Raises issues of conflicts of interest with the NRA's lawyers.
Ruling against the NRA in seeking to reargue its motion for shielding certain communications with Ackerman McQueen, the NRA’s former public relations firm, from the New York Attorney General as privileged.
DC AG responds to the NRA's initial motion to dismiss.
The list, entitled “persons likely to possess relevant knowledge and/or documents”, includes various NRA executives and board members.
NRA attempts to strike counts seeking a constructive trust.
Finding a “pattern of conducting its business in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner”, the NYAG sues the NRA.
DCAG:“in recent years, the NRA has experienced financial problems related, in large part, to low membership and the NRA’s decision to continue to waste funds on improper, lavish spending. To plug holes caused by its own poor management, the NRA turned to the Foundation’s funds.”
Court rules against the NRA and requires Ackerman to comply with the AG’s subpoena without giving the NRA an opportunity to preview and review Ackerman’s production.
Filing Summary This is a letter from the OAG in response to the NRA’s purported expert affirmation from Arthur Miller. The OAG argues that Miller’s affirmation should be disregarded as improper legal opinion. Key Points The OAG argues that the NRA’s submission of an expert affirmation from Arthur Miller is “an untimely, unauthorized, post-argument sur-reply” […]
Filing Summary Arthur Miller, a law professor at New York University, makes legal arguments in support of the NRA’s opposition to the OAG. He argues that the NRA’s relationship with Ackerman, as alleged by the NRA, is so close as to create attorney-client privilege with respect to communications between the NRA and Ackerman. The existence […]