It looks as if we have some life in the Civil Case. Judge Reed O’connor has ordered both parties (Plaintiff and Defendants) to appear for a hearing on November 17, 2010 to hear verbal arguments on the jurisdiction challenge submitted by Neil Evans, the attorney for David Feuerborn, Thomas Jennings, Larry Shultz, and Environmental Services and Support, Inc. (“Defendants”).
On November 17th Freestone will argue that the Defendants had the minimal contact needed in the state of Texas to keep the jurisdiction in the Northern District Court in Texas. According to my research, minimal contact is usually all one needs to prove in order to keep the original jurisdiction in which the complaint was originally filed. According to Freestone’s response to the Motion to Dismiss, the Defendants had minimal contact with Texas in that they originally solicited a Freestone consultant and resident of Texas while he was in Texas, made multiple phone calls to Freestone’s Texas office, sent multiple emails to Freestone’s Texas office, visited Freestone’s office in Texas on multiple occasions where they gave misrepresentations during demonstrations of the solvent, a demonstration trip in Houston, and the Petro-Sog case indicating that at least one of the Defendants (David Feuerborn) has previously directed this scam at the state of Texas.
Neil Evans, the attorney for Feuerborn in the Criminal Case, argued that he didn’t have enough time to prepare a proper defense for his client, and requested a continuance multiple times in the Criminal Case. Now, how are we supposed to believe that he has time to travel to Texas to represent all of the Defendants in the Civil Case? What are the odds that he will come up with some obtuse reason to postpone the jurisdiction hearing in the Civil Case? But then again the Judge must to approve his reason before he will allow the hearing to be postponed. I have a feeling that Judge O’connor will not have a lot of patience for these guys if they attempt delay tactics when he hears about their criminal indictment.
So now the Defendants’ attorney is going to fly back and forth between California and Texas on ESS investors’ funds. This is the biggest travesty of them all. On a phone conference with ESS investors David Feuerborn claimed he was looking for a joint venture partner, and that construction was underway on another machine. Instead, it looks like any new money that might come into this venture will be spent on defending David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings.
Personally, I would like both cases to move forward as quickly as possible. My goal is to collect any and all evidence in the Criminal Case and Civil Case that proves that Feuerborn and Jennings used fraud in their chemical scam in the hopes that an ESS class action can be put together. If there is evidence that criminal actions have occurred then the authorities might even get involved and stop them once and for all! No one else needs to get hurt by these guys and their scam.
- ESS Investor
No comments:
Post a Comment