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

Size: px
Start display at page:

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

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

2 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, 0, as Docket Entry. The Rohner Affidvit does not comply with the Order of the Court as is set forth in the Trascript of the Court s order from the hearing on July, 0. (A copy of the Transcript of the order is attached as Exhibit A.) The Rohner Affidavit does not detail the transactions as specifically ordered. Mr. Rohner fails to identify the dates of sale(s), the parties involved, where the proceeds were deposited, and the ultimate disposition of the proceeds.. I have reviewed documents delivered to me, including: a. Documents provided by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ), the majoritiy of which are attached to various court filings; b. An inventory of personal property provided by Mark S. Dzarnoski, attorney for the Corporate Defendants; c. A title to a mobile home provided by Mr Rohner; d. A Will and Post-Nuptial Agreement provided by Mr. Rohner. Real Property. I am aware that Mr. Rohner has an interest in the following real property (in addition to the interests identified by the SEC in the pleadings relating to the Motion for Contempt): a. A lot located at 0 Main Street, South English, Iowa. A copy of the closing statement relating to the recent sale of the property is attached as Exhibit Page of

3 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of B. The remaining proceeds are currently being held, at the direction of the Receiver, by John Wehr, the attorney handling the closing, whose address is East Washington Street, P.O. Box, Sigourney, Iowa. b. Mr. Rohner identifies an interest in an R-Wild Horse Ranch timeshare. A copy of a late assessment notice from the Wild Horse Owner s Association is attached hereto as Exhibit C. The Receiver is further investigating this asset. Personal Property. Mr. Rohner is the owner of a Baron mobile home, VIN#. A copy of the Certificate of Title is attached hereto as Exhibit D. Mr. Roner has executed the Assignment of Title. The Receiver is further investigating this asset.. I have reviewed the inventory of items released to Mr. Dzarnoski from the Federal Bureau of Investigations. A copy of the Receipt for Released Property is attached hereto as Exhibit E.. I received a box from Mr. Dzarnoski which was said to contain the property listed in Exhibit E. My office inventoried the items in the box and prepared an inventory of the property which is attached hereto as Exhibit F.. I have reviewd the inventory of assests in the possession of the SEC. A copy of the inventory is attached hereto as Exhibit G. Page of

4 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of Bank Accounts and Cash Assets 0. I have taken possession of the accounts at Nevada State Bank. The funds are currently held as Inteligentry Ltd. Receivership Estate, with the Receiver as the sole signatory. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED this th day of August, 0. PRINCE YEATES & GELDZAHLER /s/ Sally B. McMinimee Sally B. McMinimee Receiver CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the th day of August, 0, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which sent a Notice of Electronic Filing to all parties whose names appear on the electronic mail notice list for this case. /s/ Sally B. McMinimee Page of

5 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT A

6 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, vs. Plaintiff, INTELIGENTRY, LIMITED, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. :-cv-00-rfb-njk Las Vegas, Nevada Wednesday, July, 0 0:00 a.m. MOTION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT 0 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS THE HONORABLE RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 0 COURT REPORTER: Patricia L. Ganci, RMR, CRR United States District Court Las Vegas Boulevard South, Room Las Vegas, Nevada 0 Proceedings reported by machine shorthand, transcript produced by computer-aided transcription. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

7 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiff: KENNETH J. GUIDO, ESQ. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 00 F Street, NE Washington, DC 0 (0) - For the Corporate Defendants: MARK S. DZARNOSKI, ESQ. GORDON SILVER 0 Howard Hughes Parkway Las Vegas, Nevada (0) - 0 For the Receiver: SALLY B. MCMINIMEE, ESQ. PRINCE YEATES & GELDZAHLER West South Temple, Suite 00 Salt Lake City, Utah 0 (0) Pro Se: JOHN P. ROHNER PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

8 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 LAS VEGAS, NEVADA; WEDNESDAY, JULY, 0; 0:00 A.M. --ooo-- P R O C E E D I N G S THE COURT: Please be seated. COURTROOM ADMINISTRATOR: Now calling Securities and Exchange Commission versus Inteligentry, LTD, Case No. :-cv-00-rfb-njk. Now is the time for the status conference regarding Docket, second motion to hold John P. Rohner in contempt of court. Counsel, please note your appearances for the record. MR. DZARNOSKI: Mark Dzarnoski on behalf of the corporate defendants. Good morning, Your Honor. THE COURT: Good morning. MR. GUIDO: Kenneth Guido for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Your Honor. Good morning. THE COURT: Good morning. MR. ROHNER: John Rohner and -- myself. THE COURT: Good morning, Mr. Rohner. MS. MCMINIMEE: Sally McMinimee, Court-appointed Receiver. THE COURT: Good morning. So we are here, first off, on Motion, to hold Mr. Rohner in contempt. Mr. Guido, I have a couple of questions for you about the motion because it spans a certain period of time, actually a few years, in terms of what was disposed of and PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

9 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 what was not disposed of. What's not clear to me exactly is that what more would you expect specifically in sort of the affidavit. Obviously, you're looking for a more specific listing. And what I -- the Court seems to glean, and Mr. Rohner can confirm from this, is some of that appears to simply not exist or we're not clear about it, but I don't know if he is simply saying that I don't know that I have more, which is part of what he appears to be saying. Maybe you could be more specific with me about what it is that you are requesting. Some of it is the disposition of assets. We can deal with that later in terms of liability issues, but in terms of the contempt proceeding, as you know, the purpose of a contempt proceeding is to require or force compliance. So the question is, what is the nature of the compliance that you want specifically? MR. GUIDO: And, Your Honor, with regard to the disclosure, we do want a sworn financial disclosure from Mr. Rohner specifying what you directed him to produce in March of this year. That's the first with regard to that. THE COURT: So the first thing is just something that is clearly sworn that says, To the extent that I have anything, this is what I have, and just lay that out. MR. GUIDO: Just lay it out. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: I mean, every -- I mean, recently he just PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

