Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 3 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
gerprints from the gun which killed Mr. Spellman, (2) made public statements designed to cast doubt on her innocence and (3) disclosed confidential information to the grand jury and the Commonwealth’s Attorney after he was discharged.
Mr. Konick denied the accusations, maintaining that he had caused neither harm nor damage to Mrs. Kidwell. He noted that the Circuit Court on February 25, 1983, had ruled that his conduct had not “substantially prejudiced” her interests. According to the charges and counter charges which swell the file folder on the case, the attorney also alleged that Mrs. Kidwell’s “intentional conduct of confronting the person she killed” was in direct contravention of his advice “and she thereby caused all the consequences and damages” set out in her complaint.
Mr. Konick’s contention that the statute of limitations for filing malpractice charges had expired and his petition for dismissal on that and other grounds was denied by the court, according to file records. In addition, the court partially granted a “protective order” sought by Mrs. Kidwell’s counsel, limiting Mr. Konick’s access, through the discovery process, to materials relevant to the charges against him.
The case had been set for a threeday trial; it was removed from the docket when the out-of-court settlement was reached.
95.8%