CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February 5, 2013

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February 5, 2013"

Transcription

1 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, REPORTER'S RECORD VOLUME OF VOLUMES TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. DC--0-A DALLAS, TEXAS CONSUMER SERVICE ALLIANCE ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TEXAS, INC., ET AL., ) //0 0:: AM PLAINTIFFS, ) LISA MATZ ) Clerk vs. ) DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS ) CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, ) DEFENDANT. ) TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANT'S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION On the th day of February, 0, the following proceedings came on to be held in the above-titled and numbered cause before the Honorable Eric V. Moyé, Judge Presiding, held in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. Proceedings reported by computerized stenotype machine., CSR, RPR TEXAS CSR NO. Expiration Date: //0 Official Court Reporter of the th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas 00 Commerce Street, Dallas, Tx 0 -- FILED IN th COURT OF APPEALS TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

2 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, APPEARANCES REPRESENTING PLAINTIFF TITLEMAX OF TEXAS, INC.: MS. CAROL C. PAYNE SBOT NO. 00 ESTES OKON THORNE & CARR, P.L.L.C. 00 Maple Avenue, Suite 00 Dallas, Texas Telephone:..000 Facsimile:..0 REPRESENTING PLAINTIFF CONSUMER SERVICE ALLIANCE : MR. MICHAEL P. LYNN, P.C. SBOT NO. 00 MR. KENT D. KRABILL SBOT NO. 00 LYNN TILLOTSON PINKER & COX, L.L.P. 00 Ross Avenue Suite 00 Dallas, Texas 0 Telephone:..00 Facsimile:.. REPRESENTING DEFENDANT MS. JENNIFER C. WANG SBOT NO. 0 MR. PETER HASKEL SBOT NO. 000 MS. BARBARA ROSENBERG SBOT NO. 00 CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CITY OF DALLAS 00 Marilla Street, Suite BN Dallas, Texas 0 Telephone:.0. Facsimile:.0.0 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

3 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, VOLUME Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction February, 0 PAGE VOL. Appearances... Proceedings... Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction... Argument by Ms. Wang... Response by Ms. Payne... Response by Mr. Lynn... Argument Continued by Ms. Payne... Response by Mr. Lynn... Reply by Ms. Wang... Adjournment... Reporter's Certificate... TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

4 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0::0 0::0 0 0 P R O C E E D I N G S (Open Court; Proceedings commenced at 0: a.m.) THE BAILIFF: All rise. The th District Court is now in session. The Honorable Eric V. Moyé presiding. THE COURT: Good morning. You may be seated. We are on the record in -, Consumer Service Alliance versus City of Dallas. May I have announcements, please. MS. PAYNE: Carol Payne on behalf of Plaintiff TitleMax. THE COURT: Ms. Payne. MR. LYNN: Mike Lynn on behalf of Consumer Service Alliance of Texas. THE COURT: Mr. Lynn. MS. WANG: Jennifer Wang on behalf of the City of Dallas. THE COURT: Ms. Wang. MS. WANG: I am also joined by Peter Haskel and Barbara Rosenberg. THE COURT: I have read the Plea to the Jurisdiction and the response and the replies. I'll hear from you briefly. MS. WANG: Thank you, Your Honor. There was also filed with the Court a TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

5 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 supplement to the plea; I don't believe that that was in the notebook that you were given earlier. Can I bring that over to you at the bench? THE COURT: When was that filed? MS. WANG: It was filed December 0 th. THE COURT: I can't believe I don't have it. (Document handed to the Court.) THE COURT: Thank you. I have -- I do have this. MS. WANG: You do? All right. Your Honor, the City is seeking dismissal of the lawsuit today because Plaintiffs have not and cannot plead the facts necessary to establish the Court's jurisdiction. Even though the Plaintiffs' petition asserts that this Court has jurisdiction over the City's ordinance because it is civil in nature, we have since conferred briefly this morning and Plaintiffs are now in agreement with the City that the ordinance is penal in nature and are taking that position in the response -- responsive brief that they have recently filed with the Court. And since we are treating the City's ordinance as penal in nature, then the State of Texas TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

6 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 versus Morales sets forth the controlling standard for a court's jurisdiction and that case requires that -- that the ordinance be both unconstitutional and that enforcement will result to irreparable injury to a vested property right. In this case Plaintiffs haven't pleaded the necessary facts for either factor. With respect to a constitutional challenge, Plaintiffs have not made one; all they're saying is that the ordinance is invalid because it is preempted by state law, in this case, the Texas Finance Code. Plaintiffs appears to be arguing both field preemption as well as concept preemption and there simply is neither. Texas law is clear that the entry of the state into a field of regulation does not automatically preempt that field from regulation. In this case the Finance Code's regulation of CABs, credit access businesses, does not mean that they occupy the field of credit access business regulation, and, in fact, state law says that if the legislature decides to preempt a subject matter, it must do so with unmistakable clarity. There's simply nothing in the state laws TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

7 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 that states with unmistakable clarity or otherwise that it intends to occupy the field of regulation of credit access businesses. In fact, the Texas Finance Code, I believe, indicates otherwise. It says that credit access businesses may assess fees as permitted and is permitted to charge amounts as allowed by other laws as applicable, clearly recognizing that "other laws" may apply to the regulation of credit access businesses. Furthermore, as a part of the supplement that the City has filed, the Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner, the OCCC, the state agency responsible for regulating CABs and for implementing the Texas Finance Code, issued a bulletin in December that clearly indicated that they did not consider the City of Dallas's ordinance preempted by the Finance Code. In fact, the OCC bulletin was warning CABs that any attempt to circumvent municipal regulations, including the ordinance at issue here in Dallas, may be an indication that CABs are running afoul of the legislative intent of the very laws that Plaintiff now allege are preempted by the City ordinance. THE COURT: Well, that in and of itself would not particularly -- I mean, isn't that just being prudent? I mean, you're not suggesting that there is a TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

8 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0 0 waiver or -- of any acknowledgment -- of any position asserted by the Plaintiffs, are you, by that? MS. WANG: No. What I'm saying is rather than stating with unmistakable clarity that the state occupies the field of CAB regulation, I believe both the face of the statute of the Texas Finance Code, as well as this bulletin by the OCCC, which is the agency responsible for implementing, is -- are indications that they see no such preemption. And, in fact, you know, there's no indication of any conflict preemption. THE COURT: Should we take anything from the fact that the Labor Code speaks in terms of law as opposed to ordinances? MS. WANG: No -- No, Your Honor -- The Texas Finance Code you mean? THE COURT: Yes. I'm sorry. Did I say -- I said Labor Code. Forgive me. I'm sorry. I meant Finance Code. MS. WANG: No. No, I don't believe so. Texas -- Dallas is a Home Rule city -- THE COURT: Right. MS. WANG: -- with all the powers -- THE COURT: I understand that. MS. WANG: -- consistent, you know, with a Home Rule city, and I don't see the fact that it says TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

9 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:0: 0::00 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0 0 "as allowed by other laws" indicates, you know, that that would preclude cities. THE COURT: Proceed. MS. WANG: Furthermore, there simply, on the face of the -- the Texas Finance Code, the statute and the ordinance by the City, there is no conflict. THE COURT: What am I to take from the -- The issue of the enforcement since the enactment has been seeming to me somewhat unorthodox. What am I to take from the fact that the City has not for a time been enforcing this ordinance? MS. WANG: Nothing. The -- THE COURT: Then why hasn't it been? MS. WANG: Plaintiffs have said that they are afraid to violate the ordinance for fear of whatever financial repercussions -- THE COURT: I understand that. MS. WANG: -- that they want to cite, and so if there have been no violations of the ordinance then ostensibly there can be no enforcement either. THE COURT: Is it your position that there have been no enforcements because there have been no violations and there has not been a decision -- That's -- That's really distracting, Counsel. Would you please stop doing that? TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

