BANK OF AMERICA FORMER CEO KENNETH D. LEWIS, CHAIRMAN WALTER E. MASSEY AND CFO JOE L. PRICE REFUSE TO BE DEPOSED-FOR FEAR OF PERJURY CHARGE?

1/16/2010

CHICAGO-(AEAE)-NOTICES for depositions of BANK OF AMERICA former CEO Kenneth D. Lewis, Chairman, Walter E. Massey and CFO Joe L. Price and Subpoenas issued to Defense Counsel have met with a motion for a Protective Order and Request to Quash Subpoenas, asserting that the request was an “effort to harass”. “Furthermore, deposing opposing counsel is a harassing technique to impose additional costs and burdens upon Defendants."
Because of the broad scope of discovery in civil litigation, "it is exceedingly difficult to demonstrate an appropriate basis for an order barring the taking of a deposition." Naftchi v. New Fort Medical Center, etal., 172 F.R.D. 130 (S.D.NY 1997) citing, 8 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Richard L. Marcus, Federal Practice and Procedure.-Civil 2D section 2037, at 494-95 (1994)(hereinafter "Wright"). "Nor, in ordinary circumstances, does it matter that the proposed witness is a busy person or professes lack of knowledge of the matters at issue, as the party seeking the discovery is entitled to test the asserted lack of knowledge."
SEE YOU IN COURT 'boys"

5 Comments

EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY
Internships not available now

Help the Equal Justice Party www. equaljusticeparty.org a registered political party in Illinois, support conservative candidates and endorses AEAE. Contribute today!
FREE SPEECH ON THE NET IS NOT 'FREE'. PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR BLOGGING ALL OF THE TIME. THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY IS FIGHTING TO MAINTAIN THE FIRST AMENDMENT WHICH IS SUPPOSE TO GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. , the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Police Dep't of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 95, 33 L. Ed. 2d 212, 92 S. Ct. 2286 (1972); see also Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 530, 537, 65 L. Ed. 2d 319, 100 S. Ct. 2326 (1980)

YOU CAN SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY SUPPORTING THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY. DONATE ON-LINE
Supporting Equal Justice Party helps to maintain the Internet a free voice and EJ supports the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.
The Equal Justice Party (EJ) is a registered Political Action Committee in Chicago, Illinois S 10127 L 15656. The EJ supports conservative causes, conservative candidates, small government.
Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) www.rentamark.net is a not for profit group that supports Equal Justice www.equaljustice.org and advocates the strict enforcement of attorney ethics since 1974.
The purpose of the AEAE Blog is to exalt the law, by holding to the fundamental right of “Equal Justice” for all. It keeps “watch” on attorney and judicial misconduct issues, evolving trademark and constitutional law. It assures all people with the “good news” that in American “right” will prevail especially for those who “never” give-up “fighting” to obtain “justice”. This site adheres to the Law and the Constitution as its authority. The AEAE, is a
LEGAL ETHICS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY EXPERT, valuations, expert
witness testimony, trademark surveys, brief writer, Appellate Expert.
The author(s) graduated from Mayville State College with a BS Degree, North Dakota State University, MASTERS DEGREE and attended the University of Iowa a for a PHD. The Author(s) are the nation's most renowned
Legal Ethics experts and Intellectual Property Entrepreneur(s) with many years of experience in the field of brief writing, trademarks, licensing and
enforcement, expert witness testimony, trademark valuation Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) an attorney watch dog group since 1974. AEAE has appeared on FOX NEWS, CBS and in
numerous national news papers including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Sun Times etc and on many radio talk shows. AEAE accepts political contributions. AEAE, P.O. Box 60645, Chicago, Illinois 60660. Email ldms4@hotmail.com
312-545-4554
Copyright AEAE 2017, all rights reserved. AEAE accepts no liability for incorrect or inaccurate information appearing here. The opinions expressed here are those o f AEAE Use of this site is subject to our "terms of use" which is published here. Nothing can be duplicated without written permission.
"Litigation is the Sea We swim in,
Litigation is the Air We Breathe
Litigation is War,
Welcome to the Front!"

To Prove Defamation Case?
What Do You Have To Prove? There are two things you have to prove to be true in order to win a case of defamation of character in the court of law. First of all, you have to prove without a doubt that what was said or written about you is not true. Once you have proved that the statement is, in fact, false you have to prove that the other person said the false statement with the intent of causing you some form of harm.
The Fair Reporting Privilege is a defense to any claim of Defamation

The Fair Report Privilege applies to the information contained on this web site.

“[T]he fair report privilege has two requirements: (1) the report must be of an official proceeding; and (2) the report must be complete and accurate or a fair abridgment of the official proceeding. [Citation.] *** For a publication to be considered a fair abridgment, the report must convey to readers a substantially correct account of the official proceedings. [Citation.] A reporter is not privileged to make additions of his own that would convey a defamatory impression or to indict expressly or by innuendo the veracity or integrity of any of the parties. [Citation.] Finally, it is the accuracy of the summary, not the truth or falsity of the information being summarized, that is the benchmark of the privilege. [Citation.]” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Eubanks, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 749 (citing Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 588-90 (2006)). ¶ 30
AEAE argues it reports on the law and law suits and it is the intent of AEAE to "fairly report" these official proceedings.

AEAE has the legal right to evaluate and rate attorneys, government officials, College educators, business leaders See JOHN HENRY BROWNE, et al., AVVO, INC., et al Case No. C07-0920RSL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 18th day of December, 2007. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge

VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT

DISCLAIMER: The AEAE does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.

COURT WATCHER

1/15/2010 03:10:08 pm

Corporate officers "never" want to submit to depositions under oath for "fear" of a perjury charge.

1/17/2010 01:19:53 am

You never did tell us who is in trouble with Bank of America. Is it Leo or Christopher? Don't delete my question. Just answer it. Also would like to know if this has to do with your real estate scam in Arizona. Everyone knows about it so deleting it won't make it go away. If you can't deal with it, I suggest you not post a blog.

Whirling

1/17/2010 10:52:28 am

Neither of them are in"trouble" with the Bank of America, its the Bank of America who is in trouble. Section 802 of the Sarbanes-oxley Act imposes penalties of fines and/or of to 20 years imprisonment for altering, destroying, mutilating, concealing, falsifying records. There is evidence that BA may have falsifed records dprior to their receiving the $40 billion in bail out money...If they do not make the truthful answers to their admissions within the next 30 days, they may have to find new Officers...

1/19/2010 01:16:58 am

I suspect whirling is you Leo. Everyone knows you don't go after anyone unless they've done something to you and you don't give a rat's ass about justice.

Oven Toasted

1/20/2010 11:40:36 pm

"Justice" can be defined in many ways. The simplest is that it is the absence of injustice. This allows us to see the appropriateness of prevention. We should not have to wait for someone to abuse others before acting. Once a "situation" has become clear, we must act to prevent injustice.

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics