-
SANCTIONS
JAMES LEUENBERGER ACCORDING TO RULE 8.3
COMPLAINT REGARDING ATTORNEY JAMES LEUENBERGER
I, Deborah Swan, hereby lodge an official response to the notice
I received from
James Leuenberger.
NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT
DR 1102 (A) (1) James Leuenberger knowingly assisted his client
Ed Snook,
owner of the U.S.Observer,to procure a fraudulent default
judgment for
$49,999.99.
DR 1102 (A) (1) James Leuenberger knowingly engaged in unethical
and criminal
behavior against the Josephine County Circuit Court, Judge
Thomas Hull, Judge
Linda Baker, Judge Daniel Simcoe, and Defendant Deborah
Swan.
Page of 1 82
-
RESPONSE TO LEUENBERGERS LETTER IN REFERENCE TO
MY COMPLAINT
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. I did not send a written notice of intent to appear to James
Leuenberger
because of the fact that I did appear and I did answer to the
original complaint.
B. Therefore there was no reason for a notice of intent to
appear to be sent to
Leuenberger,
C. Leuenberger made this statement to mislead the facts in order
to cover up his
violations.
D. The facts of my timely appearance and my timely answers can
be found within
the self authenticated evidence, starting with the UPS tracking
number.
Page of 2 82
1
-
E. This tracking information can be verified by clicking the UPS
tracking link,
and entering the following tracking number:
1Z4E716V0121316819
F. UPS timely delivered my answers, affirmative defense, and
counter claim to
Leuenbergers office, at 9:04 AM on August 11, 2014.
Page of 3 82
-
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. August 11, 2014, was the 30TH day and the final day to answer
and appear,
therefore I made my appearance and I answered to the
complaint.
B. August 11, 2014, was not the 31st day after service.
C. August 11, 2014, was the 30th day, and the day I timely made
service.
D. The calendar attached as EXHIBIT A1 AND A2 will prove
Leuenbergers
claim of August 11, 2014, being the 31st day after service is
false.
Page of 4 82
2
-
CALCULATIONS ACCORDING TO RULE 10
A. Leuenberger is knowingly stating false claim, attempting to
deceive the BAR
by stating he began to prepare the default judgment on the 31st
day after
service.
B. August 11, 2014, is the 30th day, and is the same day
Leuenberger began to
draft the premature order for the default judgment.
Page of 6 82
-
C. August 11, 2014, was the same day his office employee Michele
Wilkinson, at
9:05AM, signed for my UPS proof of delivery.
Page of 7 82
-
D. August 11, 2014, is the same day Leuenberger had his employee
Michelle
Wilkinson, notarize his sworn affidavit, claiming he had not
received my
answers or any notice of any other appearance.
Page of 8 82
-
DR 1-102(A)(3) A. This statement by Leuenberger, shows his
attempt to circumvent the truth
about the details of when he knowingly began to file for the
default judgment.
B. The evidence can also be found in the court records, filed by
James
Leuenberger the day after the Oral Argument, for the Objection
Hearing on my
MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT ORDER AND JUDGMENT.
C. Leuenbergers document filed in this case is titled, RESPONSE
TO
DEFENDANTS 2ND AMENDED JUDICIAL NOTICE which Leuenberger
filed Nov. 13, 2014.
D. The following clips are copied and pasted off of the record.
The full copy is
attached as EXHIBIT B.
Page of 9 82
3
-
A. Pursuant to Leuenbergers response, page 2, lines 8-12, the
first work he
started on the morning of August 11, 2014, was prepare the
motion for order of
default and general judgment, the affidavit is support of the
motion, the draft
order of default, and the general judgment and money award on
default.
B. Once Leuenberger completed his default judgment papers, he
executed the
motion and affidavit , and then mailed all four documents to the
Josephine
County Clerk Cheryl Shonk.
Page of 10 82
-
C. Pursuant to page 2, lines 13 - 15, Around 12:00 Noon, on
August 11, 2014,
After he mailed the above described documents, shortly after
noon,
Leuenberger then opened his office mail box , and discovered the
UPS parcel
which had my answers, affirmative defense and counter claim. DR
1-102(A)
(3)
D. Leuenberger made no effort to correct this. Leuenberger at
this moment
should have contacted the clerk and told the clerk to hold off
on the default when
the papers arrive at the court. DR 1-102(A)(3)
(1) Pursuant to page 2, line 16 - 17, the first action
Leuenberger then takes, is he
scanned my answers, affirmative defense and counter claim, and
emailed a
copy to Ed Snook, the Plaintiff.
Page of 11 82
-
(2) The attached email is the proof that Leuenberger and Snook
had already made
the decision to enter this false default judgment against me, by
claiming they
never received my answers or appearance. (EXHIBIT C)
(3) The email that Leuenberger sent to Ed snook , clearly proves
that there was no
need to explain or discuss any details with Snook. (EXHIBIT
C)
(4) This type of communication it is self evident that both
Leuenberger and Snook
intentionally and knowingly began a default, before the legal
time had expired.
DR 1-102(A)(3)
E. Pursuant to lines 18 - 22, Leuenberger acknowledges that his
notary, on August
11, 2014, did in fact sign the UPS package, but she is not
authorized to open
up the mail.
Page of 12 82
4
-
A. This above statement from Leuenberger is a complete false
statement.
B. This statement is another attempt to deceive the BAR by false
statements as
facts. DR 1-102(A)(3)
C. The Civil Clerk informed me of this default judgment on
August 13, 2014.
D. The audio recorded conversation is from August 13, 2014, with
Civil Clerk
Cheryl Shonk.
1 min 33 sec your case went into a default.
1 min 50 sec yes you did send answers and appeared, but its
not
considered filed yet because there is no money on it yet
James Leuenberger planned to enter me into this false default
judgment.
The substantial proof is found in this case file.
A. Leuenberger, Ed Snook and the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk,
knowingly pushed
this default through the court, knowing it was procured by
fraud, deceit, false
facts, false sworn affidavit. DR 1-102(A)(3)
Page of 13 82
5
-
B. The court granted this motion due to the clerk Civil Shonk
assisting with
pushing it through, knowing it was false. DR 1-102(A)(3)
C. The judges signed off on the default, due to the fraud and
deception that has
been played against the court and judges without their full
knowledge of the
true facts about my answers and appearance . DR 1-102(A)(3)
D. Leuenberger continued to file more fraudulent judgments upon
the court, and
was awarded a supplemental judgment by Judge Baker, while
knowing this
Supplemental was fraud. DR 1-102(A)(3)
E. Leuenberger also was awarded attorney fees by fraud, claiming
he had been
following the rules ORCP68. DR 1-102(A)(3)
F. The judge added 9% interest, then placed a lien against me
for $49,999.99.