10 0 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0::0 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0 0 MR. HASKEL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'm sure it distracts her as much as it does me. MR. HASKEL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Are you representing to the Court that there have been no enforcement actions because there have been no violations, or has there not been -- It appears that there's been some tacit agreement that there was not going to be a violation Excuse me. -- there's not going to be an enforcement of the statute, am I correct in that or not? MS. WANG: There previously had been -- THE COURT: Right. MS. WANG: -- at the institute of this lawsuit a tacit agreement not to proceed, but as the Plaintiffs have pointed out in their responsive brief and in the that they've attached as an exhibit, the City gave them notice that as of June th, I believe, of this -- of 0, that the City would, in fact, be enforcing the ordinance. And part of what's necessary is to be able to receive a complaint from a consumer. And since there have been no complaints that have come in, ostensibly because there's been no violation of the ordinance, the City simply hasn't had time or reason to enforce, but TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

11 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 there is no agreement that the City will never enforce and there's certainly no implication by the City that it does not intend to enforce. THE COURT: Let me hear from the Plaintiffs, please. MS. PAYNE: Thank you, Judge. I think you have zeroed in on what makes this case different from the Morales case and why we believe City of Austin is the appropriate case to look at. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MS. PAYNE: The problem with Morales is that there was a long history of nonenforcement, and I believe the state even stipulated that they had no intention of enforcing going forward -- THE COURT: We don't have that here now, do we? MS. PAYNE: We don't have that here. We have -- The statute has been in effect since -- or the ordinance -- Excuse me. -- has been in effect since January st. There was an agreement of nonenforcement through about June. THE COURT: Right. MS. PAYNE: And then we got the that said open season on your folks. TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

12 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: Right. MS. PAYNE: And so -- And so there has been -- these are businesses that some of which are larger than others, but with respect to my client, for example, there's been an attempt to comply with this. And, in fact, my client has been the one that is discussed although, you know, in very general terms in that supplemental plea that you've received. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MS. PAYNE: And so the problem there is that there's an ordinance that's out here, they're not enforcing it, there's concerns about economic suicide if you run afoul because you have no idea when the City might enforce it, and now you've got these other -- THE COURT: The City said as of June they were going to enforce it, did they not? MS. PAYNE: Well, they said that anybody could be subject to enforcement, all right? THE COURT: Is that not a "yes" to my question? MS. PAYNE: Well, you would think so except that there's been a six-month period where we have heard of no instances of enforcement, and I suspect that had there been any instances of enforcement the City would have come forward with some evidence of that. TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

13 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: Ms. Wang suggests that the only reason that there's been no enforcement is because there's been no violation; is that correct? MS. PAYNE: We -- We don't know. I think my client would feel like -- feels like it has not violated, but I don't know about any of the other folks. THE COURT: So you're not aware of any violations of the ordinance as we stand here, are you? MS. PAYNE: We are not aware and I believe that that is a fact question that could be subject to discovery and fleshing out in this case. And that leads to another issue -- THE COURT: Well, let me -- Hang on now. MS. PAYNE: Sure. THE COURT: Before we get to whether they have a property right or not, wouldn't the Consumer Service Alliance of Texas know -- which I understand to be some measure -- some manner of a -- an umbrella organization for these businesses, wouldn't they know -- MS. PAYNE: My understanding is -- THE COURT: -- if -- Let me finish my question, please. MS. PAYNE: Certainly. THE COURT: Wouldn't they know if there was, indeed, one of their members who was actively TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

14 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 violating the statute? MS. PAYNE: I have to let Mike address that, that is his client, but -- THE COURT: You mean "Mr. Lynn". MS. PAYNE: -- I will say this -- THE COURT: "Mr. Lynn". Right? MR. LYNN: Your Honor, -- THE COURT: Ma'am? Ms. Payne, we're a little bit more formal than that in this Court, -- MS. PAYNE: Yes, sir. THE COURT: -- if you don't mind. Do we know -- Isn't that a fair assumption, Mr. Lynn? MR. LYNN: That we would know? THE COURT: Yes. MR. LYNN: Well, I don't have any evidence to suggest that there's been a violation, but, on the other hand, there are a number of the folks that I believe that are out there and operating and -- THE COURT: Sure. MR. LYNN: -- and my supposition is that there are probably violations out there if they were investigated. THE COURT: Okay. But my -- Is it not a reasonable -- Would it not be reasonable to assume that TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

15 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0::0 0::0 0:: 0 0 if a member of the Alliance were operating in opposition to the statute that the Alliance would know? MR. LYNN: I don't believe so because I don't believe that -- And let me explain why. The governing structure of it is that these folks get together on telephone calls and they have sometimes inside counsel and sometimes not -- THE COURT: Right. MR. LYNN: -- and they're discussing for all practical purposes -- THE COURT: (Tapping). Mr. Haskel. MR. HASKEL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'm not going to let Ms. Payne and Mr. Lynn talk while you're up because that's just rude. I want you to give them the same courtesy. MR. HASKEL: I apologize, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'm sorry, Mr. Lynn, would you make your point again. MR. LYNN: It is that the -- the conversations that I've been on, and there have been few, the discussions are very general in nature about the operation of the business and this particular lawsuit. So I wouldn't know and I'm not sure it's a fair supposition that those would be discussed at those meetings. TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

16 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0 0 THE COURT: All right. That's fair. Thank you. Ms. Payne, you may proceed with your argument. MS. PAYNE: So we have a situation now where we have an ordinance on the books. THE COURT: Right. MS. PAYNE: We have, we know, some parties that are, you know, cowed into complying with it even though they don't think it's an appropriate ordinance, and we believe that there are probably some out there who are -- could be cited but have not, and so we sit in that netherworld between, you know, how do we get judicial review. And, you know, either the lack of enforcement -- well, the lack of enforcement specifically has made it very difficult. THE COURT: If we've got somebody who's -- I don't want to misquote you. You say, "We believe there are probably some who could be cited and who have not." Couldn't you get judicial review by one of your clients who's out there acting in a manner which could get them cited merely to have them cited and then proceed in the criminal context? MS. PAYNE: Well, I guess the question TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

17 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:0:0 0 0 is -- THE COURT: No, actually, that's the question that I want answered. MS. PAYNE: Okay. If I understood your question I would answer it this way: You could have one of these organizations out there violating the ordinance. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MS. PAYNE: And you have for each -- for each customer that comes in and each loan that is accessed, for every day there's a $00 penalty and another $00 penalty, and it continues to roll, and we don't know how long it might take the City to enforce it. All right? So it could happen quickly, in which case you're right, we might end up there in front of a criminal court and we could challenge it. The problem is, is that we don't know. And it could be economic suicide for somebody to do that for any length of time. And the fact is that we've been out here for a year and nothing's happened that we are aware of. We're not -- There have been no enforcements, we're not in front of any criminal court, and so, I mean, Judge, this is not all that different from a situation where what if the City of Dallas in response TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

18 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:0:0 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0::0 0 0 to all of those awful shootings that have happened, decided that it was going to pass an ordinance where it became illegal to own or maintain a gun in one's household. THE COURT: Well, then we've got a constitutional issue which -- MS. PAYNE: That's right. THE COURT: -- which -- Hang on. -- which impacts the Second Amendment. And I assume that if you were both counsel for a Plaintiff in that context, one of the first things that you would assert would be that that offends the Second amendment. MS. PAYNE: But I'm not sure that would be enough under their standard and under the Morales case, because you would need to have -- it would have to be unconstitutional and you would have to have a vested property right at issue, and if they never enforce it would it be able to come in front of a civil court, and the answer is I'm not sure that it would. THE COURT: I'm pretty confident of the way that that hypothetical would shake itself out. MS. PAYNE: Okay. But you can also see that there would be other variations of that, where it could sit and be effectively unreviewable like this ordinance has become, because we can't get in front of a TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

