IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA"

Transcription

1 0 0 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA FORSYTH COUNTY BOARD of ETHICS, ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) CASE NO: 0CV-00 ) TERENCE SWEENEY, ) Defendant. ) MOTION FOR COMPLAINT HEARD BEFORE HONORABLE ROBERT B. STRUBLE, JUDGE ON APRIL, 0 APPEARANCES: EDWARD L. BUTLER, IV, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY AT LAW FOR THE PLAINTIFF TERENCE SWEENEY PRO SE FOR THE DEFENDANT MELISSA J. LEE, CCR APPALACHIAN COURT REPORTING POST OFFICE BOX BLAIRSVILLE, GA 0 (0) - INDEX TO PROCEEDINGS

2 0 0 TESTIMONY BOB CHARLES Direct Examination by Mr. Butler 0 Cross-Examination by Mr. Sweeney TERENCE SWEENEY Cross-Examination by Mr. Butler -Exhibits Identified Appears Plaintiff's Exhibit P R O C E E D I N G S PAGE

3 0 0 THE COURT: This is a case brought by the Forsyth County Board of Ethics and, therefore, they have the right to proceed first in the scheme of things. And I would expect to hear -- if you would like to make an opening statement -- would either one of you like to make an opening statement? I've read all of the pleadings two or three times. I've got eight pages of notes, by the way. MR. BUTLER: I'm sure. Judge, if I could, just try to make a brief clarification. I think the substantive issue before the Court today is Mr. Sweeney's complaints against the individual board members. The Board filed a declaratory judgment styled, Board of Ethics versus Mr. Sweeney in order to get guidance on who was going to hear Mr. Sweeney's complaints. And your ruling was that this Court would hear the complaints. THE COURT: Right. MR. BUTLER: So, with that being said, procedurally, I would say it is Mr. Sweeney's complaints against the individual board members and that Mr. Sweeney should probably go first and act as plaintiff procedurally speaking. But that's just an option, Judge. We will proceed however the Court directs us. But, procedurally, it is a little tricky because it is the Board of Ethics bringing the declaratory judgment to figure out who would hear Mr. Sweeney's complaints, and however you direct us

4 0 0 to proceed, Judge, we will. THE COURT: What do you say, Mr. Sweeney? MR. SWEENEY: Can I think about that for one second, Judge? THE COURT: Sure. MR. SWEENEY: The one issue that I'm having is the -- Mr. Butler is the hearing officer for the Board of Ethics and -- THE COURT: The hearing officer? He's the attorney for them, not the hearing officer. MR. SWEENEY: Well, the problem is is that Mr. Butler could possibly be called as a witness. THE COURT: Well, we will deal with that, if that occurs. MR. SWEENEY: Okay. And I don't have a problem with their opening statement. This way, I could follow up on what they say. THE COURT: All right. So you understand you go first? MR. SWEENEY: Well, I would like to go second, if that's okay. THE COURT: All right. We will do that. That will be fine. We will let you go second. Okay. You can have a seat. I have been doing this for -- this in my th year

5 0 0 to be a lawyer and my 0th year to be a superior court judge. And I require respect for each other, and that's what we will have. But as far as formality, I'm not much for formality. I remember I had a big big case in Heard County and two law firms in Atlanta were involved on both sides and we had a big pretrial in Al Goldstein's law firm's office in Atlanta. And when it was all over, one of the lawyers said, Judge, you know, everybody has their idiosyncrasies. Can you tell us what yours are? And I said, the only one I know is I don't like noise. And if there's any shouting or yelling or carrying on, I quit listening. But other than that, I believe everybody has a right to be heard and I will certainly hear from everyone. Now, Mr. Sweeney, I understand you're not a member of the bar. The way the case will proceed, of course, is that the Forsyth County Board of Ethics will present their case. They will call witnesses. The witnesses will be sworn to tell the truth. They will take the witness stand. Mr. Butler will ask them questions and then you have the right to ask them questions after Mr. Butler is finished. And then if he asks more, you have a right to ask more. It's not the purpose when you examine witnesses for you to testify or for you to make statements. The purpose of the witness, for your examination of the

6 0 0 witness, is to ask them questions so I can get the information from them. After Mr. Butler and the Board has completed their presentation of evidence, then you will have the right, if you so desire, to take the witness stand, be put under oath, and say anything to me you want to say. And then Mr. Butler will have a right to ask you questions. And, of course, you can call witnesses as well, and these witnesses will be put under oath and we will follow the same procedure. Any witnesses that you call, you have the right to ask them questions first, and then Mr. Butler will have the right to ask them question next. Again, when you ask questions, it's not the time for you to make statements. You will have the opportunity, I promise that, to say whatever you want to say. All right. Do we have any other questions? Anybody want sequestration of the witnesses? MR. BUTLER: Judge, if I could clarify one other issue, and I know you're not going to be overly formal with the procedure and I'm fine with that. But since, I guess, the substance is the Sweeney complaint against the board members, Mr. Robert Charles is here. He is the current chair of the Board and, technically, he's representing himself today, Judge. I'm not acting as his attorney. I'm the attorney for the Board of Ethics, so I

7 0 0 wanted to clarify that, Judge. And, Mr. Turner is here. He was an alternate member for some hearings that took place this past summer. I had recused from those hearings, so I don't know much about them. He has a doctor's appointment. He showed up. He's filed his answer, Judge, and he just basically wants to rest on the pleadings. He wanted to come in but then he's going to have to leave for a pre-scheduled doctor's appointment. So when it comes to, I guess, my responsibility, I don't think I should be, I guess, questioning Mr. Charles as I'm not his attorney. But I will follow the Court's guidance on how you want us to proceed, Judge. THE COURT: I would ask that you question him based upon the fact that it's easier for me to get the facts when someone asks the questions and I listen to the answers. How about the sequestration of witness, does either side desire that? MR. BUTLER: Yes. We well invoke the rule of sequestration, Judge. THE COURT: All right. Well, that requires that all the witnesses who are to be called to testify will have to remain outside the hearing room or the courtroom until such time as they are called to testify. And that the rule of sequestration requires that once a witness has

8 0 0 testified, that witness cannot discuss their testimony with any other witness. Do you have any witnesses, Mr. Sweeney? MR. SWEENEY: No, sir. THE COURT: You don't either? MR. BUTLER: No, Judge. Both of these are respondents so they have a right to be in here. We don't have any witnesses other than the parties, Judge. THE COURT: Okay. Why don't you proceed. MR. BUTLER: All right. Judge, just in way of opening, briefly, as to outline for the Court what I think the pertinent issues are in the complaint is about Board of Ethics meetings that were held, I guess, not on a date or time as outlined in the previous ordinance or not at a location as outlined in the previous ordinance. However, they were published and the public attended and they were open meetings, Judge. I think the evidence you're going to hear is going to show that the previous ordinance was impossible to follow for the Board to conduct their business. So they did what they had to do, and the ordinance has since been modified to fix that issue, Judge. So I think those are the issues that are before the Court and those would be the issues I would ask the Court to pay attention to. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Sweeney, do you desire

9 0 to make an opening statement? MR. SWEENEY: Yes, Judge. The chairman -- let me just ask one other question to you, Judge. THE COURT: Sure. MR. SWEENEY: Since I thought I wasn't going to be calling any witnesses, would I be able to call Mr. Charles as a witness at this time? THE COURT: Yeah, but probably he will already be called by Mr. Butler's side and then you can examine him, yes. Certainly, you're going to be able to ask him questions, yes. MR. SWEENEY: I would rather just -- I will wait for the witnesses. THE COURT: Okay. Very good. Thank you, sir. You may proceed. MR. BUTLER: Charles, will you take the witness stand, please. ROBERT CHARLES 0 having first been duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BUTLER:

10 0 0 0 Q. Mr. Charles, will you, please, introduce yourself to the judge? A. Yes. Judge, I'm Bob Charles. I'm the current Chairman of the Board of Ethics. I was acting chairman at some points during the time period of the complaint. I've been a member of the Board for, I believe, it's been roughly four years now. Q. And can you briefly describe for the judge what the Board of Ethics does in Forsyth County? A. Sure. The Board of Ethics is basically there to hear and look at evidence that might be presented when a complaint is brought by any member of the public against any of the elected officials, employees, public servant-type folks of the County. We are there solely to look at information that is brought in light of the ordinance in Forsyth County, the ethics rules, and how they're written. So our job is, essentially, to determine if there's been a violation of the ethics rules, you know, per what we're dealing with in the ordinance. Q. So what is the controlling law or document that you have to base all of your decisions on? A. All the decisions have to be based on the ethics ordinance in the County, which is updated from time to time. We basically have to go by that information which does reference some other ethics rules that the state of Georgia has as well. But we are bound by those rules that are within those documents.

11 0 0 MR. BUTLER: And, Judge, to perfect the record, at the last hearing we introduced into evidence a certified copy of the ethics ordinance. THE COURT: Does the court reporter have that? MR. BUTLER: Excuse me, Judge? THE COURT: Does the court reporter have that? MR. BUTLER: It was a different court reporter. I handed it to you, Judge. I don't know if you have that. THE COURT: Is this it (indicating) right here? MR. BUTLER: My I approach, Judge? THE COURT: Yeah, sure. MR. BUTLER: That is, Judge. THE COURT: It's Plaintiff's Exhibit Number. I have that and -- here. I'm going to get you to type up this record and mail to me so that I can have it when I write the judgment. I'll get the information from you and then I'll mail it to you. Go ahead. MR. BUTLER: Judge, if I may see Plaintiff's Exhibit, briefly. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Mr. Charles, will you please thumb through Plaintiff's Exhibit Number -- THE COURT: Show it to Mr. Sweeney, first. MR. BUTLER: I'm sorry, Mr. Sweeney. MR. SWEENEY: Oh, this is the ordinance.