10 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 filed something saying, Oh, I heard about a time-share that I own -- reportedly own in California, for example. Your Honor, stuff keeps dribbling in. We keep discovering things. And we want a financial -- a sworn financial statement listing all of the assets that he had a beneficial interest in at the date the TRO was entered and what exists today and what he did with it in the interim. That's what we're seeking with regard to the disclosure. And he has not complied, and he has repeatedly filed statements which are waivers of the Fifth Amendment. And, therefore, he's obligated to file that disclosure, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: Or be held in contempt. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: And... THE COURT: Let me turn to Mr. Rohner. Mr. Rohner. MR. ROHNER: Yes. Yes, sir. THE COURT: What seems to be the problem? It's a simple affidavit. I'm not understanding why you're not filing it with them. MR. ROHNER: Well, because basically I don't have the information to file it with them. THE COURT: No, you have, Mr. Rohner, the information that you possess yourself. No one's asking you to give more PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

11 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 information than what you have. An affidavit is based upon your personal knowledge. The Court is losing patience with you in terms of not responding. What I want you to do is use the information that you have. You don't have to rely upon -- if you don't have the information, then what you do is that you simply say, I don't have the information, but what you don't do is continue to file noncompliant, vague documents about what you know and don't know. That is not acceptable. You can simply write down on a piece of paper, right, This is my sworn statement. I swear to it under penalty of perjury. Here is what I had as of the date of the TRO that I remember, here's what I believe happened to those assets, and here's what I have now. That is not a complicated statement, Mr. Rohner. So I'm a little concerned about why we don't have it yet. MR. ROHNER: Your Honor, Mr. Guido brought up this time-share -- THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, answer my -- MR. ROHNER: -- that just showed up in the mail. THE COURT: No, answer my question. Why don't we have a specific sworn affidavit from you laying out exactly what I just described? MR. ROHNER: Because I don't have any of the business documents. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

12 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 THE COURT: What did I just say to you? MR. ROHNER: Well, you asked for my own -- THE COURT: What I said to you was, I'm not asking you to make up information. If you don't have information, then you can't speak to the information, but what you can't do is use your lack of access to documents as an excuse not to comply with the Court's order. I have specifically said to you on several occasions if you don't remember or if you don't know, you can't be required to say things that you don't know. If you're asserting Fifth Amendment privilege, then you need to be clear about that. And I have said that to you, haven't I? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: So what I'm not understanding is why this document is not being filed. Right. You don't have to have the records. I have not ever required you to go get records, right, to make the statement. Right. Have I ever required you to do that? All I've said is what we need to know is what did you have that you recall having at the time of the TRO, what was disposed of, and what do you have now. MR. ROHNER: Your Honor -- THE COURT: I don't want to have to come back here four and five times to do this because if you continue to be in noncompliance with the Court's order, the Court does have other PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

13 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 options and the SEC is seeking to impose those. I am not at the point yet where I am going to incarcerate you for failing to comply, but what I am saying to you is these continued excuses for noncompliance are not acceptable. MR. ROHNER: Your Honor, if you will look at the document I filed as my net worth statement, every single asset that I own is in that statement. THE COURT: No, Mr. Rohner. Here's what I am telling you. I want you to be as clear as possible about this. I want within a week an affidavit from you that says exactly what I'm saying to you now: I possessed these assets at the time that the TRO was entered. To the best of my knowledge, this is what happened to those assets. I currently possess these assets as of the date of the affidavit, and have that affidavit sworn and notarized and have it filed or sent -- excuse me -- have it sent to the SEC and have it filed with this Court within a week. MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: If that is not done, I will hold you in contempt and there will be consequences for that. MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Okay? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Mr. Guido, is that sufficient in terms of addressing this issue? MR. GUIDO: That issue, yes, Your Honor. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

14 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Rohner, again, I am not saying to you -- Mr. Rohner? I am not saying to you to make things up and I have said that to you on multiple occasions, but what I am saying is we cannot proceed unless we have clear statements. And you can't file net worth statements or other statements that are not specifically addressing the Court's inquiry as to the disclosure. So that's what you need to do. You will have a week from today to be able to do that. Is there any reason why, Mr. Rohner, you cannot meet that deadline? Mr. Rohner, is there any reason why you cannot meet that deadline? MR. ROHNER: No, Your Honor. I'll find a way to do it. THE COURT: And, again, I want to be clear. I am not asking you to obtain documents. If you have documents already, then you should use those documents. There's been quite a bit of information going back and forth in the filing, actually, a large amount of information. You could probably glean from the court filings a large amount of the information that you need. MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: The SEC has indicated that certain information and certain property that they've actually obtained. Right. You will be permitted, if you want, within that period of time to contact the Receiver to ask about information. And, Ms. McMinimee, if you receive obviously a call from Mr. Rohner, you are authorized by the Court to disclose to him whatever PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

15 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk information you have about assets in his name. MS. MCMINIMEE: I will do so, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So, Mr. Rohner, there's no reason at this point for you to have to go search through records or find things. The SEC, Mr. Guido, as I understand it, has provided to Ms. McMinimee a list of all of the assets that it has in its possession or has in its control at this time. Is that right? MR. GUIDO: That's correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: So, Mr. Rohner, all you have to do it make an appointment over the phone with Ms. McMinimee. Ms. McMinimee knows obviously the Court's deadline. I suggest you do it right away, and you simply go through with her what the information is that she has. MR. ROHNER: Yes, Your Honor. I have an appointment with her after this here. THE COURT: Okay. And, Ms. McMinimee, I would like from you a separate filing as to what you can ascertain as to what assets were in the possession of Mr. Rohner at the time that the TRO was entered, how they may have been disposed of, and what assets he had in his possession at the point at which you took possession of those assets, and what the current status -- state is of those assets. And so I'd ask you to file that two weeks from today. That way you will have an opportunity to review Mr. Rohner's filing. If there are mistakes or errors in it, please also note that. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

16 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 MS. MCMINIMEE: I will do so. THE COURT: Okay. So -- MR. ROHNER: May I ask a specific question, Your Honor? THE COURT: Of course you may. MR. ROHNER: Okay. The SEC has just taken my wife's retirement fund and the funds from her house being sold because I am the if-she-dies person. I would like to know if the Court is going to allow that or is she going to be able to get her funds so she can fix her teeth? MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, could we reserve this to the next issue? And that is the disposition of property that Mr. Rohner made in violation of the Court order. THE COURT: Certainly. Well, let's be clear about a couple of things. One is we have -- first, this hearing is about the motion for contempt. One of that relates to the issue of the disclosure. The other issue relates to the disposition of assets or the seizure of assets. I'm not sure if this seizure is included in that because it would appear to the Court there has been subsequent filings by Mr. Rohner that address some of this. And, Mr. Guido, your filing addresses some of the issue of disposition, but not all of what appears that Mr. Rohner is describing. So let's first finish with this motion and then, Mr. Rohner, we can talk about what you're discussing. Mr. Guido, you also talked about the disposition of PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