19 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0 0 criminal court and they suggest that no civil courts have the jurisdiction. But the City of Austin case was different from Morales. And Morales talked about City of Austin and did not overrule it. It distinguished it. THE COURT: Right. MS. PAYNE: So we know that Morales sits up here and City of Austin is still good law. There's no services -- no cases out there that say the City of Austin is bad law. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MS. PAYNE: And the City of Austin had a situation where an ordinance became effectively unreviewable because of the unique circumstances of that particular case, and we argued that this case is far closer to that than it is to Morales. THE COURT: But in the City of Austin you had no one dumping corpses outside the city limits or out- -- outside, inside out, I don't remember. MS. PAYNE: Right. Right. THE COURT: But here we're in a situation where you suggested just a couple minutes ago that you have -- some of your clients who are acting in a manner which could get them cited. MS. PAYNE: No. I have one client -- TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

20 0 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: No, that is exactly what you said. MS. PAYNE: But I have one client and I know that my one client is trying his darndest to comply and it's about shut it down which is our virtual preemption argument. All right. So when they say that we haven't made any allegations about the constitutionality of this, we believe that we have. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MS. PAYNE: But -- but -- So I can't speak for other clients. I suspect that there may very well be folks out there, I don't know one way or the other. But back to the Morales versus City of Austin shift, City of Austin is -- is on point with the situation that we have here. And the issue in Morales which is actually very narrow, was that in Morales there was no harm. There was no threat of enforcement and the Plaintiffs that were pursuing the case were not suffering any harm because of the statute, so there was nothing to enjoin. So the Morales case was determined on those facts and on that basis. Now, it goes on to -- there's a lot of dicta in there about what happens or should happen in other cases, but that was a hotly contested - opinion TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

21 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 and it doesn't overrule City of Austin. City of Austin survives. And so when you go to apply one of those cases or the other, this case is far more analogous to City of Austin than it ever will be to Morales. THE COURT: All right. MS. PAYNE: If you have any other questions I would be happy to answer them. THE COURT: No. Anything you wish -- I invited you in a little bit earlier than I think you -- If you've got a comment you want to make, Mr. Lynn, the Court will receive it now. MR. LYNN: Thank you, Your Honor. From our perspective the City's playing a game. And it's playing a very serious game. And it's regulating using an ordinance -- using an ordinance that we think is challengeable but we're unable to get -- we're unable to challenge it. And the way I look at the case law, the way I've read it, Your Honor, there are four elements. There has to be a threat, a realistic threat. And I think that's what Morales said, there was an -- a sodomy of law, there was no threat, that they'd ever tried to enforce the law, it was not something that was out TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

22 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 there. Here we have s and we have letters that suggest that they are threatening to do this, but they're not doing it. Why they're not doing it politically or whatever else, I'm not sure, but what it does is it basically freezes a business in place where it can't get review of the statute. What does that do? The second element. There is a vested property right that we have here. I mean, we have businesses that are being put out of business and we have this case that we've cited Your Honor to, this Smith versus Decker case, which is a case, Texas Supreme Court, which I believe is on point and I believe Your Honor will find that to be on point. THE COURT: Consumer Service Alliance of Texas doesn't have a vested property interest, does it? MR. LYNN: We're representing those who do. THE COURT: That means, "No, it does not"; isn't that right? MR. LYNN: It -- It itself will not be put out of business -- THE COURT: Right. MR. LYNN: -- but its constituents will be -- TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

23 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: Yeah, but the initial -- as the case started, when it was just this one association or the corporation and -- the Alliance -- Excuse me. -- versus the City of Dallas, it had no vested property rights; isn't that true? MR. LYNN: The association has -- THE COURT: Right. MR. LYNN: -- no -- it does not run a business and those vested property rights to which I've been referring, it does not have. THE COURT: Okay. All right. MR. LYNN: But, that said, just like a number of associations, those that involved in education, those involved in racial protection, those involved in a variety of others, those associations also brought claims on constitutionality and argued that they were representing their members in these takings. THE COURT: We don't have a constitutional assertion here, do we? MR. LYNN: We do, because we're arguing that there was a taking of that right. And we are saying there is no remedy. THE COURT: Okay. I'm sorry, I want you... MR. LYNN: That's, I think -- TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

24 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: Hold on for me just a minute, if you don't mind. MR. LYNN: May I consult with Mr. Krabill? THE COURT: Okay. I'm look- -- Yes -- Yes, you may consult with whomever you want if you need to for a second. MR. LYNN: Don't we have -- (Sotto voce discussion ensued.) MR. LYNN: I'm sorry, Your Honor, I apologize. THE COURT: My question is where -- I'm looking in the Third Amended Petition and I don't see a claim asserting that the City's ordinance is somehow unconstitutional. MR. LYNN: Do we not argue preemption, Your Honor? THE COURT: I want you to direct me where in your pleading you are asserting that the ordinance is unconstitutional. (Sotto voce discussion ensued.) MR. LYNN: I -- Page. THE COURT: Okay. MR. LYNN: I think we have the virtual prohibition argument that we have alleged -- THE COURT: I understand but -- I TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

25 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 understand virtual prohibition but I'm asking, you -- you made an assertion a couple minutes ago with regard to the -- the Alliance making an argument that the ordinance was unconstitutional, and I don't see that in this petition and I'm asking if I'm missing it. MR. LYNN: No, you're not missing anything and, yes, your analysis -- THE COURT: That's always a good answer -- always a good response. MR. LYNN: I've learned that at home as well. The argument would be this and it's probably one you understand and I probably stated it and frankly I may have stated it wrong. We have associational standing because of TitleMax to make the argument on the preemption, and I think that that's what the pleading says and I think fairly read. And I think that that is -- that's the way we're able to connect those dots in this case. THE COURT: Okay. MR. LYNN: But nevertheless, the argument is we have a valid -- we have a problem here that we're seeking resolution of. THE COURT: Uh-huh. MR. LYNN: We're seeking to have this TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

26 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0::0 0 0 Court open its doors and let us resolve it in a fair and dignified and reasonable and lawyer-like way here because we can't get before anybody else to do that. And the City is attempting to have it both ways: Shut this door but not open any other doors. And that makes -- that makes it very difficult to do business in the City of Dallas at the present time. Now, without regard to whether or not one likes this industry or dislikes this industry, we are entitled to have, I believe, a reasonable opportunity to resolve our differences with the City. And the City through its actions has foreclosed our ability to seek that resolution from -- in a reasoned and scholarly way; we just can't do it. THE COURT: I understand. MR. LYNN: So we come before you, sort of, frustrated because there's nothing we know that we can do other than this. And all their arguments to the contrary -- I mean, the problem is, we keep waiting for an opportunity to challenge this and we think we have a pretty good argument, but the City doesn't want to deal with us on the merits and that's why we're here. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MS. WANG: Your Honor, this is not a situation remotely like the City of Austin which the TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

27 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0::0 0::0 0:: 0::0 0::0 0:: 0 0 Court recognized that the problem there was both the customer as well as the business were unable to challenge because the customer would be subject to criminal prosecution. And so without a customer to bury a body, the cemetery owners were unable to even violate, to -- Here Plaintiffs are saying that they actually believe there may be some members who are violating, can violate, although others choose not to. And here I would say it's Plaintiffs who cannot have it both ways, to say we're not going to violate and yet we want to have this Court here insert its equity jurisdiction over this even though we're not willing to violate in order to allow the City to bring a prosecution. As we've represented, this is not a case similar to Morales -- Even if this were a case like Morales, there is no position the City has taken that it will never enforce or that -- that no enforcement actions will ever be taken as Morales -- THE COURT: Tell me what the City -- I'm sorry. Tell me what the City has done since the in June to ensure compliance with the ordinance, if you know. TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

