replevin of "emails"

[BerkshireIsland]

Jurisdiction

New York

Long story short: I accessed my husbands yahoo email account on her work laptop PC without his permission (he did give me the password of the computer a long time ago) and I found out he was cheating. I was stupid enough to send a screen shot of one of the emails to a common friend who was covering for him because I was upset at the betrayal, so now he can prove I did it. I can't prove he had given me the yahoo email account but I can prove he had given me his hotmail password another time which should prove that he trusted me with passwords

We are going through nasty divorce proceedings

I get a threatening letter from some other law firm threatening for legal action through a claim of replevin, it cites two cases: Dore v. Wormley, 690 F. Supp. 2d 176 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). and Batsidis v. Batsidis, 9 A.D.3d 342 as to explain why I am supposedly exposed.

Do I really have to worry here? It seems there are marital privileges here (as I understand you can open your spouses snail mail legally) and those cited cases for what I read have nothing to do with this situation and don't involve emails. Also there was no loss, me reading these emails did not cost him or his employer any money, it just cost him our marriage. Also I did not touch anything related to his work. I am guessing any judge will dismiss any BS lawsuit?

The worse part is that on the divorce agreement he wants to include a clause that such lawsuit is pending instead of settling all claims, and my lawyer says we cant take it out of the agreement, we can just make it work both ways, that also sounds like total BS to me. He says not to worry because it will be too expensive for him to sue me, but he is so crazy he might just do it

Any comments appreciated

Carly

 

[Zigner]

You have an attorney. It would be unwise (and just plain wrong) to second-guess your attorney. Ask your questions of your attorney. If you have lost faith in your attorney, find a new one.

 

[adjusterjack]

I get a threatening letter from some other law firm threatening for legal action through a claim of replevin, it cites two cases: Dore v. Wormley, 690 F. Supp. 2d 176 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). and Batsidis v. Batsidis, 9 A.D.3d 342 as to explain why I am supposedly exposed.

Did you happen to read those cases? If you didn't, read them now.

DORÉ v. WORMLEY | 690 F.Supp.2d 176 (2010) | 00827000067 | Leagle.com

Georgia Batsidis v Arthur Batsidis

Both cases make it clear that an action for replevin involve "tangible personal property or specific money." An email is neither.

What, exactly, is he alleging you have that belongs to him?

I am guessing any judge will dismiss any BS lawsuit?

Sorry, doesn't work that way. Judges don't dismiss cases just because a defendant says the plaintiff's claim is BS (though it might well be). Should you be sued you would have to raise appropriate defenses and move for dismissal or summary judgment for proper cause.

Should you win the lawsuit and can prove that the lawsuit was frivolous to begin with you can seek sanctions against the plaintiff.

The worse part is that on the divorce agreement he wants to include a clause that such lawsuit is pending instead of settling all claims, and my lawyer says we cant take it out of the agreement,

That makes no sense. You can put in or leave out anything you want to in a divorce decree and, unless you have been served with a summons and complaint, there is no lawsuit "pending." You can decline the decree as proposed by your STBEx and propose one of your own that absolves you of any liability for the email thing. And if he doesn't accept that you can petition the judge to rule on the issue.

I think you'd better have a talk with your lawyer about what you want and what he is obliged to do for you.

 

[zddoodah]

I get a threatening letter from some other law firm threatening for legal action through a claim of replevin, it cites two cases: Dore v. Wormley, 690 F. Supp. 2d 176 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). and Batsidis v. Batsidis, 9 A.D.3d 342 as to explain why I am supposedly exposed.

Do I really have to worry here?

What do you mean by "some other law firm"? Do you mean a firm other than the firm that represents your husband in the divorce case?

In any event, an action for replevin is an action whereby seized goods may be provisionally restored to their owner pending the outcome of an action to determine the respective rights of the parties to the case. I haven't looked at either of the cases you cited, but the concept doesn't make much sense in the context of email.

It seems there are marital privileges here

I don't see how. There are two species of marital privilege. One allows a person to refuse to testify against his/her spouse in a criminal proceeding in which the spouse is a defendant. The other provides that either spouse may preclude confidential communications between the spouses from coming into evidence. The former obviously has nothing to do with your situation, and the latter doesn't seem to have anything to do with it (it also has certain exceptions in divorce cases).

The worse part is that on the divorce agreement he wants to include a clause that such lawsuit is pending instead of settling all claims, and my lawyer says we cant take it out of the agreement, we can just make it work both ways, that also sounds like total BS to me.

It is. You're under no obligation to sign any settlement agreement that contains a term you find objectionable.

Perhaps your lawyer is telling you that you insisting on removing this language would be a deal-killer (since he is free to reject any settlement that doesn't include something he wants it to include).

 

[BerkshireIsland]

Than you all, your responses make sense, and align from what I was thinking

adjusterjack: exactly, I wasn't sure if emails are considered "tangible" on some legal way (is not my lingo) and there is even more non-sense on that letter that I didn't even wrote about, stating that I caused emotional distress because I walked in on him with his GF on our living room (only talking) and startle them the other day (after we had broken up) I didn't even bother to write that since is obvious that they were in OUR house so I am not in fault anyway or form

zddoodah: yes another lawfirm separate from his divorce lawfirm, and thanks for clarifying the marital privilege part. And I'll discuss with my lawyer again when I talk with him, maybe not even wasting time on this is his real approach, bothers me that he is really bad at explaining whats going on

If that letter was so full of it, I have to guess the lawyer who wrote it is just a friend helping them exploit my divorce anxiety... why waste the money on writting such BS threats, my lawyer did say that "that lawyer must have a lot of free time"...

 

[adjusterjack]

I walked in on him with his GF on our living room (only talking) and startle them the other day (after we had broken up)

I was wondering what you did to him that made him so hostile. That explains it.

If that letter was so full of it, I have to guess the lawyer who wrote it is just a friend helping them exploit my divorce anxiety.

Either a friend or a lawyer willing to write letters for a few bucks. Plenty of those around. It's cheap enough but when it comes time to file a lawsuit for $300 an hour, people often think twice, especially when they know it's bogus.