--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Skip Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To whom does the attorney owe his first allegiance, the developer
who
stands to make big bucks or the city which has embarked on a
scheme,
likely promoted by the developer and lawyer having an obvious
agenda?
IF
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, bluebishop82 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Skip Bernstein skip@ wrote:
If he is the Citys redeveloper attorney and was the developers
attorney it's a cler conflict but not if he's the Citys Attorney.
To whom does the
A lawyer is free to represent multiple parties in the same suit so
long as they are seeking or defending against the same thing.
Precisely Aaron's problem, for in representing the city, which may or
may not be acting in the interests of the electorate, the lawyer's
actions reveal, at minimum, the
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ward pointed out that City Attorney Jim Aaronâs firm, Ansell Zaro
Grimm
Aaron, also represents a conflict of interest in the condemnation
proceedings.
âThe Ansell firm represents Hovnanian Enterprises Inc,â
according to
City Attorney Jim Aaron's firm, Ansell Zaro Grimm Aaron, also
represents a conflict of interest in the condemnation proceedings.
The Ansell firm represents Hovnanian Enterprises Inc, according to
the answers filed. The Ansell firm has an actual conflict and/or an
appearance of impropriety in
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, dfsavgny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
c
He's not the city's redelopement attorney, he's the citys attorney a
big difference. That may be a good thing ,he doesn't lose
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, jerseykev@ wrote:
Ward pointed out that City Attorney
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They don't have a chance in the world to win.
Atty.: City involved in conflicts of interest
Challenge to eminent domain links law firms to developers
BY CHRISTINE VARNO
Staff Writer
Long Branchâs taking of properties
If an attorney represents the City in an eminant domain proceeding
against homeowner, and the attorney also represented the developer, it
appears to me the City and developer have the same interest (they both
want the homeowner out), and he is not suing a prior client. Wby does
anyone think there
