Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Johann]

My name is on the list of those being subpoenaed. Will I still not know what is in those documents, or what my identity on AT will  be used for?

[Artiste]

We now have a "confidentiality order" that covers documents requested that 3ABN feels are covered under some form of confidentiality. We will have documents from discover beginning
this next week relating to what was given by Blue Host. We will receive the "confidential" documents by May six. Then we have to compel the discovery of anything missing and I am sure there will be plenty.

Could someone please explain, in practical terms, what a "confidentiality order" means?

It appears that it means that Gailon will have access to certain "confidential" documents. Does it mean that he is bound to maintain the "confidentiality" of these documents and thus cannot share any of the contents?

Is there any way at all to get this information out to the "Stockholders in the Pews" if it is marked confidential?

(Since when were leaks absolutely preventable?)

[Ozzie]

My name is on the list of those being subpoenaed. Will I still not know what is in those documents, or what my identity on AT will  be used for?

I'd like to know what is in the documents too, and what my identity at AT is being used for, as I am also on the list of 'most wanted'.

[Artiste]

To get back to the lawsuit, Gailon made these comments in another thread:

I can tell you this, the civil enforcement action to enforce the subpoena against Remnant Publications has been drafted and is being served and filed with the US District Court in Michigan. 

Next comes the enforcement of the subpoena for the auditor in the Illinois district Court.

Then there will be a bunch of miscellaneous third party subpoenas that will need to be served and most likely enforced, one at a time.

Is there any further explanation of these processes, Gailon?

[Artiste]

In any event, I took it to mean that Danny was so busy trying to inure himself in various ways that he really didn't want to make provision for the "little guys". I think the judges concluded the same thing. And that is why they declared 3ABN a Shelton business [coming soon on a thread near you!!!].

Thank-you for your inquiry.

Respectfuly Submitted,

Gailon Arthur Joy

Since I don't have the opportunity to watch 3ABN anymore, I was wondering if the music recordings of Tommy Shelton are still being advertised for sale on their programming.

[guide4him]

Recently a few months ago there was a CD offered featuring Tommy Shelton and Donna Klein.

[Bob Pickle]

For the links below to work, go to http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/default.aspx and click "Civil, Family & Probate Case Records." Then do a search by "Party" rather than "Case." Put in Hayes as a last name and Jerrie as a first name, and then click search. The links below should then work, or you can use the links on the resulting search results page.
___________________________

Had a status conference today.

Not sure what it is with Jerrie Hayes, but it seems she likes to make derogatory comments about us being pro se litigants every chance she gets. She did it again today.

Not sure why. She was pro se in her divorce case and in a suit against her by Washington University. For the case against her by Riverview Associates it doesn't say whether she was represented by counsel or not.

Of course, maybe since she is a lawyer she can go pro se without other lawyers looking down on her, a privilege I can't claim. Think that's it?

[Snoopy]

Bob, I can't get the links to work.  Is it just me?

Had a status conference today.

Not sure what it is with Jerrie Hayes, but it seems she likes to make derogatory comments about us being pro se litigants every chance she gets. She did it again today.

Not sure why. She was pro se in her divorce case and in a suit against her by Washington University. For the case against her by Riverview Associates it doesn't say where she was represented by counsel or not.

Of course, maybe since she is a lawyer she can go pro se without other lawyers looking down on her, a privilege I can't claim. Think that's it?

[Bob Pickle]

For the links above to work, go to http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/default.aspx and click "Civil, Family & Probate Case Records." Then do a search by "Party" rather than "Case." Put in Hayes as a last name and Jerrie as a first name, and then click search. The links above should then work, or you can use the links on the resulting search results page.

[Ozzie]

For the links above to work, go to http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/default.aspx and click "Civil, Family & Probate Case Records." Then do a search by "Party" rather than "Case." Put in Hayes as a last name and Jerrie as a first name, and then click search. The links above should then work, or you can use the links on the resulting search results page.

