Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and Rule 11

Well, well, well, he actually did it. TDPK filed a Motion and Memorandum in Support of Rule 11 Sanctions Against Plaintiff’s Attorney Dan Backer in the federal Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit on 20 November. It showed up in the docket on PACER today. Here it is:

I haven’t got time to get into fisking this nonsense document this evening. I’ll tend to it later. There were a bunch of other filings appearing on the docket today, and I want to read them. However, I will point out a couple of glaring errors.

The first is the blatantly false statement on the first page claiming that Aaron Walker’s complaint alleges that the Montgomery County, Maryland, courts are in “cahoots” with TDPK. There is no such statement or inference in the complaint.

Second, Exhibit C is yet another breach of the seal Judge Potter placed on discovery documents in the Virginia Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. case. In for a penny, in for a pound, I guess. Or maybe stupid is as stupid does.

In an earlier filing in the Virginia case TDPK threatened that a Rule 11 sanctions motion would be filed in the federal case, but he implied that it would be filed by the counsel for Justice Through Music Project and Velvet Revolution US on behalf of those defendants. TDPK has filed one instead, whereas JTMP and VRUS have simply filed a Motion to Dismiss (that’s one of the filing I want to get around to reading tonight). Hmmmmm.

I suppose Dan Backer will file yet another Notice of Breach with Judge Potter. That will make a six pack. I’ll bet that the judge will not be amused by this during the sanctions hearing against TDPK on 4 December.

Start popping the corn, and stay tuned.

Tick, tock, tick, tock, …

UPDATE–In response to questions about redacting Exhibit C, I left it intact for two reasons. First, it has already been widely circulated, so it can’t do Aaron Walker any additional harm. Second, it serves to demonstrate how desperately TDPK is grasping for any defense.

10 thoughts on “Dread Pirate #BrettKimberlin and Rule 11


  1. If Exhibit C is another breach, should you redact it from the Scribd document above? Just wondering… (You are welcome to remove this comment as well.)


    • A good question that deserves an answer.

      I decided to leave Exhibit C intact for two reasons. First, it has already been widely circulated, so it can’t do Aaron Walker any additional harm. Second, it serves to demonstrate how desperately TDPK is grasping for any defense.


      • I guess that’s probably right. Gotta remember that you’ve lifted this from a public filing, so the party responsible for the breach is still Kimberlin alone.

        No doubt we will see another sanctions motion to address this breach.


  2. Ex. C is as I suspected neither as damning as Kimberlin would believe nor as exhonorating as a supporter of Mr. Walker would have hoped. The kernel lies in Mr. Walker’s favor, but this IS (sorry no html) overall a less than glowing appraisal of both Mr. Walker’s work habits, and PHRI’s management practices.

    I am exceptionally disappointed by Mr. Hodge’s repeated negative references to the mere fact of Mr. Walker’s possession of firearms, with no reference to any percieved carry on “company” time/property. It raises the stink that Mr. Walker may have been discriminated against based on his personal beliefs and practices.


    • I share your assessment. I think the argument about ex. c is that it is PHRI stretching for a reason to let AW go. It looks like they disagree with his politics, and subjects that he blogs on (in this case EDM). They really had no reason to let his wife go that I can see in this email…which makes me think it was a retaliation dismissal of both he and his wife.

      If AW really did such shoddy work, why did they hire him in July of 2011 after having been an outside attorney doing freelance work for at least 2 years? His work must have impressed them enough at that time.

      As far as blogging on company time…I know that you can have stories already done and then set them to actually be posted at a specific time of the day. Hogewash does that just about every night at Midnight with the latest TDPK post I think. The story is uploaded at one time, say when AW was at home on his own time, and then actually goes LIVE at a different time. Most Bloggers I would think would set new stories to appear when the average time that most of his regular readers access the site.


  3. Before considering another sanctions motion against Kimberlin for yet another breach one has to ask who wrote this filing? Kimberlin merely claims that he has “submitted” it.

    Except for perhaps the last section, there is a difference in kind between the legal reasoning, quality and tone of this filing and Kimberlin’s hysterical rantings in his reply to the opposition to dismiss filed at the same time. This might not be an accident. It appears that the person who wrote this brief had knowledge of number of relevent cases.

    It would be unacceptable for a member of the bar to breach sealed material in a filing.

    Previously, a member of the bar acting on behalf of the TJMP threatened Dan Backer with a Rule 11 sanctions filing.

    Questions need to be asked.


  4. Where is Kimberlin’s attempts to work out the dispute before filing for a Rule 11 sanction? Exhibit A might very well be such a basis for JTMP, but, there are a seperate defendant. Kimberlin doesn’t have standing to file on their behalf, nor, is an admitted member of the bar.

Leave a Reply