12 0 0 MR. BUTLER: It is. It's a certified copy. THE COURT: I think there's a bunch of them in there. There's ordinance -C, -B, and -F. MR. BUTLER: That's correct, Judge. The original ordinance was and the letters represent certain amendments that have occurred over time. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Mr. Charles, when you're thumbing through that, look at it and tell the Court if you can recognize the document, what that document is. A. Yes. This appears to be the ethics ordinance. Q. Is that the ordinance that you're required to follow when you conduct Board of Ethics business? A. Yes, it is. Q. Thank you. Mr. Charles, can you also briefly describe for the Court who makes up the Forsyth County Board of Ethics? A. Well, the Board of Ethics is made of appointees by various constituencies within the county. For example, I am appointed by the Board of Commissioners. We have another appointee from the Bar Association. We have an appointee from elected officials in the county other than the commissioners. We have an appointee from the employees of the County. So these are folks who are appointed by a vote of their particular constituency in the County to provide a balanced representation

13 0 0 on the Board of Ethics. Q. Do you have the ability to accept or reject that appointment? A. We as a board do not have the ability to do that, no. We have only the ability to potentially appoint an alternate in the case that someone is not available. Q. Do any of the members of the Board of Ethics receive any form of compensation for their service to the county? A. They do not. It is purely voluntary. There is no compensation nor is there any expense reimbursement of any kind. Q. Do you work anywhere, Mr. Charles? A. I do. Q. Where do you work? A. I'm employed by Intel Corporation. I have been there for 0 years. Q. Do other members of the Board of Ethics have regular full-time jobs, to the best of your knowledge? A. They do. The other members have regular jobs and other responsibilities outside of this and this is something that they have volunteered to do on their own time as a way to service their county. MR. BUTLER: Mr. Sweeney, I just want to show this to Mr. Charles. MR. SWEENEY: It's -B. Okay. BY MR. BUTLER:

14 0 0 Q. Mr. Charles, I'm showing you what's been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit for identification purposes. Will you take a look at that document and tell me if you know what that is? A. Yes. I believe this is one of the more recent amendments to the ordinance that was put in place to correct some of the technical language of meeting setting that was in the previous ordinance that, actually, kind of created a circular situation where we were unable to follow exactly what the letter of the ordinance was. Q. And what is the title of that particular amendment to the ordinance, - A. - B. MR. SWEENEY: Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes, sir. MR. SWEENEY: That amended ordinance is not in question today. THE COURT: I understand. It was adopted after your complaint. I understand that. Go ahead, Mr. Butler. But I understand that it was adopted subsequent to the filing of your complaint. MR. BUTLER: It was, Judge. THE COURT: I understand. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Mr. Charles, can you describe for the Court prior to

15 0 0 amendment -B, what was the guidelines in the ethics ordinance for the Board to set meetings and hold meetings? A. The guidelines in the ethics Ordinance were such that the Board had to set meetings by a majority vote of the Board. THE COURT: I don't think that's right. As I understand it, it's either by the majority of the Board or the Chairman. Is that right? THE WITNESS: Yes, Judge, and the issue comes down to the last line of that section of the ordinance which is that the time for the meeting has to be established. THE COURT: The time, yes. But the call of the meeting is either the majority of the Board or the call of the Chairman. THE WITNESS: Correct. MR. BUTLER: That part is correct, Judge. THE COURT: All right. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Under this previous version of the ordinance, which is the one at issue here today, what problems did that cause for the Board of Ethics in scheduling and setting meeting times? A. There were really two things that have taken place over time. Actually, not having the date right in front of me but if my memory serves me, one of them was corrected mid-last year. The other is corrected by this document you have showed

16 0 0 me. But the first one had to do with when the ordinance, I believe, was originally established. There were some specific dates that were picked or specific days of a week of a particular month of the year were picked for what would be the two regular meetings that would need to be scheduled by the Board of Ethics. And those are really just procedural meetings. Often times, they were very short and nothing of particular substance was generally done. It was a meeting to establish the Board and keep it operating. First of all, let's deal with the days. That particular thing created some problems in that we have five members of the Board, all of whom are volunteers with other jobs. We also have our counsel, in many cases yourself, and some case alternate counsel. We also have our clerk and we also have the need for a meeting room as well. So we have a situation where it was not always possible to get enough of the members available on one day or even a room available on any given day. And so what we would endeavor always to do was have all members present if at all possible. One thing, the ordinance is such that we can't really take any action without, at least, three of the five members, and we can't take any action on an ethics complaint without four of the five. So, as you can imagine, having the most folks available is important. We certainly think it is. In addition, the fact that each of the five appointees comes from a different area, a different side of the

17 0 0 constituencies, we always wanted to try and have everybody represented so nobody can claim that we were taking action without, you know, the person who they had voted, that person on the Board not being present. So we always made a real effort to try to have everybody available whenever possible but, certainly, four of the fire. So that certainly was one of the things that presented a problem. We would simply run into times where people were not available or even a room was not available. The other thing in question was the room that we met in. It actually was written in the original ordinance, I believe, that we needed to meet in a commissioner's meeting room, which would be the large meeting room where the commissioners actually have their public meeting. This is something that even, I believe, predates my service on the Board. The Board is, obviously, a pretty small group of people even with the handful of public participants we normally have unless there something very unusual. And so we would generally try to meet in the large conference room which was, obviously, a little bit more of a conducive environment for that small of a group to meet. It also did it require us to get availability and fire up all the lighting and the like. So that had just become practice. We discovered that -- I don't recall exactly who discovered it. It may have been our counsel or the county attorney and that was fixed. I believe the meeting room location part was fixed the

18 0 0 middle of last year. And this particular one right here (indicating) fixed the other problem of the specific dates and allowed some flexibility such that, you know, we could try to ensure the maximum number of members could participate in any board meeting whether it was a regular board meeting or a called board meeting. Q. Okay. Does the Board of Ethics in any way publish the meeting dates, times, and locations to the public? A. Absolutely. Not only are we required to do so under the Open Meetings Act, but we also -- I would say, in my term, anyway, on the Board, we have gone out of our way to make sure that we maximize the amount of notice that we are able to give based on the schedule. So, in fact, we have -- when it comes to special meetings, we have actually pushed out scheduling of a meeting because we didn't think there was enough time even though we wee technically in compliance with the notification requirements of open meetings. But we've always tried to give as much notice as we can unless it's an unusual situation. Q. What sort of the importance does the Ethics Board put on having an open meeting and giving as much notice to the public as possible? A. I mean, we think it's critical especially in light of the fact of the type of board that we are. We are the Ethics Board, so we try to make sure everything we do is as transparent as it can be. We're trying to make sure if anybody is

19 0 0 interested, they can attend, especially, when there's an actual ethics complaint that has been alleged. We want to make sure the parties involved have an opportunity to attend if they so choose. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. We want to make sure the press has a chance to be there. Certainly, you know, public confidence in the Board of Ethics is very important and we want to make sure that, you know, we're meeting in such a way that people have notice and can attend. Q. To the best of your knowledge, do you know if the Ethics Board has ever done that without complying with the public notice requirements? A. No, we have not. Q. I want to draw your attention, specifically, to some of the issues raised in Mr. Sweeney's complaint against you and other members of the Board. And without going tick by tick on each one, one of the issues is that during some times in the summer of 0 and into the fall of 0, the Ethics Board did not meet in the correct room as dictated by the ordinance in place at the time -- THE COURT: I think it was one date. Wasn't it, Mr. Sweeney, and that's July th? MR. SWEENEY: July th or the th. THE COURT: It was the th. That's the one time they did not meet in the commissioner's meetings room but met at the public safety --

20 0 0 0 MR. SWEENEY: Complex. THE COURT: -- complex, yeah. Okay. Go ahead. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. All right. With that specification, Mr. Charles, what can you tell the Court about what happened that day and why it happened? A. The public safety complex has generally been a back-up location so not only does that happen when we have people scheduling problems, but it happens sometimes when we have room scheduling problems. So if we're not able to get another room, we will use that because there's a conference room of adequate size over there to hold the Board as well as members of the public that would come in. So that's why that would take place over there. Q. Was that meeting published for the public? A. Oh, absolutely, along with its location and everything well in advance. Q. Did members of the public attend that meeting, to the best of your knowledge? A. I believe they did, yes. I think we've had, at least, some members of the public at virtually every meeting I can remember where, at least, we had a member of the press there. Q. Another complaint is that on July th, 0, the meeting time was not established by a majority vote. What can

21 0 0 you tell the Court about that particular incident and why it happened? A. It was established based upon availability of the members. And, frankly, the way that we will generally do that is over or the clerk will call individual members if the is not prudent and find out what their availability is. We also cross-coordinate that with the appropriate counsel for that meeting as well as the clerk's availability and, finally, the groups availability. Once we establish a time and date when that all aligns, we will then establish the meeting that way and call the Chairman. Q. These meetings that are alleged in the complaint on July th and July th, what sort of business was the Ethics Board conducting at these meetings? A. Without having notes in front of me, I don't want to speculate. There were -- basically, we have two types of meetings. There is either a standard meeting, which is required two times a year. Some of those meetings, we also try to incorporate in the agenda if we have a current ethics complaint in front of us, we'll try to run that through the meeting. And the rest of the meetings would be based upon an ethics complaint. So the ones in July should have been based upon the ethics complaint at the time. Q. What two months do you normally have your regular meetings with the Ethics Board?

