KingCast tells Morgan Lewis Partner Sam Shaulson: "Don't be so niggardly with your Christmas presents man!"

Remember the Scrooge post in which I noted, inter alia, that Morgan Lewis is a "No Hire Factory?" And who could forget the instant classic Strother Martin "Hard-time That's the way he gets it!" post, noting that Morgan Lewis are such tightwad tools they illegally failed to indemnify one of their own attorneys in a legal malpractice case. Wow.

Well they keep on not giving the gifts, even though the NAACP has given Sam Shaulson and Morgan Lewis' infamous dirt bag scum-sucking rat pig Citibank client a big present that was re-gifted to Yours Truly, i.e. NAACP v. Ameriquest Mortg. Co., Citigroup et al., 635 F. Supp. 2d 1096 (2009).

Well now niggardly Morgan Lewis Partner Sam Shaulson is thus far failing to gift over the video that purportedly shows me acting inappropriately at the Citibank South End branch such that manager Carlo Carmanna was justified in not opening a bank account for me even as Citibank opened such an account for my Caucasian girlfriend. She and Derrick Gillenwater will be witnesses at trial. Why is Sam Shaulson being so niggardly about it when his co-counsel, Benjamin Velella tried to threaten my lawyer with the video as their first line of defense many months ago, remember the colloquy:

"Please be advised that we do have video from the South End Branch from March 24 that captures interaction between staff and your clients and have also taken statements from the affected employees."
*********
"Sir, I couldn't care less about the self-serving employee statements. The proof is in the video from that day and all other days that you have maintained and that the court will compel you and your client to produce."

And remember what Sam Shaulson wrote to MCAD on 25 November 2009 -- an entire month ago:

"Citibank will immediately produce a copy of the video in question to the MCAD, but asks that the MCAD confirm that a copy of the video will not be provided to Mr. King."

Well we must have some sort of, ummmm... failure to communicate, because in point of fact I have already stipulated that I would abide by the MCAD ruling, which was that the Commission would not compel a video for my own possession, and I will simply sit in the room with them and observe and narrate what is happening, including the fact that Morgan Lewis Attorney Sam Shaulson intentionally lied to the Commission about the fact that Carlo Carmanna was the Decision Maker: It was not the black female teller, their own Position Description proves that because she is not cloaked with the ambit of authority to render such a decision, only he can "Resolve escalated customer complaints/issues promptly and effectively."

I dunno, but a non-negotiated $24,500.00 check is an "escalated customer issue" the last time I checked. So I will provide an Affidavit and Narrative to the Bar Discipline Counsel, which prematurely dismissed my Rule 3.3 Ethics Complaint against the niggardly Morgan Lewis Partner Sam Shaulson. They will probably dismiss it again to protect a powerful attorney like Sam Shaulson but that doesn't diminish the gravity of his deceit, No Sir.