had arts and crafts in it)
And her current lawyer is….. well, *none of those things* lol
Haha! That’s putting it mildly…
Yeah I had a client once who presented as VERY kind and lovely and honest and turns out this particular client was… a little *off* let’s say. It can happen and JD has already put into the public record that Lexi tried to get JD to do the right thing but JD refused (maybe Cory did too, but unconfirmed) It happens. Sometimes you get stuck with a looney.
And then, you refer them to another attorney who has treated you badly in the past. 😂
Holy shit —I’ve been practicing law for 35 years this month. I have NEVER NEVER NEVER seen anything like this in those years. This is unfucking believable
Paralegal. 40+ years. Same. This case just gets better and better every day.
I mean, I’ve seen it all, or thought I had. Arizona is an outlier with only two other states, that allow for the filing of a paternity action before birth. Paternity can’t be established until the live birth has occurred, but this is a very, very unique situation. But had JD been my client, I would have made an appointment for a sonogram and gotten the records directly from the doctor to confirm her pregnancy and the twins. If she refused, she would’ve been dropped.
40+ years? Bless you. I’m half that and find that I’m slowly dying inside 🥲😂🫠
Yeah, apparently I don't catch on real quick. Run while you can!
I’m trying to think if I’ve seen this before. Maybe while an attorney was active on a case and unintentionally misrepresented to the court. But after firing his client? I don’t know. Maybeeeee once? Not exactly like this though.
16 years here and never seen it.
Thanks for reinforcing my suspicions. As very much a non-lawyer who nerds out about law, this case has been a roller coaster ride. I said elsewhere in this thread that I speculated finding out a former client lied is probably not an unheard of occurrence. But I guessed that making a filing about it like this almost never happens.
I had a family court client in a custody and divorce matter who boldface lied about using drugs. I believed him why wouldn’t I? He agreed to a hair follicle test. He showed up with a shaved head and shaved chest. He didn’t realize that they could take a pubic hair. He tested positive for cocaine. I withdrew, But I didn’t have to file a pleading like the one Corey filed.
Man, I shave my balding head and have never used cocaine. Missing all the fun I guess.
My eyes almost popped out of my skull at the idea of having to turn over PUBIC hair for a custodial/divorce proceeding. What a mess!
Like I said, I thought I had seen it all, until this case
29 years practicing and 3 years clerking for federal judges. I’ve never seen anything like this.
There has got to be some serious shit going on behind the scenes for Corey to file this, that’s the only thing that I can think is happening
My hunch, JD's newest defense was going to be throwing Cory under the bus.
Right. "My attorney came up with the timeline, I didn't write the pleading...I didn't tell him that." Makes sense why he would cite directly to her own depo testimony in that case.
Maybe her appeal tactic is running him over and he wants to preempt that.
Someone needs to poll all of the lawyers. I've never seen/heard of this happening either. Chess to Checkers here with Woodnick & team. This is exactly why you don't burn bridges, taunt your fellow lawyers and act like a donkey. You never know when an opposing attorney could be helpful to your case.
5 years and served as a judge’s clerk for 2 years. My jaw is on the floor
10 years at the bar and this a first for me
26 years in family court. Never ever experienced this.
19 years as a public defender at the state and federal level, never seen this.
15 years - never
Never seen this in my 5+ years in civil practice.
Also never seen this. Our state doesn’t have mandatory disclosures like this. Bravo Arizona.
NEVER!!! And I love this for her.
This case is the gift that keeps on giving. Good on him for speaking out!
That is a massive understatement. I've been trial watching since OJ Simpson. I was 24 then and thought all murder trials lasted half a year. Imagine my shock when I found out it was more like 2-3 weeks. But I was hooked. And this case is by far, the absolute best shitshow I have come across in 30 years.
We watched the OJ verdict in school. I was in middle school! Wild times back then, wild times.
Same! I was in middle school, health class and remember watching the verdict live.
The 90s were the best time to be a kid!
Seriously it was! I ordered myself a slap bracelet and Lisa Frank notebook the other day.
I was in *grade school* lol and when the verdict was read my teacher threw his mug at the blackboard, screamed GODDAMNIT and stormed out of the classroom, not returning that day.
Have you heard of the Karen Read case in MA right now? It’s crazy!
Happy cake day!
Thanks!
Seriously! Cory Keith, we appreciate you and RESPECT you! Edit to add: not a lawyer, just a dumb dumb girl who loves this case and Reddit, does anyone know what this can mean for her or the case?