22 0 0 A. Normally, we try to target May/November as those are the originally ones stipulated in the ordinance. Q. Now, these July dates that you testified to would've been a complete meeting or the Board was somehow investigating or reviewing a complaint. Do you recall who filed that complaint? A. I believe that complaint was filed by Mr. Sweeney. Q. Do you recall who that complaint was against? A. I believe that was a complaint against three of the sitting board of commission members. Q. Do you recall what the outcome -- THE COURT: County commissioners or city commissioners? THE WITNESS: My apologies, county commissioners. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Do you recall what the outcome of the Ethics Board investigation into Mr. Sweeney's complaints against the county commissioners was? A. Yes. Ultimately those complaints were dismissed. Q. Okay. There's another complaint or particular complaint in here that on July th, you and the Ethics Board failed to have that meeting established by a majority vote of the Board of Ethics. Do you recall anything about that particular incident? A. Yes. It's, you know, identical to the previous one.

23 0 0 You know, we try to establish the meetings as quickly as we can based upon availability of the members and the counsel and the clerk as well as the room, and we also try to do it in such a way that we can provide maximum notice for public posting of the meeting. It should be noted that in a situation of a complaint, we are under some time constraint as well. We need to meet about the complaint within a timely manner and balance that with giving notice to appropriate parties and notifying the general public. So scheduling is not a trivial matter in a lot of these cases. Q. Okay. Further complaints against you and the Board are that on November 0th, 0, that being the th Wednesday of the month, there was an allegedly unlawfully meeting time. Do you recall anything about this November 0th meeting, Mr. Charles? A. I believe the November 0th meeting was a regular meeting of the Board of Ethics as per required by the ordinance the we were to meet twice a year in a regular meeting format, regardless of whether there's a complaint or not. Q. And the ordinance in effect at that time would've required y'all to meet on, I believe, the second Tuesday of November, is that correct? A. That's correct, yes. Q. Why couldn't y'all meet on the second Tuesday of November?

24 A. Again, it was availability of the Board. I don't recall whether it was also a room conflict at that time or not. We've had, you know, a variety of those come up whether it's been for a regular meeting or a called meeting. But, certainly, it's typically availability of all five members of the Board getting involved together. At one time, we had folks that do travel, including myself, for their normal course of business and so it's not always possible to rely on that prescribed date. 0 0 Q. To the best of your knowledge, has the Ethics Board ever held one of these meetings not on the appropriate day or time in an effort to not be public? A. No, absolutely not. That is the last thing we would do. Again, we go out of our way to make sure there is public notice for those. Q. The new ordinance that has been amended, the -B ordinance that we have as part of Plaintiff's, I have in front of you as Plaintiff's just for identification purposes, what has that done to correct this issue of scheduling? Because that's what I'm hearing you talk about. What has that done? A. It has basically given more flexibility to the date. Instead of putting it on a very specific date, it has given us more flexibility around that. It has also, I believe, removed the majority vote to schedule the time, which became an impossibility for obvious reasons. And so it allows us to

25 0 0 schedule a meeting -- either allow the Chairman to schedule the meeting or allows the officer of the Board who scheduled the meeting, who happened to be scheduling it during one of our regular meetings. THE COURT: Let me ask you something. Were there four members of the Board at that time? There was a vacancy, right? THE WITNESS: We have situations, Judge, where maybe a member will have to recuse themselves based on a particular thing in front of us and we appoint an alternate at that time. We did have a period of time where, actually, the previous chairman elected not to continue his service on the Board so we had, if I recall, some alternate membership at the time. But we've always tried to have a full five members. THE COURT: But when you had these meetings that were called, were there any board members absent because either they didn't have notice or they couldn't be there? THE WITNESS: Oh, no. THE COURT: Everybody was present? THE WITNESS: Yeah. I mean, nobody -- if there was an absence, it would have been because somebody either had a scheduling issue or maybe we didn't have -- but I'm trying to recall. I believe we had everybody there at most of these meetings. Nobody was ever absent because

26 0 0 they didn't have notice. THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. BY MR. BUTLER: Q. And the amendment to the ordinance -B, has that done anything to assist the Board with scheduling a meeting location as well? A. It has. In fact, I almost think we have that in a previous amendment as well. But at any rate, it has allowed the Board to schedule meetings in a room provided by the Board of Commissioners, so that certainly allowed the use of the large conference room, it would allow the use of the public safety conference room, if need be. So it gives us the flexibility of being able to pick from at least, you know, three or four rooms, potentially, that would be workable for the Board size as well as the power to adapt. Q. Are all of the meetings that were brought into question by this complaint, were they held in a public building in a public room? A. Yes, they were. In fact, when it hasn't been held over in public safety, it's been held in a large conference room which is probably, you know, no more than 00 feet away from the main commissioners meeting room in the same building, same floor. Q. Mr. Charles, is there anything else you would like to tell the judge about these incidents that I have neglected to

27 0 0 ask about that you feel is important for the Court to hear? A. I think most of it has been covered in the questioning. I would just say that, you know, this is an all volunteer board of folks trying to do the right thing for the county. We had, obviously, some language in the ordinance that, you know, if followed to a "T" would actually preclude us from ever scheduling anything based on the majority vote required to set a time for a meeting. We think it's important to have, you know, as many members present, if not all of them, as possible during any of our meetings so that the people who have appointed them have their representation. At no time during any of the meetings in question was there any damage to the ability of folks to attend or to have notice. It all complied with the Open Meetings Act. So, certainly, in the spirit of what was intended when the ordinance was set up, I believe we've met all of that. THE COURT: All right. As far as you know, did any member of the Board of Ethics get any benefit whatsoever because of the change in the meeting location or in the time of the meeting? THE WITNESS: The only benefit would be the ability for someone to attend who otherwise might not have been able to. You know, it's very similar to the situation we faced with Mr. Sweeney's current complaint where it was against every member of the Board of Ethics. There was no

28 particular language that described how we should handle that because, obviously, we would all be recusing ourselves. In fact, I guess, if you think about it, if somebody ever bought a complaint against any more than two members of the Board at one time, we couldn't -- there wouldn't be enough of a board to appoint alternates. So 0 0 it's just one of those, you know, unusual things I think maybe wasn't thought of in the language when it was originally written. But, certainly, none of this has been done with any ill-intent, with any attempt to evade anything, and certainly not with intent to persuade the public or press attendance. THE COURT: All right. Anything further? MR. BUTLER: No, Judge. I don't have any further questions. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Sweeney, you may ask him any questions you would like to ask him. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. Good morning, Judge, Mr. Charles. THE COURT: Good morning. MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Charles, you seem to be a very nice guy. With your -- THE COURT: Nice guys get sued too, you know. MR. SWEENEY: I agree. THE COURT: Go ahead.

29 MR. SWEENEY: I have Mr. Charles' response to my complaint here. I would like to ask him a few questions about it. THE COURT: Certainly. CROSS-EXAMINATION 0 0 BY MR. SWEENEY: Q. Does this look familiar? A. Yes, sir, it does. It appears to be my response to your complaint. Q. Thank you. Did you discuss or were you coached at all regarding that affidavit that you have there? A. I did have assistance from counsel, yes. Q. The other's responses were exactly the same. Did you have the same counsel as then or were you coached earlier before you got to this hearing? A. I can't speak for what the others may have filed. I can only speak for myself. Q. So were you coached before you got here to explain how everything was supposed to come down here? A. At this particular meeting? No, sir. Q. So you're saying you didn't discuss this with anybody? A. Are we talking about the response or -- I'm not clear on what you're asking.