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. Leuenberger is attempting to deceive the BAR without the
truth and the facts.
B. The motion I filed against this Default Judgment, was a
MOTION TO
VACATE VOID DEFAULT ORDERS AND JUDGMENT .
C. This motion first was filed on September 7, 2014.
Page of 14 82
6
-
D. I received a Notice for an Objection Hearing to be held on
November 12, 2014.
E. October 20, 2014, I filed for a Motion for Telephonic
Appearance and it was
denied.
F. October 22, 2014, Judge Daniel Simcoe wrote on the Order why
he denied my
motion for Telephonic appearance. This motion is attached as
EXHIBIT D.
Page of 15 82
-
A. The note on the previous page, is from Judge Simcoe. Judge
Simcoe wrote on
the order that the he denied my telephonic appearance for not
sending a copy
to the opposing attorney. Leuenberger gave a false
representation to the court,
he did not receive a copy of my MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC
APPEARANCE, and if or when he does he objects.
Page of 16 82
-
B. This is another false claim by Leuenberger, deceiving the
court to believe he
never received my MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE
C. The following is the proof of shipping which was sent on
October 18, 2014.
D. The office of James leuenberger received a copy of my MOTION
FOR
TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE on October 20, 2014.
Page of 17 82
-
A. October 23, 2014, the very next day after Judge Simcoe denied
my MOTION
FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE, Leuenberger then contradict what
he
had just told Judge Simcoe the day before, and now admits on
court record that
he did receive my MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE.
B. On October 23, 2014, Leuenberger filed an OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE, now
claiming that on October 20, 2014, he did receive my MOTION
FOR
TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE, claiming that I was intentionally
deceiving
the court by filing a false certificates of service.
Page of 18 82
-
C. Leuenberger then went even a step further by attaching to his
OPPOSITION
TO MY MOTION FOR A TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE, a copy of my
criminal record from 20 years ago, accusing me of being a
dishonest person.
D. Leuenberger stated in his OPPOSITION against my MOTION
FOR
TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE, that since I am a dishonest person, I
should
be required to appear in person, regardless of my distance from
the court.
E. Leuenberger also suggested to the court that I should be
required to bring a
government issued ID to prove who I am.
F. This all was intentional by Leuenberger to prejudice the
court against me.
G. October 26, 2014, Leuenberger filed a NOTICE TO THE COURT
where he
accused me of filing a false certificate of service accusing and
me of trying to
deceive the court.
Page of 19 82
7
-
Leuenberger has not addressed any of my motions. Leuenberger has
only made
false claims, denys receiving some of my motions, files false
Notices to the Court,
and contradicts himself without any fear of being in violation
of the rules.
Leuenberger has continued to make false claims all through this
case.
I was not aware of the fraud and the false representation made
to the court by
Leuenberger until I received a copy of Leuenbergers NOTICE TO
THE
COURT.
This is when I contacted a different clerk and requested a copy
of the entire case
file.
I wanted to see every document that has been filed in this case
by Leuenberger.
On October 31, 2014, I was sent a email with a copy of the whole
case file, that
had a left side and a right side.
This is when I discovered that the false sworn affidavit, the
false motions and
default judgment that was presented to the court by fraud,
wrongfully claiming I
never appeared, or sent my answers to Leuenberger or to the
court before the time
expired for me to appear.
Page of 20 82
-
The entire default filed by Leuenberger was procured by false
statements, fraud,
and false representations, claiming I never appeared or sent my
answers to the
clerk or to Leuenberger.
This current attempt of Leuenberger to deceive the BAR, by
giving more false
representations about the facts around my appearance and
answers, so the BAR
will not have the correct facts in an attempt to lead the BAR
into the false
direction, is another violation pursuant to Rule 8.4.
This is self evidence that Leuenberger will do what ever he can
to cover his
violations without any concern to how he is affecting the
Judiciary in whole.
The record is the self authenticated evidence which proves that
Leuenberger and
his client Ed Snook, knowingly used this court to commit the
crime of extortion,
by fraud, perjury, concealing documents, filing false sworn
affidavits, all of which
are crimes against the Tribunal, as well as Deborah Swan.
Page of 21 82
-
OBJECTION HEARING
ORAL ARGUMENT
During the November 12, 2014, Objection Hearing, I made an oral
judicial notice
of the fraud, false sworn affidavits, and false representation
made by James
Leuenebrger on each of the records he filed.
The following is on record, from the oral argument.
During the hearing, after I orally judicially noticed the
court.
Leuenberger continued to make false statements as facts
through
the entire hearing, and when Judge Hull asked him the direct
questions about my appearance and answers.
H. Leuenberger continued to tell Judge Hull false
statements.
I. The following are the actual statements made between Judge
Hull and
Leuenberger during the Objection Hearing on November 12,
2014.
J. Leuenberger denied numerous times receiving my answers and
claimed to the
court that I did not make any appearance. The Objection Hearing
was held in
Judge Hulls court.
Page of 22 82
-
K. James Leuenberger made the following statements which can be
found in the
official court records of this oral argument:
19 min 45 sec. There was no misstatements, there was no
violation of Rule17 regarding the sign a pleading for the motion
that matter, that I was not saying anything misleading or asking in
violation of the law or asking for something that Mr. Snook was not
entitled to.
L. Ed Snook was not entitled too a $50,000.00 default judgment
with attorney
fees.
M. By these false claims Leuenberger has violated DR 1-102(A)(3)
(lawyer may
not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation).
N. Leuenberger has a legal and ethical obligation, to correct
the false facts which
he made by filing the default judgment.
O. Leuenberger continued to conceal my answers which he did
received on time,
by making the following false claims to the court:
20 min 16 sec There are some vague allegations of fraud,
including fraud by the court staff, and the clerks which Ms. Swan
seems to elaborate today in court. Which there is nothing for me to
respond to in writing? It would be hard to respond now.
Page of 23 82
-
A. Leuenberger had the opportunity to correct the false
statements he made about my
answers and my appearance.
B. Leuenberger chose to continue with the false claims that I
had not answered or
appeared at all.
20 min 38 m sec I prepared the motion and the affidavit in
support of it, everything I said in it was true to the best of my
knowledge, as far as I know to this day, there was nothing I said
untruthful when I filed the motion and affidavit. In point in fact
Ms. Swan has not appeared.
A. Leuenberger has a legal duty to the court, to not knowingly
make false claims
as facts.
