THE THERESA KEEPING SAGA CONTINUES ...
by Captain Chuck Foster on 01/28/14"Out of sight" does not mean "out of mind," at least in the Foster vs. Keeping case, and since my last blog posting, a great deal of legal maneuvering has been happening this side of the Canadian/United State border.
This link will produce a 240+ page documents with exhibits and bring you up to speed on what's been happening in both the California Superior Court and the U.S. District Court.
The short version is that Keeping retained Keith Davidson, a Beverly Hills attorney who, albeit intentional and/or unintentional misconduct, has created yet more suspicion, complication and resulting delay which prolongs the now two lawsuits involving defendant Keeping. [Noteworthy is Mr. Davidson's disciplinary record for attorney misconduct with the California State Bar Association].
Attorney Davidson's Motion to Quash was filed on the same day I sought to have the matter resolved by default. Interestingly, the attorney set the hearing date for February 27, 2014 -- 133 days beyond what the statute allows. The issue was that the Canadian attorney upon whom the Summons and Complaint were served denied having the authority to accept service of process. As a result, the next time Keeping and Merkel appeared in Court regarding attempted take-over of Vinking Marine, they were personally served with the Summons and Complaint.
Also interesting is the anomaly that this Motion to Quash was filed with the attorney name of David Kashani who initially denied this was his case and that he knew nothing about it. Later, Mr. Kashani acknowledged that it was "really Keith Davidson's case" and any related matters needed to be discussed with Mr. Davidson!?
The second service of process upon Keeping and Merkel rendered the Motion to Quash moot (means not no longer relevant or applicable) but when requested, attorney Davidson refused to dismiss this now moot motion!?
Before I could get the Motion to Quash issue resolved, defense counsel served a (defective and problematic) Notice to Remove and had the matter transferred from California Superior Court to U.S. District (Federal) Court.
Really strange was my and the Superior Court receiving a Notice of Removal document that were substantially different that what was filed with the District Court!? [The defects and ramifications can be seen by reviewing my (link-accessible) Opposition to Notice of Removal and Request for Sanctions document.
Now defense counsel seeks to have the Foster vs. Keeping matter (now seeking only $50,000 + costs and a 1-day court trial) merged with the WishCruise Pirate Adventures, Ltd. case which involves a jury trial with multiple (8) Canadian defendant parties and damages in excess of $1.4+ million dollars.
To be continued ...
Comments (0)
