Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Ariel Weissberg
From: MHERll/lANESQ@ao!.com
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 5:58 PM
To: Ariel Weissberg
Cc: [email protected]; slevine@nl—Iaw.com
Subject: Your Letter Dated May 13, 2005
I am in receipt of your letter of May_ 13th. My client strenuously rejects the notion that you can remain as
counsel for Ftilwala against Kahala. Rilwala is still adverse to Mr. Patel in the litigation. Again, you are drawing
a distinction without a difference.
As to Mr. Schwab's involvement, we believe he is tainted having met with you in anticipation of the substitution.
Rilwala should have rnet with him directly, without any involvement from you. \Nhether Mr. Schwab is in your
oflice, or in a separate office, he will be sharing information and obtaining guidance from you. This is
unacceptable.
As to any extensions for discovery, RiIwala's time has long passed. l will oppose any such attempt by Mr.
Schwab. l do not intend to contact Mr. Schwab, and will oppose his Pro Hao Vice application. Please make
sure he sends me a copy of his application request.
As to our pending Motion to Disqualify you and your law firm, we do not intend to take it off calendar, and will
seek your complete removal from this case, and sanctions against you for having to bring the Motion. Why is it
that you did not propose the solution of alternate counsel months ago when I nrst raised the issue of conflict?
Why wait until the eleventh hour to search for a compromise'? Your actions with regard to Mr. PateI‘s lawsuit,
as well as KahaIa's suit, suggest a systematic attempt to delay this matter at any cost- including compromising
your professional ethics.
Thank you.
MLH
EXH BIT
g .
9/5/2O0§5)ase 2:03-cv-02160-JAT Document 164-4 Filed O9/06/2005 l ¤ • - •

Case 2:03-cv-02160-JAT

Document 164-4

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 1 of 1