Blix V YMC App # 98 - 12-35986 - Flynn Reply Re OSC

(1 of 178)
Case: 12-35986, 05/01/2014, ID: 9080331, DktEntry: 98-1, Page 1 of 16
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NO. 12-35986
TIMOTHY L. BLIXSETH
Appellant,
v.
YELLOWSTONE MOUNTAIN CLUB, LLC
YELLOWSTONE DEVEOPMENT, LLC
BIG SKY RIDGE, LLC
YELLOWSTONE CLUB CONSTRUCTION CO., LLC
Appellees.
MICHAEL J. FLYNNS REPLY TO YCLTS, CROSS
HARBORS, THE YELLOWSTONE MOUNTAIN CLUBS, THE
DEBTORS, AND SUNRISE RIDGES RESPONSE TO THE
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Montana
Case No. 2:11-73-BU-SEH
Michael J. Flynn
One Center Plaza, Suite 240
Boston, MA 02108
mike@mjfesq.com
(2 of 178)
Attorney Michael Flynn herewith replies to the YCLTs, Cross

Harbors, the YMCs, the debtors, and Sunrise Ridges Responses to the
Courts order to show cause why Appellant and his attorneys should not
be sanctioned for filing the appeal in the disqualification matter. In
their Responses, the appellees have created evidentiary issues as to the
evidence I relied upon as an advocate for Mr. Blixseth in support of our
motion to disqualify Judge Kirscher and then our decision to seek
review in the Ninth Circuit. If these sanctions are upheld under these
circumstances, the Court will effectively chill any litigants right to
challenge a judge for bias while sweeping under the rug documents
forensically authenticated in which the central figure in the Montana
bankruptcy cases before Judge Kirscher admitted that the proceedings
were rigged. An abundance of supporting evidence relied upon by Mr.
Blixseths attorneys supports the same inescapable conclusion. The
Ninth Circuit can itself authenticate all of this evidence, as did the
Blixseth attorneys. Notably, the Chief Judge never addressed these two
documents in his dismissal of the judicial misconduct complaint.
Sanctions in this matter are themselves indicative of a failure to
(3 of 178)
address these admissions, to disclose the emails of Judge Kirscher and

to intimidate Mr. Blixseth and his counsel into submission.
Mr. Flynn herewith adopts the arguments and briefing of his cocounsel, and incorporates their positions herein as if fully stated. Mr.
Flynn also invokes F.R.A.P. 46(c) and Circuit Rule 46-2(d),(e) and
requests an evidentiary hearing as recited below. The purpose of this
Reply, as was the original Response to the OSC, is to present the facts
and the law as the undersigned analyzed them as an advocate for Mr.
Blixseth as trial counsel in AP 14 having actually observed Judge
Kirscher during the AP 14 trial. The appellees misconstruction of this
primary issue is demonstrated in their gratuitous, irrelevant, ad
hominem attacks on me and co-counsel. This should alert the Court to

their utter failure to address this critical issue in their Responses.
Given the Courts order on the OSC presumably invoking its
inherent power, it is now plain to the undersigned after 44 years of
litigating in the federal court system that it is in a crisis. The law and
the rules are often not followed by a growing number of federal courts,
and, specifically, gross deviations from the rules and fundamental due
process, as occurred here, routinely occur in many bankruptcy courts,
3
(4 of 178)
particularly in large money cases, of which this case is reportedly the

largest bankruptcy in Montana history. See LoPucki: Courting Failure:
How Competition for Big Cases is Corrupting the Bankruptcy Courts.

97-122 (2005). It is likely that the Supreme Court in Stern v Marshal
and Executive Benefits (In re Bellingham) is attempting to correct a run
away freight train of judicial corruption.
My 44 years of experience and my conscience tells me that I am
being sanctioned because I am exposing the systemic corruption now
commonly present in the bankruptcy system and rapidly gaining
District and Circuit Court acceptance.
Based on my analysis of the totality of the circumstances and the
documentary evidence, and my observations as trial counsel, it became
obvious in this case that there were such deviations from judicial
propriety as to suggest the corruption of the judicial process by the
assertion of political pressure in the Montana Bankruptcy Court
which is exactly what one email states. (See Exhibit 1 to Flynn Dec.,
Dokt 78-2). Mr. Burkles approximately $1.5 million in donations and
meetings with the Montana Governor at the same time he and Mr.
Byrne were acquiring the Yellowstone Club (YC) and putting it into
4
(5 of 178)
bankruptcy through collusion with Edra Blixseth, the hiring of Mr.

Patten Judge Kirschers best friend who repeatedly engaged in what
I considered wholly improper ex parte communications, the remarkable
admissions of Edra Blixseth in two forensically authenticated
documents, the judicially sanctioned criminal conduct of Edra Blixseth,
all suggested gross deviations from the rules governing our system of
justice. It will now require independent jurists to correct this
demonstrable miscarriage of justice.
The rulings, orders and conduct by the Montana bankruptcy judge
and now by the Chief Judge, in my professional analysis, involves the
exercise of raw power in further deviation from the rules of
fundamental fairness; and the scapegoating of Mr. Blixseth and his
attorneys for seeking Judge Kirschers disqualification; and then
retaliating for seeking remedial assistance from the Judicial
Conference. My January 31, 2014 letter to the Judicial Conference
(Exhibit 7 to my Declaration, Dokt 78-9) recites the basic facts involving
Judge Kosinskis holding the Judge Kirscher investigation in connection
with our judicial misconduct complaint in abeyance. This is directly
analogous to what Judge Kosinski did in connection with Judge Cebul
5
(6 of 178)
and his mootness order, where he was subsequently ordered by the

Judicial Conference to make public Judge Cebuls emails.
Here, the circumstances are far more serious than the Cebul
emails which did not involve a specific case. The Yellowstone Club and
Edra Blixseth bankruptcies involve allegations of judicial misconduct
directly impacting the distribution of a billion dollars in assets, and the
targeting of my client in an ex parte deal made at a hotel between
Judge Kirscher and my clients adversaries. Yet, Judge Kosinski seeks
to sanction Mr. Blixseth and his lawyers for raising these issues, while
issuing an abeyance order on the judicial misconduct complaint which
directly concealed Judge Kirschers emails. These emails are at the
heart of the disqualification motion, the judicial misconduct complaint,
the reappointment of Judge Kirscher, and finally directly impact Judge
Kosinskis sanctions order. It is plain from Judge Kosinskis
involvement in the Judge Cebul case that it became a political football
in Montana and in the Circuit Court system. The Judge Kirscher
matters involve the same political forces. But here the issues and the
evidence are far more serious. Judge Kosinskis attempt to stop the
disclosure of the Judge Cebul emails with mootness, subsequently
6
(7 of 178)
rejected by the Judicial Conference, is benign compared to his orders on

these matters which include the suppression of the Kirscher emails in
the face of evidence that Judge Kirscher maintained an email account
with his prior law firm to whom he awarded $22 million with no trial;
and two forensically authenticated documents from Edra Blixseth to her
lawyer that the bankruptcy proceedings were rigged based on the
expenditure of enormous capital and political favors by Mr. Byrne,
Burkle and the Montana Governor. These facts mandated investigation
not an abeyance issued by Chief Judge Kosinski.
The conundrum for me is that I have had to appeal these matters
to the very judges, Judge Kirscher and Judge Kosinski, who, pursuant
to my duties of advocacy, are exercising their powers without following
the rules. Thus, I am forced to challenge their judicial authority to
conduct these matters, thereby invoking their ire, anger and retaliation,
and the potential ire of their colleagues, which I believe has resulted in
the sanctions and a gross miscarriage of justice to my client and now to
his attorneys. Throw into this mix, the undisclosed relationships and
potential communications of Judge Kosinskis wife, a former U.S.
Trustee within the federal bankruptcy system, and Judge Kosinskis
7
(8 of 178)
abeyance of the misconduct investigation, and this Court is confronted

with potential judicial manipulation to protect a colleague, which, under
the law, mandates the purest means of judicial independence and
review by the most untainted members of the Ninth Circuit. If this
Court is to uphold our system of justice, rather than making myself,
and my client and colleagues, sacrificial lambs under a false rubric of
upholding the law in order to conceal demonstrable judicial bias, it
should order the following:
1. Mr. Flynn respectfully requests the disqualification of Chief
Judge Kosinski on the following grounds: (a) his wife is a former U.S.
Trustee, and all communications that his wife has had on this matter
should be disclosed, and her emails produced; (b) in his position as
Chief Judge he was in charge of the Judicial Council misconduct
complaint against Judge Kirscher, and placed those proceedings in
abeyance, notwithstanding documented evidence of corruption,
thereby preventing the disclosure of bankruptcy Judge Kirschers
emails, as was required by the Judicial Conference regarding Judge
Cebul; (c) in his position as Chief Judge he was in charge of the
reappointment committee involving Judge Kirscher and sanctioned his
8
(9 of 178)
reappointment after the expiration of the time mandated for

reappointment, and after staying the investigation into Judge
Kirschers conduct specifically involving the production of his emails,
thereby thwarting review by the Ninth Circuit of Judge Kirschers
communications; (d) he exercised the inherent powers of the Ninth
Circuit to sanction myself, Mr. Blixseths attorneys, and Mr. Blixseth
for filing the disqualification appeal but continually referencing no
judicial misconduct, thereby inserting into that appeal the matters
relating to reappointment and the judicial conduct complaint, and
effectively destroying Mr. Blixseths right to counsel and fundamental
right to be heard, all of which improperly influenced the disqualification
appeal; (e) Judge Kosinski displayed a lack of judicial propriety in the
oral argument proceedings on the disqualification appeal repeatedly
asserting to Mr. Flynn that there was no judicial misconduct, when
the applicable standard under review at that proceeding was
appearance of bias, thereby injecting into the appeal his positions
with the Judicial Council and the Reappointment Committee; (f) his
sanctions order smacks of overt retaliation for Mr. Blixseth and his
attorneys pursuing their lawful remedies with the Judicial Conference
9
(10 of 178)
in connection with my letter dated January 31, 2014 attached as

Exhibit 7 (Dkt 78-9) to my Declaration filed in Response to the OSC; (g)
Judge Kosinski in an unfounded finding ruled that I have smeared
Judge Kirscher when all I have done is to expose his conduct within the
rules and filings with the appropriate federal agencies I am not
responsible for what has appeared in any form of media other than
court and Public Integrity filings; (h) in an improper zeal to reappoint
Judge Kirscher, and absolve him of misconduct, Judge Kosinski ignored
the underlying facts in the disqualification appeal, more specifically
ignoring the remarkable admissions of the central figure, Edra Blixseth,
in these matters; and is now scapegoating Mr. Blixseths counsel,
thereby substituting his own bias on whether the facts and evidence
within the scope of our professional judgment acting as advocates for

our client warranted sanctions for our request for judicial review by the
Ninth Circuit of the disqualification matters .
2. With their filings, the appellees have injected scurrilous,
irrelevant, unfounded, blatantly false and/or misleading allegations
relating to me that should compel this Court to either strike their

briefing and exhibits or conduct an evidentiary hearing into the truth or
10
(11 of 178)
falsity of the few relevant issues in their pleadings, including the

credibility of Edra Blixseth.
3. Mr. Flynn requests an evidentiary hearing into the
authenticity of the two documents I relied upon on the Edra Blixseth
computers, one of which she authenticated in a deposition, which
authentication by her I specifically relied upon. Specifically, I relied
upon the forensic examination of Mr. Whiteford who authenticated the
metadata on the documents at issue with the time clock on the Edra
Blixseth computer. I request that the Ninth Circuit use its forensic
expert to analyze the metadata; and that Mr. Whiteford be allowed to
testify on these matters; and that Edra Blixseth be compelled to appear.
See Whiteford Declaration attached as Exhibit 2 to Flynn Supp Dec.
The appellees failed to inform the Court that they have never sought
examination of the hard drives to challenge the authenticity of the
documents, nor have they ever responded to the specific facts
authenticating the documents recited in the Reply and the exhibits
attached to The Emergency Motion for a Stay. Instead, they rely upon
Ms. Blixseths credibility and attack her former partner Mr.
Montgomery. Significantly, they have produced a document from Mr.
11
(12 of 178)
Holahan allegedly not including the critical language I cited in my

Response. However, close examination of Mr. Holahans document
reveals a gap where the critical language does exist on the original
hardrive. See Flynn Supp Dec at Exhibit 1 attaching the Reply to the
Emergency Motion to Stay which is also at Dkt 56 in this appeal. Their
allegation that I am somehow in collusion with Mr. Montgomery is
absurd. I sought and received sanctions against him and his attorneys
and have hundreds of thousands in judgments against him. See
Montgomery v. Etreppid Techs., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35543

