Courts

Alex Jones Lawyers Want Off The Connecticut Sandy Hook Case

No, this isn't another ploy to postpone the trial. Why ever would you ask that?

By  
on
alex jones

(Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

After the spectacular implosion of his bankruptcy gambit, Alex Jones found himself back in state court last week preparing to finally face juries in the defamation suits by the Sandy Hook families, who were subjected to years of harassment after the podcaster called them “crisis actors” participating in a “hoax” to gin up support for gun control.

On the eve of the Texas plaintiffs’ trial, Jones placed three essentially worthless LLCs in bankruptcy, successfully postponing his day of reckoning because the LLCs were named as defendants in the tort suits. But he didn’t manage to postpone it for long, since the Connecticut and Texas plaintiffs promptly non-suited the LLCs and got the cases remanded to state court. This landed him back in the chambers of Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis, who already imposed a default judgment and contempt sanctions for Jones’s refusal to comply with discovery.

Suffice it to say that the defendant long ago exhausted her Honor’s patience, so Jones’s lawyers were facing an uphill battle when they tried to withdraw their appearance and get a further delay of the trial, which is set to begin on September 1.

On May 9 and then again on May 31, Jones’s notorious lawyer Norm Pattis moved to withdraw his firm from the case claiming that “Pursuant to Connecticut Rule of Professional Conduct 1.16(a)(3), the undersigned and his colleagues’ withdrawal is mandatory.” They also indicated that they’ve filed similar motions in Texas.

“We are in an untenable position — our communication with our client has broken down,” Pattis’s associate Cameron Atkinson told the judge last week. “We have not had direct communication with our client in over a month.”

The News-Times has been following all the developments in the Jones case and was on hand to witness this windmill tilt by Atkinson, the unfortunate lawyer who appeared in court back in March to argue that his client was too sick to appear for deposition, only to have opposing counsel open up his laptop to reveal that Jones was at that very moment in-studio broadcasting his Infowars show.

Sponsored

“The most appropriate pathway is to have a hearing on the motion to withdraw (our representation) first and proceed with a new (trial) schedule from there,” he argued. “I appreciate your honor’s repeated statement that the trial date is going to hold firm, but I believe with these developments in the case, it is not practically feasible at this point.”

“I am not surprised, attorney Atkinson, that is your position,” Judge Bellis responded. “I am going to deny it, and if you want to file a formal written motion … I will consider it.”

Judge Bellis then posted a minute order documenting both the procedural defects in the attorneys’ withdrawal motions and the 13 other times Jones swapped out his counsel, or tried to do so, since this case was filed in 2018.

The court set a hearing on the issue for June 15, and ordered Pattis et al to stay on the case.

On March 9, 2022, the court entered an order stating that “(a)ll appearing counsel shall remain as appearing counsel in these consolidated matters, unless a motion to withdraw appearance has been granted by the court. As an example, in lieu of appearances will not remove appearing counsel from the case. Additionally, the clerk will not act on an application to withdraw appearance.” Today, in light of these disturbing circumstances, the court enters the following additional order. Attorney Atkinson, Attorney Pattis, and the law firm of Pattis & Smith are ordered to continue representing the remaining Jones defendants until the court has adjudicated this motion.

Sponsored

Which does not sound like she’s going to postpone this trial, much less let Pattis nope out without another attorney to enter an appearance for Jones.

Well, good luck, fellas!

Alex Jones’ attorney Norm Pattis asks to be dropped from Sandy Hook defamation case as trial looms [News-Times]
Lafferty v. Jones [Docket]

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Topics

, , ,