30 0 0 0 Q. No, today's hearing, just in general. A. Mr. Butler and I spoke about whether I needed to attend today's hearing or not because of the unusual situation of it or the complaint being filed with the Ethics Board and, obviously, the Ethics Board couldn't hear the complaint. Q. Well, Mr. Butler is not your counsel? A. He is not. Q. In your response to my complaint, there are no specific dates noticed here as far as the times and the dates I have made the complaint about. Can you tell me why there were no specific dates noted in your affidavit, specifically, ordinance -B? A. I'm not sure I understand the question, Mr. Sweeney. Q. Well, it says under ordinance -B, the responses must be supported by affidavits based on personal knowledge as required by ethics ordinance -, and no such affidavits of personal knowledge are attached. A. Okay. Yes. I basically signed the response and also provided a notarized verification noting, in fact, my response. MR. SWEENEY: Give me a second, Judge. THE COURT: Certainly. Take all the time you need, Mr. Sweeney. We are not here to rush through anything. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. BY MR. SWEENEY:

31 0 Q. Mr. Charles, my complaint is basically based on not having the meeting at the right place at the right time and not having any postings in the right place. How did that happen? MR. BUTLER: Judge, I don't want to be too formal, but that's kind of a compound question. If Mr. Charles could just break it down, I think that will help everyone understand his answer. THE COURT: Also, Mr. Sweeney, you anticipated that he would answer, yes, it was done incorrectly and why was it done incorrectly. You ask him first whether -- how it was done and then you can decide -- we can decide whether or not it was done incorrectly. I'm interested in facts. That's what I'm interested in. MR. SWEENEY: Can I take a ten-minute recess? THE COURT: You certainly can. We will be in recess now until ten minutes of ten. MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Judge. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. 0 (Whereupon, a short break was taken) MR. SWEENEY: All right. Your Honor, I'm going to respond to Mr. Charles' answers to Mr. -- THE COURT: When you get your chance to testify, you make all the responses you -- I've been doing this so

32 0 0 long, I got to have things in sequence and in order. Your purpose now, Mr. Sweeney, is to ask him questions. Now, you're going to be given the opportunity to tell me anything you wanted to make. You can tell me about going fishing this past weekend -- that's what these guys were telling me about -- anything you want to tell me about. But right now, you ask him questions. MR. SWEENEY: All right. Thank you. I don't think I have any questions. THE COURT: All right. That's fine. Anything further, Mr. Butler? MR. BUTLER: No, sir. THE COURT: All right. You can come down. Anything further? MR. BUTLER: No, Judge. THE COURT: Do you want to testify, Mr. Sweeney? MR. SWEENEY: No, thank you. THE COURT: You don't want to testify at all? MR. SWEENEY: Well, I would like to rebut everything that was said earlier. THE COURT: Okay. Well, take the witness stand. TERENCE SWEENEY having first been duly sworn, was examined and testified as

33 follows: 0 0 THE COURT: All right. Sit down and tell me what you want to tell me and I'm taking notes as you go. MR. SWEENEY: Okay. Thank you very much, Judge. Failures of respondent to follow the Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance in responding to the Sweeney -- MR. BUTLER: Judge, if I could just know what he's reading from, I would appreciate it. MR. SWEENEY: I'm sorry. This is my updated affidavit. I ed it to you yesterday or the day before. THE COURT: Yeah, he's got it. MR. BUTLER: All right. I got a copy. I just didn't know what it was. THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. (Reading) The respondent fails to follow many of the requirements of the Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance -B as amended, also known as the "Ordinance" in the response to the complaint filed by me, Terence Joseph Sweeney. The respondent must be supported -- the responses must be supported by affidavits based on personal knowledge as required by ethics Ordinance -. No such affidavits of personal knowledge are attached.

34 0 0 The response fails to set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence since there isn't any evidence attached as required by Ordinance -. The respondent must show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated, but respondent failed to attach or make any such statements with response as required -- with a response as required by the Ordinance -. The respondent failed to attach supporting documents referred to in the response as required by Ordinance -. Missing substantiating documents include, but not limited to, ordinance, complaint, previous complaints, Georgia Open Meetings Act, seeking out publicity and quoted in the paper. Article III -() reads: Upon a receipt of a complaint alleging misconduct, the county official or employee against whom the complaint was filed may reply to the complaint within 0 days, unless such time is extended by the Board of Ethics upon good cause showing. The response of the county official or employee must be supported by affidavits based on personal knowledge, must set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and must show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated herein. All the documents referred to in an affidavit should be attached

35 0 0 to the affidavit. The failures described herein display in an abundantly clear fashion that the respondent who has serve in the capacity of an ethics board member does not know the rules he was entrusted to enforce. In respondent's first defense, it is stated that the complainant failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Forsyth County ethics rules do not require the complainant to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Clearly, the relief or disciplinary action is defined as the responsibility of the Ethics Board under - of the Ordinance. Also, in the event there was a need for a claim upon which relief may be granted then as described in the Ordinance, this would be viewed as a technical deficiency and, therefore, would be returned to the complainant for a seven-day opportunity to correct deficiency as described in the Ordinance - (): If the Ethics Board makes an initial determination that the complaint is technically deficient, the Board of Ethics shall submit a list of the deficiencies to the complainant and offer the complainant an opportunity to correct the deficiencies within seven days prior to the complaint being dismissed for technical deficiencies. The first defense pretends to advise Sweeney on the

36 0 0 way to file an ethics complaint. However, in the Ordinance -, the Ordinance anticipates a violation of an employee or a county official. A complaint against a board is not identified in the ethics Ordinance. Further, individual participation in alleged unlawful meetings is an alleged violation. Turner seems to suggest an unanticipated method for filing ethics complaints. The votes, no votes, or participation in the meeting are individual actions at an alleged, unlawful event. Respondent's second and third defenses identify the failure of respondent in his capacity as a Forsyth County ethics member to recommend the adoption of rules that are problematic or vague. The respondent identifies these failures of the rules after being alleged to be guilty of following -- of failing to follow the rules. But, apparently, never identified the flaws of the ethics Ordinance prior to the complaint. Can I get another glass of water? THE COURT: You certainly can. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you very much. Respondent's fourth defense fails to identify Ordinance and or attach same referenced and as required by ethics Ordinance -(), therefore, no response can be made to response. Complainant is unsure what the respondent is referring to. However, to the

37 0 0 extent of the words "substantial compliance" are mentioned, it would be noted that the failure to meet on the designated times or locations are complete, total, and substantiated compliance failures. Respondent's fifth defense states that the meetings were held in accordance with the Open Meetings Act O.C.G.A The Ordinance requires all documents referenced in the response by attached. No such documents for the Open Meetings Act O.C.G.A. 0-- is attached. No complaint was made about a violation of the Open Meetings Act. Participation in the unlawful meeting dates and times failed to meet the Ordinance (c) requirements and the Ordinance shall -- the Ordinance uses the word "shall" which is synonymous with "must". It should be noted that the meeting required on the second Tuesday of November failed to provide the -hour cancellation notice and did the meeting -- as did the meeting that did or did not occur on the third Thursday and, therefore, failed to comply with the Georgia Open Meetings Act for cancellation procedures. Also, the instant motion to have the Ethics Board attorney represent each member individually immediately after coming out of an executive session is another alleged violation of the Georgia Open Meetings Act since the purpose stated in the video/audio before and after the executive session is

38 0 0 contrary to the executive session affidavits stated purpose. The defense of the board members individually is not a matter of the Ethics Board to discuss in executive session and, therefore, fails the requirements of executive session under the Georgia Open Meetings Act. Two requirements of the ordinance -(c) at the time that the Ethics Board met in the wrong place states that the meeting should be held in a public hearing room of the Board of Commissioners and be duly publicized and otherwise in accordance with the Open Meetings Act. Why would the two requirements for meeting location be placed in writing if otherwise you can change the set location and requirement for time to be set by majority vote of the Ethics Board? The Ordinance is saying to do these two items and other than these things, do everything in accordance with the Georgia Open Meetings Act. Also, see Ken Jarrard's letter dated December, 0, to the Ethics Board regarding meeting violations reveals these concerns also. Respondent's sixth defense states that the complaint must be within six months of the alleged misconduct or ethical violation. The alleged violation listed in the complaint occurred in July of 0 and November of 0. The complaint was filed in December, 0. The evidence attached by Sweeney indicated the complaints were filed in

39 0 a timely manner within six months. The violations didn't occur until the meetings referenced in the complaint occurred. Other dates referenced supply evidence as to the failure of the alleged meeting violations in July and November. The requirements for a proper meeting could have met -- could have been met hours before the meeting or at the previous meeting. The previous meeting information provided reveals that the respondent failed to ensure compliance with the rules anytime before the meeting violations. Individually, respondent fails to ensure compliance with the ethics meetings rules once the meeting was conducted in November -- in July and November. 0 Respondent's eighth defense alleges Sweeney had knowledge of the violations at the time that they allegedly occurred. Sweeney became aware of the violations from a report on a local blog and a report by an individual made to Sweeney in December. Further, it is stated that Sweeney is seeking publicity and is quoted in the paper, but no evidence is attached as required by ethics Ordinance -. Sweeney has not sought publicity and did not seek an interview. Also, it's stated that Sweeney is doing everything he can do to make the Board look bad. Sweeney has not blogged or sought to publicize this event and no evidence is supplied to support the

40 0 0 0 claims of everything -- support the claims of everything is being done to make the Board look bad. The individuals of the Ethics Board have made the Ethics Board look bad. Respondent also desires to recover fees, but fails to recognize the rules of Ordinance - that requires a public hearing. According to the Ordinance -, the only way to obtain fees and expenses is from an ethics hearing. The only way to enter an ethics hearing is to find a reasonable belief that there has been a violation of this section by a county official or employee. Fees and expense recovery after respondents request for dismissal is not provided for in the ordinance. The statement in respondent's response eight is illogical. Clearly, Sweeney had knowledge of these alleged procedural violations at the time they allegedly occurred but did not file the instant complaint until months later. No evidence is provided to prove that Sweeney clearly had knowledge of the alleged violations at the time the violations occurred. Lorne Twiner's response in defense references dates that were months earlier when no such complaints were made when Twiner was not yet a member of the Ethics Board. It should be noted that former alternate member Turner participated in the ethics meeting on December