(U.S.D.NV); 2009 WL 910739 (U.S.D.NV).
I have scrutinized Mr. Montgomerys statements on the two
documents and subjected the documents to forensic examination. I
considered his partnership relationship with Ms. Blixseth, his insider
knowledge, the chain of custody issues, and I relied upon the facts and
circumstances relating to the contents of the two documents, my
knowledge of Edra Blixseths collusion with Byrne and Burkle, the
demonstrably improper rulings of Judge Kirscher regarding her, the
intrinsic accuracy of the contents of the documents, and the forensic
examination to conclude that the documents are authentic. The
12
(13 of 178)
appellees fantastical ruminations about what they claim I relied upon

in my professional analysis of the two documents should now be made
subject to an evidentiary hearing. Their reliance on Edra Blixseths
credibility is in itself an issue that any independent fact finder would
deem misplaced.
4. Mr. Flynn requests the production of all of Judge Kirschers
emails between November, 2008 and the present to be examined by an
independent referee appointed by the Ninth Circuit.
The appellees are correct that I have no remorse about my
appeal of the disqualification issues but not out of any sense of selfrighteous ego driven compulsion to be right. I have been batted
around in enough courtrooms over the past 44 years to have very little
ego left on such matters. Rather, I know that my sworn duty is to
advocate for my client; and having been immersed in the facts and law
on these matters for 7 years, my professional judgment is that he is the
victim of injustice at the hands of manipulative greed-mongers with the
complicity of the bankruptcy court. To have remorse in these
circumstances would allow falsehood to triumph over fact, lies to
triumph over truth, and evil to triumph over good. I am enough of a
13
(14 of 178)
believer in the morality of the law to still hope that after 44 years in
the pit there is such a thing as true justice.
CONCLUSION
Independent jurists on the Ninth Circuit must ask themselves if
ever in their careers have they seen such a collection of evidence
supporting judicial bias, let alone judicial corruption, buttressed by
admissions by the central figure in all of these proceedings, Edra
Blixseth, now reportedly receiving $70,000 PER MONTH from the
Yellowstone Club, stating that the proceedings were rigged, ie, SB
[Sam Byrne] and BS [Brian Schweitzer] have spent enormous
capital
and political favors to ensure they get the right outcome
from the
Montana bankruptcy judge.
May 1, 2014
/s/ Michael J. Flynn
Michael J. Flynn
Counsel for Mr. Blixseth
14
(15 of 178)
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
Pursuant to this Courts Order to Show Cause, I certify that this
Response is proportionally spaced in serif font (Century style), has a
typeface of 14 points, and contains 2,487 words, excluding the parts of
the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32. By consolidating the Replies
to both the YCLT and the Cross Harbor, Yellowstone Mountain Club,
Debtors, and Sunrise Ridge Responses, in this document, I am under
the word limit for a joint reply. This Brief was prepared using Microsoft
Word and the word court was determined using the Microsoft Word
word count application.
May 1, 2014

Michael J. Flynn
15
(16 of 178)
PROOF OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court
for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate
CM/ECF system on May 1, 2014.
Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the
appellate CM/ECF system.
I further certify that the following individuals are not participants in this appeal but
will receive service of the foregoing as they are interested parties to this appeal. I
have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have
dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days
to the following non-CM/ECF participants:
Evan R. Levy
George A. Zimmerman
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Four Times Square
New York, NY 10036
May 1, 2014

Michael J. Flynn
16
(17 of 178)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NO. 12-35986
TIMOTHY L. BLIXSETH
Appellant,
v.
YELLOWSTONE MOUNTAIN CLUB, LLC
YELLOWSTONE DEVEOPMENT, LLC
BIG SKY RIDGE, LLC
YELLOWSTONE CLUB CONSTRUCTION CO., LLC
Appellees.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY DECLARATION OF MICHAEL J.
FLYNN IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Montana
Case No. 2:11-73-BU-SEH
Michael J. Flynn
One Center Plaza, Suite 240
Boston, MA 02108
mike@mjfesq.com
I, Michael J Flynn declare:
1.
I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and if called
as a witness, I could and would testify competently to them.
2.
In their overreaching frenzy to attack Mr. Blixseth and myself in
their Responses, (itself indicative of their failure to address the relevant
(18 of 178)
facts), the appellees conveniently misstate the essential issue in the

sanctions appeal, i.e. my professional assessment of the evidence and
the law to support the appeal of the denial of the Motion to Disqualify.
The issue is whether my assessment of the law and facts supporting the
appearance of bias was objectively reasonable to warrant appeal
thereby negating any lawful possibility of sanctions. The Chief Judge,
himself, in his zeal to protect Judge Kirscher, has misconstrued,
misapplied and convoluted this issue. The Chief Judges improper
miscegenation of the evidence and the law (appearance of bias) on the
disqualification appeal to impose sanctions based on Judge Kirschers
misconduct, which involves our requested investigation into Judge
Kirschers reappointment and misconduct complaints, which he deems
to be a smearing of Judge Kirscher, has exposed and placed at issue
the foundational and forensic evidence which I believed justified all of
our filings - the appeal on disqualification, the objection to
reappointment, and the misconduct complaint. Remarkably, the Chief
Judge failed to address this foundational and forensic evidence. I am
seeking an evidentiary hearing on this forensic evidence; and the
production of Judge Kirschers emails, which I requested in my January
(19 of 178)
31, 2014 letter to the Judicial Conference. The Judge Kirscher emails
and the two Edra Blixseth documents, one of which she has already
authenticated - notwithstanding the appellees pitiable attempt to
disown it are fundamental to my due process rights to defend against
these unjust sanctions. The appellees have placed these matters, and
the credibility of Edra Blixseth at issue along with the reasonableness
of my reliance on her admissions. Given the stated basis for the OSC, if
the Ninth Circuit deems my reliance reasonable in the totality of the
circumstances, including my reliance on the Edra Blixseth admissions,
it must in good conscience revoke the OSC. The overwhelming weight
of the evidence not only supports the reasonableness of the appeal, it
also supports disqualification itself, along with an investigation into all
matters raised in the judicial misconduct complaint.
3.
The appellees resort to broad conclusions about grand
conspiracies, remorse, this Court got it wrong, my failure to include

on a pro hac application a sanction from 33 years ago; and that we
failed to inform this Court that the evidence from the computer of
Blixseths ex-wife is of highly questionable credibility. This latter
charge is itself a false red herring. There is and was no duty to inform
(20 of 178)
this Court of the legitimacy of the two documents on Edra Blixseths

computers. The forensic evidence and Ms. Blixseths authentication
supports our positions in our adversarial system of justice. BUT,
appellees did have a duty to inform the Court that Ms. Blixseth has no
credibility, is a pathological liar, and defrauded banks and lenders of
over $50 million, all ignored by Judge Kirscher. The real credibility at
issue in connection with these sanction matters, is Edra Blixseths, Mr.
Byrnes, Mr. Pattens and the YCLTs; and their failure to inform the
Court of the forensically demonstrative evidence establishing the
authenticity of the two documents at issue. The YCLT fails to inform
the Court that it has never had a forensic expert analyze the computers,
as we did; that both documents at issue exist in their forensically
provable form with unaltered metadata; that the chain of custody of the
computers containing these documents is established directly from Edra
Blixseth and her partner, Dennis Montgomery, to the expert, who has
verified the authenticity of the two documents based on forensically
demonstrative metadata. In order to misdirect the Court, the YCLT and

the appellees not only fail to inform the Court of Ms. Blixseths criminal
conduct, history of perjury, perjured/dismissed bar complaint against
(21 of 178)
me, but also her relationship with her partner, Mr. Montgomery to
whom she paid over $6 million for work now subject to a criminal
investigation. For a summary of Ms. Blixseths perjured and criminal
conduct, all ignored by Judge Kirscher, see Exhibit 1 attached hereto,
which is also Exhibit 1 to our Reply on the Emergency Motion to Stay,
included in this appeal at Dkt entry 56.
4.
The documents exist in their unaltered form on Edra Blixseth
computers when Mr. Montgomery was her partner and she was paying
him $100,000 per month, regardless of all the Edra Blixseth / appellee
piteous attempts to now disown them. Her subsequent deposition
authentication confirmed one of the documents. THAT is what I relied
upon. Together with all of the other evidence, they support the
accuracy of her statements that the bankruptcy proceedings were
effectively rigged beyond a reasonable doubt. See my letter requesting a
criminal investigation, dated March 30, 2010, subsequently sent by
Judge Peterson to the U.S. Attorney, attached hereto as Exhibit 3. The
concept that I would rely upon Mr. Montgomery alone as argued by the
appellees, given our history, is absurd. The appellees cavalier disregard
for the forensic evidence, without their own examination, and
(22 of 178)
subsequent reliance on the credibility of Edra Blixseth, is shameful;

smears my professional assessment of this evidence; and conceals the
underlying significance and impact of this evidence. Presumably, this
hard forensic evidence will not be ignored by this Court in its pursuit of
sanctions; and will result in the requested evidentiary hearing and the
appearance of Ms. Blixseth for cross examination.
5.
The authenticity of the two documents was critical to my
determination that all issues regarding disqualification should be

pursued on appeal outside of Montana. Given Mr. Pattens involvement
with Edra Blixseth as extensively recited in one of the documents, the
infamous Judge Peterson email to Mr. Patten giving Patten advice to
use against Mr. Blixseth, the emails between Mr. Patten and Judge
Kirschers law clerk giving Mr. Patten the ear of the court in this, the
largest bankruptcy in Montana history, the requested investigation into
the Worden Thane secret email account, held in abeyance by the Chief
Judge, when he also possessed the two Edra Blixseth admissions, and
the $1.5 million in donations to the Governor by the
Burkle/Byrne/Blixseth cabal; the emails between Mr. Byrne and his
cohorts evidencing admissions that they obtained the YC at a fraction of
(23 of 178)
its value through a secret deal with Edra Blixseth made weeks before
she obtained the YC on August 12, 2008, and then 89 days later put it
into bankruptcy in the context of using political pressure in the
bankruptcy process, and meetings with the Montana Governor, and
financial data proving that Mr. Burkle the recipient of the YC in
Judge Kirschers approved plan, paid the Governor almost $1.5 million
while the scheme to put the YC into bankruptcy was being

implemented, all of this evidence supports not only the authenticity of
the documents, but also the justification for appeal. I specifically
request the opportunity to present this evidence in an evidentiary
hearing to justify the reasonableness of our decision to appeal the
disqualification denial.
6.
The Chief Judge disagrees with my assessment of the evidence
and disagrees with my advocacy and issued the OSC. Obviously, my

right to oppose the OSC supports my disagreement with his evaluation
of how I evaluated the evidence as an advocate for Mr. Blixseth.
However, although the Chief Judge repeatedly and improperly
referenced judicial misconduct in connection with the disqualification
appeal, apparently referencing all of the evidence in the reappointment
(24 of 178)
and misconduct complaint matters, he did not address that evidence in

connection with imposing sanctions. As stated, our judgment that
appeal was warranted involves all of the evidence we have on Judge
Kirscher, which the Chief Judge miscegenated into the disqualification
appeal as shown by his judicial misconduct remarks, but without
addressing it as the basis for our justification to appeal. Plainly, our
request for an investigation into Judge Kirschers conduct to the
Judicial Council, given the totality of the evidence, particularly the
Edra Blixseth documents, was justified. In my professional judgment
and experience, the Montana bankruptcy proceedings were the product
of enormous capital and political favors to insure they get the right
result from the Montana bankruptcy judge, just as Ms. Blixseth stated
to her lawyer, and which the overwhelming weight of the evidence
supports. However, the Chief Judge thwarted any investigation into
Judge Kirscher and the production of his emails by holding the
investigation in abeyance. His sanctions order bespeaks retaliation
and an effort the failure to address the critical underlying evidence
justifying our appeal.
(25 of 178)
7.
In my professional judgment after 44 years of litigation, the
foundation of our entire adversarial system of justice is based on an

impartial judge with blinders on when it involves ex parte
communications. When evidence exists supporting gross deviations
from that basic principle, particularly when the reputation and
integrity of judges are involved, dutiful advocacy mandates a challenge
to their impartiality. Here, as the evidence evolved, the two Edra
Blixseth documents confirmed everything we already believed was
supported by extrinsic, documented evidence and admissions. The
bankruptcy process had been corrupted against Tim Blixseth in favor of
Edra Blixseth contrary to the law and evidence.
8.
The Chief Judge understandably desires to protect the judges he
oversees. My duty is to exhaust all of Mr. Blixseths rights and remedies

given the evidence and the magnitude of the issues involved even when
it involves a challenge to perceived judicial bias. Almost a Billion

Dollars of Blixseth marital community assets were distributed by Judge
Kirscher. Even the Supreme Court of Montana has stated that the
Montana judiciary has a history of corruption. I sent the letter to the
judicial conference because our system works that way, because I
(26 of 178)
continued to protect Mr. Blixseths rights based upon my assessment

that the Court was applying a double standard on my assessment of the
evidence regarding Judge Cebuls alleged misconduct, the Chief Judges
role in that matter, and my assessment of Judge Kirschers bias and
alleged misconduct in this specific case involving far more serious
conduct than that of Judge Cebul. I have no remorse about my
assessment of the evidence, no remorse about my advocacy for Mr.
Blixseth, and no remorse about my letter to the judicial conference
challenging the Chief Judges role in holding the investigation of Judge
Kirscher in abeyance. I have professionally adhered to all of the rules
throughout these proceedings, I observed personally that Judge
Kirscher did not follow the rules in many instances including his court
room exchanges with Mr. Patten, which he endeavored to conceal, in
fact repeatedly deviated from the rules to fulfill a pre-designed result;
and that Edra Blixseth and my opponents in putting the YC into
bankruptcy not only failed to follow the rules, they collectively
concealed over $50 million in Edra Blixseths criminal bank fraud in
order to obtain the Yellowstone Club. SER 2740-2787. Yet Judge
Kirscher exonerated her and now the appellees rely upon her
(27 of 178)
credibility; and my client is subject to a $40 million judgment involving

a gross deviation from due process and the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. The evidence establishes that recipients of Judge Kirschers
rulings Burkle and Byrne - paid off the Montana Governor to the tune
of $1.5 million at the same time that the bankruptcy scheme was being
implemented.
9.
The whole matter smells.
The appellees cite a vacated 33 year old sanctions order by an
alcoholic judge in Daytona Fl, who I was subsequently informed by an

