IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Similar documents
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT S MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISMISSAL REGARDING PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CV

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) Case No.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:16-bk VK Doc 201 Filed 09/17/18 Entered 09/17/18 15:28:13 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 33

Statement of the Case 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

RULE 3. [Reserved] CHAPTER III. PETITION PRACTICE AND PLEADING

**************************************** I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY.

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 January 2011

12PREM;^O ^, Q^0 APR CLERK OFCOURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

WYOMING RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR CIRCUIT COURTS

The Motion asks the Court to do something in a case that already exists.

GREATER ATLANTIC LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Case KRH Doc 1 Filed 06/22/16 Entered 06/22/16 16:42:55 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case Doc 554 Filed 08/07/15 Entered 08/07/15 18:36:50 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 15

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH, TEXAS

31-3: Rewritten and renumbered as G.S to by Session Laws 1953, c. 1098, s. 2.

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 29 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8

SECURITY AGREEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT OF ACCOUNT

Case KRH Doc 1 Filed 06/22/16 Entered 06/22/16 17:28:53 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

Case bjh Doc 22 Filed 12/30/11 Entered 12/30/11 19:33:15 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 70

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2014 PAULETTE WILLIAMS. CARRIE M. WARD, et al. SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 7 April 2015

DISTRICT COURT, FAMILY DIVISION CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

SUMMARY OF CONTENTS SC-1.

Defective order of registration; "same" for "this instrument".

ZiIII SEP 22 P 2: 4S STATE OF COUNTY OF BONNIER FIRST JUDICIAL DIST.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

GREATER ATLANTIC LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:08-cv DC Document 61 Filed 10/21/2008 Page 1 of 3

APPENDIX I SAMPLE INTERROGATORIES

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

Case 3:11-cv BRW Document 1 Filed 10/03/11 Page 1 of 12 FILED

Case 8:07-cv SDM-TGW Document 102 Filed 09/03/08 Page 1 of 11 PageID 1794 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 2:09-cv VBF-FFM Document 24 Filed 09/30/2009 Page 1 of 13

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/26/ :25 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/26/2016

being preempted by the court's criminal calendar.

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/14/ :34 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 10 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/14/2016

Case pwb Doc 1097 Filed 11/26/14 Entered 11/26/14 10:26:12 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

Case 1:13-cv PAB-KMT Document 98 Filed 01/20/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 19

smb Doc 117 Filed 09/28/17 Entered 09/28/17 17:00:54 Main Document Pg 1 of 3

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County. Cause No. PB

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI. SAMUEL M. BROTHERS and LORA BROTHERS

LOCAL RULES. Tenth Judicial District - Osage County Oklahoma. Effective July 1, 2012

GUIDELINES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF BAIL AND BONDS IN THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT IN AND FOR BANNOCK COUNTY

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Case: 4:15-cv RWS Doc. #: 21 Filed: 04/27/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 129

2:16-ap Doc#: 1 Filed: 10/06/16 Entered: 10/06/16 16:16:02 Page 1 of 17

CIVIL SUMMONS TO:, Defendant 1 ADDRESS:

Case 2:16-cv JNP Document 179 Filed 03/05/19 Page 1 of 8

Notice of Unlawful Contempt Process; and, Verified Motion to Dismiss the Same

Case 1:15-cv JMS-MJD Document 177 Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 891

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/03/ :03 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/03/2017

NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE. The New Hampshire Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Rules

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CHAPTER 4 CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE

ELECTRONICALLY Fl LED 2015 Nov 13 PM 2:45 CLERK OF THE APPELLATE COURT CASE NUMBER:

Case 2:14-cv GW-AS Document 6 Filed 07/07/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:389

HEADNOTE: Thomas G. Hicks v. Cindy Gilbert, et al., No. 2841, September Term 1999.

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

Case 9:14-cv DMM Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/17/2014 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Supreme Court of Ohio Clerk of Court - Filed March 16, Case No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 2015

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE June 10, 2013 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE JUSTICE COURT OF AUSTIN TOWNSHIP COUNTY OF LANDER, STATE OF NEVADA RUBEN GALLEGOS VIRGINIA (SISSIE) GALLEGOS, MICHAEL MARKING

THIS INSTRUMENT IS BEING RECORDED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ. NO RECORDING FEE IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION MEMORANDUM

GREATER ATLANTIC LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHISN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Attachment 14 to Form AT-105

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT CA **********

Transcription:

STATE OF IDAHO County of KOOTENAI ss FILED AT O'Clock M CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Deputy IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI GENE HYATT, successor trustee of the HYATT REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, vs. Plaintiff, JOHN W. HYATT, and SHIRLEY M. HYATT, individually and as a marital community, REBEKAH A. HYATT and JOHN DOE HYATT, individually and as a marital community, JOHN W. HYATT as the trustee of record for CHURCH ROAD TRUST and BOB DOE and MARY DOE. Defendants. Case No. CV 2010 6541 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS: 1 Plaintiff s Motion for Judicial Notice of Facts and Records, 2 Plaintiff s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 and 3 Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff s Motion for Judicial Notice of Facts and Records, Plaintiff s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 and Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss. All these motions were filed by plaintiff on November 5, 2010. None of the defendants filed any written response to any of these three motions. Oral argument on the motions was held on January 12, 2011. Plaintiff was represented by Theron DeSmet, attorney at law. Defendant John W. Hyatt, defendant Shirley M. Hyatt and defendant Rebekah A. Hyatt each appeared pro se. No one appeared to represent defendant Church Road Trust. John W. Hyatt cannot represent anyone other than himself pro se. The Idaho Supreme Court has MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 1

stated: We recognize the inherent right of a natural person to represent himself Pro Se, but this right does not extend to representation of other persons or corporations. Weston v. Gritman Memorial Hospital, 99 Idaho 717, 720, 587 P.2d 1252, 1255 (1978. In Indian Springs LLC v. Indian Springs Land Inv., LLC, 147 Idaho 737, 215 P.3d 457 (2009, the Idaho Supreme Court discussed its holdings in two previous cases. In White v. Idaho Forest Indus., 98 Idaho 784, 572 P.2d 887 (1977 and Kyle v. Beco Corp., 109 Idaho 267, 707 P.2d 378 (1985, the Court adopted the rule that business entities must be represented by attorneys before the Idaho Industrial Commission; the rule applies equally to the practice of law before any judicial body. Indian Springs, 147 Idaho 737, 744-45, 215 P.3d 457, 464-65. In sum, the law in Idaho is that a business entity, such as a corporation, limited liability company, or partnership, must be represented by a licensed attorney before an administrative body or a judicial body. Id. In Indian Springs, LLC, the Idaho Supreme Court specifically noted that although individuals are permitted to represent their property interest in a pro se capacity, trustees may not do so. 147 Idaho 737,745, 215 P.3d 457, 465. It is fairly wellestablished that a trustee s duties in connection with his or her office do not include the right to present an argument pro se in the courts. Id. John W. Hyatt may represent his individual interests, but cannot represent Church Road Trust in any capacity. The Court will briefly discuss the two cases which have now been consolidated. The Court will discuss the two cases in the order in which they were filed. All three pending motions are filed in Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 6541. A. Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 6541. On July 30, 2010, judgment creditor Gene Hyatt, successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust, against judgment debtor, John W. Hyatt, filed an Affidavit MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 2

Regarding Filing a Foreign Judgment in Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 6541, the case assigned to the undersigned, Judge John Mitchell. That Affidavit of Michael Ramsden, attorney for Gene Hyatt, successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust, attached the April 29, 2010, California Superior Court in Los Angeles judgment (Order on Probate Code 850 Petition for Return of Trust Property and Damages Filed by Gene Hyatt requiring defendant John W. Hyatt to pay $555,000.00 to Gene Hyatt as the successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust. The purpose of the Affidavit Regarding Filing a Foreign Judgment was to satisfy the requirements of Idaho Code 10-1303 and for filing a foreign judgment in this matter. Affidavit Regarding Filing a Foreign Judgment, p. 2, 6. A Notice of Filing of Foreign Judgment was filed on July 30, 2010, as well. A Writ of Execution was issued and filed on August 12, 2010. On August 23, 2010, John Walter Hyatt Sui Juris and True Appointed Trustee John Walter Hyatt filed a Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt. On September 16, 2010, Gene Hyatt, successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust filed Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment, and an Affidavit of Michael E. Ramsden in Support of Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment. On September 23, 2010, this Court issued its Memorandum Decision and Order on: Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Heiang Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt. That decision, in its entirety reads: I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND. This matter is before the Court on the Counter-claim and Demand MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 3