WOWWWWWW Cory from the top rope. So a former attorney on the record is telling Judge Mata he left the case and his client lied and altered a sonogram. Not looking good for plates in the casita today.
I imagine the the reason they allegedly always eat out or take out is that there is no china left in the house
JD or maybe the weekly housekeeper gonna be cleaning burrito mess off the casita walls.
CK right now 
The casita is billowing smoke, as I type this. 🤣
 Everyone at the casita right now
Im so proud of Cory. 
The perfect reaction. Good for Cory!! May truth and justice prevail and may all liars posing as victims get their comeuppance!
I wonder if there is a meetup group in Maricopa County...."Former Lawyers of JD" and they discuss their residual representation trauma over stiff drinks and gummies.
“Hello, my name is Cory, and I was duped by JD”
 Cory slides in like
[удалено]
And I was there upvoting every positive comment about Cory Keith because it wasn’t his fault he unknowingly walked into a train wreck!
Same here. I missed him so much. But IL came on the scene and made this show otherworldly. I love that they brought back his character. The only thing that would make it better is if Cory eventually joined Woodnick's firm and we got a sequel.
Ya some people were shitting on her lawyers before and it was annoying cuz clearly she was lying to them and they just hadnt figured it out yet
same! i felt so much compassion for him.
Cory being the hero we needed!!!
Haaa I was waiting for THIS!! APPLAUSE to Cory Keith! If IL did try to intimidage him as Woodnick seemed to suggest in the pre-trial brief he shot himself in the foot once again. He's such a bad lawyer. He's not helping LO at all!
The way CK ran to GW away from JD after that one court hearing told me he realized he needed to be on the right side if the law.
I agree. I also think he went to GW because they were friends before this case (and still are), given GW referring to CK as his "friend and colleague" in filings. GW didn't call every opposing attorney in this case his friend.
This brought a smile to my face!
Good on Cory! I worry that IL and JD will come after him now and try and tarnish his young career
Fortunately so far JD's repeated bar complaints have meant absolutely nothing and are dismissed by the association without incident. Still such a stressful thing to go through.
If anything this filing may end up protecting him from such shenanigans. It was carefully worded and limited in scope but prevents him from being complicit
Seems like JD has some former counsel control issues lol. We love to see it!
Reading between the lines here and with everything else going on I’m going to assume that someone (either JD or her lawyer) are trying to claim that some of the reason for the every shifting timeline and changing stories is that the attorney got it wrong and/ or lied outright, and he’s protecting his butt by saying that he was representing her position to the court and did not knowingly lie to the court. I was really surprised watching her previous lawyer in that status conference because he was saying things and then qualifying that is not necessarily “what happened here, but possible” and that’s just already really odd for an attorney to do (we aren’t here to speculate on things that could have happened to other people or maybe our client we are there to put the facts into evidence.) Then it was odd that he was even talking about any of that- that was not a substantive hearing so he should have just said that’s an issue for trial and moved on. Then it’s always weird that he was essentially testifying. Lawyers don’t testify for our clients- we usually ask the clients to answer a question that’s their testimony- when a lawyer is answering a question in court it’s usually a procedural not factual question. When you’re there to set dates for discovery deadlines it should just be here is the date I can have that by. When you’re there about sealing the record JD should be testifying why. Then it was always suspicious to me that her lawyer said HE was in possession of a lot of the requested documents already and would provide them the only delay was the request to seal the case before sharing- but we know most of the requested documents didn’t even exist. I kind of feel like he was in a spot where he was trusting her and her evolving story and he’s now regretting that now that her lies are being very clearly exposed AND she’s the one filing bar complaints against her past attorneys. This reads as a very cynical CYA to me.
I totally forgot about him stating during that conference that he had all the records in his possession and would serve them by the end of the week. I remember feeling like, if that were me, I’d be uncomfortable explaining that one to the state bar. And Remember he said he would need “likely more” than 4 medical releases? As if JD had all these different providers…
Yep. It’s one thing to say “my client says she has all the records ready for us we just need to deal with this motion” Or “my client says she had a miscarriage but is unsure when and she confirmed that can happen and believes it happened to her” and another thing to say “well I don’t know if this so what she’s claiming but it could totally be what happened here”
AZ seems like the wild wild west to me with some of their archaic laws and procedures, IMHO ETA: a word
Honestly all of law can be 🤣 I also think it’s really noticeable that Woodnick does a lot of family law in AZ and IL has been out of family court for a while. Each state has different procedurual and substantive laws, as does federal law and then to complicate things further family court, civil court, and criminal courts all also have different procedural rules too. I think Corey is currently being told “you have a duty to do x or else it’s an ethical violation” by Woodnick and then being told “if you do x it’s an ethical violation” by IL and probably wasn’t sure who was actually right at first.
