Rich Luthmann weighed in
That’s actually the legal definition of evidence in Connecticut. Frank has it spot on.
“Relevant evidence” means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is material to the determination of the proceeding more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
You’re not a lawyer. And if you are, you’re probably part of Nusbaum’s Fairfield County Club.
Question : Do you guys wear funny hats at your meetings and have a secret handshake?
No, I’m not a lawyer. I never said I was.
It is evidence that there are discrepancies between the two lawyer’s records, but I don’t think it’s evidence that proves Nusbaum’s records were falsified. Maybe Nusbaum had it right, and the other lawyer had it wrong. At this point, without the actual phone records etc of either lawyer, we just don’t know.
Bangkok Responds
Bangkok added his thoughts to the conversation, accusing Skeptic of being another commenter, Sherizzy
Bangkok wrote,
Is that you, Sherizzy? 
With regard to your comment stating ‘she signed the contract’ —- please lookup the legal principle known as “unconscionability”.
It renders all contract clauses, which meet its definition, non-enforceable.
It’s pretty universal across all states and federal law.
Here’s a quote from the article (not from CT, but CT courts have similar rulings)
“Limited discovery is a hallmark of arbitration. (Ramirez, supra, 75 Cal.App.5th at p. 385.) However, discovery must allow a party to vindicate their statutory rights in consumer and employment arbitrations. (Baxter, supra, 16 Cal.App.5th at p. 727.) If a party cannot do so, the discovery limit is unconscionable. (Ibid.)” -End of Quote
Part of deciding if a contract is unconscionable is how much power one party has over the other party (to deceive them when signing the deal).
In this case, the sophisticated ‘legal knowledge’ possessed by her shitbag attorney (Nusbaum) gave him an unfair advantage —- because he knew that Karen’s legal knowledge wasn’t sophisticated enough to realize what RIGHTS she was truly giving up by signing his one-sided, unusual, and unconscionable arbitration agreement.
Also, the fact that CT family attorneys are likely protecting their own colleagues (in arbitration disputes) is so grossly unfair, and possibly illegal, that no court would assume that any reasonable person would enter into such an agreement if they truly understood the scheme behind it.
Disagree?
Then WHY would an attorney insist on having his own colleagues, from CT family court, arbitrate his disputes?
Why not allow a neutral arbitrator who won’t favor anybody?
It’s cuz Nusbaum is a shitbag who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
But was that really evidence? I know it didn’t match with another lawyer’s records, but who’s to say that her records are correct? To me, that mismatch raises a red flag, but it is hardly dispositive evidence.
“Nusbaum, she claims, never told her of the unusual aspects of the retainer.”
However, the terms were very clearly laid out, right above where the client signs.
Is it really the lawyer’s responsibility to point out where their retainer might differ from another lawyer? I don’t think so.
I’m sure he overbilled, and I would love to see Karen get her money back, but I think she has no hope of it since she signed that contract. Unless she goes to arbitration and the arbitrator rules in her favor.