B. Leuenebrger and his client Ed Snook both are knowingly
committing fraud
upon the court, by continuing to commit perjury.
C. Leuenberger did receive Deborah Swans answers and I did make
my
appearance before the time expired.
Judge Hull then asked Leuenberger if Deborah Swan still had not
made any
appearance or answered.
20 min 55 sec Had not or still not?
Page of 24 82
-
A. Leuenberger commits fraud upon the court by directly
responding to Judge
Hulls question as follows.
B. Leuenberger knowingly and intentionally continues with this
behavior and
fraud against the court.
Leuenberger states at 21:00 :
Well, she was allowed to file a motion, after the judgment was
entered. No the 1 2answer was not filed and received by the court
before the order of default judgment Well, She appeared when she
was allowed to file a motion after the 3judgment was entered. No
the answer was not filed and received by the court 4before the
order of default or the judgment of default , so I believe Ms
Swan
A. The entire above statement by Leuenberger was made to deceive
the court.
B. Leuenberger did receive my answers and Leuenberger knew the
clerk also
received my answers on August 11, 2014.
C. Therefore Leuenberger is making a false claim that my answers
were not
filed or received before the order of default judgment, is
another false
representation by Leuenberger, knowing it is false.
D. I made my appearance when the court was served my
answers.
Leuenberger knowingly made a false statement. Leuenberger knows
that he entered a default judgment 1after I had legally answered
and appeared.
Yes, an answer was filed and received by the court before the
order of default judgment was entered by 2Leuenberger.
I appeared on time before the judgment was entered.3
Yes the answer was filed and received by the court before the
order of default or the judgment of default ,4
Page of 25 82
-
E. The UPS Proof of delivery tracking number 1Z4E716V0154650066
shows
Josephine Circuit Court received the UPS delivery on August 11,
2014, at
10:41 AM.
F. Leuenberger made the false claim upon the court as a fact, by
stating I was
allowed to file a motion after the judgment was entered.
G. Judge Hull then interrupts Leuenberger and asks if
Leuenberger disagrees with
what I had orally noticed the court about my answers and
appearance.
Judge Hull states at 22 min 15 seconds:
So what youre saying is you disagree with what she is saying
today?
A. Leuenberger continued to make the false representations,
acting as if he
never received or knew anything about my answers and my
appearance.
B. Leuenberger stated at 22 min 18 sec :
I think the record will reflect that.
C. Leuenberger is falsely directing the Judge to the court
register, knowing what
he was telling the Judge was false, and knowing the register
will assist
Leuenberger with falsely convincing the Judge that Deborah Swan
never
timely answered or appeared.
Page of 26 82
-
D. Leuenberger already knew the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk did not
officially
enter into the register when she received Deborah Swans
answers.
E. This is aiding and abetting by the clerk Cheryl Shonk for not
following her
duty which is to enter the time of day, the date of when the
clerk was served
the answers by the defendant.
F. The date of filing service is upon the date of the
mailing.
ORCP 9 says the following:
The filing of pleadings and other documents with the court as
required by these rules shall be made by filing them with the clerk
of the court or the person exercising the duties of that
office.
ORCP says the following: Appearance is made by filing with the
clerk
ORCP 7 :Filing is made upon the date of mailing.
A. Judge Hull believed Leuenbergers false statements he
made.
B. Since the OJIN court register did not have any entry of my
answers, counter
claim, or affirmative defense, entered into the OJIN
register.
C. Leuenberger and Snook were fully aware that both he and the
civil clerk
received my answers, affirmative defenses and counter claims on
August 11,
2014, before the time to appear had expired. VIOLATED RULE 3.2
(a) (b)
Page of 27 82
-
D. On August 13, 2014, Leuenberger received a call from the
civil clerk.
E. The clerk contacted Leuenberger when she received
Leuenbergers documents
that he mailed to the court to file for the default order and
judgment.
F. The civil clerk informed Leuenberger that on August 11, 2014,
she did receive
my answers on time.
G. The civil clerk explained there was a delay with my fee
waiver application.
H. Leuenberger told the clerk to continue with the default
judgment anyway.
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) (b)
I. Leuenberger attempts to prejudice the court against me again
by bringing up
the false certificate of service, claiming I have been deceiving
the court.
At 22 min 38 sec Leuenberger states:
Umm and as far as I know, the only deception that has engaged
in, is that by Ms Swan by filing her false certificate of service
on the motion for telephonic appearance , which I brought to this
courts attention, but I have not made any mind statements and as
far as I know neither has the court staff. So I ask this motion to
be denied and this judgment set.
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) Leuenberger is making a total false
statement, without any regard to the court, knowing his actions
will inflict injury upon me.
Page of 28 82
-
A. Leuenbergers actions are clear violation of ethics and his
duty to correct his
actions by not continuing to commit fraud upon the court, as
well as not
continue to use the court to unlawfully extort money out of
me.
B. In the above statement by Leuenberger, when he says, as far
as I know,
Leuenberger did know that I was not trying to deceive the court
and he knew
that certificate of service was a typographical mistake.
Leuenberger and I had a
20 minute phone call a week before this hearing, that I made to
him when I
received his NOTICE TO THE COURT, accusing me of deceiving the
court.
We discussed this and worked it out. I corrected my mistake and
he received a
copy of the corrected certificate of service. Leuenberger is
trying to do
anything he can to paint a false light to prejudice the court
against me, This is
not ethical and is a violation of Rules of Professional
Misconduct.
Judge Hulls attitude becomes more indifferent towards me as this
hearing
continues due to the constant false statements that Leuenberger
continues to use
against me.
Judge Hull then asked me if I have any response to Leuenbergers
testimony.
At 24 min 19 sec, I state:
Yes Sir. I would like to state there has deception on my side
when it comes to the certificate of service. When I realized I had
a typographical error, I immediately corrected it, and I actually
called mr. Leuenberger on the phone,
Page of 29 82
-
and let him know it was a mistake. I immediately sent in a
motion to correct it and add it to the case. It was just an error
on my part, just a mistake. So that was corrected. The tone of
voice by Judge Hull was obvious that the judge was not believing
anything I was saying during this hearing.
HULL: Anything else?
I then attempted to explain and reintegrate the facts about
my
answers and appearing before the time had expired.