Assistant Attorney General for the state of Florida was being removed
from the bench, and another 30 year old Scientology war order. These
irrelevant attacks bespeak their desperation to have the Ninth Circuit
sweep this matter under the rug by vilifying me. I responded to those
attempts before Judge Haddon with the attached declaration. Exhibit 4
attached hereto.
10.
As for the continuing investigation into these matters, the roles of
Edra Blixseth, Judge Kirscher, the Worden Thane law firm, and Ms.
Blixseths partner, Mr. Montgomery remains at issue. Although I do
not represent Mr. Montgomery, I have been in contact with law
enforcement authorities relating to his involvement with Ms. Blixseth
(28 of 178)
and the CIA; and I have reason to believe that Mr. Montgomery is in
the possession of evidence, and is in the process of securing immunity,
and that the authenticity of evidence in his possession will be subject to
scrupulous forensic examination.
11. The Court should know that Edra Blixseth and her attorney also
filed a plainly perjured bar complaint against me which has been
dismissed. Hence, the motives of Ms. Blixseth to aid the appellees in
this matter. See Exhibit 1 attached hereto.
12.
The appellees have made credibility an issue, mandating an
evidentiary hearing, particularly in connection with the Edra Blixseth

documents, and my reliance thereon to justify appeal of the
disqualification motion. My assessment of that evidence and the
requested investigation into Judge Kirscher is at issue. My assessment
of Edra Blixseths conduct and credibility in this matter was
substantially and gravely impacted by Judge Kirschers conduct to
conceal the entirety of the evidence we put before him and the Montana
Bankruptcy Court (see Exhibit 3 hereto) regarding Edra Blixseth. My
44 year study as a litigator before juries specializing in cross
examination about lying and perjury by material witnesses was a
(29 of 178)
critical component of my assessment of the evidence supporting

disqualification. Judge Kirschers continuous, unwarranted, improper,
erroneous suppression of the evidence of Ms. Blixseths conduct, and the
admitted destruction of evidence on her computers, which Judge
Kirscher ignored, created a compelling conclusion to me, buttressed by
all of the additional evidence, that political pressure had in fact
influenced him. Much has been written in professional journals, books
and legal articles about lying, particularly in the context of human
evil in connection with scapegoating, which has been defined as the
use of lies to cover over misconduct or other lies by those in a position of
power by means of lies to blame or attack their victims or those who

expose them, thereby perpetuating evil. See eg, M. Scott Peck.
People of the Lie. Simon and Schuster, 1983. The bankruptcy plan
approved by Judge Kirscher itself fits this model with the
scapegoating of Mr. Blixseth, and now the targeting of his lawyers.
The proceedings in the Montana Bankruptcy Court in my professional
assessment involve rampant lying and a resultant evil plan involving
a gross miscarriage of justice. Remarkably, as cited below, Mr. Byrne
and his cohorts used this precise term of evil to describe their conduct
(30 of 178)
and Mr. Byrnes plan to obtain a billion dollars. Judge Kirschers

findings regarding Edra Blixseth, a proven pathological liar who
defrauded banks and lenders of over $50 million, who blatantly
destroyed evidence on her computers, who filed a perjured bar
complaint against the undersigned dismissed, who entered into an
overtly fraudulent deal with Mr. Byrne to put the YC into bankruptcy,
and who now denies the authenticity of documents on her computers
which have been forensically authenticated and the hard drives
preserved for further examination, must awaken this Court to justice

gone awry. See Exhibit 1 attached hereto. See complaint and exhibits
filed with the Judicial Council. In my professional judgment, the most
compelling inference for Judge Kirschers findings protecting Ms.
Blixseth, relates to ex parte communications between Ms. Blixseths
lawyer, Mr Patten and the Judge which are evidenced in the
authenticated Notes on the MSA. The inference that I draw from the
highly suspect ex parte communications between Mr. Patten and Judge
Kirscher, which are implicitly referenced in the numerous, detailed
references to Mr. Patten in the Notes on the MSA, is that the excessive
judicial protectionism of Ms. Blixseth was done because of Mr. Pattens
(31 of 178)
concern that she would blow open their entire fraud unless she was
protected. Hence, Ms. Blixseth now reportedly receives $70,000 per
month as the historian for the YC.
13.
The financial motive for the Burkle/Byrne/Blixseth cabal to put
the Yellowstone Club into bankruptcy, have Mr. Burkle

contemporaneously donate approximately $1.5 million to the Montana
Governer to use political pressure in the bankruptcy proceedings, to
make a contemporaneous secret deal with Edra Blixseth in connection
with the divorce proceedings to obtain the Yellowstone Club, to pursue
a brilliant but evil bankruptcy plan to make a billion dollars and to
now payoff Ms. Blixseth to the tune of a reported $70,000 per month
can be found in numerous documents exemplified by these few: (a) an
October 27, 2008 email between Mr. Byrne and one of his agents, just
12 days before Edra Blixseth filed the bankruptcy petition, in which
Mr, Byrne claims he is writing a bankruptcy plan which could be
brilliant (Mr. Byrne is not a lawyer but has spent 25 years using the
bankruptcy system to acquire assets), the agent responds it could be
worth a billion dollars, dangerous, and possibly evil, and Mr, Byrne
affirms it is brilliant; (b) a March 25, 2008 email to Mr. Blixseth just
(32 of 178)
the day before Mr. Byrne had to close or risk default on Cross Harbors
$455 million contract to purchase the Yellowstone Club - to put the
Club into a pre-packed bankruptcy to leverage the Bs the minority
shareholders and to deal with the nervous Credit Suisse
bondholders. Mr. Blixseth rejected this judicially manipulated scheme.
Edra Blixseth did not. Exhibit 6 attached hereto. Mr. Byrne the next
day, March 26, 2008, revoked the contract and then within 60 days
began negotiating with Edra Blixseth to have her obtain the Club out of
the divorce proceedings and put it into bankruptcy. An evil and illegal
plan to use the Montana bankruptcy court to pull off their billion
dollar scheme.
14. The foregoing exhibits, and those cited in my response to the OSC
and numerous additional documents in the appellate record, constitute
just a few documents buttressed by many, many more that I have
examined, justified then and justify now, my belief and professional
judgment that my client has been the victim of the appearance of
judicial bias. Judge Kozinski should in good conscience disqualify
himself for all of the reasons cited in my Reply brief.
(33 of 178)
Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this First day of May,
2014 under the laws of the United States.
/s/
Michael J. Flynn
Michael J. Flynn
(34 of 178)
Exhibit 1
(35 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
2 of 1112
of 111
INTHEUN
TED
STANI
TE
SHCO
URC
RTUI
OF
C
jlV
VI
OR
THE
NT
CI
TAPPEALS RY
st
os)jJF
kC
EjD
AUS212213
NO.12-35986
TIMOTHY L.BLIXSETH
Appellant,
F
us
nj
o
-z.E.zun. DATE -- jN,,j,t
YELLOWSTONEMOUNTAIN CLUBJLLC
YELLOWSTONEDEVEOPMENT,LLC
B1G SKY RIDGE,LLC
YELLOWSTONECLUB CONSTRUCTION CO.,LLC
Appellees.
REPLY IN SUPPORT OFEMERGENCY MOTION UNDER CIRCUIT
RULE 27-3AND 27-13TO FILE UNDER SEAL AND IN SUPPORT OF
RELATED MOTION TO STAY
Appealfrom theUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheDistrictofMontana
CaseNo.2:11-73-BU-SEH
ChristopherJ.Conant
ConantLaw LLC
73017thStreet
Suite200
Denver,CO 80202
MichaelJ.Flynn
P.O.Box690
RanchoSantaFe,CA 92067
PhillipH.Stillman
Stillman& Associates
300SouthPointeDrive,
Suite4206
MiamiBeach,FL33139
MichaelJ.Ferriro
LawOfticeofMichaelFerrigno,
PLLC
1200N.MainStreet,Suite486
Meridian,ID 83680
Telephone:(303)298-1800
Cconantxcon(Intxj
6Wrs.com
Telephone:(858)775-7624
mike@mjfesq.
com
Telephone:(888)235-4279
Telephone:(208)319-3561
pstillman@stillmanassociates.com
michaelferri
gnoWerri
gno-law.col
n
AttorneysforAppellantTimothyL.Blixseth
(36 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
3 of 2112
of 111
Appellant,Mr.Blixseth,herebysubmitsthisReplyBriefin Supportofhis
EmergencyMotiontoStaythatheconditionallyfiledunderseal.
lnlightofthetimesensitivenatureoftheEmergencyMotion to Stayand
necessarilyshortreplyperiod,Mr.Blixsethcannotfullyrespondtothenumerous
mischaracterizations,half-trtlthsandincompleterecordssetforth intheYCLT'S
Opposition.Thisissimplynotthefol'
um inwhichtospininafavorablelightone
party'sversion ofnearlyfiveyearsofhighly contentiouslitigation in numerous
fonlmsbetweenthesameparties.
Mr.Blixsethwillthereforemakethreeprimaryandsuccinctpoints.
Firstand foremost,theYCLT opposestheEmergency Motionto Stayby
attackingthecredibilityandveracityoftheevidencesubmittedbyMr.Blixsethin
supportthereof.Asthesupportingevidencedemonstrates,Mr.Blixseth'scounsel
undertook sufficient independent efforts to verify as best they could the
authenticity oftheevidenceofjudicialmisconductsupportingtheEmergency
Motion. Mr.Blixseth'scounselobtained sworn testimony from Edra Blixseth
authenticating certainevidence and also hired independentcomputerexpertsin
pursuitoftheirinvestigativeduties. Undoubtedlyotherpartieswillanddodispute
the meaning,weightand credibility of this evidence. Butthe pointofthe

EmergencyMotionwasnottohavethisCourtweighevidence,assesscredibility
1
(37 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
4 of 3112
of 111
and adjudicate the factswithin appellate motionspractice,although thatis

apparentlywhattheYCLT seekswithitsOpposition.
Rather,thepointoftheEmergencyMotionistodemonstratetothisCourt
thatthere isagenuine issueofmaterialfactconceming whetherornotJudge
Kirscherhasengagedinjudicialmisconductandthatdueprocessandtheinterest
andappearanceofjusticerequiresthatalloftheYCLT'Sjudgmentenforcement
effortsbestayedpendingresolutionofthesegenuineissuesofmaterialfactbyan
independent and objective fact-finder. Undoubtedly further independent

investigation and fact-findingisrequired, andthatisimpetusoftheEmergency
Motion.
Moreover,justtodaydidMr.Blixsethlearnthathisconcernsjustifying
emergencyreliefhavecometofruitionasunbeknownsttoMr.Blixseth,theYCLT
ispresentlyexecutingonthe$40millionjudgmentgrantedtoitbyJudgeKirscher.
SeeU.S.DistrictCourtfortheDistrictofNevada,CaseNo.2:13-cv-01434.
Second,muchoftheYCLT'SOppositionisdedicatedtomakinggratuitous
personalattacksagainstMr.Blixseth andhiscounsel. Suchpersonalattacksare
notonlyunfortunatefrom apersonalperspective,butirrelevanttotheEmergency
Motion. Seee.g.,InreLoloee, 24lB.
R.655,663n.9(9thCir.B.
A.P.1992)
(EtAbusetheopponentwhenyouhavenobasisforargument.''Cd
A.
sCicerosaid,Gin
(38 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
5 of 4112
of 111
hominem decendum estigitur,quum oratio argumentationem non habet.'PRO
FLACCO j 10''). Again,Mr.Blixseth and hiscounselthrough signiticant

independentinvestigation and vetting have found suffcientevidenceto raise a
genuine issue concerning whetherJudgeKirscherand the beneficiariesofthe
YCLT haveengagedinjudicialmisconduct.ltisnow forthisCourtto decide
simply whethertheYCLT'SeffortsagainstMr.Blixseth shouldbestayeduntil

suchtime asan independentfact-findervetstheevidenceorthisappealandits
relatedappeals1areprocessed.2
WhileitisalltooeasyfortheYCLT toopposeanyjudicialreliefMr.
BlixsethseeksbasedontheperceivednegativecharactertraitsofMr.Blixsethand
hiscounsel(aperceptionthathasbeenwrongfullyperpetuated),the1aw shouldbe
blind to such methods of advocacy and should defer on factual issues to
independentandobjectiveadjudicators.
Thirdandfinally,theYCLT believesthereissomemeaningtobegleaned
from thefactthatMr.Blixsethhasnotyetrenewedhiscontemptmotionagainst
1Theappealinthiscaseisoneofmanyintenelatedappealspendingbeforethis
Court.seeStatementofRelatedCasesincludedinMr.Blixseth'sOpeningBriefin
thiscase.
2Basedonarecentorderfrom theChiefJudge,hehisholdinghisreview ofthe
ComplaintofJudicialMisconductthatMr.Blixsethinabeyancependingresolution
oftheappealspendingbeforethisCourt.Thus,Mr.Blixsethrequeststhatallof
theYCLT'Sjudgmentenforcementeffortsbestayed,atleastuntilresolutionofthis
appealaswellasthenumerousotherrelatedappeals.
3
(39 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
6 of 5112
of 111
EdraBlixsethbasedonherperjuryintheCalifomiaSuperiorCourtsupported,in
part,onthesameevidencewithwhichhesupportedhisEmergencyMotion. While
theYCLT'Sargumentisentirelyirrelevant,nosuchmeaningshouldbeinferred.
ln fact,oneofthereasonsthatMr.Blixseth hasnotyetrenewed hiscontempt

