The unsanctioned and repeated use of privileged documents led to the civil case against the forward being thrown out of court
A lawsuit filed by a woman accusing Cristiano Ronaldo of sexual assault in the United States has been dismissed by a US district judge in Las Vegas.
Kathryn Mayorga’s lawsuit, according to federal judge Jennifer Dorsey, was based on “purloined” confidential papers obtained by her counsel, which had “tainted” her case.
Another Las Vegas court recommended dismissal last year owing to Mayorga’s legal counsel’s behavior.
- Dj Middex – The Vibes Party Mixtape
- Kobby West – Feedback (Official Video)
- Strongman – Buokrom Boy EP
- Python bites and drags Australian boy into a pool
- Black Sherif, Amaarae, Juls, Teni, Oxlade, Ayra Starr, others featured on Stormzy’s new album
What did Judge Dorsey say about Ronaldo’s case?
According to the judge’s written verdict, “Mayorga loses her opportunity to pursue this case and attempt to unwind the settlement of claims that, themselves, implicate serious allegations of a highly personal nature.
“But in light of the depth and breadth with which the ill-gotten information has saturated her claims and other filings—and likely her memory and perceptions of key facts—any other sanction would be an inadequate remedy.
“Nothing less than a with-prejudice dismissal will purge the taint that has permeated this case from its very inception and preserve the integrity of the litigation process.”
What were the documents in question?
Mayorga’s lawyer, Leslie Stovall, had obtained documents from Football Leaks originator Rui Pinto pertaining to the sexual assault case, which the judge ruled were secret and privileged and hence inadmissible as evidence.
The judge went on to say, “Stovall’s recurrent exploitation of stolen, confidential documents to litigate this lawsuit bears every indication of ill faith conduct.” “And because the record demonstrates that he and Mayorga read these materials extensively and used them to form the fundamental foundation of Mayorga’s claims, just removing Stovall will not undo the prejudice caused by their mishandling.”
“Stovall went out of his way to find his opponent’s hacked, internal, private conversations. He didn’t seek ethical advice on how to handle these clearly sensitive materials once he obtained them.”
“Instead, he handed them on to his client, assuring that they would taint her memory and perception of events, and he based her case on their contents, as plaintiff’s sworn verification attests.
“He then sat on the paperwork for fourteen months with that contaminated die cast, nine of which he was actively fighting this matter.”