At 25 min 09 sec I stated the following:
Um, yes if you look at the entire case file, I was able to get a
copy of the entire thing. And there is 2 parts of the file, there
is a left side for some reason, and a right side. And so when you
have time to review the entire case file, I would hope that you do
get both the left and the right. You will see in there, the fax I
sent the clerk lisa, when I was having issues in the very beginning
about the appearance. and she told me that they had my appearances,
and as soon as this void order was ruled on, Im not sure what the
hold up is with making my appearance, but bottom line. I made my
appearance. I made my counter claim, my affirmative defenses, and
my application to fee waiver, was all sent to both parties. but the
application for fee waiver was not sent to Mr. Leuenberger, due to
that is confidential information that is just between myself and
the court. But he did get a copy of my answer, my affirmative
defenses, and my counter claim. And I can show the proof of that by
the signature, by an employee who works in his office by the name
of Michelle Wilkinson She is the one who signed for it. So you will
see it on my proof of delivery, And she is the one who signed the
false sworn affidavit the same day, When he started to file for the
default is the same day he received my answer.
Page of 30 82
-
HULL: Okay do you have a copy of the OJIN print out?
During this part of the hearing, Judge Hull discussed with
the
court clerk Cameron, what was entered in the OJIN register.
Judge Hull stated at 28 min 33 sec:
I dont see anything about additional document including the
application being filed. But I dont know. Are they usually done
that way or is it just the waiver filed without the documents?
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) 4 Leuenberger is required to tell the
truth about my answers and appearance. Leuenberger knew the clerk
Cheryl Shonk also received my answers.
Judge Hull asked Leuenberger some more questions about my
answers, and appearance.
At 29:00 Judge Hull states :
Well, Mr Leuenberger, What I see here is she filed a waiver of
fee deferral, prior to filing a motion for a default. Do you see
that?
Leuenberger then agrees that he does see this listed in the OJIN
register.
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) 4
Page of 31 82
-
Leuenberger continues to conceal the truth about my answer and
appearance
Judge Hull then goes on by stating:
At 29 min 28 sec:
Have you already, and you may have already answered the
question, Was it your intention when you were speaking just now, to
indicate that you believe a filing a fee waiver is not a filing of
an answer? Or a response required by statute?
VIOLATED RULE 3.4 (e) Leuenberger should not state a personal
belief or opinion
The judge is clearly acting out of his position by speaking
for
Leuenberger, and telling the court what Leuenbergers
intention,
r what Leuenberger was meaning to say.
Judge Hull continues with this communication between him and
Leuenberger.
The following dialog is between Judge Hull and Leuenberger:
At 29 min 30 sec:
JIM: That is correct your honor.
HULL: But you did say that? Correct?
JIM : I dont know if I said that or not but that is the way
feel.
HULL: Well I don't know if you implied that
JIM: What I said was I knew an answer had not
Page of 32 82
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (e)
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) (b)
-
been filed with the clerk, and I believe that is reflected in
OJIN, and I don't see an answer being
HULL: No there is no note and I think your right, I do not see
an answer, at least the OJIN does not have an answer.
JIM: As I recall your Honor, OJIN is the official um, the
official position of the court, as for what has been filed,
HULL:: Ok. I assume you dont have any case law to explain that
to the court?
JIM: I dont.I have it on the tip of my tougne your honor. But I
have had it come up repeatedly in cases of uh, timeliness of an
appeal, as to what the court of appeals has repeatedly relied upon
what OJIN says as what position to what uh.
HULL: Well what I am about it the , um the affidavit in motion
to waive fees as not being a response as required by law within 30
days. Do you have case law to back that?
JIM: I, am sure, but my understanding pursuant to the rule, that
uh, a first appearance is either the filing of a pleading, answer,
or a motion. Neither of which are reflected in OJIN.
HULL: Specifically the language of the filing in all those
things, correct? So to file an appearance is usually to file an
answer a motion? Okay.
HULL: So I would look for case law that would say that a motion
to waive fees would not qualify for that presumably, correct?
JIM: That is what I am aware of, but I have not researched
that.
Page of 33 82
-
HULL: Okay.
HULL: Okay, Ms Swan is there anything you want to respond about
that?
A. The dialog between Leuenberger and Judge Hull, is self
evident that Judge Hull does not believe that I turned in my
answers and made my appearance on time.
B. Leuenberger has influenced Judge Hull by not speaking the
facts about my answers and appearance being made timely to
both him and to the court.
C. Judge Hull is under the false impression that I only served
to
the clerk my fee waiver application and the fee waiver
declaration.
D. James Leuenberger and the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk, both
knew the truth.
E. Leuenberger continued to conceal this information and
still
push forward for a default judgment. Judge Hull asked me if
I wanted to respond.
Page of 34 82
-
At 31 min 29 sec, Judge Hull and myself have the following
discussion:
SWAN: Yes I believe that I did file my answers on time, I have
the proof of this, Cheryl the clerk ,Cheryl received
HULL Please stop. Please stop. Okay, What I am going by is the
file. Okay. It says you filed your motion to waive fees, and
supported it with an affidavit indicated before the default motion
was filed by a day or so. Okay? And I see that on OJIN, all right.
I have not gone through the this entire file to see exactly what
was filed that day, Okay, all right, so I don't know. There is no
indication in the OJIN records on docket that says you filed an
answer. Okay? You did not answer do you understand that?
SWAN: That is what I am hearing and its very concerning to
me.
HULL: Well, I dont know what you mean about proof..do you have a
document filed with your material that there is proof that the
clerk actually received something else?
SWAN: Yes sir if you look at the court, at the file, i don't
know if its been entered, cause Im not their, but you can even ask
your clerk cheryl yourself. i was told on the 11th she received my
answers. i was told on the that the hold up for why my,i was under
the impression, that she entered me as my appearance and I
answered. The hold up, I was under that impression,and I have all
this on recorded conversation, I record everything because this use
all new to me, and because I am in Texas. Cheryl told me on the
12th that she has spoken to Mr Leuenberger.
Mr Leuenberger was informed that I did appear and they did
receive my appearance and my answers, but the hold up was my fee
waiver application. and Cheryl then asked Mr Leuenberger, what do
you want me to do? Mr Leuenberger
Page of 35 82
-
told Cheryl to go ahead and enter a default. This is exactly
what she told me. I've got the recorded conversation and the
transcripts.
