State investigators in 2003 cited former Las Vegas police officer Maurice Carroll for operating as a process server without a license, but he did not appear on their radar again until a couple of months ago, when justices of the peace complained about his activities. Las Vegas police are now investigating allegations that Carroll's latest process serving company, On Scene Mediations, submitted false affidavits in justice courts around the valley, potentially disrupting the lives and finances of thousands of civil case defendants. On Scene Mediations is alleged to have filed affidavits swearing that it served defendants with copies of lawsuits, but in many cases the lawsuits were not served, police said. That resulted in judgments of default against some defendants because they failed to respond to the lawsuits in a timely manner. The company's clients include widely known payday loan and debt collecting firms. Police suspect that Carroll, 42, who left the police department in 2000 after roughly 10 years on the job, has been an unlicensed process server since 2003, but they said they have yet to substantiate their suspicions. Mechele Ray, executive director of the Nevada Private Investigators License Board, said agency investigators issued Carroll a $2,500 citation in late 2003 after receiving a complaint that he wasn't licensed. The citation, approved by board members in March 2004, ordered Carroll to stop doing business, she said. But Ray acknowledged that the agency has no record of any other action against Carroll until the Las Vegas justices of the peace complained about him in May. The board now has an ongoing investigation of Carroll, she said. Court officials said they don't know the scope of the problems On Scene Mediations created for Southern Nevada's courts, but police estimated thousands of cases could be affected. Records show that Carroll's company, which was run out of his North Las Vegas home, was doing about $50,000 in business a month, police said.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Process Server was Cited by State Investigators
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Living by the Goldman Rule
What profiteth the man who loses honor while reaping gold? Plenty!
As in that new Gulfstream fast enough to outrun the process server. And the house in Montecito, Calif., with walls high enough you can’t hear the howling do-gooder mob outside.
Sure, we want the respect of the world — as long as it doesn’t mean giving up bonuses as big as the gross national product of a Baltic republic for nothing more than showing up to collect the check. Such are the elements of the philosophy we call the Goldman rule. And if you want to keep collecting those bonuses, you ought to practice it every day.
Do unto yourself as you would have others do unto you: That’s the gist. Or, in simple Goldman terms, look out for ol’ No. 1. Treat everybody exactly the way you suspect they would treat you if the tables were turned. For example, no backstabbing — unless you sense somebody’s about to backstab you, which allows you to wield the dagger first, because, come on people, how can you follow the Goldman rule if you’re dead?
By the way, you don’t really have to lose respect while reaping gold. You do just like the U.S. does in Afghanistan and buy it. Goldman guy walks into a room: palpable contempt. Goldman guy walks into a room and starts throwing around Rolex Oysters: palpable respect!
Thus, you can feel free to grab that obscene year-end bonus for yourself while blocking everybody else. Think about it: A great virtue of the Goldman rule is that you can. It’s actually humane. If you were in their tax bracket, you’d want to be spared all the tax problems, the estate-planning headaches and the media carping over huge windfalls that followed, resulting in public humiliation for your loved ones.
If you have loved ones. And if you do, you’re obviously spending too much time out of the office, betraying Goldman rule small-type disclaimer Q-556-9A: “If you can’t do the time, don’t expect Goldman to cover up the crime.”
Monday, July 26, 2010
Town Upset with Process Server
FRONT ROYAL -- Town officials are upset with the way defendants in a $30 million lawsuit were served their notices during a Town Council work session.
"I don't know how else to describe it, [the process server] was slapping the copies [of the lawsuit] down on the table, just plopping the copies of the lawsuit to the named defendants and to me, which was of course to serve the town," Town Attorney Thomas R. Robinett said of the Monday session.
"I think he did, if not disrupt, he certainly interrupted an ongoing meeting of the council," Robinett said. "In other words, all they had done was vote to close the meeting and therefore to clear the room. Their meeting was ongoing and continuing at the time he decided it was time to serve process, and various folks started snapping pictures and running video cameras and whatever."
The town and three councilmen are defendants in the $30 million defamation suit that is related to an allegation involving whether Town Manager J. Michael Graham was offered what could be construed as a bribe during the bidding process for the construction of a solar energy farm.
On Thursday, David W. Silek, of the Manassas law firm of Ours & Silek, filed the lawsuit in Warren County Circuit Court on behalf of SolAVerde LLC, Donald F. Poe and Gregory A. Horton.
