Private medical information
An attorney representing Britney Spears claims that Jamie Spears disclosed private medical information.
Jamie Spears and his legal team were accused of using sealed exhibits to try to compel Britney Spears to testify, and the pop star’s attorney urged the court to punish them.
Jamia spare disclose personal medical data
The pop star’s attorney stated at a hearing on Wednesday that Britney Spears’ father and his attorneys should be punished and convicted in contempt of court for revealing private medical data about his daughter that was kept under seal.
Jamie Spears disclosed personal medical data.
In addition to trying to defend Jamie Spears, they are also trying to humiliate Britney Spears, according to lawyer Mathew Rosengart, who also emphasized that no document could accomplish so.
Who was Jamie Spears
The motion from Jamie Spears to compel his daughter’s deposition, which he filed in July, was denied. The motion contained the sealed exhibits. Rosengart was compelled to make a motion to seal the motion to compel after the document was filed. The sealing was contested by Alex Weingarten, who was Jamie Spears’ attorney.
Rosengarten inquired. Judge Brenda Penny of the Los Angeles Superior Court was urged to declare Weingarten in contempt of court and to punish both him and Jamie Spears.
Weingarten retorted, “None of this has anything to do with the matters before the court. On Rosengart’s “unnecessary speech,” he stated he would “refrain from commenting.”
Penny consented to secure the motion. Because several of the filing’s exhibits were “previously ordered sealed and are sensitive,” she determined, it was “very inappropriate for Jamie Spears to provide these materials,” adding that she had done so.
Jamie Spears filed a motion asking the state appeals court to reverse Penny’s decision prohibiting him from questioning his daughter about allegations that he had abused and watched her. Requests for comment from Weingarten did not immediately receive a response.
The judge rejected Lynne Spears‘ request for her daughter to pay her $663,203 legal fees during the hearing. She emphasized in her application for fees that her daughter had treatment that she “did not believe was warranted.” Due to the fact that her mother was never a fiduciary, Spears was against paying the bill.
Rosengart is still looking into Tri-Star Management’s role in starting the conservatorship and its purported surveillance of Spears when the ruling denying fees was made. In a discovery ruling published on October 10, Penny partially upheld Tri Star’s request to have Britney Spears’ subpoena thrown out, but she rejected the company’s attempt to avoid delivering data and correspondence pertaining to claims made by a former member of Spears’ security team.
The Court correctly concluded that there was no proof of a fiduciary relationship between Ms. Spears, the conservatee, and Tri-Star, the business manager.
In accordance with court records, Jamie Spears owed Tri Star at least $40,000 for a loan it provided to him. Rosengart has emphasized the potential conflict of interest in Jamie Spears’ selection of the company to oversee the conservatorship. Tri-Star has received more than $18 million from the estate of Britney Spears.