Seems like she believes in one rule for herself and another rule for others! But then Bob, I doubt that she would put you on a par with herself?

[Cindy]

...
Had a status conference today.

Not sure what it is with Jerrie Hayes, but it seems she likes to make derogatory comments about us being pro se litigants every chance she gets. She did it again today.

Not sure why. She was pro se in her divorce case and in a suit against her by Washington University. For the case against her by Riverview Associates it doesn't say whether she was represented by counsel or not.

Of course, maybe since she is a lawyer she can go pro se without other lawyers looking down on her, a privilege I can't claim. Think that's it?

as it looks like she did a good job in the cases, but I am thinking that most of you (unless you, yourself are one who likes making derogatory comments and want to join Mr Pickle in taking potshots at Jerrie Hayes) would rather hear about what happened at the status conference since that was brought up...

Status Conference held on 5/7/2008
Case Called,
Counsel and defendants pro-se appear for status conference,
Parties inform the Court of the status of discovery,
Both plaintiffs and defendants anticipate issues with discovery that will need court intervention,
Court informs parties to file motions to seek relief,
Court extends the time to serve production of document requests to 6/11/08,
Court sets a further status conference, ( 7/31/2008 at 2:00PM)

Source: Docket Text: Electronic Clerk's Notes for proceedings held before Judge F. Dennis Saylor, IV

There is also a hearing today at 3pm EST in Mr Joy's adversarial proceedings case.


edit- corrected typo

[Bob Pickle]

And where did I take potshots?

By the way, do you have any idea whether Jerrie Hayes lied to Magistrate Judge Hillman on March 7, 2008, about the IRS criminal investigation, or whether 3ABN or Danny lied to her? She told him there wasn't any IRS criminal investigation going on, and two days later Greg Thompson posted on BlackSDA that the IRS investigator was out on maternity leave. I can see only two possibilities, that Jerrie lied or that she was lied to. Which is it?

[Cindy]

And where did I take potshots?

By the way, do you have any idea whether Jerrie Hayes lied to Magistrate Judge Hillman on March 7, 2008, about the IRS criminal investigation, or whether 3ABN or Danny lied to her? She told him there wasn't any IRS criminal investigation going on, and two days later Greg Thompson posted on BlackSDA that the IRS investigator was out on maternity leave. I can see only two possibilities, that Jerrie lied or that she was lied to. Which is it?

Folks,

Lying to the court or in court is a serious accusation, and charge. One that courts do not take lightly especially when it concerns attorneys. Nor does the Bar. This is a question better posed to JH, and a charge better made in court. Accusations of illegal, immoral or unethical acts etc, esp those without merit, and made to other parties can and do constitute defamation per se...

In any case this has been asked by Mr Pickle previously and was also answered previously on these forums, as so much has been to no avail...

This case has been held up even more by the investigating agent going on maternity leave. (FHB was correct when he made that statement)

How come Attorney Jerrie Hayes told the magistrate judge on Friday, March 7, 2008, that there was no criminal investigation going on? Was she fibbing to the court, or had she been fibbed to?

Better yet, how long have you known about the investigation, and about the maternity leave?

Because she was referring to the fact it's been put on hold, due to the maternity leave in question, and you are again twisting and reinterpreting what was said, to make an accusation?

[Bob Pickle]

But she didn't tell the magistrate that it had been put on hold. She told the magistrate that there was no IRS criminal investigation going on. So I ask again: Who lied?

And no, I did not accuse her of lying. I have tried to give her the benefit of the doubt as much as possible. I am allowing for the possibility that she unknowingly passed on the falsehood that she had been told.

[Bob Pickle]

But my question is a lose-lose situation for 3ABN/Danny. It either demonstrates that a ministry that claims to be a supporting ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and to promote the 10 Commandments hired an attorney who lied to a magistrate, or that a spokesman for that ministry or Danny lied to the attorney that they had hired. That's a lose-lose situation.