In addition to the town, the defendants in the lawsuit are Vice Mayor Chris W. Holloway and Councilmen Carson C. Lauder Jr. and Thomas H. Sayre.
Silek says Horton and Poe are partners in SolAVerde. Horton is the owner of Arctic Air Refrigeration Inc. in Front Royal, and Poe operates a local construction business, Silek says, adding there could possibly be other defendants added to the lawsuit.
Silek had informed The Northern Virginia Daily prior to Monday's meeting that he was going to have the defendants served at that time.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Use of Private Process Servers Is Up; Concern Is, Too
When Frank Knight fell behind on his house payments in 2008 and the mortgage lender began a foreclosure case, a process server said he handed Mr. Knight the court papers at his bungalow on Chicago’s Northwest Side.
But public records show that at the time the server said Mr. Knight was being served, Mr. Knight was at a job site on the West Side, more than seven miles from his brick home in the Jefferson Park neighborhood.
“He lied on his affidavit,” Mr. Knight said this week. “I just feel like they were trying to foreclose upon me and my family as fast as possible. Why? So the bank could get their hands on this property, so they could turn it around.”
The man responsible for hand-delivering the foreclosure papers to Mr. Knight’s home is a special process server, an employee of a private detective agency. In the summer of 2007, with the housing bubble bursting and the number of foreclosure cases soaring, a Cook County judge issued an order making it easier for mortgage-foreclosure lawyers to hire special process servers to do what otherwise would be carried out by Cook County sheriff’s deputies, according to records reviewed by the Chicago News Cooperative and the Better Government Association.
The process server in Mr. Knight’s case was Timothy McWard, who said he did not recall the case. But Mr. McWard said he has served more than 20,000 legal documents in the past five years and the papers are “always given to somebody,” he said. “They will say whatever they can to save their house.”
A lawsuit filed last week in federal court in Chicago is challenging the practice, saying it is a violation of state and federal law for the judge to allow freer use of special process servers. The lawyer for David L. Washington, the foreclosed property owner who is the plaintiff in the suit, said he hoped to convert the case into a class-action suit that would void tens of thousands of foreclosure cases handled by special process servers in recent years.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Town Upset with Process Server
FRONT ROYAL -- Town officials are upset with the way defendants in a $30 million lawsuit were served their notices during a Town Council work session.
"I don't know how else to describe it, [the process server] was slapping the copies [of the lawsuit] down on the table, just plopping the copies of the lawsuit to the named defendants and to me, which was of course to serve the town," Town Attorney Thomas R. Robinett said of the Monday session.
"I think he did, if not disrupt, he certainly interrupted an ongoing meeting of the council," Robinett said. "In other words, all they had done was vote to close the meeting and therefore to clear the room. Their meeting was ongoing and continuing at the time he decided it was time to serve process, and various folks started snapping pictures and running video cameras and whatever."
The town and three councilmen are defendants in the $30 million defamation suit that is related to an allegation involving whether Town Manager J. Michael Graham was offered what could be construed as a bribe during the bidding process for the construction of a solar energy farm.
On Thursday, David W. Silek, of the Manassas law firm of Ours & Silek, filed the lawsuit in Warren County Circuit Court on behalf of SolAVerde LLC, Donald F. Poe and Gregory A. Horton.
In addition to the town, the defendants in the lawsuit are Vice Mayor Chris W. Holloway and Councilmen Carson C. Lauder Jr. and Thomas H. Sayre.
Silek says Horton and Poe are partners in SolAVerde. Horton is the owner of Arctic Air Refrigeration Inc. in Front Royal, and Poe operates a local construction business, Silek says, adding there could possibly be other defendants added to the lawsuit.
Silek had informed The Northern Virginia Daily prior to Monday's meeting that he was going to have the defendants served at that time.
Read more here and follow us on Twitter!
Monday, July 19, 2010
Grand jury subpoenas Lance Armstrong sponsor Trek in cycling drug probe
A federal grand jury investigating possible doping conspiracies in cycling has issued a subpoena for documents to the Trek Bicycle Corporation, the Wisconsin-based bike manufacturer that sponsored Lance Armstrong's cycling teams since 1998, according to a person with knowledge of the investigation.