for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, filed August 23, 2010, and Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment filed on September 16, 2010. Neither party has noticed their motions for a hearing. On July 30, 2010, plaintiffs filed their Notice of Filing Foreign Judgment. The foreign judgment is dated April 29, 2010, is from California Superior Court of Los Angeles, and is in the amount of $555,000.00 in favor of Gene Hyatt as successor trustee on behalf of the (plaintiff herein Hyatt Revocable Living trust, and is against defendant John Walter Hyatt (defendant herein. On August 23, 2010, defendant John Walter Hyatt pro se filed his the Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, in response to plaintiff s Notice of Filing Foreign Judgment. On September 16, 2010, plaintiffs filed Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment, and Affidavit of Michael E. Ramsden in Support of Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment. II. ANALYSIS. In defendant John Walter Hyatt s pro se Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, John Walter Hyatt recognizes that this Court has jurisdiction over both parties (Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, p. 2, 2, and John Walter Hyatt makes various complaints about his family s dynamics (Id., pp. 2-4, 1-11, and makes various allegations about improprieties in the California proceeding (Id., pp. 4-6, 12-20. John Walter Hyatt demands a SHOW CAUSE HEARING (Id., p. 7, but has failed to notice such up for a hearing. John Walter Hyatt sets forth his versions of the authority for jurisdiction and remedies this Court possesses. Id., pp. 8-9. However, John Walter Hyatt fails to cite I.C. 10-2304, and he fails realize that the only vehicle available to this Court for a stay of execution is I.C. 10-2304. Under that statute, the only means for this Court to grant a stay is if the judgment debtor shows the district court that an appeal from the foreign judgment is pending or will be taken, or that a stay of execution has been granted John Walter Hyatt has alleged none of these things in his Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt. Additionally, plaintiffs are correct that: John Walter Hyatt s arguments are barred by res judicata (Plaintiff s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant s Motion for Invalidity, Injunctive Relief and Stay of Execution on Foreign Judgment, pp. 4-5; John Walter Hyatt has not been deprived due process (Id., pp. 5-6; John Walter Hyatt s pleading in this Idaho case is an unlawful collateral attack on the California MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 4

proceeding and judgment (Id., pp. 6-7; that John Walter Hyatt cannot assert a claim on behalf of others (Id., pp. 7-8 and that John Walter Hyatt has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Id., p. 7. III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER. For the reasons stated above, Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt must be denied. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THE Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt is hereby DENIED. Memorandum Decision and Order on: Counter-claim and Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, pp. 1-3. On October 19, 2010, John Walter Hyatt Sui Juris and True Appointed Trustee John Walter Hyatt filed a plethora of other filings were made which do not comport with the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure. All of these pleadings are signed by John Walter Hyatt. It is in this case in which all three motions are pending. On December 28, 2010, the undersigned, who was at all times assigned to Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 6541, signed an order consolidating Judge Simpson s case (Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 8180 into CV 2010 6541. B. Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 8180. On September 22, 2010, plaintiff Gene Hyatt, successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust, filed the Complaint in CV 2010 8180, the case assigned to Judge Benjamin Simpson. That Complaint alleged that defendant John W. Hyatt is a trustee of the defendant Church Road Trust, which owns four parcels of real property located in Kootenai County, Idaho. Complaint, p. 2. Shirley Hyatt is alleged to be John W. Hyatt s wife, and Rebekah A. Hyatt is their daughter and is also alleged to own these four parcels. Id., pp. 2, 4. The Complaint alleges that on April 29, 2010, California Superior Court in Los Angeles entered a Judgment requiring defendant John W. Hyatt MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 5

to pay $555,000.00 to Gene Hyatt as the successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust and return various specific property of Dorothy Hyatt. Id., p. 3. Defendant John W. Hyatt neither paid the Judgment nor did he return the property. Id. Plaintiff alleges the California Judgment establishes that defendants John W. Hyatt and Shirley Hyatt, in bad faith, intentionally and wrongfully stole Trust Assets from the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust and/or Dorothy Hyatt, and then John W. Hyatt and Shirley Hyatt used the stolen Trust Assets to acquire the Kootenai County real property. Id. Plaintiff Gene Hyatt, successor trustee of the Hyatt Revocable Living Trust then domesticated the Judgment and recorded it in the Records of Kootenai County so that it is a lien on defendant John W. Hyatt s real property in Kootenai County. Id. Plaintiff claims John W. Hyatt and Shirley Hyatt owned these parcels as one single parcel, then deeded the parcel to John W. Hyatt as trustee for the Church Road Trust, and then John W. Hyatt as trustee for the Church Road Trust divided the parcel into four parcels, and then on September 9, 2009, John W. Hyatt as trustee for the Church Road Trust conveyed the four parcels to his daughter Rebekah Hyatt. Plaintiff gave notice to defendants of a lis pendens action and sues defendants on theories of fraudulent conveyance, unjust enrichment, and conversion. Id., pp. 5-7. Plaintiff seeks an order requiring the parcels be reconveyed to John W. Hyatt and then executed upon to satisfy the California Judgment. Id., pp. 7-8. In the case originally before District Judge Ben Simpson, on October 21, 2010, John Walter Hyatt, Shirley Michelle Hyatt and Rebekah Ann Hyatt filed an Answer, Counterclaim, Demand for Emergency Injunctive Relief and Demand for Show Cause Hearing Presented by Affidavit of John Walter Hyatt, Shirley Michelle Hyatt and Rebekah Ann Hyatt. Only John W. Hyatt signed that pleading, and as discussed above, he cannot represent his wife or his daughter. The Answer primarily MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 6

