Chris Brown is disputing the claims of a process server who alleges he personally served the singer with a copy of a lawsuit filed by the life coach hired to help rehabilitate the entertainer’s image after his 2009 domestic abuse of Rihanna, and he wants the summons invalidated.
Mike G sued the singer on June 23 in Los Angeles Superior Court for allegedly beating him up on May 10, just days before Brown was to leave for a European tour.
Although Mike G thought he was having a routine talk with Brown about the tour, Brown instead took him into a room and punched him four times in the face and neck, the suit alleges. The plaintiff says that while he had to go to the hospital to be treated, Brown allegedly showed no remorse and boasted to others about the attack.
…. Court records show that a process server repeatedly showed up, and the Kahns ultimately had no choice but to vacate their home of six years. Her 22-year-old daughter subsequently moved into a small back porch room in a neighboring city. Her 19-year-old son crashed on couches. Kahn, meanwhile, moved into her black 1995 Camry station wagon – where she has been sleeping ever since, often stationed in Walmart parking lots…..
On July 26th, 2016, the Supreme Court of British Columbia released an interesting decision that addresses questions regarding: (1) the scope of privilege that applies to work done by lawyers in relation to judicial proceedings; and (2) the interpretation of BC’s Privacy Act with respect to the requirements of “wilfulness”
In Duncan v. Lessing, 2016 BCSC 1386, the issue centered on claims brought by an individual, Mr. Duncan, against Mr. Lessing, a lawyer that represented Duncan’s former wife in family litigation between the two parties. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant lawyer breached his privacy: (1) in the course of serving application materials; and (2) through the conveyance of information about the plaintiff in a casual conversation with another lawyer.
The first alleged breach of privacy concerned prior litigation between the plaintiff and his former wife. In the course of bringing an action against the plaintiff, the defendant’s process server unintentionally served an unsealed notice of application and affidavit on several companies not party to the litigation. The plaintiff contended that these documents contained information of circumstances between the couple which were private, including tax returns and a pre-nuptial agreement.