Judge Hull tried to stop me from speaking, and I then
responded
by
stating: 34 min 07 sec:
Let me finish please sir. then she tells me on the 13th of
August that my case was go into default. and i went into panic mode
and i asked her why. and she said, well don't panic yet, its in the
judges box, with a note on it and the hold up was the fee waiver
application, and she told me herself,that when the judge sees an
attempt to be made an attempt to appear, once the judge reads that
little note that sure said she put on there, the he, that most
likely the judge will not enter a default . this is what your clem
cheryl told me. okay. and i have it on record, so then i calmed
down, and i was required by Cheryl or some reason to get a
notarized statement from my parents claiming that i have them
helping me with my bills right now. so that took an unnecessary
delay by the clerk. but this is what she told me i had to do in
order to get my fee waiver approved . i asked her if i could fax
this stuff into her, she told me no, it has to be sent over in the
mail. Now its Thursday and i'm trying to find a way to send it over
night to Oregon, because the first time when I ant my answers and
appearance it cost 120.00 next day air ups to your court . i did
not have the money, and i called her again. and i asked her can i
please fax this to you, because i had just gotten done reading the
rules of faxing, and records are allowed to be faxed. she tells me
again you're not allowed to fax. her and i got into to a little
confrontation on the phone, and she hangs up on me. I called back
and I talked to Lisa. Lisa said Deborah, you are allowed to fax
your proof of the bills and stuff, and I will take care of it. That
is what Lisa told me. So there are a lot of dynamics that happened
about this fee waiver, but my point it is that I sent and I
appeared and I answered to this complaint, that was filed against
me. I made my appearance and I made my answer All the other stuff
is a complete violation of my due process and there is not supposed
to be any kind of discrimination when it comes to the status or
your income.
Page of 36 82
-
Im having finical issues in my life, and that should not be able
to hold me back to step forward and defend myself from a claim
against me. And that is what this whole thing has turned into,.
This fee waiver application is restricting my rights to my own due
process of law. and that is the right to be heard, and a right to
appear. okay. and any appellate judges would side with me and the
supreme court also has a lot of case law that there should never be
any sort of price tag related your righted to the judicial process.
and that is what Leuenberger did get my appearance and did get my
answers. and if I have to appeal his I will, cause Ive got the
proof to it. and I will file a suit affiant your clerk if I have to
get her to speak honestly because Cheryl knows all the details
involved here. Ands so does Lisa, and so does JUDY.
JIM Can I ask you a question?
SWAN Yes sir
JIM Um Ms Swan, have you subpoena any of these court clerk to
appear in court?
SWAN No I did not subpoena any of them to appear today. But I
can though. Can we have a continuance and have them appear?
The fact that Leuenberger challenged me about not subpoenaing
the clerks, is self evidence that Leuenberger knew the clerk would
not be allowed to testify.
HULL Okay, sounds like we are in the end I will have to review
the file and I will let you know .No I am not giving you a
continuance at this point.
SWAN: Okay thank you
Page of 37 82
-
HULL: Ill have to look at the file so I can answer the question
today. All right otherwise that is all today.
SWAN: So we will I get a notice from anything?
HULL: Uh you will get something in writing. Yea you will.
SWAN: All right. Am I allowed too submit anything to court? At
this point again?
HULL: Generally , no. this is the date and this is the time, I
have your material already. Okay..
Judge Hull is now claiming he has my material already. This is a
contradiction from the entire hearing. During the hearing I noticed
the Judge of the UPS tracking and the prof that I had recorded
conversations that would show the truth about my appearance.
SWAN So I am not allowed to submit anything else? After this
hearing?
HULL: What is it you want to submit man?
SWAN: What ever I think is necessary to have my place in
honorably ruled over.
HULL: Well I cant tell you what to do. I cant tell you what you
need or don't need. This is your opportunity to a hearing. You
obviously knew about the time for the hearing , this is the time to
present the material. It does not keep going. We don't continue and
continue ad continue, okay? So right now this is the hearing time
and this is when you have the opportunity to present what you want
to okay.
SWAN Okay.
Page of 38 82
-
SWAN So let me ask the opposing side one more question. Are you
telling me today that you did not receive my answers?
JIM inaudible
HULL Just a minute, who are you asking this question of?
SWAN: Mr Leuenberger
JIM: Uh Ms Swan I did receive copies of an answer with an
affirmative defense and counter claim, uh but that does not
constitute an appearance.
SWAN Why does that not constitute an appearance? My appearance
was made to the court?
HULL umm maam,
SWAN Yes sir
HULL Okay you can ask a question but you cant ask him what he
thinks his opinion is of the law.
SWAN: Okay well that why, let me ask him one more question if
you don't mind why then on all these orders
Page of 39 82
-
of default did you falsely state that you have not received any
appearance or answers or my intent of my appearance?
JIM My affidavit was accurate.
CONTRADICTION FROM WHAT HE JUST ADMITTED! THE AFFIDAVIT HE IS
REFERRING TOO IS BELOW:
Page of 40 82
-
PAGE 2 OF LEUENBERGERS AFFIDAVIT
Page of 41 82
-
SWAN Every order that you have filed states that you have not
received any answer or any appearance from me or any intent of my
appearance.
HULL Okay he is not responding to that.. Okay
Judge Hull interrupts and does not let Leuenberger answer my
question about his contradictions and false claims he just now on
record admitted to.
SWAN All right.
HULL His answer was he has not. So that is all today. So um I
will review the material in the file and let you know what my
decision is.
Judge Hull answered for Leuenberger and is now covering for
Leuenberger, after Leuenberger just admitted to receiving my UPS,
and then Leuenberger claims his AFFIDAVIT in support of the MOTION
for A DEFAULT JUDGEMENT was accurate!
SWAN Thank you.
HULL Okay that is all today. So go ahead and please hang up the
phone
END OF ORAL ARGUMENT
Page of 42 82
-
VIOLATIONS OF CRIMINAL STATUTES
1. 162.355 SIMULATING LEGAL PROCESS. 5
James Leuenberger and Ed Snook, knowingly committed the crime of
simulating
legal process, with the malicious intent to harass, injure and
defraud Deborah
Swan.
James Leuenberger knowingly issued and delivered to the Civil
Clerk Cheryl
Shonk, in Josephine County Court, documents that in form and
substance, falsely
simulated the action of entering a false default judgment
against Deborah Swan for
$49,999.99.
2. 162.075 FALSE SWEARING.
(1) James Leuenberger knowingly committed the crime of false
swearing by
making false sworn statements, and false unsworn declarations,
knowing it to be
false.
(2) False swearing is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 184;
2013 c.218 20]
5
Page of 43 82
-
3.
ORS 164.0 THEFT
Respondent James Leuenberger, knowingly has committed theft
against Deborah
Swan, with the intent to deprive Deborah Swan of her property by
appropriating
$49,999.99 from Deborah Swan.
James Leuenberger and Ed Snook both knowingly, used the
Josephine County
Circuit Court for unlawful purpose.