motionisbecausehehasbeen gathering additionalevidenceofEdraBlixseth's
perjuryaspartofherdocumentedscorchedlitigationtacticsagainstheradversaries
andtheirattorneys. SeeMont
gomery v. Etreppid Technologies,LLC,2009WL
910739,31(D.Nev.2009).Withthatevidencenowgatheredandhavingrecently
defeatedtheYCLT'Sand MontanaDepartmentofRevenue'sseven-month long
effol
'
tto forceMr.Blixseth into an involuntarybanknlptcy which hasdiverted
muchofMr.Blixseth'sattention(seeU.S.Bankruptcy CourtfortheDistrictof
Nevada,CaseNo.11-15010),Mr.Blixseth is now preparing to re-new his
contemptmotion3againstEdrausingthesameevidencethatheusedtosupporthis
EmergencyMotion. Moreover,astotheYCLT'Srelianceonthetafterthefact''
declarationsofEdraBlixsethandherattomeyfiledinCaliforniaSuperiorCourtin
whichtheyattempttoretracttheirpriorswornstatementsinwhichtheybothadmit
tocreatingadocumentwhereintheyacknowledgetheircomplicityinjudicial
misconduct,Mr.Blixsethhasalreadyrespondedtothoseallegationsinpre-hearing
3TheCaliforniaSuperiorCourtdeniedhiscontemptmotioninJanuary2012)
withoutprejudicetoallowMr.Blixsethre-fileitinappropriatefonuandformat.
4
(40 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
7 of 6112
of 111
briefingbeforetheCaliforniaSuperiorCourtandhasinnumerablegroundsupon
whichtoimpeachanythingEdraBlixsethandherattorneysayunderoathwhenthe
opportunityfinallypresentsitself. A completecopy ofthisreply briefwith its
supportingdeclarationsfiledwiththeCalifomiaSuperiorCourtisattachedhereto
asExhibit1.4 ButthatofcourseisthepointoftheEmergency Motion. Due
processandtheappearanceofjusticerequirethatalltheYCLT'Seffortsagainst
Mr.Blixsethbestayedpendingresolutionbyanindependentadjudicatorts)ofthe
genuineissuesraisedintheEmergencyMotion. ThatisallMr.Blixsethseeks. He
doesnotseek,asapparentlytheYCLT does, to havetheMotionsPanelofthis

Courtresolvedisputedfactualissues.
Dated,August20,2013:
?
,
.
Mi elJ.Flynn
Chrl herJ.Conant
AttorneysfortheAppellant
4Inthisreplybriefanditssupportingdeclarations,Mr.Blixsethandhiscounsel
explaintheeffortstheyundeltookverifytheevidencesubmittedinsupportthereof,
whichevidencewasalsousedtosupporttheEmergencyMotion.
5
(41 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
8 of 7112
of 111
CERTIFICATE OFSERVICE
1hereby certify thatonthe 20th day ofAugust,lmailed the foregoing

