$20 Million Trial Involving Iverson Goes to Jury

Headline News

[##_1L|1193016994.jpg|width="120" height="80" alt=""|_##]A federal jury began deliberations Thursday in a $20 million lawsuit against Denver Nuggets guard Allen Iverson over a 2005 nightclub fight that two patrons say was sparked by Iverson's entourage. The NBA player has testified that he had no role in the brawl. A lawyer for the men suing Iverson and his bodyguard said in closing arguments Thursday that Iverson has demonstrated little concern about the case against him. He noted that Iverson only appeared in court Monday to testify for about two hours in a trial that is now into its second week.

"He doesn't respect the court. He ain't here," attorney Gregory Lattimer told the U.S. District Court jury, motioning toward an empty chair next to Iverson's lawyer at the defense table. "He doesn't respect anything that isn't Allen Iverson."

Marlin Godfrey and David Anthony Kittrell say the fight was started by Iverson's bodyguard and entourage when the pair refused to vacate a VIP section for Iverson at the Eyebar nightclub in Washington. Iverson, 32, testified that he didn't see the fight.

Godfrey and Kittrell claim the bodyguard, Jason Kane, and Terrance Williams assaulted them. They allege that Williams, a friend of Kane, was acting on Iverson's behalf.

Godfrey was badly beaten during the melee, suffering head and other injuries. Lattimer said he suffered depression and other long-term health problems from the incident.

The lawsuit says Iverson is responsible for the brawl because he failed to properly supervise Kane and Williams _ but it does not claim he took part in the fight. The suit also accuses Kane of assault and battery for allegedly beating Godfrey with items that include a bottle.

Iverson said Monday the suit was a get-rich-quick scheme by the two men, who targeted him because of his wealth and fame. Kane testified he wasn't involved in the fight and hustled Iverson out of the club when a brawl appeared imminent.

Iverson's lawyer, Alan Milstein, told jurors Thursday that Kittrell and Godfrey lied about details of the fight and who instigated it.

Iverson had no role in the melee, and wasn't responsible for Williams, who was not working for him, Milstein said. He echoed Iverson's claim that the case was an attempt to fleece the wealthy NBA star.

"The only reason Mr. Iverson is sued is because he's got the money. This whole case is about who's got it and how do we get it," Milstein said.

Iverson faces another lawsuit for another nightclub fight involving his security in Hampton, Va. That happened less than two weeks before the Washington fight.

Related listings

  • Carbondale law firm celebrates anniversary

    Carbondale law firm celebrates anniversary

    Headline News 07/07/2007

    July marks the 30th anniversary for a Carbondale law firm that has technically been in existence for the last 99 years. Feirich/Mager/Green/Ryan and Associates, 2001 W. Main St. near the Westtown Mall in Murdale, established its current banner in 197...

  • Law firm boosts cellular signal in new offices

    Law firm boosts cellular signal in new offices

    Headline News 07/06/2007

    Cellular signals often have difficulty penetrating massive steel high-rise buildings. But in Washington's downtown, matters are worse because of height restrictions that force builders to add multiple basement floors. One law firm knew that a new hea...

  • High court misfires on desegregation

    High court misfires on desegregation

    Headline News 07/03/2007

    [##_1L|1291836040.jpg|width="80" height="146" alt=""|_##]After 53 years of standing against racially segregated public classrooms, the Supreme Court has signaled retreat. That it came in a case partially growing from Louisville's traumatic school des...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read