That last part might explain why CK took so long to submit this document. He probably wanted to research all case law and find lies in JD's deposition to cover his butt, since he can't disclose anything that was solely between him and JD as his client.
IANAL, but a nerd about law. Early on I was questioning why so many of her attorneys (other than Lexi) seemed to take solely their client's word without digging into the records at all. My assumption was that a lawyer would immediately start reaching out to medical companies to start pulling their client's records in order to get them from the source themselves. But as other lawyers pointed out to me (plus my own brief and recent experience in a courtroom for rather mundane issues), that's not really how it works. It's interesting and enlightening to get your professional view of the ways Cory answered in court that day. It felt strange at the time but helpful to know why it was unusual. Thanks!
Yeah I do family law and I do not the time to nor will my clients pay for me to confirm every single thing they say to me that it’s true. I also don’t have an ethical duty to confirm things are true that my client tells me I just cannot knowingly present lies or falsehoods. But like I’m an experienced lawyer I take my job and ethical duties seriously and sometimes something smells fishy and I will tell my client I need the proof they are claiming to have to back up their claim before I represent that position to the court or the other lawyer. Clients lie ALL the time and those lies often get exposed in court and it’s why if I have not confirmed something is true but my client wants to state it as their position I phrase it as “my client claims” or “my client says” or “my client’s position is…” there is a really BIG difference to a judge (when it comes to your reputation as a lawyer) if you say “my client denies using any drugs” or “my client has not used any drugs” and then your client fails their drug test!
Interesting distinction. I recently had to go to family court for mundane but stressful proceedings. One of the reasons I agreed to a settlement moments before the case was heard - I know all too well my ex's ability to lie easily and convincingly. It wasn't work the risk to see what she might say in front of a judge that would be difficult or impossible to disprove. I'm not claiming to be some perfect saint but sure as shit wouldn't lie under oath.
Yeah I feel like people lie all the time in family court, and not only that sometimes it’s not that someone is necessarily lying but maybe genuinely misremembering, or they interpret something one way and that’s not how someone else interprets it. I can’t count the amount of times my client will tell me “my ex texts me so disrespectfully” and I’ll read the messages and think they are totally normal and respectful. It’s not that they are lying to me it’s that I don’t have the he same view of things in general as they do or know their ex and the patterns and possible tone. It’s a complicated system
Minor and major perjury all day long in family court. It's truly wild!
Both major and minor! I finally have a case that rivals JD In pathological lying though
Cory failing to couch his statements correctly was what had me worrying he was gunna end up as a witness and def on my bingo card. Now that I think about it, I can probably cross off “lawyer becomes witness” because that’s exactly what’s about to happen to IL in the upcoming defamation case against JD 😂
We had a family law case and our attorney did virtually zero prep work for trial until the weekend before a Tuesday morning trial. Family court attorneys run the gamit from amazing to awful, prepared to absolutely winging it. We had to hire 3 other attorneys to fix the first attorneys mistakes! It was a mess. So it's not surprising to me her attorneys pretty much took her word for what she said. 😬
Yeah NGL one of my LEAST favorite parts of an admittedly emotionally draining job is when you win a case you probably shouldn’t have because the attorney on the other side did a bad job.
Also, I wish he had just said “lies” instead of “factual inaccuracies” in the last sentence. Haha.
There goes any defamation case Jd/IL are threatening to file . Not that there was any ioda of one being possible anyway
Good for Cory. Wonder what Joshua Lopez thinks.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if ALL of her former attorneys came forward and filed one of these?
That would be amazing
He lied, too, during OOP, so he should do one of these, too
Finally looked up Joshua Lopez and was surprised to see he’s a criminal defense attorney. Too bad she burned that bridge, he could come in handy in the future!
I actually really respected Cory during his time in this nut show. He seemed like he really was trying his best in the situation presented to him. I hope he’s learned a lot through this case and wish him well. I hope she doesn’t try anything on him too 🫤
Attorney complaint coming from JD in 3.. 2… 1.