17 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 assets, but I believe based upon the disclosure that we would -- I expect from Mr. Rohner that will be addressed. I mean, there's a second issue about what to do in the context of the property that may have been improperly disposed, but that, as you well know, is not the purpose of a contempt proceeding. That's simply a violation of the Court's order, and then we can make a determination about potentially what to do. I mean, if he's disposed of assets, that may be a separate issue in terms of potential referral for criminal contempt, but that's not something that I would necessarily handle, unless there was a determination by this Court that, in fact, those assets had been disposed of improperly. I don't know that I'm in a position to do that until I first receive from him his affidavit. I'm not saying that there isn't -- there has or has not been an improper disposition, but what I am saying is without the affidavit and without the statement from Mr. Rohner, I can't say whether or not they were improperly disposed of. There could be circumstances that would not necessarily justify it, but that would not lead to a conclusion that they were deliberately disposed of contrary to the Court's order. MR. GUIDO: May I address that, Your Honor? THE COURT: Certainly. MR. GUIDO: With all due respect, we filed a brief with a declaration authenticating documents that show that Mr. Rohner PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

18 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 transferred two pieces of real estate in violation -- clearly in violation of the TRO and the preliminary injunction. One of them I think $,000 was acquired -- was obtained for that, and another one I think the Receiver has indicated -- THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, why don't you -- Mr. Rohner, why don't you sit down please and let him finish talking. MR. ROHNER: Okay. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. GUIDO: And Mr. Rohner in his reply admitted that those transactions took place. The documentation before the Court shows that he had a beneficial -- a legal and a beneficial interest in those two pieces of property. And we believe that the Court should direct him to return those properties or provide those properties to the Receiver, or the cash to the Receiver to be held so that it is not dissipated by Mr. Rohner or his wife, who apparently he initially transferred title to the properties to and then had her transfer title to third parties. But recently as this year Mr. Rohner has signed a deed transferring title to property that -- from the information that we've been provided, we provided to the Court, there was $,000 that was obtained on those sales. We would like that money provided to the Receiver or that he be held in contempt for not doing so. THE COURT: Okay. So let me just be clear, Mr. Guido, PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

19 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 because, again, there are several transactions that are referenced in your brief. And your position is is that he still has access to the cash because that part was not clear to me from your briefing. It's your position that, in fact, he either has access to this money or he has access to it through his wife or someone else such that it can be returned because there's a separate issue, Mr. Guido, if it's already been disposed of and the cash has been dissipated. That creates a separate potential proceeding in the context of contempt, but what you're saying to me today and I want to be clear about this and be clear from your briefing is, in fact, that he currently possesses access to cash and accounts that are not controlled by the Receiver. MR. GUIDO: That's correct, Your Honor. He and his wife transferred title to two pieces of property, but we've been able to ascertain and the documentation is before the Court -- THE COURT: I've seen that. MR. GUIDO: -- that at least $,000 was obtained from those sales. We believe that that $,000 should be transferred to the Receiver or he should be held in contempt. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: For doing so. Your Honor, this isn't, you know, a question of somebody being confused about a financial disclosure. This is a very specific violation that is clearly deliberate based on the facts before the Court that Mr. Rohner to get around the freeze order transferred his interest in a PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

20 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 property to his wife, who then attempted to sell that property and couldn't do so. And Mr. Rohner and his wife then signed a deed to that property to third parties, Your Honor, after the freeze order. Your Honor, those facts show a deliberate contempt of this Court's order. THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Guido. We have two separate issues. One is if there's a deliberate contempt, there's a separate proceeding for that as it relates to potentially a criminal contempt proceeding. Right? You understand that? MR. GUIDO: No, Your Honor. I'm not asking for criminal. THE COURT: No, I understand that, but within -- but then what's left for the Court is what to do about the transfer. If a transfer occurs, as it appears to have done, the issue that's left for me is whether or not he has the ability to either control the property or return the money because if he doesn't, there's not much I can do with a contempt order. So part of the reason why I want this statement is because I need to know whether or not he is saying that he has access to that or not and what evidence there is about the existence of this cash somewhere because without that, Mr. Guido, whether or not he transferred the property the question then becomes what do I do about the transfer if the transfer's already occurred in the context to third parties. And so that's my concern. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, can I address that? PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

21 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 THE COURT: Certainly. MR. GUIDO: And that is that he had that cash after the order was issued. There's no doubt about that based on the record that you have before you. What he's done with that he can then -- if you want to give him X number of days to provide that money or an explanation of -- that he doesn't have it and he can't comply, then I think that would be appropriate. But I believe that he should be directed to transfer that $,000 that he had in his possession at the time after the freeze orders went into effect. Now, if he wants to purge that in the seven-day time period you've given him, I think, you know, he can do that, but I don't think that in this case -- THE COURT: Mr. Guido, let me stop you for a minute. And just so we're clear. The Court's order with respect to the affidavit would include the disposition of any property and what happened to the assets. So my order to Mr. Rohner about what happened with the transfer and the cash that may have been obtained as a result of that would be included in that affidavit. Right. And so I don't know that I -- prior to receiving that affidavit as to how much cash was obtained, if any, and where that cash was placed or how it was spent, I don't know that I can act upon a request for the return of the cash until he tells me whether or not he still has it under oath. Once that occurs, then I think a decision can be made PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