41 0 th, 0, where Turner seconded motions and voted in the same meeting as Tim Perry. Perry is the very person Turner placed in the July meetings for the limited purpose as stated in the meeting minutes. In the subsequent meeting of the Board of Ethics, the Board took corrective action for the unlawful participation of Turner. In the first paragraph, the response identifies Terence Joseph Sweeney as "Sweeney". However, later in the response it identifies "Sweeney" on multiple occasions. The Earnest Vasco Turner III response failed to be filed with the clerk of the Ethics Board in a timely manner within 0 days as required by the Ordinance - and, therefore, the Turner complaint should be considered without Turner's response. And that's about it. Thank you. THE COURT: Anything else you want to say? THE WITNESS: No, sir. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Butler? 0 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BUTLER: Q. Mr. Sweeney, you were actually quoted in the paper talking about your complaints, weren't you? A. I don't really recall at this time. Can you show me

42 0 0 a copy? Q. I'm asking you a question, Mr. Sweeney. Do you not recall being specifically quoted in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution regarding these issues? A. What was the verbiage? Q. Do you recall? I'm asking you a question. Do you recall? A. No. I don't recall at this time. MR. BUTLER: All right. Thank you. I don't have anything else, Judge. THE COURT: All right. Anything else you want to say? THE WITNESS: The ultimate findings, I believe, should be, if I may, to disband the Ethics Board, overturn all the actions at unlawful meetings, a reprimand letter, and that's about it. THE COURT: Anything further Mr. Butler? MR. BUTLER: No, sir. THE COURT: All right. You can go back and have a seat, Mr. Sweeney. Thank you. Anything in rebuttal, Mr. Butler? MR. BUTLER: No, sir. THE COURT: All right. Why don't we do this, gentlemen. Of course, you have the right to make a closing argument, if you wish. It would help me even more

43 0 if, Mr. Butler, you have ten days from today to file any kind of brief that you want to file with any applicable law that's involved and, also, any comment you wish to make on the evidence. And after you've had your ten days, then, Mr. Sweeney, you will have an additional ten days to respond to whatever he says. MR. BUTLER: That's fine. If that's how the Court wishes to proceed, I'm fine with it. THE COURT: Just keep your seat. All right. Is there anything else we need to do? MR. BUTLER: No, sir. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. THE COURT: All right. We will recess or adjourn or whatever you do. Thank you. MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Judge. MR. SWEENEY: Thank you. MR. BUTLER: Do you need this, Judge? THE COURT: No, just leave it with her. Thank you. MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Judge. 0 (The proceedings concluded)

44 0 (PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NUMBER ) (ORIGINAL EXHIBIT IN THE CUSTODY OF THE COURT REPORTER) 0

45 0 CERTIFICATE STATE OF GEORGIA ) COUNTY OF HALL ) I hereby certify that the foregoing hearing was taken down by me; that the foregoing pages represent a true, correct, and complete transcript; that I am not a relative, employee, attorney, or counsel of any of the parties; that I have no contract with either party nor am I financially interested in the action. 0 This, the day of 0.

46 Melissa J. Lee, CCR Certified Court Reporter Certificate B- 0 (SEAL) 0

Curtis L. Johnston Selman v. Cobb County School District, et al June 30, 2003

Curtis L. Johnston Selman v. Cobb County School District, et al June 30, 2003 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2 ATLANTA DIVISION 3 JEFFREY MICHAEL SELMAN, Plaintiff, 4 vs. CASE NO. 1:02-CV-2325-CC 5 COBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 6 COBB COUNTY BOARD

More information

PAGES: 1-24 EXHIBITS: 0. Sanjeev Lath vs. City of Manchester, NH DEPOSITION OF PATROL OFFICER AUSTIN R. GOODMAN

PAGES: 1-24 EXHIBITS: 0. Sanjeev Lath vs. City of Manchester, NH DEPOSITION OF PATROL OFFICER AUSTIN R. GOODMAN 1 PAGES: 1-24 EXHIBITS: 0 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE HILLSBOROUGH SS SUPERIOR NORTH DOCKET NO. 216-2016-CV-821 Sanjeev Lath vs., NH DEPOSITION OF This deposition held pursuant to the New Hampshire Rules of

More information

Page 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA

Page 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA Page 1 STATE OF ALASKA, Plaintiff, vs. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. 3AN-06-05630 CI VOLUME 18 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS March 26, 2008 - Pages

More information

Marc James Asay v. Michael W. Moore

Marc James Asay v. Michael W. Moore 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

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET WILL BE THE FLORIDA BAR V. ROBERT ADAMS. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MR. CHIEF JUSTICE, AND MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT,

>> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET WILL BE THE FLORIDA BAR V. ROBERT ADAMS. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MR. CHIEF JUSTICE, AND MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, >> THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET WILL BE THE FLORIDA BAR V. ROBERT ADAMS. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MR. CHIEF JUSTICE, AND MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, I'M WILLIAM JUNK, AND I'M HERE WITH RESPONDENT, MR.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN JOSE DIVISION 4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CR-0-2027-JF ) 5 Plaintiff, ) ) San Jose, CA 6 vs. ) October 2, 200 ) 7 ROGER VER, ) ) 8

More information

DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMISSION OF THE 13 DHC 11

DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMISSION OF THE 13 DHC 11 1 NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF WAKE BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMISSION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR 13 DHC 11 E-X-C-E-R-P-T THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, ) ) PARTIAL TESTIMONY Plaintiff, ) OF )

More information

/10/2007, In the matter of Theodore Smith Associated Reporters Int'l., Inc. Page 1419

/10/2007, In the matter of Theodore Smith Associated Reporters Int'l., Inc. Page 1419 1 2 THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 3 4 In the Matter of 5 NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION v. 6 THEODORE SMITH 7 Section 3020-a Education Law Proceeding (File

More information

INTERVIEW OF: CHARLES LYDECKER

INTERVIEW OF: CHARLES LYDECKER INTERVIEW OF: CHARLES LYDECKER DATE TAKEN: MARCH 1, TIME: :0 P.M. - : P.M. PLACE: BROWN & BROWN 0 SOUTH RIDGEWOOD AVENUE DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA 1 1 --0 1 1 APPEARANCES: JONATHAN KANEY, ESQUIRE Kaney &

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/01/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 431 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/01/2018

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/01/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 431 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/01/2018 1 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: CIVIL TERM : PART 17 2 -------------------------------------------------X LAWRENCE KINGSLEY 3 Plaintiff 4 - against - 5 300 W. 106TH ST. CORP.

More information

STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO, NEVADA TRANSCRIPT OF ELECTRONICALLY-RECORDED INTERVIEW JOHN MAYER AUGUST 4, 2014 RENO, NEVADA

STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO, NEVADA TRANSCRIPT OF ELECTRONICALLY-RECORDED INTERVIEW JOHN MAYER AUGUST 4, 2014 RENO, NEVADA STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO, NEVADA TRANSCRIPT OF ELECTRONICALLY-RECORDED INTERVIEW JOHN MAYER AUGUST, RENO, NEVADA Transcribed and proofread by: CAPITOL REPORTERS BY: Michel Loomis

More information

COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT. Plaintiff, Defendant. hearing before the Honorable Daniel C. Moreno, one of

COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT. Plaintiff, Defendant. hearing before the Honorable Daniel C. Moreno, one of STTE OF MINNESOT DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIL DISTRICT State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, v. Chrishaun Reed McDonald, District Court File No. -CR-- TRNSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Defendant. The

More information

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 3 J.F., et al., ) 4 Plaintiffs, ) 3:14-cv-00581-PK ) 5 vs. ) April 15, 2014 ) 6 MULTNOMAH COUNTY SCHOOL ) Portland, Oregon DISTRICT

More information

Page 280. Cleveland, Ohio. 20 Todd L. Persson, Notary Public

Page 280. Cleveland, Ohio. 20 Todd L. Persson, Notary Public Case: 1:12-cv-00797-SJD Doc #: 91-1 Filed: 06/04/14 Page: 1 of 200 PAGEID #: 1805 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 EASTERN DIVISION 4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5 6 FAIR ELECTIONS

More information

Teresa Plenge Selman v. Cobb County School District, et al July 1, Page 1

Teresa Plenge Selman v. Cobb County School District, et al July 1, Page 1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2 ATLANTA DIVISION 3 JEFFREY MICHAEL SELMAN, Plaintiff, 4 vs. CASE NO. 1:02-CV-2325-CC 5 COBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 6 COBB COUNTY BOARD

More information

Testimony of Detective Jimmy Patterson (2)

Testimony of Detective Jimmy Patterson (2) Testimony of Detective Jimmy Patterson (2) THE COURT: Mr. Mosty, are you ready? 20 MR. RICHARD C. MOSTY: Well, that 21 depends on what we're getting ready to do. 22 THE COURT: Well. All right. Where 23

More information

CASE NO.: BKC-AJC IN RE: LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., Debtor. /

CASE NO.: BKC-AJC IN RE: LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., Debtor. / UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Page 1 CASE NO.: 07-12641-BKC-AJC IN RE: LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., Debtor. / Genovese Joblove & Battista, P.A. 100 Southeast 2nd Avenue

More information

ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF KEN ANDERSON VOLUME 2

ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF KEN ANDERSON VOLUME 2 CAUSE NO. 86-452-K26 THE STATE OF TEXAS ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff(s) Page 311 VS. ) WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS MICHAEL MORTON Defendant(s). ) 26TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION

More information

2 THE COURT: All right. Please raise your. 5 having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: 6 THE COURT: All right, sir.