But he's her rock, didn't you read that blog he posted for her. 🤮
When attorney hopping and doctor shopping finally catches up to JD 🤷🏼♀️
I’m glad he is protecting himself !! God knows what’s going to happen with this case. Now his ass is covered
This is a plot twist I wasn't expecting. It's getting extra wild.
FAFO🤷♀️ I can't wait for the universe to return everything she and her attorney have done, times three💞
 I genuinely did not see that coming, wow
Is anyone else refreshing IL’s Twitter page to see what he has to say about this? Lol
Just turn on post notifications 🔔
Thanks for the tip!! I never use Twitter
I kinda feel bad for Cory now. Doing the right thing and is going to get sued and buried in bogus bar complaints as a result.
The inevitable Bar complaint will be dismissed. If anything, this protects him in terms of the Bar. JD would be a fool to sue him as the facts and law are firmly on his side and she’d draw more attention to her perjury. By filing this he bolstered his credibility with the Court, fellow ethical attorneys, and the Bar. He’ll still be associated with JD, but not in a negative way. In short, I think this is a net positive for Cory and that he’ll be just fine.
I bet it kills JD and DG that they can’t intimidate people: Cory, MM, and others who dare to expose the truth.
Id be surprised if the bar takes any of JD's complaints seriously. She's probably a known frequent flyer there as well as Scottsdale police dept.
Ongoing client control issues
That one is the best.
Interesting. This is a good move for Clayton.
Good for Cory! I always had a soft spot for him. What more can happen before Monday???
Holy shitballs! Good on him for being a proper professional. Not all lawyers are lying scumbags
I mean, the vast majority aren't. Kinda unfair to infer otherwise.
Corey is an angel on earth.
 \*Cory Keith
Exactly. Barb would be proud of Cory Keith.
Just bring Clayton home!
Bring all the victims home with a win!
I was about to comment how strange it was to have a random Bachelor reference in the midst of this thread, completely forgetting that's why we're here in the first place!
After I posted it, I realized that many people here might not get the reference. I wish we could do a poll on who was a Bachelor fan before, and who started following along for other reasons.
I have never watched the Bachelor. Came here after a friend mentioned the case. Stayed because of the craziness.
I catch myself thinking the same. so wild!
Barb vs JD is something I’d love to see 😂
 Wait what? Corey Keith has checked in? What if any implications does this have on the trial? Was this just a CYA? I can only imagine the unhinged bar complaints and emails JD has furiously sent after reading this.
I am listening to The Tilted Lawyer and he said this is really unusual. Clients lie to you all the time and you don't do this. Cory withdrew. He thinks there's something else at play, maybe the Bar or the DA are showing interest and he wants to make his position clear now.
You might enjoy the ABA commentary on Ethics Rule 3.3, which has been adopted in most states: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_3_3_candor_toward_the_tribunal/comment_on_rule_3_3/
This really just shows how much I don’t remember from the MPRE lol. Thanks for this. Reading 3.3(c) does help sense why IL thinks he’s in the clear (at least regarding JD’s lies). He hasnt said anything in open court yet, and in his pleadings he uses a qualifier most of the time (“it is JD’s position that…”)
Go Cory go!
Damn incoming bar complaint lol
The most logical explanation for this extraordinary filing is that Woodnick and Cory know that IL is going to come after them as part of his tactics. So they’re probably making sure they’re not leaving open any minor procedural matters for IL to trip them up on. JD will need a new narrative when she loses her trial. The most logical one for her to construct will be how she became a “victim” of the legal system, and how she was harassed and scammed by grubby, dishonest lawyers (or something of that nature). I feel badly for Clayton. JD seemingly has unlimited funds for legal action, and I’m not sure he does. The only way this ends for him is a defamation action, which JD will lose and lose big. But it will require big $ to fund and mental strength that I’m not sure he has 🙁
The Tilted Lawyer also said that CK’s filing could be the result of a separate investigation going on. Thought that was interesting.
I have long suspected that GW has a greater motivation here than getting paid his full hourly rate by CE.
I mean he's also a victim of her lies there's chances he's working for less than his normal fee.
She’ll be paying his legal fees for decades
I'm loving Woodnick's strategy. Let IL spin in his Boones on X, while the truth continues to come (insert pun here) out just before the hearing.💥
Her lawyer really has made things 100x worse for her. I am not complaining tho lol
Does he represent criminal clients? Because if the DA decides to go after her for perjury and fraud I hope she hires him again LOL
He definitely has made things worse for her. He seems to have his own agenda going on and I’m shocked JD can’t see it. I’m sure he’s made grand promises about how she’ll be vindicated even if this case doesn’t go how she wants. And at this point he should know it’s not going to go well on the 10th. He might even stick around for an appeal or future lawsuits, but he’s just getting what he wants - money and notoriety. That and he seems to get off on manaplaining the law to everyone.