28 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 MS. WANG: We've actually answered inquiries made on behalf of citizens, if you will, wondering about what their rights would be under the new city ordinance -- THE COURT: Okay. MS. WANG: -- and we've actually said that if you believe there's a violation, you know, to please bring a complaint to the City. Now, as I said, if there's not been a complaint yet brought to the City either because many of them are not violating the ordinance, or because as the OCCC -- I'm sorry. -- OCC bulletin noted, a lot of them are sending -- you know, initiating the loan within the City of Dallas and then telling them to renew elsewhere in which case there is still no violation the City can prosecute or enforce, if you will. In this case it is the City's hands that are tied. Without a complaint coming into the City where the City's aware of a violation, without -- without the Plaintiffs actually committing a violation, the City is unable to enforcement. This is not a situation like the City of Austin where they could not under any circumstance violate the ordinance and then seek redress through the normal coarse by having enforcement and going through TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

29 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0::0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 prosecution, defending against that prosecution, this is not that situation. You know, what they're saying is they would like to have it both ways, they would like to continue on with their business model without ever, you know, -- or -- or is to not challenge the ordinance in a criminal court by ever violating it. Second, a key factor here is the issue of vested property rights. I mean, having an adequate remedy of law is just one part of the equation; they need to have a vested property right in order to bring this -- to invoke the Court's equity jurisdiction. THE COURT: Doesn't TitleMax do that? MS. WANG: There is no vested property right, there's no authority that recognizes what they're claiming to be essentially their business model, their way of doing business as a vested property right. The one case that Mr. Lynn had cited just now, Smith V Decker, having to do with the right of bail bondsmen, that case actually said that there was a right to make a living subject only to valid and subsisting regulatory statutes. There are a whole host of cases that say you can't go about doing your business in any manner in which you choose to do it, you are still subject to TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

30 0 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 valid and subsisting regulatory statutes. And, for example, I think one case that runs very similar to this in terms of the kind of financial harm argument they're trying to argue is, you know, in the case of Morrow versus Truckload Fireworks, there, there was a ban on the use of fireworks that the Court recognized would destroy Truckloads business, would cause an unrecoverable loss of income -- THE COURT: Slow down for my court reporter, please. Thank you. MS. WANG: And that even though the total ban on the use of fireworks would result in tremendous financial loss, and even though that loss would be tangible and significant, it is insufficient to constitute a vested property right. THE COURT: All right. MS. WANG: There's simply no authority in Texas law that recognizes a business plan or a business model or way of doing business as a vested property right. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. I will have a decision to both of you before the end of the day. Thank you very much. MS. PAYNE: Your Honor, I have copies of the two cases that deal with the vested property rights, TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

31 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 the two cases that we've cited. THE COURT: Sure. MS. PAYNE: May I approach? THE COURT: You may. MS. PAYNE: One is the Smith versus Decker case -- THE COURT: I've read that already. MS. PAYNE: And the other one is the Brazos court case that deals with the franchise concept. MS. WANG: May I take a minute to address the Brazos court case? THE COURT: I believe I've heard all I need to. MS. WANG: All right. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. HASKEL: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you-all very much. You're excused. MR. LYNN: Thank you. MS. PAYNE: Thank you. THE COURT: Do either of you have a proposed form of order? MS. WANG: I do, Your Honor. MS. PAYNE: Your Honor, I left mine at the office but I can send it up at a moment's notice. TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

32 CASE NO.: CV Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction -February, 0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 pleasant day. to you. MS. WANG: I'll give you copies here. MR. LYNN: We'll transmit an order. THE COURT: That will be fine. (Document handed to the Court.) THE COURT: Thank you. MR. HASKEL: May we be excused? THE COURT: You may be excused. Have a MR. HASKEL: Thank you, Your Honor; same (Proceedings adjourned at 0: a.m.) TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

33 0 0 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DALLAS I, Diane L. Robert, Official Court Reporter in and for the th District Court of Dallas County, State of Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing contains a true and correct transcription of all portions of evidence and other proceedings requested in writing by counsel for the parties to be included in this volume of the Reporter's Record in the above-styled and numbered cause, all of which occurred in open court or in chambers and were reported by me. I further certify that this Reporter's Record of the proceedings truly and correctly reflects the exhibits, if any, offered by the respective parties. I further certify that the total cost for the preparation of this Reporter's Record is $.00 and will be paid by Counsel of the City of Dallas. WITNESS MY OFFICIAL HAND, on this the th day of February, 0. BY: /s/diane L. Robert Diane L. Robert, CSR Texas CSR Official Court Reporter th District Court Dallas County, Texas 00 Commerce Street Dallas, Texas 0 Telephone:.. Expiration: //0 drobert@irareporting.com TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY Branch 9

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY Branch 9 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY Branch FILED 0-0-1 CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY, WI 1CV000 AMY LYNN PHOTOGRAPHY STUDIO, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. 1 CV CITY OF MADISON, et al., Defendants.

More information

STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF DONA ANA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT CV WILLIAM TURNER, Plaintiff, vs.

STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF DONA ANA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT CV WILLIAM TURNER, Plaintiff, vs. 0 0 STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF DONA ANA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT WILLIAM TURNER, vs. Plaintiff, CV-0- ROZELLA BRANSFORD, et al., Defendants. TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS On the th day of November 0, at

More information

21 Proceedings reported by Certified Shorthand. 22 Reporter and Machine Shorthand/Computer-Aided

21 Proceedings reported by Certified Shorthand. 22 Reporter and Machine Shorthand/Computer-Aided 1 1 CAUSE NUMBER 2011-47860 2 IN RE : VU T RAN, IN THE DISTRICT COURT 3 HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS 4 PETITIONER 164th JUDICIAL DISTRICT 5 6 7 8 9 ******************************************* * ***** 10 SEPTEMBER

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF YAVAPAI 0 PRESCOTT SPORTSMANS CLUB, by and) through Board of Directors, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) MARK SMITH; TIM MASON; WILLIAM

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH. Petitioner, ) vs. ) Cause No Defendant.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH. Petitioner, ) vs. ) Cause No Defendant. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH MICHAEL RAETHER AND SAVANNA ) RAETHER, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) Cause No. --0-0 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST ) COMPANY;

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS DIVISION 6. MARVIN L. BROWN, et al., ) Plaintiff,) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS DIVISION 6. MARVIN L. BROWN, et al., ) Plaintiff,) ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS DIVISION MARVIN L. BROWN, et al., ) Plaintiff,) ) vs. KRIS KOBACK, KANSAS SECRETARY ) OF STATE, ) Defendant.) ) Case No. CV0 ) TRANSCRIPT OF JUDGE'S DECISIONS

More information

2 JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 3 Respondents, ) ) 4 vs. ) No. SC ) 5 STATE OF MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 6 Appellants. )

2 JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 3 Respondents, ) ) 4 vs. ) No. SC ) 5 STATE OF MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 6 Appellants. ) 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI 2 JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 3 Respondents, ) ) 4 vs. ) No. SC 88038 ) 5 STATE OF MISSOURI, et al., ) ) 6 Appellants. ) 7 8 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY,

More information

Case 2:08-cv AHM-PJW Document 93 Filed 12/28/09 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1024 1

Case 2:08-cv AHM-PJW Document 93 Filed 12/28/09 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1024 1 Case 2:08-cv-05341-AHM-PJW Document 93 Filed 12/28/09 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1024 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - WESTERN DIVISION 3 HONORABLE A. HOWARD MATZ, U.S. DISTRICT

More information

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 3 DEPARTMENT 9 HON. DENISE MOTTER, COMMISSIONER 4 5 CHRISTINE SONTAG, )

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 3 DEPARTMENT 9 HON. DENISE MOTTER, COMMISSIONER 4 5 CHRISTINE SONTAG, ) 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 3 DEPARTMENT 9 HON. DENISE MOTTER, COMMISSIONER 4 5 CHRISTINE SONTAG, ) ) 6 PLAINTIFF, ) ) 7 VS. ) NO. 1381216 ) 8 WILLIAM

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CA XXXX MB

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CA XXXX MB 9708 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 50 2008 CA 040969XXXX MB THE BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR CHASEFLEX TRUST SERIES 2007-3,

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE:. Case No. 0-.. SHARON DIANE HILL,.. USX Tower - th Floor. 00 Grant Street. Pittsburgh, PA Debtor,.. December 0, 00................