claims there was a fraud upon the California court. Also on October 21, 2010, a plethora of other filings were made which do not comport with the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure. On December 28, 2010, upon plaintiff s motion, Judge Simpson struck those pleadings and two others that were filed after October 21, 2010. Also, on December 28, 2010, the undersigned, who was at all times assigned to Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 6541, signed an order consolidating Judge Simpson s case (Kootenai County Case No. CV 2010 8180 into CV 2010 6541. II. ANALYSIS A. Plaintiff s Motion for Judicial Notice of Facts and Records. Plaintiff simply requests this Court take judicial notice of Kootenai County Civil Case No. CV 2010 8180, and its contents, a case previously assigned to District Judge Ben Simpson. On December 28, 2010, this Court consolidated that case into this case, CV 2010 6541. Not only is such motion appropriate, granting such motion is mandatory under Idaho Rule of Evidence 201(d. The Court GRANTED Plaintiff s Motion for Judicial Notice of Facts and Records at oral argument. B. Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff moves to strike seventeen different pleadings filed in this case by defendant John W. Hyatt, up to this point in time. All of these pleadings were filed on October 19, 2010, and all are similar to the numerous pleadings filed in the case assigned to Judge Simpson, which were filed in that case two days later, on October 21, 2010. John W. Hyatt is the only signatory on these pleadings filed in CV 2010 6541. The Court has reviewed these pleadings and finds that they are appropriate to being stricken under I.R.C.P. 12(f and 12(b. The Court finds such documents to be not only an attempt at harassment, but are in fact harassment. John W. Hyatt alleges felony MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 7

crimes have been committed by a wide variety of people, including those attorneys presently representing the plaintiff in this Idaho action, which in Kootenai Case No. CV 2010 6541 (the case in which the motion to strike is pending before this Court is simply an action to register a foreign judgment. John W. Hyatt provides no substance for those claims. John W. Hyatt s pleadings are a sham. The pleadings are not in accordance with the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure. None on the petitions, request for judicial notice or motions have been noticed up for hearing, so defendant John W. Hyatt has filed these documents yet not requested this Court to even take action upon these pleadings, further illustrating the harassing nature of these pleadings. Finally, on December 28, 2010, District Court Judge Simpson granted a similar motion to strike similar pleadings in CV 2010 8180. No cogent argument as to why these pleadings should not be stricken was given by any of the three individual defendants at the January 12, 2011, oral argument. The Court took this motion under advisement at the conclusion of oral argument on January 12, 2011. Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. All seventeen pleadings listed in Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss, pp. 1-2, are stricken. C. Plaintiff s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11. Plaintiff requests attorney fees pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11(a(1, based upon plaintiff needing to bring the above two motions to defend against John W. Hyatt s pleadings that the Court has now stricken. The Court has reviewed the Affidavit of Theron DeSmet in Support of Plaintiff s Memorandum of Fees Awarded for Plaintiff s Motion to Strike and or Dismiss Pleadings, and finds the amount of attorney fees sought to be proper and in accordance with I.R.C.P. 54, and the Court finds no reason to depart MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 8

upward or downward under consideration of all factors in I.R.C.P. 54(e(3(A-(L. Accordingly, attorney fees in the amount requested are awarded. No cogent argument was made at oral argument by any of the defendants on this motion. At the conclusion of oral argument, this Court took this motion under advisement. Plaintiff s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 is GRANTED as against John W. Hyatt only (as he is the only signatory on these pleadings. An Order in the appropriate form for this motion has been presented by counsel for plaintiff and will be signed by the Court. III. ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Plaintiff s Motion for Judicial Notice of Facts and Records is GRANTED, as stated at oral argument. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff s Motion to Strike Pleadings/Filings and/or Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs and Sanctions Pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 is GRANTED, as against John W. Hyatt only, and a separate Order has been signed. Entered this 14 th day of January, 2011. John T. Mitchell, District Judge Certificate of Service I certify that on the day of January, 2011, a true copy of the foregoing was mailed postage prepaid or was sent by interoffice mail or facsimile to each of the following: Lawyer Fax # Pro se Michael E. Ramsden Theron DeSmet 664-5884 John Walter Hyatt 11341 N. Church Road Rathdrum, ID 83858 Rebekah Ann Hyatt 11341 N. Church Road Rathdrum, ID 83858 Michelle Hyatt 11341 N. Church Road MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 9

Rathdrum, ID 83858 Jeanne Clausen, Deputy Clerk MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTIONS Page 10