22 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 about what to do with whatever assets remain or whatever property remains. What I'm saying to you is that without that statement or without specific information from you saying there is a bank account in ABC Bank that are the proceeds from that property that we want the Court to seize as a result of that, I'm not sure what I can do now until I receive his sworn statement in the context of the disposition of assets. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, may I? THE COURT: I'll give you a chance, Mr. Rohner. Just hold on a second. MR. GUIDO: Yeah. Your Honor, with regard to that, if that's the approach you're going to take, we would like to have permission to issue a subpoena to Mrs. Rohner for all of her bank accounts that she has in her name because it's possible that that's where that money ended up. THE COURT: Okay. So what we'll do -- Mr. Rohner, I will hear from you about this because -- MR. ROHNER: Yes. THE COURT: -- first of all, let me explain to you part of the reason why this is an issue, Mr. Rohner. If there is the co-mingling of funds that relate to these entities and what happened in the context of what the Court has already found, whether or not those accounts are in your wife's name does not necessarily prohibit the Court from freezing those assets so that they can be preserved for potential victims of the fraud in PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

23 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 this case. MR. ROHNER: Your Honor -- THE COURT: So that's part of the reason why we're having this discussion. MR. ROHNER: I never got any money from her house sale. THE COURT: That's -- the issue -- Mr. Rohner? Mr. Rohner, the issue is this. No, no. Don't hand me any documents. And just so you know, because you don't normally know this, if you're going to approach the bench, you usually have to have permission to do that. MR. ROHNER: All right, Your Honor. THE COURT: The issue -- MR. ROHNER: Can I -- can I read this? THE COURT: No, no, no. Mr. Rohner, I want us because we're not going to go back and forth about this because -- MR. ROHNER: I didn't spend a dime. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, please stop talking and I want you to listen to this very carefully. The issue is what happened to assets that you transferred. MR. ROHNER: Yes. THE COURT: What I want you to do rather than hand me documents is go through your records carefully. You have before you what the SEC says that you had and transferred. If you did not receive assets, if you didn't possess the assets, say that in your statement. I'm not requiring you here today to respond PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

24 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 to all of that. I have said, right, and I've said to the SEC that you have a week to be able to list the assets, what happened to the assets -- Mrs. Rohner, you're not actually going to be able to speak because you're not a party to this. I'm sorry. MRS. ROHNER: He's including me, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mrs. Rohner, I want to be as clear as I can be about this. MRS. ROHNER: All right. THE COURT: Because you have to listen to what the Court is telling you both because you both can be held in contempt and I don't want to do that. That's why I'm trying to be clear with you. If there are issues related to your wife's property, Mr. Rohner, that you want to distinguish and point out to the Court, your statement is an opportunity to be able to do that. If you have transferred property, however, to her during the course of this case, and that is beginning with the initial TRO, you must list that property and what happened to it. MR. ROHNER: And I have done that. THE COURT: If you had assets, accounts, business and personal accounts, that received any money or were in any way involved with the company and the business -- businesses that are the subject of the litigation, they must be listed in your affidavit. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

25 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Now, you may not have all of the information as to these -- the balances, and to the extent that Ms. McMinimee can provide that, if she has it, that's fine. To the extent that you have to do your best in terms of estimating it, that's fine. However, any accounts, whether your wife is on them or not, that were in any way involved with the business transactions in this case must be listed. Now, if you want to make an argument about why the major portion of those assets are not related to this case, you can explain that in the context of what amounts may have been placed in there and what the purposes of the accounts were if you want to do that. Now, you have filed separately some documents related to the release of assets. Right. You don't have to duplicate all of that information, but the purpose of the affidavit is to say specifically what assets you had. That would include accounts that are jointly in your name. That would include property that you possessed that you then transferred to your wife. That would include any assets that came into the organization from your wife or any assets that were, including cash or income, that were transferred to her over the course of this case beginning with the temporary freeze order. The temporary freeze order included your personal assets. If you transferred from those personal assets any assets, income, or PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

26 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 property, or any form of cash, you must list it. Okay? Now, again, Ms. McMinimee will help you in terms of some of this process, and that's why I asked you if you are able to do that. Now, what I'm going to do based upon what you're telling me, I think, is give you a little bit more time because I think that I want to make sure this is complete. I don't want us to be going back and forth. I don't want you to have to be handing me documents. I want you to do the best job you can this first time because that's really what the Court's going to look at. And understand that there is separate consequences for the improper transfer, but we first have to figure out whether or not there were -- there were any improper transfers in this case. Okay? I am going to, therefore, give you... MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, can I ask a clarification? THE COURT: Yes. MR. GUIDO: You keep talking about he has to report assets. The Court orders applied to those he had legal title to and beneficial ownership to. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: I think it's very important that Mr. Rohner understand that distinction. THE COURT: Okay. MR. ROHNER: Yeah. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

27 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 THE COURT: Well, let me first set a date, Mr. Guido, so that we can be clear about what it is that we're doing here. I'm going to give you, Mr. Rohner, until August th to file this statement. And Mr. Guido is correct. It is not simply assets. It is any assets you have beneficial interest in, which means that you have the legal right to either receive a benefit from them or a right to be able to control them in some way. So if you are part owner in a property, even if you are not a complete owner in property, but you have the ability to dispose of that portion of your interest in ownership, that would be a beneficial interest. If you have the right to any type of intellectual property that you can sell or dispose of, that would be property in which you would have a beneficial interest. Okay. So it's not simply real property like property you own or you -- a house you live in, but it's other property that you may also have an interest in that you can dispose of either by selling or transferring your interest in it to someone else or property in which you were to receive some benefit or dividend in. Okay? MR. ROHNER: Okay. THE COURT: All right. MR. ROHNER: My only question to that is that if she has life insurance and I'm the beneficiary, does that have to be listed? PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

28 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk THE COURT: Yes. MR. ROHNER: Even though it was before this whole thing? 0 0 THE COURT: Yes. The answer to that question is yes. MR. ROHNER: Okay. THE COURT: We don't want to -- Mr. Rohner, I'm not saying that all of that property will be subject to being frozen or seized. What I don't want to have happen and what Mr. Guido referred to are drips and drabs of information about assets. I want us to be able to clearly identify that so that that can be considered by the Court because you're asking me to make decisions about certain aspects of your assets and I can't do that without a full picture. MR. ROHNER: Well, Your Honor, I thought I had lost this property through a divorce years ago. I was as surprised as anyone else when this showed up in my mailbox, and I immediately sent it off to the Receiver. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, you don't have to explain to me now the different aspect -- MR. ROHNER: But I wouldn't have known this three weeks ago. THE COURT: Different aspects of different properties. I understand that. All I'm saying to you is to do your best job at this point to provide that detail by August th. And then, Ms. McMinimee, your follow-up report will be submitted by August PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