More information

3 IN THE GENERAL DISTRICT COURT OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

3 IN THE GENERAL DISTRICT COURT OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY 1 4-7-10 Page 1 2 V I R G I N I A 3 IN THE GENERAL DISTRICT COURT OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY 4 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 6 THIDA WIN, : 7 Plaintiff, : 8 versus, : GV09022748-00 9 NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HONORABLE PERCY ANDERSON, JUDGE PRESIDING. Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) Vs. Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HONORABLE PERCY ANDERSON, JUDGE PRESIDING. Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) Vs. Defendant. CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HONORABLE PERCY ANDERSON, JUDGE PRESIDING 0 TODD KIMSEY, Plaintiff, Vs. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF TEXAS, Defendant. No. CV - PA REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF STATUS CONFERENCE

More information

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 HONORABLE RICHARD A. KRAMER, JUDGE PRESIDING 4 DEPARTMENT NO.

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 HONORABLE RICHARD A. KRAMER, JUDGE PRESIDING 4 DEPARTMENT NO. 1 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 HONORABLE RICHARD A. KRAMER, JUDGE PRESIDING 4 DEPARTMENT NO. 304 5 ---ooo--- 6 COORDINATION PROCEEDING ) SPECIAL TITLE [Rule 1550(b)] ) 7 )

More information

Page 5 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 THE COURT: All we have left is Number 5 and 3 then Mr. Stopa's. Are you ready to proceed? 4 MR. SPANOLIOS: Your Honor

Page 5 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 THE COURT: All we have left is Number 5 and 3 then Mr. Stopa's. Are you ready to proceed? 4 MR. SPANOLIOS: Your Honor Page 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 3 4 5 NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, 6 Plaintiff, 7 vs CASE NO: 2009-CA-002668 8 TONY ROBINSON and DEBRA ROBINSON,

More information

The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, et al. v. Brunner, Jennifer, etc.

The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, et al. v. Brunner, Jennifer, etc. 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 THE NORTHEAST OHIO ) 4 COALITION FOR THE ) HOMELESS, ET AL., ) 5 ) Plaintiffs, ) 6 ) vs. ) Case No. C2-06-896 7 ) JENNIFER BRUNNER,

More information

GLOBAL HUB LOGISTICS, et al., ) VS. ) February 2, ) ) Defendants. ) ) TAMERLANE GLOBAL SERVICES, et al.,) MOTIONS HEARING

GLOBAL HUB LOGISTICS, et al., ) VS. ) February 2, ) ) Defendants. ) ) TAMERLANE GLOBAL SERVICES, et al.,) MOTIONS HEARING Case :-cv-0-gbl-idd Document Filed 0// Page of PageID# IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division GLOBAL HUB LOGISTICS, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Civil

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. The above-entitled matter came on for oral

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. The above-entitled matter came on for oral UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 0 AMADOR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, v. Appellant, KENNETH LEE SALAZAR, SECRETARY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL., Appellees.

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CI-19 UCN: CA015815XXCICI

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CI-19 UCN: CA015815XXCICI 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-015815-CI-19 UCN: 522008CA015815XXCICI INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB, Successor in Interest to INDYMAC BANK,

More information

Case 2:12-cv WCO Document 16-3 Filed 04/06/13 Page 1 of 25. Exhibit C

Case 2:12-cv WCO Document 16-3 Filed 04/06/13 Page 1 of 25. Exhibit C Case 2:12-cv-00262-WCO Document 16-3 Filed 04/06/13 Page 1 of 25 Exhibit C Case 2:12-cv-00262-WCO Document 16-3 Filed 04/06/13 Page 2 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA

More information

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS THE CASE OF CLARKE V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WHAT DID I SAY, CLARKE V. UNITED STATES? >> YEAH.

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS THE CASE OF CLARKE V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WHAT DID I SAY, CLARKE V. UNITED STATES? >> YEAH. >> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS THE CASE OF CLARKE V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WHAT DID I SAY, CLARKE V. UNITED STATES? >> YEAH. >> YOU MAY PROCEED WHEN YOU'RE READY, COUNSEL. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHIEF

More information

Case 3:15-cv HEH-RCY Document Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID# Exhibit D

Case 3:15-cv HEH-RCY Document Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID# Exhibit D Case 3:15-cv-00357-HEH-RCY Document 139-4 Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID# 1828 Exhibit D Case 3:15-cv-00357-HEH-RCY Document 139-4 Filed 02/05/16 Page 2 of 6 PageID# 1829 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

More information

LARRY BOWOTO, ) ET AL., ) ) PLAINTIFFS, ) ) VS. ) NO. C CAL ) CHEVRON CORPORATION, ) ) DEFENDANT. ) )

LARRY BOWOTO, ) ET AL., ) ) PLAINTIFFS, ) ) VS. ) NO. C CAL ) CHEVRON CORPORATION, ) ) DEFENDANT. ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT PAGES 1-14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE CHARLES A. LEGGE, JUDGE LARRY BOWOTO, ) ET AL., ) ) PLAINTIFFS, ) ) VS. ) NO. C 99-2506 CAL ) CHEVRON CORPORATION,

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT 61 BEFORE HON. JOHN S. MEYER, JUDGE

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT 61 BEFORE HON. JOHN S. MEYER, JUDGE IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT BEFORE HON. JOHN S. MEYER, JUDGE 0 DAVID RADEL, ) ) Plaintiff, )No. -0-000-CU-FR-CTL ) vs. ) ) RANCHO CIELO

More information

KRESSE & ASSOCIATES, LLC

KRESSE & ASSOCIATES, LLC 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION 3 CASE NO. 09-49079CA22 4 5 WACHOVIA MORTGAGE, F.S.D. F/K/A WORLD SAVINGS BANK,

More information

Case 2:11-cr KJM Document 258 Filed 03/20/14 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.

Case 2:11-cr KJM Document 258 Filed 03/20/14 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Case :-cr-00-kjm Document Filed 0/0/ Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ---ooo--- BEFORE THE HONORABLE KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, JUDGE ---ooo--- UNITED STATES

More information

Case 3:18-cv RS Document Filed 11/16/18 Page 1 of 139

Case 3:18-cv RS Document Filed 11/16/18 Page 1 of 139 Case 3:18-cv-02279-RS Document 103-2 Filed 11/16/18 Page 1 of 139 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP JOHN F. LIBBY (Bar No. CA 128207)

More information

HAHN & BOWERSOCK FAX KALMUS DRIVE, SUITE L1 COSTA MESA, CA 92626

HAHN & BOWERSOCK FAX KALMUS DRIVE, SUITE L1 COSTA MESA, CA 92626 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPT 24 HON. ROBERT L. HESS, JUDGE BAT WORLD SANCTUARY, ET AL, PLAINTIFF, VS MARY CUMMINS, DEFENDANT. CASE NO.: BS140207 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT

More information

The Florida Bar v. Bruce Edward Committe

The Florida Bar v. Bruce Edward Committe The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those

More information

5 Plaintiff, 6 Vs. 7 WILLIAM DAVISON, 8 Defendant. 9 / 13 * * * * * * * * 14 DEPOSITION OF MARLIN KNAPP 15 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT

5 Plaintiff, 6 Vs. 7 WILLIAM DAVISON, 8 Defendant. 9 / 13 * * * * * * * * 14 DEPOSITION OF MARLIN KNAPP 15 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT Page: 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 2 IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 10 CA 002652 (AW) 3 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 4 AS TRUSTEE FOR RALI 06QS2 5 Plaintiff,

More information

5 Plaintiff, 6 Vs. 7 WILLIAM DAVISON, 8 Defendant. 9 / 13 * * * * * * * * 14 DEPOSITION OF MARLIN KNAPP 15 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT

5 Plaintiff, 6 Vs. 7 WILLIAM DAVISON, 8 Defendant. 9 / 13 * * * * * * * * 14 DEPOSITION OF MARLIN KNAPP 15 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT Page: 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 2 IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 2010 CA 002652 (AW) 3 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 4 AS TRUSTEE FOR RALI 2006QS2 5 Plaintiff,

More information

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 08/08/2016 Page: 1. Re: Supplemental Authority in Fish, et al. v. Kobach, Case No.