documentbyFirstClassMail,postageprepaidtothefollowing:
RobertBell
MullinHoard& Brown,LLP
AmarilloNationalPlazaTwo
Suite800
500SouthTaylor,LobbyBox#213
Amarillo,Texas79101-2445
CounselfortheYCLT
CharlesW.Hingle
ShaneP.Coleman
Holland& Ha1
4LLP
401North31stStreet
Suite1500
Billings,MT59101-1277
August20,2013
- N.
ChristopherJ. ant,Esq.
(42 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
9 of 8112
of 111
t9080331,
. '.,
2
) j.
r -. t
,,j.
,
f t X'$X,
f
.
1 CHIUSTOPHERJ.CONANT
2 '
Cal.B/No.244597
3
4
D
73017mSkeet
,Suito200
F jk ; DD
Teeln
Ceo
o
ra
02
2800
cv
pc
ho,
n
:l
(3
0d
3o
)8
29
80
-1
F
acsimile:(303)298-1804
Email:= nant@conantlawyers.com
SupEjto
lvjgguujjjjq..
JAN072213
5 AttomeyforTimothyL.Blixseth
-.-
R*Reid -
7
8
SW ERIORCOURTOFCALIFORNIAFORTHECOUNTYOFmc ltsmE
9 Inr4theManiageof:Blixsoth
CasNo.RmmD91152
1: Peutioner:EdraBlixseth
yeasslgncdtoDcpt.10fromDept.F501)
11
x
Mu
12
13 Respondent:TimolyL.Blixseth
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
RRRPONDENT'SREPLYBRIRFIN
SUPPORTOFMRMORANDUM OFPOINTS
AxoAUTHORITDSm suppolt'rOF
RsspoxoExrsMoTloNFoR
SANW IONSANDTOSHOW CAUSE
Judge:SharonJ.Watem
Heming:January14,2013
Time:8:30mm.
Dept.10
24
25
26
27
28
RVPOY X SU LYBRWP
(43 of 178)
Case:
Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:ID:
9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,56Page
Page:
10 of9112
of 111
1 CHRISTOPHERJ,CONANT
2 '
cal.B!JNo.244597
73:17mstreet,Suite2O0
3 Denver,Colorado80202
Telephone:(303)298-1800
4 Facsimile:$03)298-1804
Email:cconant@conaptlawyers.com
5 AttorneyforTimothyL
,Bl
ixsel
6
7
8
SUPERIORcouR-royCALIFORNIAFORTHBcolrx'rvop'RIVERSIDE
9 InretheMarriageof:Blixseth
CaseNo.RIDIND9I152
j() Petitioner:EdraBlixseth
(l
teassignedtoDept,10fromDept.F501)
11
and
12
Respondent:TimothyL.Blixsdh
13
14
15
16
17
RES
NT'
SRE
PLYNDUM
BRIEFOF
IN POINTS
SUPP
PO
ONDE
RTOF
ME
MORA
xxoAUTHORJTIESIN SUPPORToy
psspoxopxTysMoTloNFoR
SANCTIONSANDTO SHOW CAUSE
Judge:SharonJ.Waters
He
arin
j:
:3J0an
y14,2013
ume
:8
aumar
.
Dept,10
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RBSPONDENT'SREPLYBMEF
(44 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
11 of10112
of 111
1
RespondentTilnothyL.Blixseth,throughhisundersigned,herebysubmitsthisReply
2 briefinsupportofhisRequestfbrOrder.Asaninitialmatter,Petitionerrepeatedlysuggeststhat
Respondcnt'sRequestforOrderwasnotappropriatebecauseitwasallegedlynotfiledby
4 Respondent'scounselofrecord.Petitionerisincorrect.TherecordreflectstlaatonoraboutJuly
14,2O11,Mr.Conant,amemberoftheCaliforniaBar,associatedinascounselinthismatter.
6 1. PETITIONERHASBEENCAUGHTINHERTANGLEDWEB;HER
EXP
LANATI
ONS
UNAVAI
LING
1
ADMI
SSIONS
'
OFARE
HERNOT
PERJONLY
URYAND
FRAUD
ONBUT
TITICONTAI
SCOURTNFURTHER
g
A. PetitionerandMr.HolahanAdmittotheirPeriurvandFraudonthisCourt
ItisnowundisputedthatPetitionerandMnHolahannotonlyconcealedassetsfrom
RespondentsotllathecouldnotenforcetheMSAobligationsthatPetitioneroweshim,butthey
mademateriallyfalserepresentationstothisCourtinfurtheranceoftheirconcealment. Altlaough
PetitionerandMr.Holahanattempttoprovideinnocentexplanationsfortheil'now admitted
gaudulentconduct,theireqplanationsembroilthem furtherandareadmissionsoftheirfraudon
thisCourtwhentheyrepresentedthatshehadnoassetswithwhichtosatisfytheobligatiousshe
owestoRespondent,Specifically,Petitioneradmitsthatshedidnotopenbankaocountsinher
16 ownnamebecauseshewmztedtoconcealherassetsfromRespondenttowhonnsheowes$20+
17 millioninnon-dischargeableMSA obligations.Petitioner'sDeclarationatp.4:25-5:2.Thisisby
10
11
12
13
14
15
18 definitionfraudulentaotivity.Cal,Civ.Code3439.04(a)(1).Petitionerevenadmitsthather
19
20
21
22
concealmenteffol'tsinthisregardpaidoffwhenshesuccessfullythwarttdRespondent'sattempts
toenforcetheMSAinOctoberof2011.fJ.Ofcom%e,oneofthereasonsPetitionerwas
successfklinthwrtingRespondent'seffortstocollectmoneylegitimatelyowedtobim was
becausePetitionerandMr.HolalaanrepresentedtothisCourtinJulyandOctoberof2011thatshe
23 hadnoassets,PetitionerandMr.Holahalnowadmitthatshedidhavemoneyandassets,shejust
24 didnothaveitinherownnamebutwasadmittedlyconcealingandlatmderingherassetswiththe
ypuposeofdefiaudinnRespondentbeforeth.k
25 facilitationofMr.Holahanandothersforthevel'
26 CourtinhisabilitytoenforcetheMSAobligationsPetitionerowestohim.1d.lns1Aol4,
27 Petitioneradmitstosuccessfullydefraudingandconcealingassetsfrom Respondentbymeansof
28 intontionalmisrepresentationstothisCourt.Thisisashockingadmissionandmostassuredly
IGSPONDENT'SREPLYBR1El7
(45 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
12 of11112
of 111
1 warrantssanctionsagainstherandMr.Holaham:SeealsoCal.RuleofProf.Conduct5-220)5-
2 2001).
3
Asidefrom theirshockingadmissionsaboutintentionallyconoealingassetsandmaking
4 knowinglyfalserepresentationstothisCoul-t,otheraspectsofPetitioner'sandMr,Holahan's
5 declarationsrevealsignificantdeception.Forexample,Petitionerinherdeolarationdeniesthat
6 sheownedFF&ELiquidators,lnc.Peti
tionerDeclaration!(6.Yet,Mr.Holahantestiesthat
7 Petitionerdi
rectedhimtoincorporateFF&ELiqui
dators,Inc,
.d
tforhe1
'
.'HolahanDecl.!6.
*8
9
10
11
12
Whiletheirinabilitytotdgettheirstory''straightaboutFF&ELiquidators,lnc.,isindicativeof
theirlackofoandorwiththisCouTt,thatlackofcandormorphsintooutrightdeceptioninlig'
htof
Petitioner'sotheradmissionsinhcrdeclaration.Speciscally,inhisdeclaratlonMr.Montgomery
explainshowmanyofthepaymentstohim from PetitionerswerefunneledthroughFF&E
Liquidators,Inc.,whichisthecompanyMr.Montgomerytestif'
ieswasacompanyownedand
13 cont
TolledbyPdtitioner.Montg.Decl.!j6.ThebankstatementssublnittedbyMr.Montgomery
14 oorroboratethis.Mont.Decl.!12,Ex,2.AndPetitionerdoesnotdenyt
hatshepaidMr.
15 Montgomm'ythroughFF&ELiquidators,Inc.Jndeed,PetitioneradmitsthatshepaidMr.
16 Montgomeryoverthelastyeal
'todevelopsoft
ware(PetitionerDeclaration!6)butisnoticeably
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
evasiveabouthowshepaidhim particularlyinlightofthefaotthatsheadmitsthatshedidnot
haveanybankaocountsinherownname.WhatisrevealedbyPetitioneracknowledgingth'
atshe
-.
1Inherdeclaration,Potitionerexousest
hefactthatshedidnotopenbankaccountsinherown
namebyshiftingtheblametoRespondentan.dhisdesiretocolleotonmoneylegitimatelyowedto
him:inotherwords,shecries:d'Tim mademedoitl''Petitioner'sDeolarationatp.4:25-5:2.
EvenassumingthatRespondentistheonlyreasonPetitionerengagedin amoneylaundering
schemetohideherassets,thisdoesnotexcuseherfzaudulenttransferactivity. Petitioner
legitimatelyowesRespondehtover$20millioninoutmacdingMSAobligatiohs.Petitionermay
notlikethefactthatsheowesthismoneytoRespondent,butshedoesandsheowesittohim after
bargainingatarms-lengthwhiletheywereb0threpresentedbycompetentcounsel. Petitionor,
unfortunately,endedupinbanltruptcyslzortlyahertheMSA wasconsmmmatedbeoause,coupled
withinancialandc'reditcrisisthathittheworldeconomiesinthefallof2008,shemadea
numberofriskybusinessdecisionsandassumptionsinenteringintotheMSA,al1ofwhiohher
a
o
ey
uqtu(
ee
bhit
o
)
e,fosr
n
h
A,
St
et
er
ltn
in
gstc
oau
at
vio
on
idedthheeroa
ob
no
se
es
n
ceE
sxohfi
er2ot
wnCo
pn
oa
on
lt
'De
decc
i1
s.
i
onbs
heeen
ht
ae
sri
dg
eci
in
dt
eo
dt
toeMS
blame
Respondentfora1lofherpost-MsA woes,WhilethishasbeenPetitloner'sthemeforthelast
severalyears,Petitioner'slatestdeclarationisremarkableinthatitappearstobethesrsttimethat
Petitionerhasopenlyadmittedtoengaginginf'
raudulentactivity,yetsheistmashamedofdoing
sobecausesheapparentlybelievesthatblamingRespondentforherownconductisasuffcient
excusetoexoulpateherfromwrongdoing'
lulsl'oxoENT'sRSPLYBluISF
(46 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
13 of12112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
paidM.
1*.MontgolnerytlaroughFF&ELiquidators,Inc.whileatthesametimedenyingthatshe
ownedFF&ELiquidators,Inc.eventhoughMr.HolahanadmitsthatheincorporatedStfo1'her''is
asignificantandunmitigatedlevelofdeceptiononthisCourt.z
B. Petitioner'sExplanationofHerPen-uredStatementsConcernhzzMr.Flvnn
AreUnavallinc
PetitioneradmitstotheauthenticityoftheemailsprovidedbyM1
'.BlixsethinhisRequest
fororderwhereinsheadmtstoherattornysandothersthatMr.Flynnwasneverherlawyer,
Petitionel-ftlrtheradmitsthatduringtherelevanttimeperiodinwhichshemadethesenumerous
representationstoherattornoysuaatthoseemailsacouratelyreneotedlwrbeliefthatMr.Flynn
wasnevm.herattorney.Petitioner'sDeolarationlfs(
qtistruethatIlaterstatedthatMikeFlynn
wasnevermylawyer.Thatwasmyunderstandingthen....').However,inatlattempttoexplain
awayherdemonstrableper
jm'
ybeforethisCourtinwhichshetestilesunderoat
hthatMr,Flynn
washerattorney,Petitionerhidesbehindtheexpedientexcusethatwithhindsightshenow
understandsandbelievesthatunderCalifornia1aw Mr.Flynnwasherattorneybecauseshepaid
hisfeestorepl.esentDennisMontgolneryandheallegedlyprovidedhersomecasualinsight
ooncemingllerdivorcebecauseitimpactt &isthonolentM'
r.Montgomery,'-lrl.
lll'
tlonex,sposb hocexcusesimplyhigllligl
tsthatsieknowss:ehasbeonoaughtpeTjudnghevself.
Ms.Blixseth,stwlstedpeljuriesarespecmcallyencapsulatedinherpresentswornuseof
thewo1.dqater''intheaforesaidquote.Whenshenowstatesunderoathtllatt4istruethat1later
2JnsupportofherdefonsethatsheandMr.Holahandidnotmisleadt'
htsCourtwhenthey
representedthatshe'
hadnoassets,Petitionerbelievess.
tisskgnifloantthatthepictmesskowing
21 hel
.lavishful
mishingsandartinherluxuryBevel'
lyHillsapartment(anapal
-t
mentcosting
,5ma
00/dmo
nrerpen
,
i
ohC
De
5
22-2
re
h
aaft
eyl'
22 $
sh7e
etn
ht
eh
sei
ret
seE
nx
th
at
ib
oi
nts1
.t
T
ison
isan
st
iin
plc
yl.
i,
np
cp
re.
d8
ib:
le8
.,Do
P4
e)
tiwe
tion
mt
'a
ak
ne
dnhf
eo
rur
atmo
tornnet
ys
rc
ll
23
24
25
26
27
oxpectthisCotu'ttobelievethatshewasdestituteinJulyandOctoberof2011butthenonlytwo
monthslater'thititbig''allowinghertoliveinaluxuryBeverlyHillsapartlnentdecoratedwith
thea'
rtandfurnittvefrom PorouphleCreekwhiohsheownedbeforethedivorce? Thisisnone
n
s
e
1Peti.tioner,sbeliefthatCalifornia1awdictatesthatMr.Flynnwasherlawyerbecauseshepaid
Mr. F
.lynn'slegalfeestorepresentMr.Montgomeryisunsupportedbylaw. First,whetlaer
california1aw appliesishighlyquestionablebecauseMr.FlynnrepresentedMr.Montgomeryin
connectionwithlitigationinNevadafederalcomt Regardless,bothCaliforniaandNovadal'ules
ofprofessionalconducts'pecicallycontemplateandallow someoneotherthantheclienttopay
theclient'sattorneys'feeswithoutthepayoralsobecomhlgaclientoftheattorneybyvil-tueof
payingthoclient'sfees.CaliforniaRuleof*ProfessionalConduct3-31O(F);NevadaRuleof
28 professionalConduct1.8(9.
RESPONDENT'SREPLYBRIEF
(47 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
14 of13112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
statedthatMikeFlynnwasnevermylawyer,''sheisagainlyingtotheCourt.Shedidnotllater''
statethatMr.Flynnwasherlawyer,sherepeatedlymadethatassertioncontemporaneouslywith
whentheissuewaspending.ShepreviouslyinJuly,2007,whentheresgestaeofthisissuewas
thenbeinglitigatedintheNevadaFederalCoultmadethosedenials,notd<later''asshenow
swears.Ms.Blixsethwrotethenow authenticatedemailsdenyingMr.Flynnwasherlawyerin
July,2007whenMr.Flynnwaswithdrawingfrom therepresentationofMontgomery,andthe
issuesofhisrepresentationwerethenbeforetheNevadaFederalCourtinthecontextofhisand
8 associatecotmsel'sclaimsforfeesinexcessof$690,000.Ms.Blixseth'sthenatlorneyDeborah
9 Klar,therecipientoftheseemails,wastryingtocoaxherintoclaimingthatMr.Flynnwasinfaot
10 herlawyer,whichMs.Blixsethvehementlydeniedatthattime.ltwasonlyE'latel'''inDecember,
11 2009whenMr.HolahanreplacedKlarandwasthencoachinghertocommitperjury,thatshe
12 chmlgedherposition.Ms.BlixgethagaindeniedinanemailtoHolahaninDecember2009that
13 Mr.Flynnwashorlawvel
'.ThenHolahan'ssubornationreallytookholdresultingintheper
jured
14 deolarationbeforethiscourt.
15
ItisobviousthatPetitioner'speljureddeclarationconcerningMr.Flynnwastheprodtlct
16 ofM1'.HolahrcoachingPetitionertoconcoctwhateverstorytheycouldtofl-ustrateMr.
17 Blixseth'sl'ighttoberepresentedbythecounselofhischoice,Mr.Flylm.ThatPditioner's
18 perjureddeclarationhasnobasisinfaotisestablishedbyherownemails,butithas11obasisin
19 1aweitlwrbecauseherclaim thatshenowbelieves,albeityearsafterthefact,thatMr.Flynnwas
20 herattorneyislogallyspeciousandMr.Holahanshouldknowbetter.M1'.Holahanprobably
21 recognizedthislittleproblem whenheslippedtheword<slater''intotheaforesaidquote.
22 RespondentsubmitstothisCourtthatMr.Holahan'scomplicityinthisperjtlryisevldencednot
23 onlybyMs.Blixseth'spreviousdenialstoKlaT,butherdenialstohim.Hehasnowchosento
subornfurtherperjurywithMs,Blixseth'srespondi
ngdeclarationunderoat
h.Thisoourtshould
referhimtotheCaliforniaBar.Speoiically,itiswell-eatab2sh.ed-t.
h.at-lmd
.er-Calic
fernia-taw-ttit-i
26 theintentandconduotoftl4epartiesthatooht'
rolstlwquestionastowlletkeranattoTnoy-clketat
27 relationshiphasbeencreated.''Zcnlthlns.Co.v.CozenO'Connor,148Ca1.A1&.4th998,1010
28 (2007).Theallegedclient'sdd
hindsightbeliefs'thatsucharelationshipexistedarethuslegally
RESPONDEN'
I''SREPLYl3ItIEF
(48 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
15 of14112
of 111
1
2
3
4
irrelevant.''1d.ThePetitioner'scontemporaneousemailstoherthenattorneysandothers
repeatedlydisolaiminginnouncertaintermsthatMr.FlymAwasC'neverherattorney''
uneqtlivocallydemonstratethatshedidnotbelievcthatMpFlynnwasherattorney.Thus,
becausePetitionerneverbelievedthatMr.Flynnwasherattorney,anddetailsinemailsher
5 conductconsistentwiththatcontemporaneousbelief(i.
e.
,thatshehadherownattorneysand
6 alwayscorrectedMr.Flynnifhesuggestedthathewasherattorney),asamatteroflaw,Mr.
7 Flynnwasneverherattorney.ThePetitioner'snowSfhindsight''belieftothecontraryafterbeing
8 coachedbyMr.Holahanandtakenfornootherpurposethantogainastrategiclitigation
9 advantageoverMr.BlixsethmerelyhigblightsheratldMr.Holahan'sunmitigatedwillingnessto
10 commitpel
jurywhenitsuitstheirends.
1j
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
c. Petitioners'ClaimsthatExhibits9.10.11and12AreAlte
-r
edandFabricated
Rin-uHollow
Petitionel.andlwrattorneyhavenootherchoicebuttoclaim thatthedocumentsattached
asBxhibits9,10,11or12arefabrioatedoraltel.edbecauseforthem toadmittotheirauthenticity
isforthelntoadmitseriouscrimes.Moreover,todeflectfl.
om tlw criminalimplicationsoftheir
oNvndocuments,PetitionerandherattorneypisdirectthisCourtbygoingontheoffenseagainst
Respondent,hisattorneysandM1
-.Montgomery.Theirefrortsringhonow.
F11.s'
t,petitionercannotdenytheauthenticityofthetsNotesontheMSA''dooument
attachedasB'
xhibit11toMontgomm'y,sDcclarationbecauseonDecember14,2012,she
authenticatedthisvel.ydocumen.tunderoathduringherdeposition.lndeed,notonlydid
petitionet.autlwnticatethisdocumentatherowndeposition,butthetranscriptreflectsthatMr.
HolahanspontsigniscanttimealsoauthenticatingitasadocumentheworkedonwithPetitioner.
seeEdraBlixseth'sDecembel'14,2012depositiontranscript,pp.268-276anddepositionexhibit
11,attachedtoconantDeclarationasExhibit1lledconcurrentlyherewith. 113theirRespons:
filedwiththiscourt,PetitionerandMr.Holahanfailtoacknowledgethattheyauthenticatedthis
verydocumentjustweeksago. Instead,Petiuonel.andherattorneysubmitself-servingemails
thatallegedlycontaina$copyandpaste''ofsomeform oftheSNotesontheMSA''documentthat
27 petitionerpe
.paredinseptembm'of2009(HolahanEx,A-1)andtlaeyalsosubmittheallegedreal
28
(49 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
16 of15112
of 111
tl
NotesontheMSA''document(HolahanEx.A-3).Neitherofthesedocumentshelpstheircause,
2 Ctlriotlsly,onthelastpageofwhatPetitionerclaimstobetherealti
NotesontheMSA''document
3 (HolahanEx.A-1andA-3),thereisanunusuallylargegaporl
nultiple'
hardreturn''spacing
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
wherePetitioner'smostillicitstatementswerelocatedinthe''NotesontheMSA''document
attachedtoMontgomery'sdeclaration.ClearlyPetitionerandherattorneydeletedhorillicit
statementsfrom thedoculnentstheyfiledwiththisCourtbutfailedtoproperlyeditthose
doctmzentsfollowingtheiro'
wnalterationthereoftoRcovertheirtracks''byremovingthegap
createdbytheirdeletion.
Moreimportmttly,however,independentevidencesupportstheauthenticityofthe
doculnentssubmittedbyMr.Montgomerytl
aatcannotbedisputedbyPetitioner'sandMI..
Holahr'sself-servingdeclaration.Submittedconcm-rentlyherewithisthedeclarationofRobel't
12 WhitefordwhoisanindopendentcomputerexpertthatMr.BlixseyhandMr.Flynnretained
13 monthsagofortheptlrposeofinvestigatingthe''mdadata''containedonelectronicflesand
14 computersthatMr.MontgomeryproducedtoMr.Bli
xset
h'scounsel.SeealsoConantDecl.!7.
15 AmongthemanythingsinvestigatedbyMr.WhitefordwerethedatesthatExhibits9,10andi1
16 werecreatedandlastmodifi
edonVs,Blixseth'seleotronicallystoredmedia.1d.AsMr.
17 Whitefordtestiesinhisdeclaration,theGtblotesontheMSA''documentwascreatedon
18 September20,2009andlastmodifiedonOctober23,2009.WhitefordDeclaration!7.Thefact
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
thattheNotesontheMSAdocumentassubmittedbyMr.Montgomeryinhisdeclarationwaslast
modifiedonOctobor23,2009rendersmeaninglessthesupposedSeptember29,2009earlier
versionorthedocumentthatMr.Holahanattachestohisdeclaration.Indeed,notablyabsent
from Petitioner'sandMr.Holahan'sdeclarationisanyrepresentationthatExhibitsA-landA-3
toMr.Holahan'sdeclarationarethelatestversionsofthatdocumentintheirpossession.
Mo1'eover,thelastmodiicationonOctober23,2009occurredatatimewhenPetitionerhad
possessionandcontrolofthecomputeronwhichthisdocumentwasmodified.lnqddition,
PetitionersuggeststhatMr.Montgomerywouldhavehadamotivationtoalterthedocument
himselfonlysinceJuneof2012whenshepartedwayswithhim,yetthelastmodiicationtothis
documentoocurredyearsbeforethenatatimewhenMs.Blixsothhadpossessionoftheflesand
.
6
RIISPONDENT'SREPLYBRIEF
(50 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
17 of16112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
wellbefol'eanyallegedmotivationbyMr.Montgomerytotamperwiththedooumentswould
havearisen.
Second,todeflectfrom thecriminalimplicationsoftheirowndocuments,Petitionerand
Mr.HolahangoontheoffenseagainstRespondentandhiscounsel,claimingthatRespondentand
Mr.ConantsubmittedknowinglyfabricateddocumentsinMr.Montgomery'sdeclaration.
Nothingcouldbefurtherfrom t'
hetruth.lnfm-theranceoftheirinvestigativedutiestothisCourt,
priortofilingMr.Montgomery'sdeclarationanditsaccompanyingexhibits,Respondentandhis
counsell'etainedMr.Whitefordtoindependentlyvmifytheauthenticityoftheelectronic
documentsonPetitioner'selectronicstoragedevices,andparticularlyExhibits9-11toMr.
10 Montgomery'sdeclaration.ConantDeclaration!79FlynnDecl.!13,Asdiscussedabove,
11 RespondentandhiscounseltaslcedMr.Whitefordwithdeterminingthedatecreatedandlastdate
12 modifiedofExhibits9-11todetennineifthesedocumentswerelastmodi'
fiedatatimewhen
13 Petitionerwasinpossessionofthefilesoriftheywererecentlymodifed,therebysuggestingthat
14 Mr.Montgomeryhadalteredthecontzntsoftizefiles.1d.MnWhitefordreportedtoRespondent
15 atzdhiscounselthattheoriginalelectronicfilesrepresentedbyExhibits9-11werelastmodified
16
17
18
19
onOctober25,2009,July17,2011(notablythisisthedatebeforePetitionerfi
ledheropposition
wit,
hthisCotu'
ttoRespondent'sprolzacviceapplicationforMr.Flynn),andOctober23,2009,
respectively,WhitefordDeol,!!7-10.Thesedatesarea11datesthatPetitionerhadcontrolofthe
electronicfiles(aocordingtoMr.Montgomery'sdeclarationwhichPeti
tionerdidnotrefute)and
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
thereforeRespondentatldhiscounselwereandaresatisfiedastotheauthenticityofthe
documentsinamannm.thatisindependentofanyrelianceonMr.Montgomery,Mereover,given
thehighlypersonalanddetailedcontentofthedocuments,Respondentandhiscotmselwel'e
suflkientlysatisfiedthatthedocumentscouldonlyhavebeendraftedbyPetitioner.
Third,theironyofPetitionerattackingthecredibilityofMr.Montgomeryandreferringto
him asadscon-man''onlynowshouldnotbelostontheCourtandcannotbcbelieved.Petitioner
acknowledgestbatMr.Montgomeryhasbeenherbusinesspartnerforthelastsixyears.
27 Petitionersot
wstedMr.Montgomerythatshepaidhim$100,000amonthbetweenAprilof'2006
28 andMayof2009todevelopsoftwareforher.See2009depositionofPetitionerattachedto
7
RESPONDENT'SIIEPLY1)RIEIZ
(51 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
18 of17112
of 111
1 ConmAtDecl.asEx.3.Indeed,inanemaildatedNovember5.2008(aftertheMSAwas
2 consummated)Ms.Blixset
htoldMr.Montgol
nerythatbeingsuccessfulwiththei
rteohnology
3
4
5
6
companywasa11shecaredabout,notwithstandingthehundredsofmillionsofotherassdsshe
obtainedoutoftheMSA.SeeEx.1toPetitioner'sdepositiontranscriptattachedtoConantDecl.
asExhibit1.Moreover,herownattorneysweresmwtionedbyafederalcourtinfurtheranceand
indefenseofherpadnershiprelationshipwithMr.Montgomery,SeeMontgomeryv.Etreppid
7 Technologies,LLC,2009WL910739,31(D.
Nev.2009).Pditionerisalsocmrentlyincontempt
8 of@Coloradofederalcourtandthereiscurrentlyawarrantoutforherarrestasaresult.Conatlt
9 Decl.!J4.Additionally,inherdeolarationPetitioneradmitstolalmderingmone/andcashover
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
thelastyeartopayMr.Montgomerytodevelopteclmologyforher.
Thepointbeing,PetitionerhaslongplacedhertrustatldconfdenceinMr.Montgomery,
payingh1m $100,000amonthforthreeyears,5andhasengagedinhighlyquestionableconducton
hisbehalf;thereforehercuzrentattemptstoattackhiscredibilityisp'edictable,butnotwelltaken.Indeed,beoauseofthelong-standingpartnershiprelationshipbetweenPetitionerandMr,
Montgomery,heknowspreciselyGwherethebodiesareburied''andisthereforebestsuitedto
reveala11thefraudsthatPetitionerhasbeenengaginginoverthelastsevel.a1years.6
z. PETIT-IONER'SSUGGESTION T-HATMR.FLYNNHASG
VENMR.
-I
MONTGOMERY AaGIFT''ISNOTSUPPORTEDBYTHERECORD
Petitioner,basedpurelyonconjecture,claimsthatMr.Montgomery'sdeclarationisthe
ProductofRespondent'sattorney,MikeFlynn,purchasingMr.Montgomery'sfonnerhomeinthe
townofYal
rowPoint,StateofWashington(hereinafteruYarrowPointPropertyh'
)outofMr.
4Altlzoughsheclaimsthatsheisnotlaunderingmoney,sheadmitstonotopeningbankaccounts
22 inhernameand usingotherstofunnelmoneytoMr,Montgolnerya11undertheguiseof
concealinghe1
.assetsfrom Respondentbecausesheoweshimoverf20millioninolkigations
23 undortheMSA. Thisisthedefinitionofmoneylaunderingandisbydeinition fraudulent
oPnedtu
c
t.
Sree
c
a
l.
cii
v.
C
od
e
j
3
4
3
9
.
04
.atshengvel'sharedanofficewithMr.Montgomerybpt
24 i
i
t
i
o
n
e
c
l
q
i
m
s
n
h
e
r
d
e
o
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
thatslw occaslonallysetupalaptopcomputerm hisconferenceroom.Petitioner,sassertionls
25 betmyed by thepicturesofherofflcesetup includedin Mr.Montgomery'ssupplemental