29 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 th to the Court. Okay. So I believe, Mr. Rohner and Mr. Guido, that would address this motion, at least in part, in terms of what we need or what the Court needs to make further determination because, Mr. Guido, I understand what your position is from the documents and affidavits you've submitted. I do want to give Mr. Rohner an opportunity to be able to respond in a clear way, which I am not sure has happened yet, as to what were the assets or beneficial interests at the time and what's happened to them. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, does that include the -- our request that he terminate all third-party rights to Inteligentry assets, IPO's that he reportedly transferred to other corporations? THE COURT: Does what -- I'm sorry. Does what include? MR. GUIDO: Does your order that you're going to wait for him to file something, does that apply to our request that he be required to terminate the transfer of the intellectual property, which he's admitted he's already done, to third parties so that we can avoid further fraud on innocent victims? THE COURT: Okay. So -- MR. ROHNER: Your Honor, may I ask a question? THE COURT: Sure. MR. ROHNER: Would you please have the SEC define the term "third parties?" Because right here are what he's calling third parties. These are the ex-investors that the SEC took PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

30 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 their money from, right here, and this is the ex-investors' company. And they're the ones that I gave -- that I told could keep the IP. THE COURT: Okay. Listen to me, Mr. Rohner. MR. ROHNER: The SEC is calling them third parties. THE COURT: They are third parties from a legal standpoint, and let me be as clear as I can be about this because I want you not to be held in contempt. You are not to dispose of and you don't have the right to dispose of any property going forward. MR. ROHNER: I haven't. THE COURT: You should not be disposing of property. You should not be telling people you have the right to dispose of property that is controlled by the Receiver or you have an interest in. If you do that, you are in contempt of this Court's order. Okay? You cannot transfer property. You cannot transfer assets. You cannot promise the transfer of assets. Right. You cannot promise that you will transfer ownership. Right. All of your assets and the assets of these companies are controlled by at the order of this Court the Receiver. And whether that relates to ex-investors or not, the Court is the ultimate arbiter of who receives what assets based upon what happened in this case. You don't get to individually decide that at this point anymore. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

31 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 So you should not be disposing of assets even if you think someone is legally entitled to that. That is something that will happen if that's correct over the course of this litigation, but you don't get to individually decide that. MR. ROHNER: Yes, Your Honor, but I have provided the Court with the fact that they do legally have the right to that -- THE COURT: They don't have the right to anything that you own until the Court decides -- MR. ROHNER: No, no. THE COURT: -- to transfer it. MR. ROHNER: This is on -- this is on their contract from the corporation when they first hired on. THE COURT: No, listen to me, Mr. Rohner. I want you to understand this. Right. The corporations' contracts are no longer your concern. The Receiver controls the corporations, all of them. You have no right, no authority, under the law or from this Court to make any decisions for those corporations. You have no right under the law or under the authority of this Court to dispose of any property within the possession of those corporations. MR. ROHNER: Yep. THE COURT: Okay? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: So don't refer to contracts that the PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

32 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 corporation has with these individuals. There will be an opportunity for these individuals to make a claim or to make a request for disbursement when this case has been fully litigated in terms of liability and who should be receiving some form of payment as a result of being victimized by fraud. That, however, is not your concern at this point. So you should not be referring to contracts that the corporation made as a basis for transferring property. Do you understand? MR. ROHNER: Your Honor, I didn't transfer anything to them that they don't have. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, Mr. Rohner, do you understand me? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: No transfers of property. No promises to transfer property. No promises to give anyone anything that the corporation has. Are we clear about that? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes, Mr. Guido. MR. GUIDO: I'd like to address the previous transfers to the intellectual property that Mr. Rohner just admitted that he made on behalf of the corporations, and I have two questions for the Court. One is, does the Receiver have the authority to notify those third parties that they are not entitled to use PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

33 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 those assets for their benefit or to dispose of those assets or to use those assets to raise funds from other parties because those are the assets of the entities that are controlled by the Receiver? THE COURT: The Receiver as receiver has the legal authority obviously to try to retain interest in whatever property may have been improperly transferred. I'm not going to direct her in terms of how she goes about making that determination. MR. GUIDO: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: I think Ms. McMinimee is well aware of the fact that if there are improper fraudulent transfers, the Receiver has the legal ability to be able to claw back or whatever the term would be those assets, but that's a separate process that they would have to go through. And the Receiver has to make a determination, Mr. Guido, quite frankly, whether or not it's worth it to do that for the value of the asset. MR. GUIDO: Yes, I understand that. THE COURT: Right. That is not something that I am going to do. That is the responsibility of the Receiver. So for now I'm not going to direct the Receiver to do anything other than what she understands her job to do -- to be, which is basically maintain those assets. That includes the legal ability, should she determine it, to obtain or to have returned property or assets that may have been improperly or fraudulently PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

34 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 transferred. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, now my second question is a clarification, Your Honor, is the initial TRO and the preliminary injunction ran against Mr. Rohner, the entities, and anyone who had knowledge of the freeze orders, Your Honor. The people that he is talking about knew about the freeze order. They knew about the preliminary injunction. Does the freeze order run against those third parties which he now claims were investors in the original entity -- MR. ROHNER: Claims? MR. GUIDO: Because I'd like to have clarification because we may seek relief against those third parties -- THE COURT: So, Mr. Guido, here's what I will tell you. I'm not going to make a blanket judgment that the individuals, whether they're in the courtroom or not, knew about and therefore participated implicitly or explicitly in an improper fraudulent transfer. Each individual, each entity, would have the right to be able to make an argument about that to this Court. The Receiver has been appointed to marshal assets and protect them. It is her job to do that. And until such time as I have information that indicates that for some reason that's not happening, I'm not going to give her specific direction about what to do about that. As I've already said, if she believes assets were improperly transferred, if someone accepted PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

35 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk assets improperly and fraudulently, the Receiver has the authority to do that, but she also has the authority and discretion, Mr. Guido, to decide whether or not that's something that she should do given the assets that are available and given the resources of the estate. MR. GUIDO: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: It is a separate issue, Mr. Guido, about improper transfer and whether or not people participated or not in a violation of the Court's order, but for the purposes of this litigation, what I am focussed on is maintaining these assets and trying to make sure that they are protected. So I'm not going to issue any advisory or blanket ruling about those transfers. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, but you're not changing the existing TRO or preliminary injunctions? THE COURT: I'm not changing anything in terms of that. MR. GUIDO: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: And I'm not changing the Receiver's authority. I've already outlined what that is in an order that's been filed by the Court. Mr. Rohner? MR. ROHNER: Could we please have your input as to whether or not the document we're talking about is or? It would seem to me that Document -- THE COURT: Which document? What are you talking PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

36 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk about? 0 0 MR. ROHNER: For the TRO. There are two documents. One was filed preliminarily, and then one was actually filed by the Court as the order of the Court. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, Mr. Rohner is incorrect. Exhibit -- Docket is the TRO. Docket is the preliminary injunction which incorporates all of the provisions of the TRO. THE COURT: So the -- MR. GUIDO: And Mr. Rohner signed the second document. THE COURT: Let me finish, Mr. Guido. MR. ROHNER: I was going to say -- THE COURT: So the answer to that question is both. They are both orders of the Court. They are both binding upon you. MR. ROHNER: They're different. THE COURT: They are -- they are complimentary, Mr. Rohner. They're not different. They both contain orders that you have to follow. So they're both orders of the Court, and you will comply with both of them when you prepare the affidavit. MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Okay. MR. ROHNER: Also, I'd like to mention that the SEC placed the value on the IP as zero in one of their documents. THE COURT: Okay. We're not going to get into that PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

37 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 right now. Okay? We're not going to have an argument about that. What I am going to do at this point in time is I'm going to defer ruling on the motion for contempt, which is Document No., until the Court has received the information that it has ordered to be provided by Mr. Rohner and then the subsequent report from the Receiver. At that point in time the Court will make a determination after receiving that information about how to proceed. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor? THE COURT: Mr. Guido. MR. GUIDO: There's the fourth point in the contempt, and that is Mr. Rohner's participation in the sale of stock through websites, through his participation in this third entity, Your Honor. And what we have asked for in our order that he be directed to take down any websites that are offering the sale of stock in violation of the TRO. There are a number of websites -- THE COURT: All right. Well, let me -- Mr. Guido, let's actually make this easy. Are you offering the sale of stock on any websites, Mr. Rohner? MR. ROHNER: Not that I know of, Your Honor. THE COURT: Not that you know of. Are you or aren't you? MR. ROHNER: No, I am not. PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

38 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 THE COURT: All right. So -- MR. ROHNER: What I have done is made the comment that the ex-investors, okay, formed their own corporation. That's all I've ever done. THE COURT: Okay. Well, I just want to be clear, Mr. Guido. I'm not going to give a specific ruling on this. I'm simply going to reiterate what I said previously which is that no assets should be transferred, no sale should occur, you should not engage in any financial transactions without the authority and permission of the Receiver. That would include -- include the transfer or sale of any stock of any corporation that previously or currently exists under your direction or ownership. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, the orders -- excuse me, Your Honor. THE COURT: Hold on a second. MR. GUIDO: I'm sorry. (Court conferring with courtroom deputy.) MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, the initial orders prohibited Mr. Rohner from participating in -- participating in the offer of sale of any securities. And is your order now -- what you just directed him to do modifying that order? THE COURT: No, and I'm not modifying the order. I think the order -- the order that I simply or the direction I gave is consistent, Mr. Guido, with what the order says. All PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

39 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 right. He should not be transferring or selling or offering for sale any type of stock or ownership in corporations at this point in time consistent with the Court's order. I'm not modifying the order. I think that's consistent with it. MR. ROHNER: Your Honor, Terry, the CEO of their plasmic transmission process company, is right here in case you would like to query him about my having anything to do with these companies. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner, I'm not going to query him about anything. Right. I've given -- he is not a party of this case. You are the one -- MR. ROHNER: Yes, Your Honor. He has to prove I did anything. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner? MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Stop interrupting me, please. MR. ROHNER: Yes, sir. THE COURT: You are the one who must comply with the Court's order. So that is what the Court's order will be that you will have your document filed by August th. MR. ROHNER: Right. THE COURT: The Receiver will file her report by August th. The Court will defer ruling and defers ruling on Docket No., motion for contempt, at this time. Is there anything else? Because I have a proceeding PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

40 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 that's going to start very shortly. Right now is there anything else that we need to address? MR. GUIDO: No, Your Honor, that was it with regard to the contempt motion. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Dzarnoski? MR. DZARNOSKI: Yes, Your Honor. I just wanted to give you a brief status update is that the Receiver has signed the consent judgment with the SEC that would fully and finally resolve all issues regarding the corporate entities. It is going up to the Security Exchange commissioners for final approval. Assuming that there is a final approval, that order would be presented to you for signature and my portion of these proceedings is done. And I would -- I understand the SEC's approval process could take several months. If you schedule further appearances as long as that settlement is moving forward, do I have to appear or can I no longer appear unless that settlement breaks down? THE COURT: That's fine. Mr. Dzarnoski, you're excused from further appearances unless there is a breakdown of settlement negotiations with SEC and the Receiver. MR. DZARNOSKI: Thank you, Your Honor. MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, that reminded me. It will probably take six weeks for the Commission to decide what its position is with regard to the consent that Mr. Dzarnoski refers PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

41 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk 0 0 to. It does leave open the issue of attorney's fees, and in the final judgment we put in a provision that nothing precludes him from filing his motion for fees. So that would be one other issue that will come before the Court. THE COURT: Oh, I anticipated that, but thank you, Mr. Guido. Is there anything else that we need to address today? Ms. McMinimee? MS. MCMINIMEE: No. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Guido? MR. GUIDO: Your Honor, are you going to schedule another status conference for the remaining issues? THE COURT: I am not going to schedule it now. I want to look at the material then decide how much time I need to review it, but I will schedule something after I receive the material. MR. GUIDO: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Dzarnoski? MR. DZARNOSKI: Nothing further. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Rohner? MR. ROHNER: Nothing further, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Then we are adjourned. I'm going to stay on the bench for the next matter. Thank you. (Whereupon proceedings concluded at :0 a.m.) PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