2 THE COURT: All right. Please raise your. 5 having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: 6 THE COURT: All right, sir. 38 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 2 THE COURT: All right. Please raise your 3 right hand. 4 CHARLES BRODSKY, 5 having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: 6 THE COURT: All right, sir. You may take 7

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/07/2012 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/07/2012

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/07/2012 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/07/2012 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0/0/0 INDEX NO. /0 NYSCEF DOC. NO. - RECEIVED NYSCEF: 0/0/0 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY - CIVIL TERM - PART ----------------------------------------------x

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Docket No. CR ) Plaintiff, ) Chicago, Illinois ) March, 0 v. ) : p.m. ) JOHN DENNIS

More information

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 1 IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AFFINITY WEALTH MANAGEMENT, : INC., a Delaware corporation, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action : No. 5813-VCP STEVEN V. CHANTLER, MATTHEW J. : RILEY

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION ) ) ) ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION IN RE SPRINGFIELD GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION ) ) ) ) CASE NO. -MC-00 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 0 JULY, TRANSCRIPT

More information

FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION 3 FRANKLIN COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 4 SECOND FLOOR COMMISSION CHAMBERS 5 400

FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION 3 FRANKLIN COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 4 SECOND FLOOR COMMISSION CHAMBERS 5 400 0001 1 FRANKLIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING 2 FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSION 3 FRANKLIN COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 4 SECOND FLOOR COMMISSION CHAMBERS 5 400 EAST LOCUST STREET 6 UNION, MISSOURI 63084 7 8 9 TRANSCRIPT

More information

EXHIBIT 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. LIST INTERACTIVE LTD., d/b/a Uknight Interactive; and LEONARD S.

EXHIBIT 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. LIST INTERACTIVE LTD., d/b/a Uknight Interactive; and LEONARD S. EXHIBIT 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. -CV-000-RBJ LIST INTERACTIVE LTD., d/b/a Uknight Interactive; and LEONARD S. LABRIOLA, Plaintiffs, vs. KNIGHTS

More information

The Florida Bar v. Jorge Luis Cueto

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

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH vs. Case No. 05 CF 381

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH 1 2 3 STATE OF WISCONSIN, 4 PLAINTIFF, 05 CF 381 5 vs. Case No. 05 CF 381 6 STEVEN A. AVERY, 7 DEFENDANT. 8 DATE: September 28, 2009 9 BEFORE:

More information

Case 2:13-cv RFB-NJK Document Filed 10/26/15 Page 1 of 85. 2:13-cv RFB-NJK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Case 2:13-cv RFB-NJK Document Filed 10/26/15 Page 1 of 85. 2:13-cv RFB-NJK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA Case :-cv-00-rfb-njk Document - Filed // Page of :-cv-00-rfb-njk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, vs. Plaintiff, INTELIGENTRY, LIMITED, et al., Defendants.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THE HONORABLE NEIL V. WAKE, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THE HONORABLE NEIL V. WAKE, JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Joseph Rudolph Wood III, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Charles L. Ryan, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CV --PHX-NVW Phoenix, Arizona July, 0 : p.m. 0 BEFORE: THE HONORABLE

More information

Case 2:13-cr FVS Document 369 Filed 05/09/14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SPOKANE DIVISION

Case 2:13-cr FVS Document 369 Filed 05/09/14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SPOKANE DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SPOKANE DIVISION 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. :-CR-000-FVS ) RHONDA LEE FIRESTACK-HARVEY, ) LARRY LESTER

More information

* EXCERPT * Audio Transcription. Court Reporters Certification Advisory Board. Meeting, April 1, Judge William C.

* EXCERPT * Audio Transcription. Court Reporters Certification Advisory Board. Meeting, April 1, Judge William C. Excerpt- 0 * EXCERPT * Audio Transcription Court Reporters Certification Advisory Board Meeting, April, Advisory Board Participants: Judge William C. Sowder, Chair Deborah Hamon, CSR Janice Eidd-Meadows

More information

UNOFFICIAL, UNEDITED, UNCERTIFIED DRAFT

UNOFFICIAL, UNEDITED, UNCERTIFIED DRAFT 0 THIS UNCERTIFIED DRAFT TRANSCRIPT HAS NOT BEEN EDITED OR PROOFREAD BY THE COURT REPORTER. DIFFERENCES WILL EXIST BETWEEN THE UNCERTIFIED DRAFT VERSION AND THE CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT. (CCP (R)() When prepared

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X RACHELI COHEN AND ADDITIONAL : PLAINTIFFS LISTED IN RIDER A, Plaintiffs, : -CV-0(NGG) -against- : United States

More information

Tuesday, February 12, Washington, D.C. Room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 10

Tuesday, February 12, Washington, D.C. Room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 10 1 RPTS DEN DCMN HERZFELD COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT ND GOVERNMENT REFORM, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTTIVES, WSHINGTON, D.C. TELEPHONE INTERVIEW OF: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 Washington, D.C. The telephone interview

More information

5 INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE NO Case No: SC JUDGE RICHARD H. ALBRITTON, JR / 7

5 INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE NO Case No: SC JUDGE RICHARD H. ALBRITTON, JR / 7 1 1 2 3 BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION 4 5 INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE NO. 04-239 Case No: SC05-851 6 JUDGE RICHARD H. ALBRITTON, JR. --------------------------------------/ 7 8 9

More information

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The R.M.C. 803 session was called to order at 1246, MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order.

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The R.M.C. 803 session was called to order at 1246, MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order. 0 [The R.M.C. 0 session was called to order at, December.] MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order. All parties who were present before are again present. Get the witness back up, please.

More information

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY 1 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY 2 MILWAUKEE BRANCH OF THE NAACP 3 VOCES DE LA FRONTERA, RICKY T. LEWIS, JENNIFER T. PLATT, JOHN J. WOLFE, 4 CAROLYN ANDERSON, NDIDI BROWNLEE, ANTHONY FUMBANKS,

More information

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The R.M.C. 803 session was called to order at 1602, MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order.

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The R.M.C. 803 session was called to order at 1602, MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order. 0 [The R.M.C. 0 session was called to order at 0, February.] MJ [Col SPATH]: These commissions are called to order. All parties present before the recess are again present. Defense Counsel, you may call

More information

INTERVIEW OF: TIMOTHY DAVIS

INTERVIEW OF: TIMOTHY DAVIS INTERVIEW OF: TIMOTHY DAVIS DATE TAKEN: MARCH, TIME: : A.M. - : A.M. PLACE: HOMEWOOD SUITES BY HILTON BILL FRANCE BOULEVARD DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA APPEARANCES: JONATHAN KANEY, ESQUIRE Kaney & Olivari,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Joseph M. Arpaio, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 0--PHX-GMS Phoenix,

More information

GAnthony-rough.txt. Rough Draft IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND 2 FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

GAnthony-rough.txt. Rough Draft IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND 2 FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA Rough Draft - 1 GAnthony-rough.txt 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND 2 FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA 3 ZENAIDA FERNANDEZ-GONZALEZ, 4 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, 5 vs. CASE NO.:

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. CR-S KJD(LRL) ) vs. ) ) IRWIN SCHIFF, CYNTHIA NEUN, ) and LAWRENCE COHEN, )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. CR-S KJD(LRL) ) vs. ) ) IRWIN SCHIFF, CYNTHIA NEUN, ) and LAWRENCE COHEN, ) 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, ) and

More information

ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST

ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST JUDICIAL PROCEDURE Printed: February 2006 ASSEMBLIES OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST JUDICIAL PROCEDURE Printed: February 2006 JUDICIAL PROCEDURE INTRODUCTION The purpose of

More information

>> PLEASE RISE. >> FLORIDA SUPREME COURT IS NOW IN SESSION. >> WE NOW TAKE UP THE SECOND CASE ON OUR DOCKET WHICH IS MEISTER VERSUS RIVERO.

>> PLEASE RISE. >> FLORIDA SUPREME COURT IS NOW IN SESSION. >> WE NOW TAKE UP THE SECOND CASE ON OUR DOCKET WHICH IS MEISTER VERSUS RIVERO. >> PLEASE RISE. >> FLORIDA SUPREME COURT IS NOW IN SESSION. >> WE NOW TAKE UP THE SECOND CASE ON OUR DOCKET WHICH IS MEISTER VERSUS RIVERO. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, LYNN WAXMAN REPRESENTING THE PETITIONER.