clasr
26 d
6e
Re
paoti
nodne.
ntcategoricallydeniestheallegationsinParagraph7ofPetitioner'sDeclarationand
a
1
1
o
t
l
A
e
l
'
s
i
mi
ar
a
le
gat
opsMo
whe
nme
shreyc<l
a
ms
t
a
nis
nt
gobmq
r
desnet
hadrequestedl
tll
al
t
De
ni
ms
nr
te
gi
o
hi
a
ck'
'hi
nt
tD
oe
en
ma
ilMo
sor
we
mt
ey
sto
ol
fdah
ne
yr
ot
nheat
oR
re
os
tp
ho
en
rwi
obtainlnformat
ionfromthirdpartiest
lu'
oughillegalmeans.Respondenthasneverrequestedthat
28 Mr.Montgomerydoanysuchthing.
RESPONDENXSREPLYBRIE12
(52 of 178)
i
l
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
19 of18112
of 111
1
p
l
I
1
2
3
1
i
l
I
4 purohasedtheYarrowPointPropertysubjecttoa11liensandencumbrances.ExhibitE,p.6,to
5 HolahanDecl.TheYarrowPointPropertyissubjecttoa$2.
4millionloanwhichBankof
I
!
6 Amoricaiscurrentlyforeclosingupon. FlynnDecl.!69Ex
E,p.4toHolahanDeclaration.ltis
..
!
1
i
i
.
Montgomery'sbankruptcyestateandgivingitbacktoMr.Montgomery.ThePetitionerfailsto
understalldthenatureofMr.Flylm'spurchase.AsthemotionfiledbyM1',Montgomery's
ballkruptcytrusteetosellal1ofMr.Montgomery'sassetstoMr.Flynnmakesclear,M.
r.Flymz
7 alsosubjecttoa$26millionjudgmentlieninfavorofe'
rreppid.FlynnDecl.!6.r
nAus,Mr.
8 Flynncouldnot's
gift''theYarrowPointpropertytoMr.Montgomerybecausethatpropelywill
9 soollbeforecloseduponbyBanlcofAmerioaasthereisnowayMr.Flynncanorwillsatisfythe
10 defaultedindebtednessencumberingthatmoperty.WhatPetitionerignoresonthisatready
l
I
1
11 colateralmatt
eri
st
l
zatM,.l
qynnpuwuasedal
wmbero.
fl
iugat
ioac
zai
mseom'
M,.
!
!
i
l
!
1
i
t
r
Montgomery'estatethatMr.Flynn,asalftigatol'andwlthextensiveknowledgeofMr.
Montgolnery'sbusinessdealings,percei
vestohavepotentialvalue.FlynnDecl.!(
!(3,7.This
factismadeclearinareviewoftheSaleMotbonasawhole.Ex,EtoHblahanDecl.Astoher
.
15 claimthatMr.MtmtgomeryhasmovedbaclcintotheYarrowPoin!property,Mr,Monlgolnery
16 (lidthatofhisownvoli
tionandwitlouttheconsentofMr.Flynn.FlynnDecl.!9.Indeed,the
17 bankruptcyjudgeadministeringMr,Montgomery'sestateapprovedhistrustee'ssaleMotion
l
1
i
'
I
i
12
13
14
18
19
20
21
22
23
onlyonJanuary2,2013,andtlworderapprovingtlzatmotionhasnotyetbeenentered,nordoes
Mr.Flynnevenhaveadeedtothevanmwlaointpropty.lqynnoecl,!(8.Thus,despite
petitioner,sinsinuationsthatMr.Flynnsomelaow improperlyinducedMr.Montgomorytosigu
hisdeclarationbytgiving'sMr.MontgomerytheYal-rowPointpropertyandallowh4gMr.
Montgomm'ytomovebaclcin,Mr,Flynnhasnotdoneanysuchthingandtherecordsreflectsthat
Mr.Flynnandnoauthoritytodoanysuchthing.lnfact,MnFlynnintendstopursuethe
l
I
24 satisfactionofhisnearly$1,000,000.00injudgmentsagainstMontgomerythroughhaving
!
l
25 purchasetlt'
heolaimsof-theMorltgomerybmucmptcyestateagainsttlwmortgageesonthevarrow
26 PointPropert
y.FlynnDecl.!7.
27
28
9
(53 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
20 of19112
of 111
PetitionerAttemptstoDenectfrom HerNow AdmlttedFraudulentConduct