The grand jury's investigation coincides with the recent confession of performance-enhancing drug use by Armstrong's former teammate Floyd Landis, who alleged that Armstrong, other top riders, and team leaders were complicit in doping practices on the U.S. Postal Service cycling team in 2002, 2003 and 2004.
Federal grand juries, which convene in secrecy, have the power to issue subpoenas for documents, witness testimony, or both. According to a Daily News source close to the case, testimony subpoenas have not yet been issued.
Bill Mashek, a spokesman for Trek, said the company would not comment on an ongoing federal investigation, and sent the Daily News a statement from the company.
"Trek will not comment on whether or not it has been contacted by federal investigators; however, if contacted, the company would fully cooperate in an investigation," the statement said.
Earlier this month The Wall Street Journal quoted Landis saying Armstrong's team sold high-end racing bikes to finance an sophisticated doping program that included blood transfusions and performance-enhancing drug use. Armstrong has strenuously denied all allegations that he doped on his way to Tour de France victories. His attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Melissa Etheridge Was Expecting a Call From the Kids, Got Served Instead
A process server didn't come to Melissa Etheridge's window, but his arrival at the door of her hotel room wasn't particularly welcome, either.
"In a ploy to have me served, and mistakenly believing that by serving me I would have to dismiss my Petition, [Tammy Lynn Michaels] used our children as pawns," Etheridge states in a declaration released Thursday in which she describes how she was presented with her ex's petition for sole custody of their 3-year-old twins.
The Grammy and Oscar winner says Michaels told her the kids were going to meet Etheridge at her hotel. "Finally, I received a text message...stating, 'My plans changed, sorry,'" the singer recounts.
Etheridge offered up this custody-battle fodder as part of a filing objecting to Michaels' request for more spousal support, plus $4,300 in monthly child-support payments so that the former Popular actress—who says she has no income at this time—can afford childcare while she's out working.
Among the monthly expenses Michaels lists in her latest court filing are $6,000 for rent, $1,500 for groceries, $800 for eating out and $50 for laundry and cleaning. Plus, she's used to spending $5,000 a month on clothes.
Etheridge makes between $600,000 and $750,000 a month, Michaels claims—more than enough to fork over more dough.
But Etheridge, who stated in her petition to dissolve their domestic partnership that she wants to share custody of daughter Johnnie Rose and son Miller, isn't biting.
Her lawyer told a judge Monday that his client has been giving Michaels $2,000 a month and paying all of her household expenses.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Scottsdale Asking Judge for Alternative Measure to Serve Alleged Speeders, Red-Light Runners
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- The city of Scottsdale is looking at giving process servers some additional power when it comes to serving residents with red-light-running or speeding tickets.
In a move designed to crack down on people who ignore those tickets, the city is asking a judge for permission to run an alternative measure to serve alleged offenders.
Right now a process server has to make actual physical contact with a person in order to serve him or her with a summons.
If the judge approves the city's request, process servers who have made three attempts to serve a summons will be allowed to leave a court date at the driver's home address without any signatures. The alleged offender would be required to appear in court on that date and proceedings would then move forward from there.
Missing that court date would result in a suspended driver license.
Attorneys Christopher Corso and John Rhude of the Peoria law firm Corso & Rhude are challenging Scottsdale's proposed serving process, saying "it will set a dangerous precedent."
Read more here and follow us on Twitter!
Monday, July 12, 2010
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Served Legal Papers
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg apparently received a side dish of legal papers with his lunch while at a media lunch event on Saturday in Idaho.
According to an article in the NY Post, he was sitting with COO Sheryl Sandberg when someone approached their table, asked for Zuckerberg's signature and stated, "You've been served."
What the lawsuit is about is not clear. The NY Post indicates that a Facebook spokeswoman had "no immediate details" about the lawsuit.
Zack Whittaker, who writes the iGeneration blog on ZDNet posted some updated information on the situation on Sunday.
I spoke to ZDNet blogger Denise Howell, a qualified lawyer in regards to this to try and get a better perspective of this issue ... Howell said, "Long story short, the law specifies ‘personal service’ for things like a summons and complaint or a subpoena ... Service by ambush like this is something more the province of collection actions against deadbeats, not captains of industry in Sun Valley. Seems like there’s some kind of embarrassment-related agenda at work here perhaps.”