42 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk --ooo-- COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE I, PATRICIA L. GANCI, Official Court Reporter, United States District Court, District of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. Date: August, 0. 0 /s/ Patricia L. Ganci Patricia L. Ganci, RMR, CRR 0 PATRICIA L. GANCI, RMR, CRR (0) -00

43 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT B

44 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

45 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

46 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

47 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

48 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT C

49 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

50 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of

51 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT D

52 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

53 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

54 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT E

55 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

56 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

57 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

58 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT F

59 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

60 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page 0 of

61 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

62 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

63 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

64 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

65 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

66 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of EXHIBIT G

67 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

68 Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document Filed 0// Page of

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

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. v. : Case No. : CA018991XXXX MB. v. :Case No.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. v. : Case No. : CA018991XXXX MB. v. :Case No. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL Page 1 CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ----------------------------x WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, : Plaintiff, : v. : Case No. et al. :50 2010 CA018991XXXX

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FROM THE KORTE WARTMAN LAW FIRM. Page: 1 IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CA (AW)

FROM THE KORTE WARTMAN LAW FIRM. Page: 1 IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO CA (AW) FROM THE KORTE WARTMAN LAW FIRM Page: 1 IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 2009 CA 025833 (AW) DLJ MORTGAGE CAPITAL, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) )

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

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 2 CASE NO. 12-CV MGC. Plaintiff, June 11, vs.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 2 CASE NO. 12-CV MGC. Plaintiff, June 11, vs. Case 1:12-cv-21799-MGC Document 115 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2013 Page 1 of 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 2 CASE NO. 12-CV-21799-MGC 3 4 JERRY ROBIN REYES, 5 vs. Plaintiff,

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

CIRCUIT AND CHANCERY COURTS:

CIRCUIT AND CHANCERY COURTS: . CIRCUIT AND CHANCERY COURTS: Advice for Persons Who Want to Represent Themselves Read this booklet before completing any forms! Table of Contents INTRODUCTION... 1 THE PURPOSE OF THIS BOOKLET... 1 SHOULD

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: CACE

Page 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: CACE Page 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: CACE 09 001184 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, Plaintiff, -vs- MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION

More information

Case 2:11-cr KJM Document 142 Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. --o0o-- Plaintiff,

Case 2:11-cr KJM Document 142 Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. --o0o-- Plaintiff, Case :-cr-00-kjm Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA --o0o-- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, ) Case No. :-cr-00-kjm ) formerly :-mj-00-kjn ) )

More information

v. 18 Cr. 850 (ALC) New York, N.Y. November 29, :00 a.m. HON. ANDREW L. CARTER, JR., District Judge APPEARANCES

v. 18 Cr. 850 (ALC) New York, N.Y. November 29, :00 a.m. HON. ANDREW L. CARTER, JR., District Judge APPEARANCES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Cr. 0 (ALC) MICHAEL COHEN, Defendant. ------------------------------x Before: Plea

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

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

Case 1:06-cv RDB Document Filed 10/29/2007 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:06-cv RDB Document Filed 10/29/2007 Page 1 of 6 Case 1:06-cv-01389-RDB Document 193-2 Filed 10/29/2007 Page 1 of 6 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND 2 NORTHERN DIVISION 3 ALBERT SNYDER, Civil No. RDB-06-1389 4 Plaintiff Baltimore,

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

APPEARANCES 8 AND. t0 DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 215 WEST HIGH STREET 4 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: 6 JOSEPH KISOR 7 CHIEF DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

APPEARANCES 8 AND. t0 DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 215 WEST HIGH STREET 4 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: 6 JOSEPH KISOR 7 CHIEF DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY APPEARANCES 2 3 4 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: 5 6 JOSEPH KISOR 7 CHIEF DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 8 AND 9 BRIAN JOHNSON t0 DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 215 WEST HIGH STREET 12 LAWRENCEBURG, IN 47025 13 14

More information

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 3 DEPARTMENT CJC 48 HON. CHRISTOPHER K. LUI, JUDGE

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 3 DEPARTMENT CJC 48 HON. CHRISTOPHER K. LUI, JUDGE 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 3 DEPARTMENT CJC 48 HON. CHRISTOPHER K. LUI, JUDGE 4 5 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,) ) 6 PLAINTIFF,) VS. ) CASE NO.

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/17/2018 INDEX NO / :15 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 246 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/17/2018

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/17/2018 INDEX NO / :15 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 246 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/17/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - CIVIL TERM - PART: 23 -------------------------------------------------------X YOUSSOUF DEMBELE a/k/a MALAHA SALIK, -against- Plaintiff, ACTION

More information

Court Reporter: Felicia Rene Zabin, RPR, CCR 478 Federal Certified Realtime Reporter (702)

Court Reporter: Felicia Rene Zabin, RPR, CCR 478 Federal Certified Realtime Reporter (702) 0 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA THE HON. KENT J. DAWSON, JUDGE PRESIDING UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. CR-S-0--KJD(LRL) ) vs. ) ) IRWIN SCHIFF, CYNTHIA NEUN,

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

Case 2:03-cv DGC Document 141 Filed 01/04/2006 Page 1 of 32

Case 2:03-cv DGC Document 141 Filed 01/04/2006 Page 1 of 32 Exhibit A to the Motion to Exclude Testimony of Phillip Esplin Case 2:03-cv-02343-DGC Document 141 Filed 01/04/2006 Page 1 of 32 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 3 4 Cheryl Allred,

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.. IN RE:. Chapter 11. The SCO Group, Inc.,. et al.,.. Debtor(s).. Bankruptcy # (KG)...

