The Insanity Continues...Again

We have some new movement in the Civil Case.  David Feuerborn, Thomas Jennings, Environmental Services and Support, Inc., and Larry Shultz finally responded to the lawsuit filed in July of last year.  It’s about damn time!  It looks like they used up all their stall tactics.  

As assumed, they deny most of the claims and allegations made by Freestone.  Here are some highlights:

Neil Evans (attorney representing the Defendants) denies that jurisdiction is proper in the Northern District of Texas.  I find this amusing because Judge O’Connor has already ruled that jurisdiction is proper in Texas!  He is basically telling a Federal Judge that he is wrong.  Neil attempted the same rhetoric in the Criminal Case against Judge Otero.  I don’t think Federal Judges take too kindly to this type of flippancy.    

My favorite part of the Response occurs where Evans states that the, “[d]efendants admit that a Cease and Refrain Order was issued by the California Department of Corporations, on or about November 9, 2006, and that the document speaks for itself, and the Defendants otherwise deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 4.15 to the extent they do not accurately restate the provisions of the Cease and Refrain Order itself.”  I find this last sentence extremely amusing because Freestone copied, verbatim, the language of the Desist and Refrain Order in paragraph 4.15 of their Complaint!!!!  So basically Evans is claiming that copying the exact language from the Desist and Refrain Order does not constitute accurately restating it?!  What a joke!  http://www.corp.ca.gov/ENF/pdf/2006/ess.pdf

Evans also states that there were no omissions made by the Defendants prior to the contract.  So, Mr. Evans, you are trying to tell me that Feuerborn, Jennings, ESSI, and Shutz told Freestone that they had been shut down by the SCAQMD because chlorinated carcinogens were spewing from their machine in 2007?  You are also telling me that the Defendants disclosed lab reports issued by the SCAQMD and Louisiana that also verify that chlorinated, non-proprietary chemicals are in the solvent?  You are telling me that the Defendants gave a copy of the Desist and Refrain Order to Freestone?  If they left out any of the items listed above then they omitted material information to fraudulently induce Freestone into signing a contract.

-ESS Investor