More information

State of Florida v. Victor Giorgetti

State of Florida v. Victor Giorgetti 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 3:10-cv GPC-WVG Document Filed 03/07/15 Page 1 of 30 EXHIBIT 5

Case 3:10-cv GPC-WVG Document Filed 03/07/15 Page 1 of 30 EXHIBIT 5 Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 388-4 Filed 03/07/15 Page 1 of 30 EXHIBIT 5 Case 3:10-cv-00940-GPC-WVG Document 388-4 Filed 03/07/15 Page 2 of 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA I N D E X T O W I T N E S S E S TAMMY KITZMILLER, et al : : CASE NO. v. : :0-CR-00 : DOVER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, : et al : FOR

More information

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC Filing # 7828 E-Filed 09//2018 07:41 : PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CIRCUIT CRIMINAL NO. l5-oo6cfano STATE OF FLORIDA, VS. JOHN N. JONCHUCK,

More information

>> ALL RISE. HEAR YE HEAR YE, HEAR YE. THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. ALL WHO HAVE CAUSE TO PLEAD, DRAW NEAR, GIVE ATTENTION AND YOU

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

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE. ) Case No.: 3:17-CR-82. Defendants. )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE. ) Case No.: 3:17-CR-82. Defendants. ) IN THE FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. RANDALL KEITH BEANE, ) HEATHER ANN TUCCI-JARRAF, ) ) Defendants. ) ) APPEARANCES: ) Case No.:

More information

BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA AMENDED NOTICE OF FORMAL CHARGES

BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA AMENDED NOTICE OF FORMAL CHARGES BEFORE THE FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF FLORIDA INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE: CYNTHIA A. HOLLOWAY NO.: 00-143 / Florida Supreme Court AMENDED NOTICE OF FORMAL CHARGES TO: The Honorable

More information

Condcnsclt! Page 1. 6 Part 9. I don't think I could have anticipated the snow. 7 and your having to be here at 1:30 any better than I did.

Condcnsclt! Page 1. 6 Part 9. I don't think I could have anticipated the snow. 7 and your having to be here at 1:30 any better than I did. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY, MARYLAND STATE OF MARYLAND, V. ADNAN SYEO, BEFORE: Defendant. Indictment Nos. 199100-6 REPORTER'S OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS (Trial on the Merita) Baltimore.

More information

Case 1:12-cv RJS Document 8 Filed 01/29/13 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:12-cv RJS Document 8 Filed 01/29/13 Page 1 of 8 Case 112-cv-08170-RJS Document 8 Filed 01/29/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------- X U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION,

More information

LIABILITY LITIGATION : NO. CV MRP (CWx) Videotaped Deposition of ROBERT TEMPLE, M.D.

LIABILITY LITIGATION : NO. CV MRP (CWx) Videotaped Deposition of ROBERT TEMPLE, M.D. Exhibit 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Page 1 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----------------------x IN RE PAXIL PRODUCTS : LIABILITY LITIGATION : NO. CV 01-07937 MRP (CWx) ----------------------x

More information

STATE OF VERMONT PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD. Decision No. 35

STATE OF VERMONT PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD. Decision No. 35 35 PRB [17-May-2002] PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD In re: Thomas A. Bailey, Esq. - Respondent PRB Docket No. 2002-118 Decision No. 35 Upon receipt of the Affidavit of Resignation submitted to the Board

More information

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO -. RI^ NIAL In Re: Complaint against BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 13-0569 Steven James McBeth Attorney Reg. No. 0063426 Respondent Cincinnati Bar Association

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : v. : : :

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : v. : : : 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA HARRISBURG DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CASE NO. v. MURRAY ROJAS -CR-00 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS JURY TRIAL TESTIMONY

More information

A & T TRANSCRIPTS (720)

A & T TRANSCRIPTS (720) THE COURT: ll right. Bring the jury in. nd, Mr. Cooper, I'll ask you to stand and be sworn. You can wait till the jury comes in, if you want. (Jury present at :0 a.m.) THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Cooper, if you'll

More information

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 107 Filed: 04/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1817

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 107 Filed: 04/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1817 Case: 1:13-cv-05014 Document #: 107 Filed: 04/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1817 J. DAVID JOHN, United States of America, ex rel., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

More information

MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017 HEARING AND ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT ON ( 1) MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT

MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017 HEARING AND ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT ON ( 1) MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT 1 NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA CIVIL SECTION 22 KENNETH JOHNSON V. NO. 649587 STATE OF LOUISIANA, ET AL MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017 HEARING AND ORAL REASONS

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 SAN JOSE DIVISION 4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CR-0-2027-JF ) 5 Plaintiff, ) ) San Jose, California 6 vs. ) May 2, 2002 ) 7 ROGER VER,

More information

FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 11/16/ :25 AM

FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 11/16/ :25 AM FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 11/16/2016 09:25 AM STATE OF NEW YORK CICERO TOWN COURT COUNTY OF ONONDAGA INDEX NO. 2016EF4347 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/16/2016 TOWN OF CICERO, Petitioner, MOTIONS

More information

4 THE COURT: Raise your right hand, 8 THE COURT: All right. Feel free to. 9 adjust the chair and microphone. And if one of the

4 THE COURT: Raise your right hand, 8 THE COURT: All right. Feel free to. 9 adjust the chair and microphone. And if one of the 154 1 (Discussion off the record.) 2 Good afternoon, sir. 3 THE WITNESS: Afternoon, Judge. 4 THE COURT: Raise your right hand, 5 please. 6 (Witness sworn.) 7 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 8 THE COURT: All right.

More information

CONSTITUTION AND RULES OF PROCEDURE OF CHRIST CHURCH HILLCREST. (Church of England in South Africa)

CONSTITUTION AND RULES OF PROCEDURE OF CHRIST CHURCH HILLCREST. (Church of England in South Africa) CONSTITUTION AND RULES OF PROCEDURE OF CHRIST CHURCH HILLCREST (Church of England in South Africa) 1 To the glory of God. It is hereby declared that the congregation of Christ Church, Hillcrest, is a Constituent

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION ) 1:09-CV-13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION ) 1:09-CV-13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel.) RIBIK ) ) VS. HCR MANORCARE, INC., et al. ) ) ) :0-CV- ) ) ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA ) OCTOBER,

More information

CAMERON SANDERS and KEVIN S. SANDERS, Plaintiffs,

CAMERON SANDERS and KEVIN S. SANDERS, Plaintiffs, CAMERON SANDERS and KEVIN S. SANDERS, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. CASE NO.: 16-2012-CA-008487-XXXX-MA DIVISION: CV-H vs. Plaintiffs, NEWPORT UNIT

More information

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page Page 1 Transcription Hyderabad Discussion of Motions Friday, 04 November 2016 at 13:45 IST Note: Although the transcription is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible

More information

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED NOTICE. August 19, No STAN SMITH, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED NOTICE. August 19, No STAN SMITH, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED August 19, 1997 A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See 808.10 and RULE 809.62, STATS.

More information

Page 1. Case 1:09-cv CKK Document 48-3 Filed 04/12/11 Page 1 of 129

Page 1. Case 1:09-cv CKK Document 48-3 Filed 04/12/11 Page 1 of 129 Case 1:09-cv-02030-CKK Document 48-3 Filed 04/12/11 Page 1 of 129 Page 1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2 - - - 3 COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC: 4 RELATIONS, : : 5 Plaintiff,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION GEORGE AND CHRISTINA FOWLER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION GEORGE AND CHRISTINA FOWLER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION GEORGE AND CHRISTINA FOWLER VERSUS STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, HAAG ENGINEERING, AND STEVE SAUCIER

More information

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The Military Commission was called to order at 0941, MJ [COL POHL]: This Commission is called to order.

UNOFFICIAL/UNAUTHENTICATED TRANSCRIPT. [The Military Commission was called to order at 0941, MJ [COL POHL]: This Commission is called to order. 0 0 [The Military Commission was called to order at 0, January 0.] MJ [COL POHL]: This Commission is called to order. All parties are again present who were present when the Commission recessed. The next

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Vol. - 1 THE NORTHEAST OHIO COALITION ) FOR THE HOMELESS, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) CASE NO. :0-CV-00 ) JON HUSTED, in his

More information

SUFFIELD TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 8:00 P.M., JANUARY 2, 2018 PUBLIC HEARING IN RE: GREG AND JENNIFER SPICKARD

SUFFIELD TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 8:00 P.M., JANUARY 2, 2018 PUBLIC HEARING IN RE: GREG AND JENNIFER SPICKARD SUFFIELD TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS :00 P.M., JANUARY, PUBLIC HEARING IN RE: GREG AND JENNIFER SPICKARD - - - - - Held at Suffield Township Fire Department Community Room Waterloo Road, Mogadore,

More information

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLAINTIFF, DEFENDANT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLAINTIFF, DEFENDANT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 1 THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO JASON E. COBB, PLAINTIFF, VS. CASE NO. CIV508137 ERNEST BREDE, et al., DEFENDANT REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

More information

Press Conference Announcing Recusal from Investigation into Russian Influence in the U.S. Presidential Election Campaign

Press Conference Announcing Recusal from Investigation into Russian Influence in the U.S. Presidential Election Campaign Jeff Sessions Press Conference Announcing Recusal from Investigation into Russian Influence in the U.S. Presidential Election Campaign delivered 2 March 2017, DOJ Conference Center, Washington, D.C. [AUTHENTICITY

More information

FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 05/20/ :33 PM INDEX NO. 2014EF5188 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 95 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/20/2016. Exhibit E

FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 05/20/ :33 PM INDEX NO. 2014EF5188 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 95 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/20/2016. Exhibit E FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 05/20/2016 02:33 PM INDEX NO. 2014EF5188 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 95 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/20/2016 Exhibit E Goodwin Procter LLP Counselors at Law 901 New York Avenue, N.W. T: 202.346.4000