bvAccusintRespondentandHlsCounselofUnethlcallvRevlewlneAttornevCllentPrlvlleaedDocuments
Inanotherattempttodeflectfrom theiznowadmittedfri
mdsonthisCourt,Petitionm'and
'ConanthaveengagedinunetlAioal
4 Mr.HolahansuggestthatRespondentandhiscounsel,M1'
eviewingPetitioner'sattorney-clientcommunications.Pditioner'sResponse,p.1O.
5 conductbyl'
rgument.Firstandforemost,Exhibits10and11toMr.Montgomery's
6 Thisisadesperatea'
declarationontheirfacearenotprivilegedbecausetheyevidencePetitioner'sandMr.I-lolahan's
8 knowi
ngparticipationincriminalconduct,i.
e.
,judicialcorruption.Cal.Evid.Codej956.
9 Second,PetitionerreliesonanargumentthatExhiblts10andl1toMr.Montgomery'sdeclaration
10 weresomehowsinadvertentlydisclosed''duringtl)ecourseofdiscovery.Thislineofargument
andthecasescitedinsupportthereofarewhollyinappositebecausetheydealwiththesituation
12 whereapartytoalawsuitinadvertentlydisclosespdviiegedcommunicationsduringthecourseof
sindiscovery.inadvertentlyorotherwiso.-/
-t
13 discovery,Petitionerneverdisclosedtllesed-ocm-u.en
her,Respondentandhiscounselobtainedthesedocumentstlu'oughanindependentsourceand
14 Rat
15 therefol'etheyuzpersenotprivilegedbecausethemerefactthatPetitionervoluntarily
zolofathird-partynon-lawyermeansthat
16 abandonedthesedocumentstothecustodyandcont
t
'
heyl
Aavelostanymivilegethatmay'
haveattaohedtothem.Cat.Evld.Codob912(a);Jnsurcncchyl/
zlcrfc,
cv.SuperiorCourt,108Cal.
xpp.
3d758)765-766(19%%($'
lftheolsent
18 Co.ofNort
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
disclosesattornepclientcommunicationstommecessarythirdparties,l)emanbfesfsa11Jntentto
walveconfidentiality.').
9Petitionerstal'tsherarguluentinbystatingd'lnadvertentdisclosureduringcliscoverynoconsent:
Byitsverynature,discoveryiscoercion....''Petitioner'sResponse,p.10,lines7-8.Respondent
isbaffledbythepremiseofPetltioner'sargtunentinthisregardbecausetheargumentassumes
thatPetitionerdisclosedthedooumentsatissueduringthecourseofdiscovery.Nosuchthing
everhappened.Mr.Montgolnery'sdeclarationmakesclearthathereceivedtlhesedocuments
from Petitioneroutsideofthediscoveryprocess.Inttum.Mr,Montgomeryt'
urnedoverthese '
docmnentstoRespondent'scotmsel. Petitioneroffersnoevidencetothecontrary. Inother
words,theentirepremiseofPetitioner'sargumentthatsheproducedthesedocumentsduringthe
discoveryprocesshasnobasisinfactorlaw;i.e.,itisafrivolousargument.
10
lulspolqo>r'sItEPLYBRIEF
(54 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
21 of20112
of 111
l
Dated: December7,2013
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
CHRISTOPHERJ.CONANT
By:
Christo J.Conant
AttorneyT1 hyL.Blixseth
.
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
1
11
IIIi
;SIAONDEN'
I-*SREPLYBRIEF
(55 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
22 of21112
of 111
1
2
3
PROOFOFSERVICE
1,ChristopherJ.Conants-fkjy
lgmq.....
,. .- ..,
.. ...-.......
........
-....----.....
..- -...
lam aresidentoftheStateofColoradoandkvertheageofeighteenyeaTs,andnot
apartytothewithinaction.Mybusinessaddressis73017b'Street,Suite200,Denver:CO
4 80202.OnJanuary7,2013,1servedthewithi
ndocumentts);
5
6
RESPONDENT'SREPLYBRIEFINSUPPORTOFMEMORANDUM OF
POINTSANDAUTHORITIESIN SUPPORTOFRFSPONDENT'SMOTION
FORSANCTIONSAND TOSHOW CAUSE
bytransmitti
ngviafacsi
milethedocumentls)listedabovetothefaxnumbertsjset
b
p
a
t
h
eindotc
enit
sate
bov
anse
it
pso
a
n
fuy
ll
yl
pc
ri
en
pg
ai
d,
hu
em
Un
tt
es
d)l
Si
t
ted
sa
ma
ile
ai
tn
De
va
el
re
,d
Ce
on
lv
oe
rl
ao
dp
oe
aw
dd
rh
es
es
dt
ag
se
st
eh
te
fr
oe
ro
th
10
ll
above.
I
Z
1a
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
forthbtlowonthisdate.
l
u
u
l
ocpheet
v
e
ahov
evl
mei
eli
ve
ad
re
soerddaesliveryby
inc
da
i
cs
ae
td
eds
oc
nh
thel
ewae
tt
a
dosb
ee
rvd
ie
cl
ei
li
sr
te
.dSv
ui
c
en
lg
oh
pt
ed
wa
s
dr
ey
po
sid
te
ds
f
UPSfollowingthefil-m'sordinarybusinesspractices.
IZ
I.
Z
v
iaelectronic/e-mailsel
wice.Thedocumentts)listedaboveweresel
wedviae-mail
totheaddresseeslisted.
B
yhavingacopydeliveredpersonallytoM1*
.Holahan'soff
sceattheaddresslisted
below
DennisJ.Holahan
2049CenturyParkEast
suite3180
L
sAngeles,CA90067
Fo
ax:(707)586.
2983
d
ho
a
ayn@h
ah
law.
om
At
tol
nh
ae
foro
El
d
raan
D.
Blc
ix
seth
20
21
1amreadilyfamiliazwiththefirm'spracticeofcollectionandprocessing
correspondenceformailing.UnderthatpracticeitwouldbedepositedwithUPSonthatsame
22 d
aywithgostagethereonfullyprepaidintheordinarycourseofbusiness.1amawarethaton
motionotthepa14yserved,serviceispresumedinvalidifpostalcancellationdateorpostage
23 metel'dateismorethanonedayafterdateofdepositformailinginaffidavit.l
24
ldeclareunderpenaltyofperjuryunderthelawsoftheStateofColoradothatthe
25
26
27
28
foregoingistrueandcorrect.
ExecutedonJanual'y7,2013atDenver,Colorado.
rlstopherJ.Conant
POS
(56 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
23 of22112
of 111
1 CHRISTOPHERJ.CONANT
2 Cal.BaJNo.244597
73017tnstreet,Suite200
Telephone:(303)298-1800
4 Facsimile:(303)298-1804
ma
i
l:c
nran
lawiyxesr
s.
com
5 E
At
tol
me
yco
fo
Tt
i@c
moo
thn
yan
Lt
.Bl
eth
6
7
8
supsRloRcokm'roFCALIFORNIAFoRTHEcouxTvolrRIVERSloE
9 lnretheMarriageof:
CaseNo.RIDIND9I152
10 Petitioner:Plaintiff
gReassignedtoDept.10fromDept.F501)
11
SUP
PLEsME
NTALDECLARATION OF
and
os
xxl
L.MO
NTGOMERY
12
Respondent:TimothyL.Blixseth
Judge:sharonJ.Waters
13
Hearjng:January14,20l3
14
Time:8:30a.m.
Dept.10
15
16
17
18
19
20
'
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATIONOFDENNISL.MONTGOMERY
(57 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
24 of23112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1,DennisL.Montgomery,doherebydeclareasfollows:
1. lmnover18yearsofageandhavepersonalknowledgeofthefactsstatedbelow.
lfcalledasawimess,Icouldandwouldtestifycompetentlytothem.
2. IhavereviewedtheDeclarationofDennl
.sHolahanandEdraD.Blixsethfiledin
thismatterandhavethefollowingcomments.
3. EdraBlixsethsGtesthatshedidnotshareofficespacew1t.
11meandthatsheonly
occasionallysetupalaptopintheconferenceroom.'rhisisfalse.Asthepicturesattachedhereto
asExhibit1demonstrate,Ms.BlixsethsetupanomcewithmeinPCI'softkespace,andhad
n'lmerouscomputers,includingherlaptop,files,boxesofdocuments,furnitureandpersonal
effects.ThisisreflectedbythepicturesofherdeskandherpersonaleffectstlkeninPCI's
omceswhereIworkedalongsideofherin2011and2012,whichpicturesareattachedheretoas
Exhibit1.
4. Ms.Blixseth'ssuggestionthatlstoledocllmentsfromhercomputersand
electronicstoragedevicesiscompletelyfalse.Ms.Blixsdhintentionallylefthercomputersand
electrorlicstoragedevicesinmycustodyandcontrolandsheinfactabandonedtheseitemstome
in2012.
5. Mr.FlylmhasnotKgiAed''theYarrow Pointpropertytome.Imovedintothe
YarrowPointproperty,whichwasmypropertyuntillfiledmybanknlptcypetition,withoutMr.
Flynn'sconsent.Iwasrecentlyevicted9om thehouse1wasrentingirlthePalm Springsareaand
solmovedintotheYan'
owPointpropertyhousebecauseIneededaplaceformeandmywifeto
liveand1knew itwasvacantandthatBnnkofAmericahadnotyetcompletedtheforeclosttre
.galoanofmore
process.BankofAmericaholdsafirstpositionmortgageonthepropertysemmn
than$2.4millionandisintheprocessofforeclosingonitsmortgage.TheYarrowPointproperty
isalsosubjecttoa$26.
5millionjudgmentlieninfavorofWarrenTreppandhiscompany.I
knowthatinmybankrnptcyMr.Flynnpl
zrchasedtheYarrowPointpropertysubjecttotheBnnk
ofAmericamort
gageandthe$26.5millionjudo entlienoutofmybanknzptcyesGte,but.itis
abstlrdforMs.BlixsethtosuggestthatMr.Flynn%tgifted''thatpropertytome.Mr.Flynn'sonly
l
(58 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
25 of24112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
interestin thatpropertywillbewipedoutonceBankofAmericacompletestheforeclosm'
e
process.ldoknowthatM.
r.Flynnpurchasedotherasetsoutofmybnnknxptcyestate.Those
otherassetsareprimarilylitigationclaimsthatIownedbeforeIliledforbnnknlptcy.Mr.Flynn
hastoldmethatheintendstopursuethoselitigationclnimsinanattempttocollectupon
approximately$800,000ilzjudgmentsthat1owehim.
6. Ms.Blixsethhastoldmeonseveraloccsionsthatshehaspaidherattorney
DennisHolahanapproximately$350,000overthelastyearandahalf.
7. Mr.Blixsethhasneverrequestedthat1gaintmauthorizedaccessintoother
peoples'emailaddresses,computers,websitesorthelike.Similarly,Mr.Blixsethhasnever
requestedthatIobtainevidenceforhim inanyillegitimatemanner.
8. Bycontrast,Ms.BlixsethandherattorneyDeborahKlarrepeatedlyaskedmeto
gaintmauthorizedaccessintothephonerecordsandemailaccolmtsofMr.Blixsethandhis
attorneys.AttachedheretoasExhibit2aretwoemailsdemonstratingthis;onewhereisMs.
BlixsethasksmeifshecanhavemegainaccesstoMr.Blixseth'semails;theotheriswhereher
attomeyDeborahKlarasksmetofindouttheidentityofMr.Blixseth'scellphoneservice
providers.
9. Ms.Blixseth'sclaimsthatIalteredandfabricatedExhibits9-12tomypdor
declarationarefalse.Ididnotalter,forge,orfabricateanyofthedocumentsattachedtomyprior
declaration.
10. .Ms.Blixseth'sclaimthatshedoesnotownFF&ELiquidators,lnc.isfalse.Ms.
BlixsethrepeatedlypaidmeformyserdcesthroughFF&ELiquidators,lnc.andheldouttomeat
a11timesthatshewasitsownerandmanager.Mr.Holahanformeditforherandasreflectedin
hermanypaymentstometlzroughFF&ELiquidators,Inc.,shewasatalltimesthebeneficial
ownerthereof.Bmsedona11themoneythatMs.BlixsethflmneledtometlzroughFF&E
Liquidators,lnca,IbelieveMs.Blixsethisdenyingownershipthereofbecauseshedoesnotwant
thebnnkrecordsofFF&Eproduced,asthoserecordswillretlectssignificantsumsofmoney,al1
ofwllicharetheassetsofMs.Blixseth.
2
(59 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
26 of25112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11. Ms.BlixsethhasbeenshoppinghertestimonyazotmdregrdingtheCreditSuisse
loansthathasbeenthebasisformuchoftheliabilitythatnumerouspartieshavebeen
attemptingtopinonMr.Blixsethforthelasttwoyears.Ms.Blixsethhastoldmeonmorethan
oneocc%ion(withDennisHolahanpresentononeofthoseoccasions),thatshewanted$10mil
f'
rom Tim BlixsethtochangehertestimonyregardingCreditSuisse,orattheleastnotcoopemte
withthem,orshewouldgotoCreditSuisseandgetitfrom them.
1declaretmderNnalt
yofperjuryofthelawsoftheStateofCaliforniathattheforegoing
istrueandcoaect.Signedthis7thdayofJanuary,atBellevue,Wmshington.
De s . ontomery
3
DECLAM TIONOFDENNISL.MONTGOMERY
(60 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
27 of26112
of 111
Exhibit1
(61 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
28 of27112
of 111
(62 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
29 of28112
of 111
(63 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
30 of29112
of 111
(64 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
31 of30112
of 111
(65 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
32 of31112
of 111
(66 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
33 of32112
of 111
(67 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
34 of33112
of 111
Exhibit2
(68 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
35 of34112
of 111
From:
To:
S
ubject:
Date:
LearGzaaol.com
denni
sancoder.net
t
h
o
u
g
hl?
Sunday,August19,200710:25:59AM
Dennis-Matthew andIhavetwospechomesthatareonthemarketatYC.WeknowthatTim him

