Friday, January 08, 2010

Government: No actual conflict with Mark Nurik

Here's the government's response to Judge Cohn's inquiry regarding whether Marc Nurik is under investigation: he's not. The government explains that he isn't a target or subject in the investigation. But it says:

The government perceives two areas in which Mr. Nurik’s representation of the defendant presents a potential conflict of interest which must be addressed. In examining potential conflicts of interest, the Court’s “goal is to discover whether the defense lawyer has divided loyalties that prevent him from effectively representing the defendant.” United States v. Ross, 33 F.3d 1507, 1523 (11th Cir. 1994). As a former employee of RRA, which has been designated as the Enterprise through which criminal conduct was conducted herein, Mr. Nurik has, at a minimum, professional relationships with other employees of RRA who do have apparent criminal culpability in the case, which could conceivably interfere with the undivided loyalty that Mr. Nurik owes to the defendant.

Secondly,* because Mr. Nurik was an employee at RRA, he may personally be in the position to provide exculpatory evidence on the defendant’s behalf, which would be prohibited if Mr. Nurik persisted in his representation of the defendant.

It is the government’s position that, in the instant case, because the aforesaid constitute potential, rather than actual, conflicts of interest, the defendant may waive those conflicts at a properly-conducted Garcia hearing.

*My question -- is "secondly" a word? Or is it just, "second"?


Anonymous said...

The jury is still out on whether to use first or firstly, second or secondly, &c. Traditional usage had first, secondly, thirdly, but this is too inconsistent for modern taste. Most guides prefer just plain old first, second, third, and so forth, without the -ly ending.

Word of the day guyz said...

David- next time you have such a question just beam a W outside of your window and we will respond post haste.

"Secondly" is a word; however, it's a cumbersome word. Most people (and government prosecutors) use it to make their papers sound "smarter," but it usually just bumbles through the reading. Personally, we don't use the word.

"Secondly" is the adverb and specifically means: "in the second place".

We frown on using it.

Anonymous said...


look at his chompers!

he needs some dental attenSHION

to reverse the distorSHION

creation by the porcelON

Anonymous said...

Think they would have taken that position if he was not pleaing the client?

Anonymous said...

Since 1935 Strunk and White has frowned upon "secondly," "thirdly," etc. See p. 57 in the 4th ed. "Unless you are prepared to begin with firstly and defend it (which will be difficult), do not prettify numbers with -ly. Modern usage prefers second, third, and so on." This excerpt is missing the italics that appear in the original because I cannot get the computer to allow me to use italics or underlining.