Mike Lindell, the MyPillow CEO, has recently found himself without legal representation in his ongoing litigation over a $5 million award related to his “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge. This development comes after Lindell’s long-time lawyer, Andrew Parker, withdrew from multiple cases representing Lindell. Evidently, Parker’s decision to withdraw came shortly after Lindell announced on Steve Bannon’s show that he had chosen not to pay his previous lawyers, which has made it difficult for him to find new legal representation willing to take on his case.
Following Parker’s departure, Thomas Miller, a bankruptcy lawyer from Wayzata, Minnesota, briefly stepped in to challenge an arbitration ruling that ordered Lindell to pay $5 million to software engineer Robert Zeidman. Zeidman had accepted Lindell’s challenge and proved that the data Lindell presented as evidence of election fraud did not support such claims. The arbitrators unanimously ruled in Zeidman’s favor, a decision subsequently upheld by Judge John Tunheim, who recognized the binding nature of the arbitration despite his personal disagreements with the outcome.
Judge Tunheim’s decision was guided by the Federal Arbitration Act, which limits judicial review of arbitration awards except in cases of corruption, fraud, or undue means. You can read Judge Tunheim’s full opinion here. Undeterred, Lindell has filed an appeal, alleging that the arbitrators improperly considered extrinsic evidence, thereby violating the parol evidence rule. However, Zeidman’s lawyers countered that arbitration does not adhere strictly to traditional rules of evidence, as outlined in the initial agreement drafted by Lindell’s legal team.
Meanwhile, back in Judge Tunheim’s courtroom, Lindell’s last remaining lawyer in the case, Thomas Miller, filed a motion to withdraw, citing his inability to continue representing him. Following this, Douglas Wardlow, a former Minnesota House Member and current General Counsel for MyPillow, agreed to accept service, preventing Lindell Management, LLC, from being without representation, a necessity since a corporate entity cannot appear pro se in court.
Lindell’s litigation woes are compounded by his financial difficulties, raising questions about how he will secure future legal representation. As the legal battles continue, high-level corporate and legal professionals are closely monitoring the outcomes due to the significant ramifications for arbitration and corporate law precedents. For detailed case information, visit the trial docket or the circuit docket.
The original article can be found here.