Lin Wood Kicked Off Delaware Court Case Over ‘Toxic’ Post-Election Lawsuits - Forbes

Topline

Conservative attorney L. Lin Wood was removed from representing former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page in a lawsuit in Delaware state court Monday, as the judge declared Wood’s “frivolous” and error-ridden lawsuits attempting to overturn the election results made him unfit to serve as an attorney in the case and marking the latest repercussion faced by lawyers pushing failed post-election lawsuits.

Key Facts

Wood was representing Page in a defamation lawsuit against Yahoo News and HuffPost parent company Oath, which alleged the company “portrayed [Page] as a traitor to America.”

After previously asking Wood to show cause for why he shouldn’t be removed from the case in December, Delaware Superior Court Judge Craig A. Karsnitz issued an order removing Wood from the case because he did not show the “appropriate level of integrity and competence.”

Karsnitz cited a Georgia post-election lawsuit Wood was a plaintiff of that was found to have “no basis in law or fact,” which the judge called “textbook frivolous litigation.”

The judge also cited a Wisconsin case Wood filed with attorney Sidney Powell that was “riddled with errors,” including serious issues like failing to serve the Defendants, with Karsnitz writing the complaint “would not survive a law school civil procedure class.”

While Karsnitz acknowledged he does not have the power to determine whether Wood violated Delaware’s Rules of Professional Conduct, the judge could stop him from appearing in the case, as he is required to “ensure that those practicing before me are of sufficient character, and conduct themselves with sufficient civility and truthfulness.”

Karsnitz denounced Wood’s recent social media posts, which include calling for Vice President Mike Pence’s execution, and said his tweets “incited” the recent attack on the U.S. Capitol building—but emphasized that conduct “does not form any part of the basis” for his decision to take Wood off the case.

Crucial Quote

“The conduct of Mr. Wood, albeit not in my jurisdiction, exhibited a toxic stew of mendacity, prevarication and surprising incompetence,” Karsnitz wrote. “What has been shown in Court decisions of our sister States satisfies me that it would be inappropriate and inadvisable to continue Mr. Wood’s permission to practice before this Court.”

Chief Critic

In his response to Karsnitz’s initial order asking Wood to explain why he should not be removed from the case, Wood cited reasons including claiming Karsnitz did not have the power to say he violated the state’s rules for professional conduct, the fact Wood was only a party in the Georgia lawsuit instead of an attorney and claiming the errors in the Wisconsin litigation were only “proofreading errors.” Wood’s defenses did not “hold merit” with Karsnitz, the judge wrote, and the attorney cited cases in his defense that “are inapposite and of no avail.”

Key Background

Wood, along with Powell, has been one of the most notorious purveyors of the GOP’s post-election efforts to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victory, pushing wild conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact and filing failed lawsuits that have been widely criticized for their numerous errors. Though Wood and Powell have reportedly spoken with President Donald Trump about their voter fraud allegations, the two attorneys—particularly Wood—have faced pushback from even Trump allies for things like urging Georgia voters not to vote in the recent runoff elections. Wood was also recently kicked off Twitter for suggesting last week’s violent attack on the U.S. Capitol building was “staged” by antifa. Wood’s removal from the Delaware case comes as attorneys involved in the GOP’s overwhelmingly unsuccessful post-election litigation are starting to face consequences, including Dominion Voting Systems filing a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit against Powell for peddling a false conspiracy theory about its voting machines. That lawsuit also involves Wood, as it names Powell and Wood’s joint fundraising venture Defending the Republic, Inc as a defendant.