More information

) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETI'S. 2 SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT (Consolidated CA No ) 3

) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETI'S. 2 SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT (Consolidated CA No ) 3 )0001 1 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETI'S 2 SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT (Consolidated CA No. 02-1296) 3 4 JAMES M. HOGAN, et al., Plaintiffs, 5 VS. 6 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC 7 ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON, a

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Stephen G. Montoya (#01) MONTOYA JIMENEZ, P.A. The Great American Tower 0 North Central Avenue, Ste. 0 Phoenix, Arizona 0 (0) - (fax) - sgmlegal@aol.com Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

More information

ICANN Transcription. GNSO Review Working Group. Thursday 08 June 2017 at 1200 UTC

ICANN Transcription. GNSO Review Working Group. Thursday 08 June 2017 at 1200 UTC Page 1 Transcription GNSO Review Working Group Thursday 08 June 2017 at 1200 UTC Note: The following is the output of transcribing from an audio recording of Registrar Stakeholder Group call on the Thursday,

More information

(Witness sworn.) THE COURT: Let's proceed. NAT TOVAR, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION

(Witness sworn.) THE COURT: Let's proceed. NAT TOVAR, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION State call officer Tovar. THE BAILIFF: witness has not been sworn. Your Honor, this THE COURT: Raise your right hand, please. 0 0 (Witness sworn.) THE COURT: Let's proceed. NAT TOVAR, having been first

More information

6 1 to use before granule? 2 MR. SPARKS: They're synonyms, at 3 least as I know. 4 Thank you, Your Honor. 5 MR. HOLZMAN: Likewise, Your Honor, as 6 7 8 9 far as I'm concerned, if we get down to trial dates

More information

1. After a public profession of faith in Christ as personal savior, and upon baptism by immersion in water as authorized by the Church; or

1. After a public profession of faith in Christ as personal savior, and upon baptism by immersion in water as authorized by the Church; or BYLAWS GREEN ACRES BAPTIST CHURCH OF TYLER, TEXAS ARTICLE I MEMBERSHIP A. THE MEMBERSHIP The membership of Green Acres Baptist Church, Tyler, Texas, referred to herein as the "Church, will consist of all

More information

Case 2:08-cv GLF-NMK Document 79-4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 11

Case 2:08-cv GLF-NMK Document 79-4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 11 Case 2:08-cv-00575-GLF-NMK Document 79-4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 11 Case 2:08-cv-00575-GLF-NMK Document 79-4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 2 of Page 11 4680 IN THE MATTER OF THE TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT OF JOHN

More information

MANUAL ON MINISTRY. Student in Care of Association. United Church of Christ. Section 2 of 10

MANUAL ON MINISTRY. Student in Care of Association. United Church of Christ. Section 2 of 10 Section 2 of 10 United Church of Christ MANUAL ON MINISTRY Perspectives and Procedures for Ecclesiastical Authorization of Ministry Parish Life and Leadership Ministry Local Church Ministries A Covenanted

More information

Michael Bullen. 5:31pm. Okay. So thanks Paul. Look I'm not going to go through the spiel I went through at the public enquiry meeting.

Michael Bullen. 5:31pm. Okay. So thanks Paul. Look I'm not going to go through the spiel I went through at the public enquiry meeting. Council: Delegate: Michael Bullen. Venue: Date: February 16 Time: 5:31pm 5 Okay. So thanks Paul. Look I'm not going to go through the spiel I went through at the public enquiry meeting. No, I'm sure you've

More information

American Legal Transcription 11 Market Street - Suite Poughkeepsie, NY Tel. (845) Fax: (845)

American Legal Transcription 11 Market Street - Suite Poughkeepsie, NY Tel. (845) Fax: (845) Exhibit A Evid. Hrg. Transcript Pg of UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------- In Re: Case No. 0-000-rdd CYNTHIA CARSSOW FRANKLIN, Chapter White Plains,

More information

CERTIFIED COPY SWORN STATEMENT 12 ROBERTO J. BAYARDO 13 OCTOBER 3,

CERTIFIED COPY SWORN STATEMENT 12 ROBERTO J. BAYARDO 13 OCTOBER 3, 1 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 SWORN STATEMENT 12 ROBERTO J. BAYARDO 13 OCTOBER 3, 2011 14 15 16 17 CERTIFIED COPY 18 19 20 Sworn Statement OF ROBERTO J. BAYARDO, given 21 on the 3rd day of October, 2011,

More information

JOHN WALLACE DICKIE & OTHERS v. Day 07 CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED. Page 1 Wednesday, 14 October 2009

JOHN WALLACE DICKIE & OTHERS v. Day 07 CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED. Page 1 Wednesday, 14 October 2009 Page 1 Wednesday, 14 October 2009 (10.02 am) HIS LORDSHIP: Mr Grossman? Mr Huggins? MR HUGGINS: May it please you, my Lord, I call Anthony Nigel Tyler. MR ANTHONY NIGEL TYLER (sworn) Examination-in-chief

More information

>> THE NEXT CASE IS STATE OF FLORIDA VERSUS FLOYD. >> TAKE YOUR TIME. TAKE YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.

>> THE NEXT CASE IS STATE OF FLORIDA VERSUS FLOYD. >> TAKE YOUR TIME. TAKE YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> THE NEXT CASE IS STATE OF FLORIDA VERSUS FLOYD. >> TAKE YOUR TIME. TAKE YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> GOOD MORNING. MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL

More information

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 BEFORE THE HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG, JUDGE

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 BEFORE THE HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG, JUDGE 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 BEFORE THE HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG, JUDGE 4 -------------------------------) ) 5 Espanola Jackson, et al., ) ) 6 Plaintiffs, ) ) 7

More information

Ramsey media interview - May 1, 1997

Ramsey media interview - May 1, 1997 Ramsey media interview - May 1, 1997 JOHN RAMSEY: We are pleased to be here this morning. You've been anxious to meet us for some time, and I can tell you why it's taken us so long. We felt there was really

More information

Case 2:11-cv GP Document 12 Filed 09/29/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:11-cv GP Document 12 Filed 09/29/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:11-cv-05827-GP Document 12 Filed 09/29/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA WEBMD HEALTH CORP. ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 11-5827 ) ANTHONY

More information

>> NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS DEMOTT VERSUS STATE. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. COUNSEL, MY NAME IS KEVIN HOLTZ.

>> NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS DEMOTT VERSUS STATE. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. COUNSEL, MY NAME IS KEVIN HOLTZ. >> NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS DEMOTT VERSUS STATE. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. COUNSEL, MY NAME IS KEVIN HOLTZ. I REPRESENT THE PETITIONER, JUSTIN DEMOTT IN THIS CASE THAT IS HERE

More information

Name: First Middle Last. Other names used (alias, maiden, nickname): Current Address: Street/P.O. Box City State Zip Code

Name: First Middle Last. Other names used (alias, maiden, nickname): Current Address: Street/P.O. Box City State Zip Code Grace Evangelical Presbyterian Church Children s Ministry Application Please answer each question. The information on this application will not be disclosed to unauthorized persons. Name: First Middle

More information

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT. IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT. IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and File No. HE20070047 LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and IN THE MATTER OF a Hearing regarding the conduct of Calum J. Bruce, a Member

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY AT INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURl

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY AT INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURl IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY AT INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURl SAMUEL K. LIP ARl (Assignee of Dissolved Medical Supply Chain, Inc., v. NOVATION, LLC, et al., Plaintiff, Defendants. Case No. 0816-CV-04217

More information

Pastor's Notes. Hello

Pastor's Notes. Hello Pastor's Notes Hello We're looking at the ways you need to see God's mercy in your life. There are three emotions; shame, anger, and fear. God does not want you living your life filled with shame from

More information

A P P E A R A N C E S FOR THE PLAINTIFF: MR. DIRRELL S. JONES (BY TELEPHONE) ASSISTANT DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL State Bar of Texas Office of the Chief

A P P E A R A N C E S FOR THE PLAINTIFF: MR. DIRRELL S. JONES (BY TELEPHONE) ASSISTANT DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL State Bar of Texas Office of the Chief CUSE NO. 380-01407-2013 COMMISSION FOR LWYER )( IN THE DISTRICT COURT DISCIPLINE, )( )( Plaintiff, )( )( VS. )( 380th JUDICIL DISTRICT )( TY CLEVENGER, )( )( Defendant. )( COLLIN COUNTY, TEXS ---------------------------------------------------------------

More information

CONSTITUTION AVONDALE BIBLE CHURCH

CONSTITUTION AVONDALE BIBLE CHURCH ARTICLE 1 - NAME AND LOCATION CONSTITUTION AVONDALE BIBLE CHURCH A. The church shall be known as Avondale Bible Church. B. The location of the church is 17010 Avondale Road NE, Woodinville, WA. 98077 ARTICLE

More information

Page 1 EXCERPT FAU FACULTY SENATE MEETING APEX REPORTING GROUP

Page 1 EXCERPT FAU FACULTY SENATE MEETING APEX REPORTING GROUP Page 1 EXCERPT OF FAU FACULTY SENATE MEETING September 4th, 2015 1 APPEARANCES: 2 3 CHRIS BEETLE, Professor, Physics, Faculty Senate President 4 5 TIM LENZ, Professor, Political Science, Senator 6 MARSHALL

More information