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.. IN RE:. Chapter 11. The SCO Group, Inc.,. et al.,.. Debtor(s).. Bankruptcy # (KG)... UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. IN RE:. Chapter 11. The SCO Group, Inc.,. et al.,.. Debtor(s).. Bankruptcy #07-11337 (KG)... Wilmington, DE December 5, 2007 10:00 a.m. TRANSCRIPT OF

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

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

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

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA HEARING Monday, January 26, 2009

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA HEARING Monday, January 26, 2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, JAMES R. ROSENDALL, JR., HONORABLE AVERN COHN No. 09-20025 Defendant. / ARRAIGNMENT AND

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

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

CIRCUIT COURT BRANCH 4

CIRCUIT COURT BRANCH 4 PAGE 01 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN 2 CIRCUIT COURT BRANCH 4 WALWORTH COUNTY 3 4 STATE OF WISCONSIN ex. rei. et ai, 5 6 7 8 -vs- Plaintiffs, Case No. 09-CV-1346 10 9 William Chesen, et ai, 11 Defendants. 12 13

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

) ROSETTA STONE LTD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No ) VS. ) September 18, 2009 ) GOOGLE, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTIONS HEARING

) ROSETTA STONE LTD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No ) VS. ) September 18, 2009 ) GOOGLE, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) ) MOTIONS HEARING Rosetta Stone LTD v. Google Inc. Doc. Dockets.Justia.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ) ROSETTA STONE LTD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No. 0-

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION BASHE ABDI YOUSUF, et al.,. Civil Action No. :0cv0. Plaintiffs,.. vs.. Alexandria, Virginia. April, 00 MOHAMED ALI

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

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * No

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * No r' --5j- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * No. 06-53273 COMMONWEALTH

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRI EASTERN DISTRICT OF 9 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JOHN-F. MOULDS 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRI EASTERN DISTRICT OF 9 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JOHN-F. MOULDS 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ORIGINAIC---:F'-- I UNITED STATES DISTRI EASTERN DISTRICT OF JOHN B. CRUZ, et al., ) Case ) Plaintiffs, ) Sacramento, California ) Thursday, May, 1 vs. ) 11:00 A.M. ) COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al., ) Plaintiffs'

More information

Defense Motion for Mistrial

Defense Motion for Mistrial Defense Motion for Mistrial MR. RICHARD C. MOSTY: Your Honor, 11 could we take care of a housekeeping matter? 12 THE COURT: We sure can. Just a 13 moment. 14 All right. Ladies and gentlemen of 15 the jury,

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

1/2/ 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

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

No. 1:13-CV TPG

No. 1:13-CV TPG Exhibit 45 Page 1 TODD S. HYMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, -against- No. 1:13-CV-06326-TPG PREVEZON

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 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

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

APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER (FOR DEFENDANTS WHO MADE BOND) IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE COURT PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER (FOR DEFENDANTS WHO MADE BOND) IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE COURT PLEASE READ CAREFULLY APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER (FOR DEFENDANTS WHO MADE BOND IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE COURT PLEASE READ CAREFULLY YOU MUST DO EVERYTHING LISTED BELOW BEFORE THE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTED COUNSEL

More information

What were the final scores in your scenario for prosecution and defense? What side were you on? What primarily helped your win or lose?

What were the final scores in your scenario for prosecution and defense? What side were you on? What primarily helped your win or lose? Quiz name: Make Your Case Debrief Activity (1-27-2016) Date: 01/27/2016 Question with Most Correct Answers: #0 Total Questions: 8 Question with Fewest Correct Answers: #0 1. What were the final scores

More information

Case 3:18-cv M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084

Case 3:18-cv M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084 Case 3:18-cv-00186-M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,

More information

APPEAL A FORCIBLE DETAINER JUDGMENT

APPEAL A FORCIBLE DETAINER JUDGMENT MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE COURT How to APPEAL A FORCIBLE DETAINER JUDGMENT Justice Court in Maricopa County June 23, 2005 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED FORM (# MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE COURT Either party may appeal

More information

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE DAVIS MR JUSTICE CRANSTON. Between:

B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE DAVIS MR JUSTICE CRANSTON. Between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION DIVISIONAL COURT CO/3452/2007 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Thursday, 31 July 2014 B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE DAVIS MR JUSTICE CRANSTON

More information

>> ALL RISE. HEAR YE, HEAR YE, HEAR YE, SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. ALL WHO HAVE CAUSE TO PLEA, DRAW NEAR, YOU SHALL BE HEARD.

>> ALL RISE. HEAR YE, HEAR YE, HEAR YE, SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. ALL WHO HAVE CAUSE TO PLEA, DRAW NEAR, YOU SHALL BE HEARD. >> ALL RISE. HEAR YE, HEAR YE, HEAR YE, SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. ALL WHO HAVE CAUSE TO PLEA, DRAW NEAR, YOU SHALL BE HEARD. GOD SAVE THESE UNITED STATES, THE GREAT STATE OF FLORIDA,

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE XXXXXXXXXX JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR XXXXXXXXX COUNTY, FLORIDA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) /

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE XXXXXXXXXX JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR XXXXXXXXX COUNTY, FLORIDA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) / IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE XXXXXXXXXX JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR XXXXXXXXX COUNTY, FLORIDA XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Plaintiff, vs. JOHN XXXXXXXXXXXXX, et al., Defendant / Case No.: XXXXXX MOTION TO STRIKE

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

Scott A. Walter, 1/13/2010 Page: 1

Scott A. Walter, 1/13/2010 Page: 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 3 AT SEATTLE Scott A. Walter, 1/13/2010 Page: 1 Page 1 4 5 In Re: Case No. 07-13346-KAO 6 Steven C. Bateman and 7 Virginia T. Lee, 8 Debtors.

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

Exceptional Reporting Services, Inc. P.O. Box Corpus Christi, TX

Exceptional Reporting Services, Inc. P.O. Box Corpus Christi, TX UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CASE NO: :-CR-00-WCG-DEJ- ) Plaintiff, ) CRIMINAL ) vs. ) Green Bay, Wisconsin ) RONALD H. VAN

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

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 1:04-cv JJF Document Filed 03/19/2008 Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT A

Case 1:04-cv JJF Document Filed 03/19/2008 Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT A Case :0-cv-0-JJF Document - Filed 0//00 Page of EXHIBIT A Case :0-cv-0-JJF Document - Filed 0//00 Page of IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA BEFORE THE

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, ) ) No. CR 0-0

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/22/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 34 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/22/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/22/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 34 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/22/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/22/2016 12:04 PM INDEX NO. 159878/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 34 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/22/2016 1 Page 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------X

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