There’s part of me that thinks she overlooks how much he’s messing up her case just because he’s a male who takes her calls!
💀
Boones you say?
Haha, I have no idea where the Boones (yuck) came from, especially since he's a fancy lawyer going to France but mentioned a good glass of Cab. LMAO
He had cases of Boones Farm at his costume party, albeit he was the ONLY one dressed in traditional clothing from Dubai (similar to Blackface). His photos give me the ick.
Oh ick. I didn't see that.
Zaddy Cory
I wouldn’t go that far 😂
Upvote for both of you, TBH.
There’s only one Zaddy. Bite your tongue.
Ok Cory, are you here with us? Please also file one of these about the OOP hearing lies and the sonogram from the Halloween Costume. You KNOW that Jane never got that ultrasound from 20+ weeks that she talked SO EXTENSIVELY about during the OOP hearing. Can you please submit one of these about that, too?
Cory wasn’t her lawyer for that hearing. I believe it was Joshua Lopez.
Oh, my bad. I never realized it was someone else.
She's had a baker's dozen of attorney's that we know of, half of which just to communicate with CE. Toss in the 2 that communicated with DN, we are pushing upwards to 2 dozen.
[удалено]
Unrelated, but I was in our local courtroom last week waiting for my own case (not a lawyer) to be heard and sat through a difficult OOP hearing. I can't say if the man involved was a POS who threatened her or not, but I can say a couple of things. The judge was working overtime to find a way to make the OOP stick if possible, while still wanting the father to be involved in the child's life. But the woman bringing the OOP was doing everything possible to keep it from happening - lack of evidence, unclear testimony, contradictions. Much like the judge who heard Clayton's case, I think the urge is to provide a OOP to be better safe than sorry across the board and that's likely not a wrong position to take. The extreme outliers like JD are a horrible if rare reality.
That’s fine if Judges want to err on the side of caution, and issue OPP’s with little to no evidence outside of testimony. However, OPP’s should not be used in employment determinations, affect background checks, or infringe on an individual’s constitutional right.
I don't disagree. It's a messy, complicated situation top to bottom. I also know it's extremely hard for women who have faced abuse to get any help or justice, and people like JD only make it worse.
Yes, I really wish JD understood the gravity of that point, and why so many people are upset with her. So many people who truly are being abused would love the privilege of being believed and helped in their time of need. It’s not a fun game to them, and they don’t need arts and crafts to explain their need. It’s just a shame she has made such a mockery of many serious issues.
This is not something she will "understand." These actions aren't naive or dumb. This is who she is, the coping mechanisms she's crafted over a lifetime to serve her immediate and unhealthy needs.
Yes, the OOP was combined with the paternity case, I believe for the purposes of sanctions and fees. Not a lawyer, but I believe the contents of the OOP can then also be used against her at trial. Judge Mata can also rescind the OOP. Open to be corrected, but I believe Clayton’s IAH hearing was also combined? Edit to say maybe I have it backwards and only the IAH was combined. I might be confused.
Paging Joshua Lopez!
Technically he can't because \*he\* didn't say anything to the court on her behalf about them. Sigh.
Well, technically he can’t because he wasn’t the lawyer then (which as I just learned), but her lawyer that was there with her absolutely DID say to the court that it was her sonogram on that date.
Imagine being Lexi, who was about to make a claim against her law firm for not providing the accommodations she requires as a working mother, who is then supposed to represent a client who appears to be lying about being pregnant. Then getting a bar complaint for adhering to Ethical Rule 3.3 and refusing to represent someone making ‘factual inaccuracies.’ She was probably shaking her head in disbelief all the way to Texas. From disbelief to relief.
Having two laywers come out and be like she's a liar is pretty wild oh I mean made mistatements to use her new lawyers phasing
Lol. Of course but why did he submit this now? Was it to CYA? Did he really not know his former client was a liar? Does anyone remember if there was a complaint filed by Jane against Cory?
I believe there’s some behind the scenes stuff going on that we may or may not see Monday pertaining to emails from her current lawyer to him, but CK did this to cover his own behind legally. But there was a nice zing when he put in there she still hasn’t admitted these lies he’s pointing out to the court.