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 08/08/2016 Page: 1. Re: Supplemental Authority in Fish, et al. v. Kobach, Case No. Appellate Case: - Document: 0 Date Filed: 0/0/0 Page: AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION NATIONAL OFFICE BROAD STREET, TH FL. NEW YORK, NY 00-00 T/.. F/-- WWW.ACLU.ORG Elisabeth Shumaker Clerk of

More information

ONTARIO, INC., Appellant, Respondent

ONTARIO, INC., Appellant, Respondent 0 COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------- ONTARIO, INC., -against- Appellant, SAMSUNG C&T CORPORATION, Respondent. ---------------------------------------- Before: No.

More information

0001 1 THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND 2 FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA 3 CASE NO.: 16-2008-CA-012971 DIVISION: CV:G 4 5 GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC, ) ) 6 Plaintiff, ) ) 7 vs. ) ) 8 CARRIE GASQUE,

More information

Case 1:12-cv RMC-DST-RLW Document Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 323 EXHIBIT 2

Case 1:12-cv RMC-DST-RLW Document Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 323 EXHIBIT 2 Case 1:12-cv-00128-RMC-DST-RLW Document 136-4 Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 323 EXHIBIT 2 Case 1:12-cv-00128-RMC-DST-RLW Document 136-4 Filed 05/21/12 Page 2 of 323 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

More information

This is one of the Lawyers in Brian Korte`s office, SUSANNA LEHMAN, ESQ. She makes the Plaintiff very confused and argued a very different angle of

This is one of the Lawyers in Brian Korte`s office, SUSANNA LEHMAN, ESQ. She makes the Plaintiff very confused and argued a very different angle of This is one of the Lawyers in Brian Korte`s office, SUSANNA LEHMAN, ESQ. She makes the Plaintiff very confused and argued a very different angle of the Pooling and Servicing agreement and the use of the

More information

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 * * * 4 NORTHEAST OHIO COALITION. 5 FOR THE HOMELESS, et al.

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 * * * 4 NORTHEAST OHIO COALITION. 5 FOR THE HOMELESS, et al. 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Page 1 2 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 * * * 4 NORTHEAST OHIO COALITION 5 FOR THE HOMELESS, et al., 6 Plaintiffs, 7 vs. CASE NO. C2-06-896 8 JENNIFER BRUNNER,

More information

Harry Ridgewell: So how have islands in the South Pacific been affected by rising sea levels in the last 10 years?

Harry Ridgewell: So how have islands in the South Pacific been affected by rising sea levels in the last 10 years? So how have islands in the South Pacific been affected by rising sea levels in the last 10 years? Well, in most places the maximum sea level rise has been about 0.7 millimetres a year. So most places that's

More information

18 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT

18 TAKEN AT THE INSTANCE OF THE DEFENDANT Page: 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 2 OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA 3 CASE NO.: 2009 CA 033952 4 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS 5 TRUSTEE UNDER POOLING AND

More information

Case 3:11-cv REP Document 132 Filed 01/28/12 Page 1 of 153 PageID# 2426 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Case 3:11-cv REP Document 132 Filed 01/28/12 Page 1 of 153 PageID# 2426 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Case :-cv-00-rep Document Filed 0// Page of PageID# IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION 0 -------------------------------------- : GILBERT JAMES :

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII 0 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII ) U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Vs. ) Civil No. --0() ) PATRICK LOWELL VERHAGEN, ) ET AL., ) ) Defendants. ) ) TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

More information

>> OUR NEXT CASE OF THE DAY IS DEBRA LAFAVE VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. I'M JULIUS AULISIO.

>> OUR NEXT CASE OF THE DAY IS DEBRA LAFAVE VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. I'M JULIUS AULISIO. >> OUR NEXT CASE OF THE DAY IS DEBRA LAFAVE VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. I'M JULIUS AULISIO. I REPRESENT DEBRA LAFAVE THE PETITIONER IN THIS CASE. WE'RE HERE

More information

The Due Process Advocate

The Due Process Advocate The Due Process Advocate No Person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law - Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution Vol. 15 No. 2 www.dueprocessadvocate.com

More information

James M. Maloney. Attorney at Law Proctor in Admiralty. P.O. Box Bayview Avenue Port Washington, NY April 7, 2014

James M. Maloney. Attorney at Law Proctor in Admiralty. P.O. Box Bayview Avenue Port Washington, NY April 7, 2014 admitted to practice in New York; New Jersey; United States Supreme Court; U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second and Third Circuits; U.S. District Courts for the District of Connecticut, Northern District

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, MOTION HEARING. 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, MOTION HEARING. 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, MOTION HEARING 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT. 8 DATE: DECEMBER 20, 2006 9

More information

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS GARRETT VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, MY NAME IS MEGAN LONG WITH

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS GARRETT VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, MY NAME IS MEGAN LONG WITH >> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS GARRETT VERSUS STATE OF FLORIDA. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, MY NAME IS MEGAN LONG WITH THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT.

More information

1/2/ ANNETTE FAKLIS MORIARTY, C.S.R.

1/2/ ANNETTE FAKLIS MORIARTY, C.S.R. 1/2/2019 2019-1 ANNETTE FAKLIS MORIARTY, C.S.R. BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF LISLE MUNICIPAL OFFICERS ELECTORAL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF THE ) OBJECTIONS OF: ) ) MICHAEL HANTSCH ) ) Objector, ) No. 2019-1 ) VS.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ORRICK, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ORRICK, JUDGE Pages - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ORRICK, JUDGE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN ) FRANCISCO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) NO. C -0 WHO ) DONALD J.

More information

Page 1. 10:10 a.m. Veritext Legal Solutions

Page 1. 10:10 a.m. Veritext Legal Solutions 1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., etc. 4 Plaintiff, 5 vs. Case No. CV-12-789401 6 EDGEWATER REALTY, LLC, et al. 7 Defendant. 8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More information

Case 1:11-cv LAK Document Filed 02/06/11 Page 1 of 35

Case 1:11-cv LAK Document Filed 02/06/11 Page 1 of 35 Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK Document 31-21 Filed 02/06/11 Page 1 of 35 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2 ATLANTA DIVISION Page 1 3 In re: Application of ) CHEVRON

More information

CASE 0:11-cv SRN-SER Document 22 Filed 04/24/12 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

CASE 0:11-cv SRN-SER Document 22 Filed 04/24/12 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA CASE 0:-cv-0-SRN-SER Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ----------------------------------------------------------- ) State of North Dakota, et al,, Plaintiffs,

More information

STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS.

STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS. 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS SS. COUNTY OF COOK IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY COUNTY DEPARTMENT-CRIMINAL DIVISION THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Case No. 1 CR -01 Plaintiff, VS RYNE SANHAMEL,

More information

TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEONIE M. BRINKEMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. (Pages 1-15)

TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEONIE M. BRINKEMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. (Pages 1-15) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION SUHAIL NAJIM ABDULLAH Civil Action No :0cv AL SHIMARI, et al, Plaintiffs, vs Alexandria, Virginia June, 0 CACI PREMIER

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII. Plaintiff, vs. CIVIL NO Defendant.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII. Plaintiff, vs. CIVIL NO Defendant. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Plaintiff, vs. CIVIL NO. -- ELAINE E. KAWASAKI, et al., Defendant. TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS before the HONORABLE, GLENN

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, ARRAIGNMENT & BAIL MODIFICATION 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 375 & 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT.

More information

OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION CONTEST IN THE 98TH HOUSE DISTRICT - - -

OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION CONTEST IN THE 98TH HOUSE DISTRICT - - - OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTION CONTEST IN THE 98TH HOUSE DISTRICT - - - PROCEEDINGS of the Select Committee, at the Ohio Statehouse, 1 Capitol Square, Columbus, Ohio, on

More information

40609Nicoletti.txt. 7 MR. BRUTOCAO: Nicholas Brutocao appearing. 12 Honor. I'm counsel associated with Steve Krause and

40609Nicoletti.txt. 7 MR. BRUTOCAO: Nicholas Brutocao appearing. 12 Honor. I'm counsel associated with Steve Krause and 1 1 VENTURA, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2009 2 --o0o-- 3 4 5 THE COURT: Nicoletti versus Metrocities 6 Mortgage. 7 MR. BRUTOCAO: Nicholas Brutocao appearing 8 for the defendant Taylor, Bean and Whitaker.

More information

Case 1:12-cr JTN Doc #220 Filed 04/04/13 Page 1 of 20 Page ID#1769. Plaintiff,

Case 1:12-cr JTN Doc #220 Filed 04/04/13 Page 1 of 20 Page ID#1769. Plaintiff, Case :-cr-000-jtn Doc #0 Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 Page ID# IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, No: :cr0 0 0 vs. DENNIS

More information

1 FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS PUBLIC MEETING MAY 28, (Commencing at 11:02 a.m.

1 FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS PUBLIC MEETING MAY 28, (Commencing at 11:02 a.m. 1 1 FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION 3 4 5 6 7 8 FILE NO. 130050 9 10 11 12 13 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS PUBLIC MEETING MAY 28, 2013 (Commencing at 11:02 a.m.) 14 15 16

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 26 5 vs. Case No.

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 26 5 vs. Case No. 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 26 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT. 8 DATE: MARCH 17,

More information

ARROWHEAD CAPITAL FINANCE, LTD., CHEYNE SPECIALTY FINANCE FUND L.P., et al.

ARROWHEAD CAPITAL FINANCE, LTD., CHEYNE SPECIALTY FINANCE FUND L.P., et al. 0 0 COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------- ARROWHEAD CAPITAL FINANCE, LTD., -against- Appellant, CHEYNE SPECIALTY FINANCE FUND L.P., et al. Respondents. ----------------------------------------

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, ARRAIGNMENT & MOTIONS. 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, ARRAIGNMENT & MOTIONS. 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, ARRAIGNMENT & MOTIONS 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT. 8 DATE: MAY 3, 2006

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ISADORE ROSENBERG, REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS THURSDAY, MAY 5, 2011

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ISADORE ROSENBERG, REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS THURSDAY, MAY 5, 2011 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT CE-ll HON. MICHAEL I. LEVANAS, JUDGE IN RE THE ESTATE OF: ISADORE ROSENBERG, NO. BP109162 DECEASED. REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT

More information

Volume 7. Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter 1

Volume 7. Sandra M. Halsey, CSR, Official Court Reporter 1 Volume 7 1 2 IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 3 3 DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 4 5 6 7 THE STATE OF TEXAS } 8 VS: } NO. F-96-39972-J 9 DARLIE LYNN ROUTIER } & F-96-39973-J 10 11 12 13 14 STATEMENT OF FACTS 15

More information

>>> THE SECOND CASE IS GRIDINE V. THE STATE OF FLORIDA. YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, I'M GAIL ANDERSON REPRESENTING MR.

>>> THE SECOND CASE IS GRIDINE V. THE STATE OF FLORIDA. YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, I'M GAIL ANDERSON REPRESENTING MR. >>> THE SECOND CASE IS GRIDINE V. THE STATE OF FLORIDA. YOU MAY PROCEED. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, I'M GAIL ANDERSON REPRESENTING MR. SHIMEEKA GRIDINE. HE WAS 14 YEARS OLD WHEN HE COMMITTED ATTEMPTED

More information

Case4:10-cv SBA Document81 Filed05/31/11 Page1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case4:10-cv SBA Document81 Filed05/31/11 Page1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case:-cv-0-SBA Document Filed0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION RITZ CAMERA & IMAGE, LLC, VS. PLAINTIFF, SANDISK CORPORATION, ET AL,

More information

Case 2:13-cv Document Filed in TXSD on 11/11/14 Page 1 of 77

Case 2:13-cv Document Filed in TXSD on 11/11/14 Page 1 of 77 : Case Case 1 12-cv-00128 2:13-cv-00193 - RMC-DST Document - RLW660-12 Document Filed 207-1 in TXSD Filed on 11/11/14 06 /20/12 Page 131of of77 5 the fact that this number comes from LBB. I believe 6 they

More information

Gerald Lynn Bates v. State of Florida

Gerald Lynn Bates v. State of Florida The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those

More information

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. 2 x 3 SPOKEO, INC., : 4 Petitioner : No v. : 6 THOMAS ROBINS. : 7 x. 8 Washington, D.C.

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. 2 x 3 SPOKEO, INC., : 4 Petitioner : No v. : 6 THOMAS ROBINS. : 7 x. 8 Washington, D.C. 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1 2 x 3 SPOKEO, INC., : 4 Petitioner : No. 13 1339 5 v. : 6 THOMAS ROBINS. : 7 x 8 Washington, D.C. 9 Monday, November 2, 2015 10 11 The above entitled matter

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 25 5 vs. Case No.

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 25 5 vs. Case No. 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 25 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT. 8 DATE: MARCH 16,

More information

Kenneth Friedman, M.D. v. Heart Institute of Port St. Lucie, Inc.

Kenneth Friedman, M.D. v. Heart Institute of Port St. Lucie, Inc. The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) VS. ) June 15, ISHMAEL JONES, ) A pen name ) ) Defendant. ) )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) VS. ) June 15, ISHMAEL JONES, ) A pen name ) ) Defendant. ) ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No. - ) VS. ) June, ) ISHMAEL JONES, ) A pen name ) ) ) Defendant.

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-CRIMINAL DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-CRIMINAL DIVISION 0 STATE OF ILLINOIS SS COUNTY OF C O O K IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-CRIMINAL DIVISION THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. CR 0 RYNE SANHAMEL,

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE Commission

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE Commission 1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE Commission In the matter of the application of Consumers Energy Company for authority to reconcile electric DOCKET

More information

Case 2:13-cv RFB-NJK Document 335 Filed 08/14/15 Page 1 of 68

Case 2:13-cv RFB-NJK Document 335 Filed 08/14/15 Page 1 of 68 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of. I have reviewed the Affidavit of John P. Rohner (the Rohner Affidavit ), filed with the Court on August,

More information

PlainSite. Legal Document. California Northern District Court Case No. 4:11-cr JST USA v. Su. Document 193. View Document.

PlainSite. Legal Document. California Northern District Court Case No. 4:11-cr JST USA v. Su. Document 193. View Document. PlainSite Legal Document California Northern District Court Case No. :-cr-00-jst USA v. Su Document View Document View Docket A joint project of Think Computer Corporation and Think Computer Foundation.

