@sds71 and @gitana1, But I'm confused again.They are setting a date for a evidentiary hearing on motion 151
151 was Farber asking for a pretrial remedy of 3 Mil instead of 500,00
There were a few requests kicking around the case so far as I can tell and I cannot tell which request was being referred to here.
Possible requests that I am aware of in this case:
We had the atty's that had been representing FD wanting to be off the case.
We had the new atty (Bill Murray) coming on board as new counsel for FD.
We had GF atty filing for summary judgment after FD didn't show up for his 2nd deposition last week (FD did not attend prior requested deposition either).
We have GF atty filing that FORE/FD had not complied with prior request for financial information.
We also had new atty (Bill Murray) sending notice to the court that FD didn't attend the recent 2nd deposition because he "forgot" or some similar word.
So, alot going on but it doesn't seem to me that GF is getting much attention from the court as she has been asking for basic books and records from FORE for nearly a year and has received zero from FORE/FD.
Really need help to understand this as the requests of FORE by GF and the Court have been very clear and simple yet there has been zero compliance in evidence. It seems at a certain point the Court must decide and I am baffled how non compliance and not showing up for depositions can have no consequences for FORE/FD.
MOO
The hearing topic is undefined so far as I can tell, perhaps its to discuss everything that has gone on so far as quite a bit has happened and perhaps the judge wants to discuss it all with atty's and FD present.
Also the case with GF is a civil matter and not criminal.FD is involved with a criminal case but that is for the tampering/hindering related to JD.
They are setting a date for a evidentiary hearing on motion 151
151 was Farber asking for a pretrial remedy of 3 Mil instead of 500,00
My fear is that there may be concrete or chemicals involved...
so I think I have this right@sds71 and @gitana1, But I'm confused again.
Why wasn't this dealt with back when the original motion was filed in 2/19? Was it because GF was waiting for additional information which she subquently received and so is now ready to present the evidence?
Based on looking at the file its not clear that FD/FORE has provided the books and records to GF that she had requested. It did look like some bank records might have been shared by FORE but I'm not sure what GF is asking to present at the hearing?
This was the Judges rulingThanks for that. That says prejudgment remedy. Maybe it's a request for attorney's fees based on ability to pay and need?
This was the Judges ruling
After due hearing at which the plaintiff and the defendants appeared and were fully heard on the claims and any defenses, it is found that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff's claim, although in a lesser amount after considering any known defenses, counterclaims and/or set offs, and that the application should be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff may attach, garnish and/or encumber to the value of $500,000 against the defendant, Fore, the property and/or assets of the defendant, Fore, in any real or personal property, including any money deposited in any financial institution, and such other property and/or assets of said defendant as shall be disclosed to the plaintiff in the form of an affidavit by September 30, 2018. See Practice Book § 13-13.
HHDCV186088970S 9/6/2018 Page 1 of 2
This was the Judges ruling
After due hearing at which the plaintiff and the defendants appeared and were fully heard on the claims and any defenses, it is found that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff's claim, although in a lesser amount after considering any known defenses, counterclaims and/or set offs, and that the application should be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the plaintiff may attach, garnish and/or encumber to the value of $500,000 against the defendant, Fore, the property and/or assets of the defendant, Fore, in any real or personal property, including any money deposited in any financial institution, and such other property and/or assets of said defendant as shall be disclosed to the plaintiff in the form of an affidavit by September 30, 2018. See Practice Book § 13-13.
HHDCV186088970S 9/6/2018 Page 1 of 2
Thank you. I was lost! I think this must be related to the Fore Group case for money owed to the Farbers. right?
I looked it up. CT allows assets to be frozen in a certain amount prior to the actual trial to ensure that assets will be there if there is an ultimate award, using this prejudgment remedy. She is asking for that amount to be increased based on information discovered.
To get such a remedy, the "Plaintiff must merely prove the existence of probable cause for their claim. The Court has defined probable cause as “a bona fide belief in the existence of the facts essential under the law for the action and such as would warrant a man of ordinary caution, prudence and judgment, under the circumstances, in entertaining it.” Wall v. Toomey, 52 Conn. 35, 36(1884). The Court has even gone as far as to say you don’t have to prove you have a “fifty-fifty” chance of success. “Probable cause is a flexible common sense standard. It does not demand that a belief be correct or more likely true than false.” New England Land Co., Ltd. v. DeMarkey, 213 Conn. 612, 620, 569 A.2d 1098 (1990)".
What is a Prejudgment Remedy? - Russo Associates
Read the link because it has more information that is interesting when it comes to FD and what he is facing and how the process works.
Here is another link that explains exactly what it is, how it can be used and why it works:
You Need A Collection Lawyer
As I've explained before there are consequences. There's contempt of court. Motions for sanctions. Some of the most effective when it comes to discovery issues when a party refuses to do what they're supposed to are issue or terminating sanctions which sort of mean (without getting technical) that the party disobeying court orders will not get to present evidence as to an issue being debated and the other party will, and/or that a person's entire action will be dismissed and/or deemed a default.
All of that takes time due to the impact of the court's calendar and just how the process slowly unfolds. A year is not that long in the scheme of things in the family law arena. It's frustrating but not, again, a result of incompetence or corruption. With the exception that sneaky attorneys will drag the process out and that's easy to do.
Now, however, FD is in a sense bizarrely protected by the criminal charges. Because financial issues involving Fore Inc. may incriminate him when it comes to the criminal case. So he may not be compelled to now sit for a depo.
Everyone knows he's facing murder charges.
Just subpoena bank records, financial companies, start from there. And of course, LE has FD computers. Let’s look in there, too.
I’m saying that MT is wearing a rosary for all to see like it is jewelry. A rosary is NOT jewelry. She apparently doesn’t know that. She could have had one in her pocket if she truly knew the meaning of it and wanted that symbol to feel Gods presence with her in court. The rosary is the physical symbol of the prayers that surround a person praying and meditating on the life of Jesus. I wonder if MT knows anything about the life of Christ. She is a crazy loon for wearing it! TOTAL NUT! NO ONE wears it like jewelry. It’s total disrespect in doing so, for what it is intended .. A persons fingers are intended to hold a bead during each prayer and she had it draped around her! This really is significant to the kind of person she is.So are you saying MT is a Heathen w/ rosary?
Thank you for your postIt hurts my heart that Jennifer's story is so common in our society where many women sacrifice their own mental health and safety to hold a traditional family together for their children.
Arrogant and entitled men demean them as they flaunt their mistresses.
How distressing that a woman of means like Jennifer couldn't escape the nightmare of a narcissist.
Imagine how it is for someone poor or middle class.
God bless them all and may Jennifer be a warning to many.
Yes. Although this site reminds me of Ghost Busters they have apparently worked with LE to find bodies.
How Ground Penetrating Radar Works - How Deep Can It Go - Global GPR Service
Also the NIST was working on a corpse detection system a few years back. Interesting article here New Technique Finds Buried Bodies Better