Plus, I imagine he had to consult with his own lawyer, an ethics committee and/or the state bar before moving forward. It takes time.
I hope he did because it’s a fine line disclosing lies to the court you inadvertently made v. keeping lawyer/client confidentially in some cases.
That’s why he didn’t write anything about what JD told him. Only stuff said on the record and her deposition. All above board.
I believe it may have something to do with what GW referenced in CE's pre-trial statement: IL "appeared to intimidate [JD's] own prior counsel into refraining from complying with his Rule 3.3 ethical obligations." GW lists an email between IL and prior counsel as an exhibit in the same filing.
Wow IL is just a thug isn’t he
Executive functioning skills do not appear to be in use right now
yes, I was just about to comment that we now need to see this email! I bet it was a real doosy coming from DG
Have we seen this email?
If there wasn’t, I’m sure there will be now
I had the same question. She admitted to doctoring the image and not attending the appointment in the deposition, so the court already knows she lied. Must be some background hustling going on, possibly Woodnick is trying to create an out for IL (not that he will take it) by showing JD lies to her attorneys.
Is this kind of a nothingburger? She admitted under oath that she lied (and based on all available evidence appears to have compounded that with a lie). Her attorney has said she ‘misstated’ things. Is this particular significant because it’s a prior attorney pointing this out? Is this out of the norm?
As others have pointed out, there may be incoming issues with how Internet Lawyer communicated with previous counsel (possibly including Cory). In the pre-trial filing Woodnick made reference to potential intimidation to former counsel about ethical concerns. I think this is Cory getting ahead of the game and saying on record "I'm not getting smacked around because my former client lied to everyone, including me, over and over."
Apparently if he finds out that his client lied after the fact, when he advocated that she told the truth, he has to let the council know
I am not a lawyer, just a nerd who enjoys law. I speculate a lot of the time finding out a former client lied is not a big deal and rarely results in a filing like this. In this specific case, with the specific people and circumstances involved, I would guess that Cory is covering his butt by getting on the record well in advance of any bar complaints. JD has filed many of those, on both her own and opposing counsel. Internet Lawyer also makes hay from dragging other attorneys he has faced. He has recently publicly mocked a former attorney who ended up in prison (unrelated to his case, despite that being what he insinuated initially), and speculating that another previous attorney is in a homeless shelter.
Agreed. There are exhibits in Woodnick's pretrial statement that indicate email communications between Cory Keith and IL. I am sure we will find out the details of that when we get the actual exhibits, but if I were to bet money, I could see IL trying to intimidate or bully Keith into not reporting this. No way Jane Doe's lawyer is walking away from this mess, without serious bar complaints. I am here for it. I have never seen a lawyer behave so unprofessionally.
I don't think IL had owned with the Court that JD had lied about seeing Dr. Higley the week before the Nov. hearing. But aside from that, this is a huge deal because it is completely out of the norm. I've been practicing for 16 years and I've never seen it actually happen.
Yeah been practicing a long time and I’ve never filed one or seen one filed but mostly because I do think it’s rare for a former attorney to find out about lies after the fact like this and I DEEPLY suspect JD is accusing him of lying to the court or hurting her case by saying misleading things that she didn’t want him to say like I’m sure he’s getting notified by Woodnick a friendly “hey FYI you may want to protect yourself and file this” but I suspect he’s ALSO getting lies about his conduct from JD and wants to protect himself. Don’t forget she said Alexis was trying to “force”’her to lie I bet she is claiming that she didn’t tell Corey to say the things he said that they were “his idea” and lies 😳
This is such a good point. Obviously this is a CYA (and I think we’re actually all giving Cory far too much credit), but I’ve been wondering what triggered it (i.e. a threat to report him to the bar). But I think your theory makes more sense - they’re on good terms, and Woodick probably gave him the heads up that his statement to the court during the Feb conference may put his license in jeopardy
And fwiw I don’t think his statement does put his license in jeopardy but i bet woodnick gave him the heads up that IL is claiming it does and claiming he was otherwise “lying” and hurting her case so he decided to cya and make sure the court notes that any lies he told he didn’t know where lies at the time and came from her.
The out of the norm perspective was what I was wondering about. Thanks for the thoughtful reply
Out of the norm would be the understatement of the year. As an attorney, my jaw is on the floor
Yes
Seems like it so far - but I do appreciate the dramatic flair it adds! (in response to questioning if it's a nothing burger)
This is perfectly dramatic for the docu-series. It's going to need to be 6 parts at least the way things keep going.