164.085
THEFT BY DECEPTION
A. James Leuenberger and Edward Snook, committed theft by
deception, through
their willful and deliberate intent of committing fraud, by
making multiple
false representations to the Josephine County Court about
Deborah Swan.
B. Defendant James Leuenberger procured a false default judgment
against the
Plaintiff for $49,999.99.
C. James Leuenberger created a false impressions of law, value,
intention and
State of mind, that he knew are not true.
Page of 44 82
-
D. Leuenberger and Ed Snook, have both failed to correct this
false impression
about Deborah Swan, which they intentionally started on August
11, 2014.
E. James Leuenberger and Ed Snook, have continued with their
deception,
fraud, and false impression, about Deborah Swan both during and
after the
Oral Argument held on November 12, 2014, and have continued up
to the
present day.
F. James Leuenberger has prevented Judge Thomas Hull, Judge Lynn
Baker, and
Judge Daniel Simcoe, from acquiring the truthful information
involving
Deborah Swans appearance, affirmative defenses, answers, and
counter
claim, that Deborah Swan sent on time to James Leuenbergers
office, on
August 11, 2014, at 9:05 A.M..
DEFAULT JUDGMENT PROCURED BY
FRAUD, DECEIT AND FALSE REPRESENTATION
The proof of James Leuenberger receiving Deborah Swans
appearance, answers,
and counter claim has been proven by the following irrefutable
and self
authenticated evidence:
Page of 45 82
-
James Leuenbergers oral confession, during the objection hearing
November 12,
2014.
James Leuenberger filed response to the Defendants Judicial
Notices November
13, 2014.
Deborah Swans Proof of Delivery to James Leuenbergers office on
August 11,
2014 by UPS and tracking number
Cheryl Shonk, the civil clerks statement to Deborah Swan, on
August 12, 2014,
when Cheryl confirmed to Deborah that she spoke with James
Leuenberger, and he
confirmed he did receive her answers, counter complaint, and
affirmative defense
on time. (RECORDED PHONE CALL ATTACHED IN THE EMAIL)
(f) Leuenbergers email to Ed Snook on August 11, 2014. (EXHIBIT
C)
JUDICIAL NOTICE TO JUDGE THOMAS HULL
DEBORAH SWAN
FRAUD, FALSE STATEMENTS OF FACTS AND FALSE REPRESENTATIONS MADE
BY LEUENBERGER TO PROCURE A FALSE DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Page of 46 82
-
The following statements we're stated on court record in Judge
Thomas Hulls
court room on November 12, 2014, as well as Leuenberger response
he filed to the
court on November 13, 2014.
The following is from the response he filed.
November 12, 2014, During the oral argument, Deborah Swan
judicially noticed
Judge Thomas Hull, of fraud, false representation, and
misconduct.
The following is on record, from the oral argument.
SWAN Yes I would like to add to the record, a judicial notice of
new evidence that I have discovered of fraud on all the
HULL Okay that did not just happen automatically. you have to
tell me what is you're trying to admit, because here are rules.
SWAN It would be according to rule 60
HULL Im having trouble hearing you, you're missing point so go a
little slower
SWAN Hang on, Im having trouble too, my phone is not doing very
hang on one-second.
HULL Do you have a land line perhaps?
SWAN Well Im having trouble with my charger, it's giving me some
issues, but I think it's okay now.
HULL Well what you just said was audible, yes
Page of 47 82
-
SWAN Okay what I would like to do for the record, is to give
judicial notice of evidence that I have newly
Page of 48 82
-
discovered,by reviewing the docket, that has been filed, so this
is self authenticated evidence of fraud and
misrepresentations, on these uh, on these records.
HULL Lets try this, what records are you talking about?
SWAN Um, I, am talking about the motion, hang on, the motion
filed by mr James Leuenberger, the first motion he put in for a
default judgment
HULL I understand there is a default judgment, yes, with an
affidavit to support that goes along with the default judgment,
yes
SWAN Right, yes sir, on page 1 lines 18 through 25, and on page
2, this motion for order of default, claims that I never appeared
or answered.
Page of 49 82
-
Page of 50 82
-
And that is why he is filing for a default. But I did appear,
and I did send answers to both the court clerk, as well asJames on
time. So this default judgment is void.
The Judge then asked me:
HULL: When you say it was sent, does that mean the day you
forwarded it here?
This question by the Judge shows me he had no clue about my
situation. The clerk Cheryl informed me she put a noter in his box
about my delay. This shows me Cheryl was knowingly helping the
opposing side with the fraudulent default.
SWAN Yes sir,its on court record, I have the proof of my
tracking, Cheryl the clerk is aware that I filed it on time, and it
was received on time. And so is the other clerk, Michelle, I
believe is her name, no Lisa. Because Lisa, as well as James
Leuenberger, he also received a copy of it on time,on August 11,
2014.
HULL Okay, I am listening to what you have to say.
SWAN So when you go through this entire docket sheet, of all
these records, on the affidavit that was filed by
Mr Leuenberger, on the 13th, he swears its a sworn affidavit.
And he swears under oath, the he has not received any notice of my
appearance or answers.
Page of 51 82
-
And he has not received any intent of me trying to appear. And
that is completely not true.
Page of 52 82
-
HULL Are you going to tell me how you know he received these
documents?
SWAN Because I have the tracking number of his assistant names
Michelle Wilkinson, signing the UPS proof of delivery, at 9:05 am
on the 11th.
Page of 53 82
-
HULL Is that with the material you filed?
SWAN Is it with the material I filed? umI have a recorded
conversation, actually it is, because I sent it by fax to um, the
other clerk, lisa, when all this was going on, I sent a fax to
Lisa. Its there in your files. And I have the proof of the UPS
tracking with his notary signing it. For the proof of delivery.
HULL Carry on
SWAN Well I can carry on, so from everything from that point,
your Honor, would seem like it would be fraud and
misrepresentation, this entire default judgment has been pushed
through under the implication that I never appeared, or i never
filed answers. I even have a counter claim that was filed with my
answers as well. So, its just been put on a shelf. Its never been
entered.
HULL What do you mean its been put on a shelf?
SWAN This is what Cheryl the clerk did. Because my application
for fee waiver was delayed.
HULL Ms. Swan, Please understand that in regard to what you are
saying about what a clerk did, its hearsay at this point.
SWAN Ive got a recorded conversation if that will help you.
HULL I did not ask you that.
SWAN Well Im just letting you know
HULL Do you have anything more?
Page of 54 82
-
SWAN I can answer any more question if you want me too.
HULL I just asked you do you have anything more you want to put
on the record.
SWAN Is this my only opportunity to put things on the record, in
this hearing?