More information

Mr. John Gillespie, Board Member Ms. Cinthia Slusarczyk, Clerk

Mr. John Gillespie, Board Member Ms. Cinthia Slusarczyk, Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MEETING OF THE LORDSTOWN VILLAGE BOARD OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS 1455 Salt Springs Road, Lordstown, Ohio June 10, 2015 6:00 p.m. to 6:15 p.m. IN ATTENDANCE: Mr. Kevin Campbell, President

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION R. DANIEL BRADY, ET AL, ) PLAINTIFFS, ) ) V. ) 5:09-CV-449-BO ) XE SERVICES LLC, ET AL, ) DEFENDANTS. ) ) MOTIONS HEARING

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CLARA COUNTY HONORABLE AARON PERSKY, JUDGE DEPARTMENT o0o--- PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CLARA COUNTY HONORABLE AARON PERSKY, JUDGE DEPARTMENT o0o--- PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CLARA COUNTY HONORABLE AARON PERSKY, JUDGE DEPARTMENT ---o0o--- PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, vs. Plaintiff, BROCK ALLEN TURNER, Defendant. CASE NO. B ---o0o---

More information

Exhibit 13. Case 1:15-cv TDS-JEP Document Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 5

Exhibit 13. Case 1:15-cv TDS-JEP Document Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 5 Exhibit Case :-cv-00-tds-jep Document - Filed 0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMON CAUSE, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Civil Action No. :-CV--WO-JEP

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA BEFORE THE HONORABLE DEBORAH RYAN, JUDGE DEPARTMENT NO.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA BEFORE THE HONORABLE DEBORAH RYAN, JUDGE DEPARTMENT NO. THIS TRANSCRIPT IS PROTECTED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION (d) 0 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA BEFORE THE HONORABLE DEBORAH RYAN, JUDGE DEPARTMENT

More information

KYLEEN CANE - 12/18/06 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KYLEEN CANE - 12/18/06 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 DAVID KAGEL, ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) 5 ) vs. ) 6 ) JAN WALLACE, ) CASE NO.: 7 ) CV 06-3357 R (SSx) Defendant. ) 8 ) ) 9 AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIM.

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: CIVIL DIV. : PART X RELIABLE ABSTRACT CO.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: CIVIL DIV. : PART X RELIABLE ABSTRACT CO. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/09/2016 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 653850/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 211 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/09/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: CIVIL DIV. : PART 61 ----------------------------

More information

MEETING OF THE OHIO BALLOT BOARD

MEETING OF THE OHIO BALLOT BOARD MEETING OF THE OHIO BALLOT BOARD 1 - - - MEETING of the Ohio Ballot Board, at the Ohio Statehouse, Finan Finance Hearing Room, 1 Capitol Square, Columbus, Ohio, called at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December

More information

Ph Fax Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite West Palm Beach, FL 33401

Ph Fax Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Page 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 50 2008 CA 028558 XXXX MB DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR MORGAN STANLEY ABS

More information

Justice Andrea Hoch: It is my pleasure. Thank you for inviting me.

Justice Andrea Hoch: It is my pleasure. Thank you for inviting me. Mary-Beth Moylan: Hello, I'm Mary-Beth Moylan, Associate Dean for Experiential Learning at McGeorge School of Law, sitting down with Associate Justice Andrea Lynn Hoch from the 3rd District Court of Appeal.

More information

5 v. 11 Cv (JSR) 6 SONAR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, et al., 7 Defendants x 9 February 17, :00 p.m.

5 v. 11 Cv (JSR) 6 SONAR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, et al., 7 Defendants x 9 February 17, :00 p.m. Case 1:11-cv-09665-JSR Document 20 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 20 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2 ------------------------------x 3 SIDNEY GORDON, 4 Plaintiff, 5 v. 11 Cv.

More information

Amendments To Uniform Guidelines For Taxation of Costs

Amendments To Uniform Guidelines For Taxation of Costs The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those

More information

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.:

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.: 3 4 Plaintiff, 5 -vs- 6 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY a municipal corporation 7 and political subdivision of the State

More information

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC 1

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC 1 1 BEFORE SPECIAL MASTER BARTON H. THOMPSON, JR. HEARING RE: MONTANA'S RIGHT TO V(B) CLAIMS September 30, 2011 IN THE MATTER OF MONTANA VS. WYOMING AND NORTH DAKOTA NO. 220137 ORG The above-entitled matter

More information

TRIAL COURT CAUSE NOS & REPORTER'S RECORD VOLUME 1 OF 1 ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF )

TRIAL COURT CAUSE NOS & REPORTER'S RECORD VOLUME 1 OF 1 ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF ) 1 1 TRIAL COURT CAUSE NOS. 1-806-9 & 1-808-9 REPORTER'S RECORD VOLUME 1 OF 1 6 8 9 10 11 THE STATE OF TEXAS vs. KENNETH LEON SNOW ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF ) ) SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS ) ) 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS TRANSCRIPT OF SENTENCING HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE CARLOS MURGUIA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS TRANSCRIPT OF SENTENCING HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE CARLOS MURGUIA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY RENFROW, Defendant.... APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiff: For the Defendant: Court Reporter: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS Docket No. -0-CM

More information

SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DR. SANG-HOON AHN, DR. LAURENCE ) BOGGELN, DR. GEORGE DELGADO, ) DR. PHIL DREISBACH, DR. VINCENT ) FORTANASCE, DR. VINCENT NGUYEN, ) and AMERICAN

More information

W. EARL BRITT SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF N.C.

W. EARL BRITT SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF N.C. Case :-cv-0-wo-jep Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMON CAUSE, et al. ) v. ) :-CV0 ROBERT A. RUCHO, et al. ) ) LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ) OF NORTH

More information

Page 1. VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE. Defendant(s). VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE Counterclaimants and Third Party Plaintiffs, vs.

Page 1. VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE. Defendant(s). VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE Counterclaimants and Third Party Plaintiffs, vs. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION - ATLANTIC COUNTY DOCKET NO. F-10209-08 BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS CWABS, INC. ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-AB3 Plaintiff(s),

More information

Armstrong & Okey, Inc., Columbus, Ohio (614)

Armstrong & Okey, Inc., Columbus, Ohio (614) Case: 2:14-cv-00404-PCE-NMK Doc #: 64-4 Filed: 08/07/14 Page: 1 of 41 PAGEID #: 4277 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION - - - Ohio State Conference of : the

More information

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 BEFORE THE HONORABLE HAROLD E. KAHN, JUDGE PRESIDING 4 DEPARTMENT NO. 302 5 JARED TAYLOR; NEW CENTURY

More information

1 STATE OF INDIANA) IN THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT )SS: CIVIL DIVISION, ROOM TWO 2 COUNTY OF LAKE ) SITTING AT EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA

1 STATE OF INDIANA) IN THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT )SS: CIVIL DIVISION, ROOM TWO 2 COUNTY OF LAKE ) SITTING AT EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA 1 STATE OF INDIANA) IN THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT )SS: CIVIL DIVISION, ROOM TWO 2 COUNTY OF LAKE ) SITTING AT EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA 3 JOHN B. CURLEY, as Chairman of ) 4 the Lake County, Indiana, ) republican

More information

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.: CACE

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.: CACE Page: 1 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA 2 CASE NO.: CACE090039 3 4 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE FOR SASCO 05-WF4, 5 Plaintiff(s), 6 vs.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON AT EUGENE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON AT EUGENE Michael R. Seidl, OSB No. 833190 mseidl@landye-bennett.com Jennifer L. Gates, OSB No. 050578 jgates@landye-bennett.com Landye Bennett Blumstein, LLP 1300 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 3500 Portland, Oregon 97201

More information