Hard to say what the alleged lawsuit is about but the facts behind it are likely to surface over the next few days. After all, there's nothing faster than the social media grapevine.
Friday, July 09, 2010
Wisconsin Department of Justice Settles Grievance with Agent Accused of Harrasing Process Server
MADISON, Wis. (AP) - A state Justice Department agent accused of harassing a process server has settled a grievance with the agency.
Special Agent Gilbert Magolan was suspended for 30 work days in March. Magolan appealed the violation.
Magolan on Tuesday agreed to drop his appeal. DOJ in return reduced his suspension to 30 calendar days and agreed to reimburse him for eight days of lost wages.
According to agency documents, a process server complained Magolan was harassing him after he tried to serve Magolan with a lawsuit over a dentist bill. Magolan improperly used a DOJ fax machine to send a complaint about the server to state licensing officials and improperly persuaded a police officer to find the server's address through the National Crime Information Center.
A spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Professional Employees Council, the union that represents DOJ agents, didn't immediately return messages.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Lindsay Lohan Had "F*** U" On Fingernail In Court
Los Angeles, CA, United States (AHN) - So was all the crying and begging and pleading just part of the show? Lindsay Lohan was spotted with a "f*** u" written on her middle fingernail the entire time she was in court Tuesday.
Just before she was sentenced to 90 days in jail, Lohan, 24, made the impassioned plea to Judge Martha Revel to go easy on her, saying that she has done everything that the court expected of her.
However, WWTDD.com has discovered that the sometime actress had "f*** u" written on her left hand middle fingernail, which was pointed toward Revel for most of the day. It begs the question whether her whole "I am not taking this as a joke" speech was sincere.
There's more trouble for Lohan, who allegedly received a punch from a waitress when she was celebrating her 24th birthday during the weekend. According to TMZ, she was served with legal papers in a civil lawsuit while she was in the courtroom elevator.
Lohan was on her way to the courtroom when a process server working for Tough As Nails attempted to hand her the legal documents. The process server said she "freaked out" and told people around her to get the guy out of the elevator. She would not take the papers so the process server dropped them on the elevator floor by her feet.
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
War Crimes Court Orders Naomi Campbell to Testify
(CNN) -- A war crimes tribunal served a subpoena on supermodel Naomi Campbell Thursday, ordering her to testify in the trial of former Liberian President Charles Taylor.
The court ordered her to appear July 29 to testify or "show good cause why" she cannot.
If she fails to comply she could face a prison term of up to seven years, a fine of about $500, or both, the subpoena says.
Campbell's lawyer, Gideon Benaim, had no immediate response, his secretary said.
Prosecutors asked the court in May to order the supermodel to testify about allegations she got a "blood diamond" from Taylor, and requested permission to reopen their case against him.
The court granted both requests this week.
Taylor faces war crimes charges over a brutal conflict in Sierra Leone which was fueled by rough diamonds, also known as blood diamonds or conflict diamonds.
The prosecution -- which rested in February of last year -- asked to reopen their case specifically in order to call Campbell, as well as actress Mia Farrow and a witness named Carole Taylor, court papers show.
Friday, July 02, 2010
Anti-tax advocate served with subpoena
DENVER — Colorado Attorney General John Suthers finally got his man.
Suthers' spokesman Mike Saccone said Tuesday that process servers located anti-tax activist Douglas Bruce and served him with a citation for contempt of court after trying more than 30 times to serve him with a subpoena.
Denver District Court Judge Brian Whitney ruled there is evidence that Bruce flouted the law. He ordered Bruce to show up July 26 for a hearing.
Bruce said he was never properly served.
"I did nothing wrong, that's the upshot, because I was never served. The judge has already found me guilty, he's already made up his mind. This is America, and Douglas Bruce has rights to due process of law," Bruce said.
Bruce was in court Tuesday fighting a subpoena ordering him to appear before a grand jury in an unrelated case, but Saccone said he didn't know when or where process servers found Bruce.
Kathleen Walsh, spokesman for the district attorney's office, said Bruce was ordered to show up Wednesday to testify before the grand jury. She said the grand jury proceedings are secret and she refused to disclose why Bruce was called to testify.
The judge denied a motion by Bruce to quash the two subpoenas for the grand jury after Bruce contended they weren't valid because one was unsigned and the other didn't provide sufficient notice.
Posts