HULL This is a hearing on the motion to set aside the default
judgment, so I suspect you should look at it that way, yes.
SWAN All right your honor, just bare with me I have never done
anything like this so I appreciate your patience. Umm let me see
here, give me one second, if you dont mind I need to review and to
look at my notes
On every one of these, let me just go down the list to show you
how many times this has been false misrepresented about my non
appearing. On page one affidavit for default judgment.
HULL I dont need you to repeat that, just tell me what else you
have."
SWAN Default order and general judgment on August 13th. Um
Cheryl accepted this false sworn affidavit, knowing it to be false.
the clerk. Pursuant to page 2 line 6
Page of 55 82
-
Page of 56 82
-
HULL: Okay, just hold on a minute here what is it your saying?
What the clerk did that was fraud?
SWAN: Every time these have been filed, on the top right these
records, have her stamp on it, and Cheryl knew this entire time I
made my appearance and I made my answer, and these records
presented to the court, and she accepted them, knowing to be false.
So thats fraud.
HULL: Okay, carry on
SWAN: Page 2 of the same order of default judgment, the clerk
accepted it, page 2 line 1 - 4. Mr. Leuenberger, drafted this
motion for default and general judgment on August 11, which was the
exact same day he received my answers and my appearance. The same
day he is drafting a motion for a default judgment is the same day
he received my answers.
Page of 57 82
-
Page of 58 82
-
Page 1 line 21 - 23, Mr Leuenberger again made a false
misrepresentation claiming I had not answered or made an
appearance.
Page of 59 82
-
"On the DEFAULT ORDER AND GENERAL JUDGMENT, August 13, 2014,
submits a misleading affidavit, which failed to disclose the facts
regarding my appearance and my answers."
Page of 60 82
-
Page 2 line 11 - 15, Michelle Wilkinson, is the notary, she
notarized the false sworn affidavit knowing it to be false,
Page of 61 82
-
Ms Wilkinson is the one who signed the UPS delivery on August
11,2014, so she knew that my answers and my appearances were sent
to the office of Mr Leuenberger.
Page of 62 82
-
On August 14, on the um, the false ORDER OF DEFAULT that was
filed by Mr Leuenberger, again the same thing he is claiming I did
not appear, the clerk Cheryl accepted it knowing it to be false,
and.. the Judge signed it.
Page of 63 82
-
I think it was uh, I believe it was actually you, judge who
signed this false ORDER OF DEFAULT, due to fraud misrepresentation,
and the opposing attorney, have all misrepresented this for this
default judgment.
Page of 64 82
-
The GENERAL JUDGMENT MONEY AWARD, knowing all this to be false,
was again filed by Mr Leuenberger, the court having entered a
default judgment against myself, knowing it to be false, for
$49,999.99 and 9% interest. This entire thing should be completely
void, its a complete obstruction of justice
Page of 65 82
-
It says that ORCP 68 has been followed, and applied to this
default judgement. it has not been followed. I dont see how they
can even say that I owe any attorney fees for this void default
judgment, It also says, lets see here. Im good. I will stop for a
second.
silence in the court
Page of 66 82
-
SWAN Have I lost you guys?
HULL Nope, we are still waiting for you to finish.
SWAN I guess thats it. my closing statement, lets see here, let
me get this on record, according to ummm, lets see here, a default
judgement not pursuant to rule 60 of the federal rules of civil
procedure, should be based upon facts. this default judgment has
gone beyond the allegations in this complaint, and that the
judgment is void. due to this large judgments of compensatory
damages, without evidence to prove that I even owe Snook any
damages at all, and the entire thing is based on fraud and mis
representation of facts and, this entire thing should be void on
its face, with prejudice. and thats it.
G. These facts are pertinent to the disposition of the courts
for approving or
denying a motion for a default judgment.
FRAUD
A. The fraud, false representation, and misconduct, that has
been perpetrated by
James Leuenberger, and Edward Snook, is how they were able to
place the
$49,999.99 fraudulent default judgment against Deborah Swan.
B. August 11, 2014, James Leuenberger knowingly sent to the
Josephine County
Court, a motion for a DEFAULT AND GENERAL JUDGMENT, with a
false
supporting affidavit, for the intent to defraud and make false
representation.
Page of 67 82
-
C. On August 13, 2014, James Leuenberger knowingly mis lead the
court by filing
these false motions, where he stated as a fact, claiming that he
had not received
Deborahs answers, and that he has no knowledge of Deborah Swan
having any
intent to appear.
D. This information is pertinent to the disposition whether a
default order and
judgment, attorney fees and money award would be allowed
according to the
rules of default judgments to be granted. 6
E. Defendants Leuenberger knowingly committed fraud upon Judge
Thomas
Hull, Deborah Swan, and Josephine County Circuit Court, by
filing under oath
these false sworn affidavits, and false representations to the
court, claiming
Deborah Swan had NOT appeared or filed her answers and had no
knowledge
of the Deborah Swans intent to appear.
F. These mis representations, deceptions and fraud, caused Judge
Hull to
unlawfully entered a $49,999.99 default judgment against Deborah
Swan, with
a lien and 9% interest, with awarded attorney fees all to be
paid.
Under Former Similar Statute (Ors 165.205) 6The accused must
have intended to defraud the injured party, made a false pretense,
the latter must have relied on the false representation believing
it to be true and must thereby have been induced to part with
something of value. State v. Clermont, 9 Or App 141, 495 P2d 305
(1972), Sup Ct review denied
Page of 68 82
http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/165.205
-
165.102
OBTAINING EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS BY DECEPTION.
A. James Leuenberger and Edward Snook knowingly committed the
crime of
obtaining, and the execution of documents by deception, with
intent to
knowingly defraud and injure Deborah Swan, to acquire a
substantial benefit
for himself, and Leuenbergers client Ed Snook.
B. James Leuenberger knowingly obtained by fraud, deceit and
subterfuge, the
execution of written instruments which affected, and will end up
purporting
the pecuniary interest of Deborah Swan.
C. Knowingly Obtaining execution of documents by deception is a
Class A
misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 168]
ORS 164.095 THEFT BY RECEIVING.
A. James Leuenberger and Edward Snook knowingly have committed
theft by
receiving, due to the default judgment was procured through
fraud, deceit, 7
and false misrepresentation.
Under Former Similar Statute (Ors 165.205)The accused must have
intended to defraud the injured party, made a false pretense, 7the
latter must have relied on the false representation believing it to
be true and must thereby have been induced to part with something
of value. State v. Clermont, 9 Or App 141, 495 P2d 305 (1972),
Page of 69 82
-
B. Leuenberger and Edward Snook, knowingly allowed the court to
approve false
money awards and damages, at the expense of Deborah Swan,
knowing the
judgments and money awards and damages were procured through
fraud,
theft, false representations and deceit.
