A plaintiff confessed to his attorney “that the “Cerner contract” was not authentic…. that although there had been an actual contract with Cerner Corporation, that contract had been altered and had certain schedules attached to it that were forgeries.” In the case of LBDS Holding Company, LLC v. ISOL Technology Inc., et al in the Eastern District of Texas, on May 21, 2014 Sanford Warren, a partner at Akin Gump, who represented Plaintiff LBDS filed his Notice to Court Pursuant to Texas Disciplinary Rule of Professional Conduct 3.03 and Unopposed Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiff.
Attached to the Notice was Mr. Warren’s affidavit in which not only did plaintiff admit forged evidence, but:
Also the plaintiff admitted set up a fictitious domain name and sent emails from that domain name to create the impression that certain emails were sent by Cerner Corporation, when in fact they were not.
Mr. Warren spoke to his client on May 15, 2014 after receiving Defendants Emergency Motion for Sanctions on May 14, 2014 and further stated in his affidavit:
Before May 15, 2014, I did not know the contract and documents provided by Plaintiff and entered into evidence in this litigation were forgeries and falsifications.
Nor did I, prior to May 14, 2014, have any reason to question the authenticity of the documents at issue.
Nor did I, prior to May 15, 2014, know that any of the testimony offered by Mr. Davis or Mr. Herndon was untrue.
There will be more to this story about forged evidence and fabricated emails.