Embattled researcher Judy Mikovits lost an important round in court yesterday in a civil suit that his former employer filed against it over alleged "misappropriation" laboratory notebooks and computer data.
Mikovits, who shot to fame in 09 for a disputed study that linked a mouse retrovirus to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), seems to have frustrated a judge of Nevada, who said she had "mocked" his order return the disputed property to the applicant, the Whittemore Peterson Institute for Neuro-immune Disease (WPI) in Reno. Mikovits, who is also facing related criminal charges for possession of stolen property, returned some notebooks and a laptop after being briefly imprisoned. But WPI filed an affidavit of a computer expert who said that all the files were deleted recently on the laptop. WPI lawyer Ann Hall also argues that Mikovits returned only 18 laptops, retaining a half-dozen that include experiments between 06 and 09. Lawyers for Mikovits did not respond to interview requests.
After a flurry of motions were filed by each party, Brent Adams judge in the Second Court of the judicial district in Washoe County ruled in favor of WPI, who shot Mikovits in September for insubordination. In essence, the "default judgment" judge rejected Mikovits responses to the complaint and confirmed all allegations of WPI, including breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets. "It's surprising," said judge Hall "striking" the Mikovits response, noting that the judge noted that he never took this step in his 22 years on the bench. In general, judges give a decision point by point on merit answers a defendant to comply. Mikovits attended the hearing but did not testify.
In court documents, Mikovits pleaded the Fifth Amendment right not to testify against oneself. Room charge as the Fifth Amendment defense "was too broad and the nature of an abuse of process."
Temple said it is unclear whether WPI will never recover the property it seeks, and the civil case will now focus on the damage. WPI has yet to tell the court the value of the property in question, and no future court date was set for the damages hearing interests
updated December 22. Scott Freeman, lawyer Mikovits in his criminal case, said the judgment was "wonderful" when it comes to his defense against the charges levied against his client. "WPI not win because they have a judge or jury to decide the merits in their favor," said Freeman. "They win by default, literally. An analysis of criminal defense, there has never been tried on the merits." According to Freeman, frustration due mainly to judge lawyer with the civil fault Mikovits meet specific deadlines.
Freeman predicted that attempts to WPI to recover significant damage will not succeed. "Judy is not the Whittemores," he said, referring to Annette and Harvey Whittemore, who used part of their personal wealth to help start WPI. "She has no money. And you can not get water from a stone."
He says he tries to have his criminal case dismissed. But even if he does not succeed, Freeman said. "I am very optimistic about his defense" If this trial goes ahead, he hopes it will be around the beginning of spring
0 Komentar