C. Leuenberger, the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk, and Edward Snook
both
knowingly concealed the facts about Deborah Swans answers,
affirmative
defense, counterclaim, fee waiver application, and appearance,
that Civil
Clerk Cheryl Shonk, James Leuenberger and Edward Snook all
received on
time, before the time expired, to deceive the Josephine County
Judges.
D. This criminal concealment was perpetrated by the Civil Clerk
Cheryl Shonk,
Leuenberger and Ed Snook, to enter the false default judgment,
order of a
money award, damages and attorney fees to be unlawfully forced
to be paid
by Deborah Swan.
E. On August 11, 2014, James Leuenberger and Edward Snook,
knowingly sent
false, fraudulent documents to the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk.
F. On August 15, 2015, James Leuenberger and his client Ed
Snook, knowingly
deceived Judge Thomas Hull into signing a fraudulent General
Judgment and
Money Award, with post judgment interest at 9% per annum,
attorney fees
Page of 70 82
-
and cost disbursements which are falsely claimed to be in
accordance with
ORCP 68.
G. On September 3, 2014, James Leuenberger and Edward Snook,
knowingly
both deceived Judge Linda Baker, by claiming that the Default
Judgment and
Money Award on Default, that was entered by James Leuenberger on
August
15, 2014, was a valid default that has been entered. 8
H. Linda Baker then signed off of the fraudulent Supplemental
Judgment.
I. October 20,2014, James Leuenberger knowingly lied to Judge
Daniel Simcoe,
denying receiving the Defendants MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC
APPEARANCE.
OUJI-CR 3-19
PERJURY BY CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS
A. James Leuenberger knowingly has made contradictory
statements, which have
been proven to be false, beyond a reasonable doubt, by the self
authenticated
evidence found in the court records, Snook vs Swan, 14CV0835, in
Josephine
An accused acts knowingly under the ABA Standards when he has
"conscious awareness of the nature or attendant 8circumstances of
the conduct but without the conscious objective or purpose to
accomplish a particular result." ABA Standards at 17. The Oregon
criminal standard for a "knowing[]" mental state articulated in ORS
161.085(8) and the ABA standard for "knowing" conduct describe the
same state of mind. Therefore, as to the convictions for false
reporting and improper use of the emergency reporting system, the
record establishes that the accused acted with at least a knowing
state of mind.
Page of 71 82
-
County, Oregon.
James Leuenberger filed a false default
C. The records that have been filed in this case is the self
authenticated
evidence of fraud, misconduct and misrepresentation.
D. The records show where Leuenberger has claimed that the
Defendant did
not appear nor does he has any knowledge of the Defendant
appearing.
E. The confession by James Leuenberger during the objection
hearing, that he DID
receive the Defendants answers, affirmative defense and counter
claim, clearly
proves this default judgment is not legal.
Annotated ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3; cf. DR
7-102(B)(1); see
also DR 1-102(A)(3) (lawyer may not engage in conduct involving
dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation).
Leuenberger has admitted on court record, in his response to the
Judicial Notice I
orally made during the Objection Hearing help on November 12,
2014, in Judge
Thomas Hulls courtroom.
Page of 72 82
-
TITLE 18 2071
CONCEALMENT, REMOVAL, OR MUTILATION GENERALLY
A. On August 11, 2014, Deborah Swan filed, deposited with the
civil clerk Cheryl
Shonk in Josephine County Circuit Court, and with employee
Michelle
Wilkinson, at the office of James Leuenberger Fight 4 Rights,
her answers,
affirmative defense and counter claim.
B. On August 11, 2014. James Leuenberger and Ed Snook knowingly
concealed
Deborah Swans answers, affirmative defense and counter
claim.
C. The purpose for concealing Deborah Swans answers, affirmative
defense, and
counter claim Leuenberger received by UPS, was to present false
facts to the
Josephine Circuit Court Judges, in order to be granted a
$49,999.99 default
judgment against Deborah Swan.
D. Cheryl Shonk, the civil clerk knowingly concealed Deborah
Swan's answers,
affirmative defense, and counter claim by refusing to enter into
the court OJIN
register that Deborah Swan did make her appearance and did
answer to the
complaint on August 11, 2014 before the legal time had
expired.
Page of 73 82
-
VIOLATION OF EXPARTE COMMUNUCATIONS
WITH JUDGE HULL
A. January 28, 2015, James Leuenberger and his client Ed Snook
had private
communication with Judge Hull.
B. On January 28, 2015, I filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Hull
with a proposed
order.
C. Leuenberger was communicating with Judge Hull about my motion
to change
a judge and the proposed order I filed.
D. During their communication, I was copied by mistake by
Leuenberger when he
sent a email to Judge Hull.
E. Leuenberger thought he was emailing Judge Hull, but instead
he sent the email
to Judge Hill out in Linn County.
F. When Judge Hill opened up the email and discovered what Jim
was doing,
Judge Hill responded to Leuenberger by reminding Leuenberger
that this type
of communications with a judge is not legal.
G. Leuenberger responded to Judge Hill by saying Sorry.
Page of 74 82
-
Page of 75 82
-
6.21
Page of 76 82
-
Page of 77 82
DO NOT COUNT THE DAY OF SERVICE. THE FOLLOWING DAY IS THE 1ST
DAY AFTER
EXHIBIT A1
-
SERVED SUMMONS ON JULY 11, 2014
Page of 78 82
EXHIBIT A2
DO NOT COUNT THE 30TH DAY IF THE 30TH DAY FALLS ON A SUNDAY. YOU
SKIP THE SUNDAT AND THE 30TH DAY IS MONDAY.
-
Page of 79 82
EXHIBIT B
-
Page of 80 82
EXHIBIT CLEUENBERGER SENT THIS EMAIL TO Ed SNOOK ON
AUGUST 11, 2014 AT 12:02 PM.
THIS PROVES LEUENBERGER AND SNOOKDID RECEIVE DEBORAH SWANS
ANSWERS,
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE AND COUNTER CLAIM, BEFORE THE LEGAL TIME
EXPIRED .
-
Page of 81 82
EXHIBIT DTHE PROOF THAT LEUENBERGER GAVE FALSE FACTS TO JUDGE
SIMCOE BY CLAIMING HE DID NOT RECEIVE A COPY OF MY TELEPHONIC
APPEARANCE.
-
Page of 82 82