EFTA01001361.pdf

From: Martin Weinberg s'= > To: "Jeffrey E." <jeevacation(0gmail.com>, Martin Weinberg <a Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:11:40 +0000 I would guess the recusal was connected to reinhart-marie conversation. I can track what we know about it but it would require some diving into old pleadings principally the ones unsealed at time the court denied govt MTD. Give me a day or so. Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note EFTA01001361 that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. On Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:46 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: slomans self report was in o8 On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Martin Weinberg <I > wrote: My memory is that OPR declined to investigate based on the Cassell Dec 2010 complaint finding that the complaint was the subject of ongoing litigation and that the recusal came later and was based not on Cassell's complaint but on other matters (maybe referred to OPR by Sloman, see last nights pleading and dkt 260, attached, where they refer to a separate time period in Aug 2011. We can track it down - thru their privilege logs (dates), perhaps the unsealed pleadings from last year where we first learned of the officewide recusal. I am quite certain the recusal did not emanate from the Cassell OPR complaint from Dec 2010. Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of EFTA01001362 Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. On Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:32 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected]> wrote: it says that the opr declined to investigate. ?? why then the office recusal On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Martin Weinberg <-> wrote: The 12-19-07 letter at pg 2 references the USAO view of CVRA (referred to in last nights pleading at pg 10). See also the 12-6-07 Sloman letter also relied on to set forth the USAO position on CVRA. Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 EFTA01001363  This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this EFTA01001364  communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved MIM please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA01001365