nowtwi
cepulledthemfrom thehometoursandistellingthesalesguysnottoshowthem orpush
them.Isthereanywaytogetthee-mail
'sfromthesalesguysorTim ifwedonothavethecontrolof
thesever?Iam goingtowaittowri
teane-mailtothesalesguys,untilIhearfromyouifthereis
anotherwaytogoaboutit.Edra
PSLetmeknowwhenlshwantstoclosethehouse.
Thismessageandanyattacheddocumentsmaybeconfidential,privilegedorboth.If
youarenottheintendedrecipient,youarenotauthorizedtoopen,read,copy,store,
distributeorusethisinformationinanyway.Failuretocomplywiththisnoticemaybe
aviolationofapplicableIawsconcerningthereceiptofelectronicmail.Ifyouhave
receivedthistransmissioninerror,pleasenotifythesenderimmediatelybyreplying
tothise-mailandthendeletethismessage.Thankyou.
********%***W************W************
Getasneakpeekoftheall-new AOLathttp'
.//discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom3otour
(69 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
36 of35112
of 111
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
DeborahA.Klar
Ncoder
LearGzaaol.
com
TimBl
ixseth
Tuesday,November20,200710:48:30AM
Dennis,CanIpleasegetthenamesofthecarriersTim hasrecentlysignedupwith
forcellservice.lwanttogivethatinformationtotheJaffefirm,sotheycansubpoena
Tim'sphonerecords.Also,ifyoucangetusthenameoftheprosecutorinOntario,
thatwouldbehelpful.Bestregards,D.A.K.
1
.
3eboraln/3
-.1(!at
4
l
N
V
Y
A
N
K
E
L
E
V
ITZSUNSHINE&REGENSTREIFLLP
:
.
y
J
:
.
.
.
. r
)'
.'
.
!llooGl
,
.
).
L
')..u.
,.
y
endonAvenuel14thFloor
.
s
NoticeofPrivilege/confidentialityprivilegedcndConfidenticlinformationmt
w becontainedinthismesscge.If
youorenottheaddresseeindicatedinthismessage(orRemonsiblefordeliveryofthemeoagetoSuchpersonlw
voumavnotcopyordeliverthismesscgetocnyone.Insuchccse,poushoulddestrogthismessageandkindly
notifytheSenderbpreplyemcil.pleaseodviseimmediatelgi
fgouoryouremploverdoesnotcongenttolnternet
emcilformessogesofthiskind.Opinions,conclusionscndotherinformati
oninthismeBagethatdonotrelateto
theofficialbusinessofmpfirmshallbeunderstoodc5neithergivennorendorsedbpit.
IR5Circular23ODi
sclosure:Toensurecompli
ancewithTreasurgDepa/mentRegulations,weodvisepouthat
unle55otherwiseexpresslvindiccted,anyfederaltcxadvicecontainedinthiscommuncationwc5notintendedor
writtentobeused,andcannotbeused,forthepurposeof(i)cvoidi
ngtax-relatedpenaltiesundertheInternal
RevenueCodeorapplicableStcteorIocultoxlawprovisionsor(ii
)promoting,marketingorrecommendingto
cnotherpartvanptcx-relatedmatteraddressedherein.
(70 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
37 of36112
of 111
1
2
3
PROOFOFSERVICE
1,ChristopherJ.Conant,declare:
1mnaresidentoftheStateofColoradoandgvertheageofeighteenyears,andnot
apartytothewithinaction.Mybusinessaddressis73017*uStreet,Suite200,Denver,CO
4 80202.OnJanuary7,2013,1servedthewithindocumentts):
5
6
SUPPLEMENTALDECLAM TIONOFDENNISL.MONTGOMERY IN
SUPPORTOFRESPONDENT'SMOTION TOLIFTSTAY
IZ
b
ytransmittingviafacsimilethedocumentts)listedabovetothefaxnumberts)set
forthbelowonthisdate.
8
9
I--I b
yplacingthedocumentts)listedabovei
nasealedenvelopewithpostagethereon
fullyprepaid,intheUnitedStatesmailatDenver,Coloradoaddressedassetforth
above.
10
I
Z
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
UPSfollowingthefinu,sordinarybusinesspractices.
IZ
I
Z
v
iaelectronic/e-mailservice.Thedocumentts)listedabovewereservedviae-mail
B
ylohwavingacopydeliveredpersonallytoMr.Holahan'sofficeattheaddresslisted
be
DennisJ.Holahan
2049CenturyParkEast
Suite3180
LosAngeles,CA90067
l8
Fax:(707)586.
2983
d
h
o
l
a
h
a
n
@h
o
l
a
hanlaw.com
AttorneyforEdraD.Blixseth
l9
20
21
22
I
ddsu
chtheenv
l
v
ahoevnevrn
ig
eli
er
asdid
re
soerddaesliveryby
ino
da
iu
cs
ae
te
on
ae
tt
ao
cp
he
et
do
sb
ee
l
wd
ie
cl
ei
lie
sr
te
.d
Sv
ui
c
el
oh
pt
ed
wa
sv
d
ey
po
te
ds
f
lnm readilyfamiliarwiththefilnn,spracticeofcollectionandprocessing
c
rrespondenceformailing.UnderthatpracticeitwouldbedepositedwithUPSonthatsame
do
aywithpostagethereonfullyprepaidintheordinarycourseofbusiness.1nm awarethaton
motionofthepartyselwed,serviceispresumedinvalidifpostalcancsd
ellationdateorpostage
meterdateismoret1
4% onedayaherdateofdepositformailingina avit.g
23
ldeclaretmderpenaltyofperjuryunderthelawsoftheStateofColoradothatthe
24 foregoingistrueandcorrect.
ExecutedonJanuary7,2013-a nver,Colorado.
25
26
27
Chlist
28
POS
9
J.Conant
(71 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
38 of37112
of 111
2 Cal.ByrNo,244597
73017'1Stzeet,Suite200
3 Denvor,Colozado80202
Telephone:(303)298-1800
4 Facsimile:(303)298-1804
E
mail:cconant@conantlawyers.com
AttorneyforTimothyL.Blixseth
6
SUPERIORCOURTOFCALIFORNIAFORTHECOUNTY OFRIVERSIDE
9 InyetheManiageof:
CaseNo.R1DmD91152
Xd
(ReassignedtoDept,10fromDept.F501j
12 Respondent:Ti
mothyL.Blixseth
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION OFMICHAELJ.FLYNN IN
SUPPORTOFRESPONDBNT'SREQUEST
FoRAN ORDER
,
yu(jgo;sharonJ,watel.s
Hearing:Janum'y14,2013
Time:8:30a.m.
Dept.10
DECLARATIONOFMICHAELJ.PLYNN
(72 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
39 of38112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1,MichaelJ.Flynn,doherebydtolareunderpenaltyofpel
juryofthelawsoftlaeStateof
Californiaasfollows:
1havepersonalknowledgeoftheforegoingfactsandifcalledupontodoso,could
andwouldtestifybeforethecourtregardingthesame.
1am leadlitigationcounselforTimothyL.Blixsethinahostoflitigationmatters
throughouttlwUnitedStates.1previouslysubmittedmyproJlficviceapplicationtothisCourt
butwithdrewbasedonmywitnessstatusafterMs.BlixsethandMr.Holahanopposedby
admissionintothiscasebasedontheirperjureddeclazations.Iintendtorenew1
nyapplication
andwouldrequestthattheCou14suaspontegrant1uypreviouslywithdrawnappllcationinlightof
Ms.Blixsdh'sandMr.Holahan'sperjury.AsMs.Blixsethhersolfstatedonnumerous
occasions,1haveCC
NEVER''beenMs.Blixseth'slawyer,(Capsandboldinnwltipleoriginal
emailsofMs.Blixset
h)
13
3. Ihavebeenalitigatorsince1972.
14
4. OnoraboutNovember12,2012Ienteredintoanassetpurchaseagreelnentwith
15 Nfl'.Montgomery'sbankruptcytrusteewhereinIagreedtopurcllaseanumberofassetsofMr.
16 Montgomery'sbankruptcyestate.
5. Mostoftheassets1purchasedwerelitigationclaimsthatweroownedbyMr.
18 Montgomery'sbankruptestate.
19
IncludedintheassdslpurohasedwasMr.Montgomery,sformerhouselocatedat
20 38129thAve,NE,YarrowPoint,Washington.However,priortoenteringintotllepurchase
21 agreement1investigatedwhatamountofdebt,ifany,encumberedtheYm'row Pointhouse.
22 discoveredthatBmll
tofAmericaheldafirs'
tpositionmortgageonthepropm'tyunderwhichit
23 wasdueapproxi
mately$2.4million.Mr.MontgomerywasindefaultundertllisloanandonMay
24 26,2010Banl
tofAmericahadobtainedrelieffrom tlleautomaticbanlcruptcystaytocompletoits
25 foreolosuresaleoftheproperty.1havenoabilityordesiretocurethedebtowedtoBankof
26 Americaandthefai
rmadtetvalueofthispropertyisfarlessthan$2.4million.TheYarrowPoint
27 Propert
yisalsosubjeottoanapproximate$26.
5millionjudgmentinfavorofWm.l.ennyeppaud
28
DBCLARATIONOFMICHAELJ.FLYNN
(73 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
40 of39112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
hisentities,Again,Ihavenoabilitytodesiretosatisfythisdebt.
7. 1boughttheYarrowPointpropertybecauseaspartofmypurchaseagreementwith
Mr.Montgomery'sbankruptcytrustee,1alsopurchaselitigationclaimsassociatedwiththis
propertythatMr.Montgomery'sestatehasagainstBanlcofAmetica.Iintendtopm'suethese
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
z1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Moreover,nodeedtotheYarrowPointpropm'tyhasydbeenissuedtomebyMr.Montgomery's
bankruptcytrustee.
9. IunderstandthatMr.MontgomeryrecentlymovedintotheYarrowPointpropel-ty.
However,hedidsowithoutmyconsent,However,atthistime1havenoauthoritytoevictMr.
MontgomeryasldonothavetitletotheYarrowPointproperty.Also,1understandthroughMr.
Montgomery'scotmselthatMr.Montgomeryismaintainingthepropertyandpreventingitfrom
fallingintodisrepair.Sountil1haveauthoritytosellthoproporty,1havenostandingtodo
tecr,anytlgngtoMr.
anythingrelatingtoMr.Montgomery'sstatusintheproperty,IhavenotugjjMontgomeryasfalselystatedbyMs.Blixsethandherlawyer.
1O. AttachedheretoasExhibit2toMr.Conant,sdeclarationisatt
.ueaa(joorxctoopy
ofaletterdatedJune10,2008toEdraD.Blixsethfrom herdivorcecounselDanielJaffeadvising
Ms.Blixsethofa11tl'
lerisksassociatedwithherenteringintotheMSA.lnevel.sawtus
docttmentbeforethesummerof2009andonlysawitasaresultofMr,Conantbringingittomy
attentionafterhediscoveredit5otyRussell,shaxddrives.
CJ.Conantalsoropresontsmeinmysuccessfuleffol.tstodonyDennisL.
litigationclaimsinanefforttoreoouptheapproximate$1,000,
000injudgmentsincluding
.
interestthatMr.Montgomeryowestome.1understandMs.BlixsethowesMr.Montgomery
.ionclaimsagainstMs.BlixsethwhichIintendto
moneyandthatMr.Montgomeryhaslitigat
pursueandtogarnishanymoniesduehim inordertosatisfythedebt.
8. Although1enteredintothepurchaseagreementwiththetrusteeonNovember12,
2012,thebalkruptcyjudgeadministeringMr.Montgomery'sbankruptcyestatedidnotapprove
thepurchaseagreementunti
lJanuary2,2013.Moreover,eventhoughthebankruptcyjudge
12
approveditontheJanuary3rd,todatethejudgehasnotenteredtheorderapprovingthesale.
DECLARATIONOFMICHAEL1.FLYNN
(74 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
41 of40112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Montgomeryhisbanknlptcydischargeandherepresentsmeinmystatusasacreditorand
interestedpal'tyinMr.Montgomery'sbankruptcycasependingintheU.S.BankruptcyCourtfor
theCentralDistrictofCalifornia,CaseNo.2:10-bk-18510.Mr.Montgomery'sapproxilnate$1
millionindebttomeincludinginteresthasnotbeendischargedand1intendtocollectitthrough
litigationclaims.
12. Aspartofmfjudpnentenforcementeffortsagai
nstMr.Montgomery,1
subpoenaedMz'.Montgomerytoobtaindocumentsandeleotronicdatathatwouldevidenceany
paymentsowedtoMr.Montgomeryfrom anythirdparties,includingMs.Blixseth.Inresponse
tothatsubpoena,Mr.Montgomeryt
'urnedovertheelectronicdatathatisreferencedinMr.
Montgomery'sdeclaration.
13. Toverifytheauthenticityofthedocumentfilesontheelectronicstoragedevices
12 andcomputersthatMr.Montgomeryproducedtome,andtodetenuinethedatesthatthefiles
13 t
hereonwerecreatedandlastmodiied,togetherwithMr.Blixsethandh1slawyers,weretained
14 computerexpertRobertWhitefordtoanalyzethemetadataontheseelectronicstoragedevices
15
andcomputersandthefilesthereonandreporttomeandMr.Blixseththeinformationrevealed
16 bythismetadataandwhetherthereappearedtobeanytnmperingormanipulationwiththe
17
electronicstoragedevicesandcomputerswhichmightsuggestwhethertheinformationcontained
18 onthemetadatahadbeentmnperedwithoraltered.
19
1declareunderpenaltyofperjuryofthelawsoftheStateofCaliforniathattheforegoing
ztl istnzeandcorrect.
21
22
Dated: January7,2013
23
,q
/1
24
'
MichaelJ
25
26
27
28
3
DECLARATIONOFMICHAELJ.FLYNN
(75 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
42 of41112
of 111
1
2
PROOFOFSERVICE
lamaresidentoftheStateofColoradoandjzvertheageofeighteenyears,andnot
apartytothewithinaction.Mybusinessaddressis73017=Street,Suite200,Denver,CO
4 80202.OnJanuary7,2013,lservedthewithindocumentts):
5
DECLARATION OFMICHAELJ.FLYNN IN SUPPORTOF
RESPONDENT'SREQUESTFORANORDER
IZ
b
8
9
r--l b
yplacingthedocumentts)listedaboveinasealedenvelopewithpostagethereon
above.
10
I
Z
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
1
causedsuchenvelopetobedeliveredviaovernightdeliveryaddressedas
indicatedontheattachedselwicelist.Suchenvelopewasdeposiledfordeliveryby
UPSfollowingthefirm,sordinarybusinesspractices.
IZ
M
v
atheeleacdtr
mla
il
r
ice.Thedocumentts)listedabovewereservedviae-mail
toi
do
rn
ei
sc
s/
ee
es
is
tes
de
.v
BeylohwavingacopydeliveredpersonallytoMr.Holahan'sofficeattheaddresslisted
b
DennisJ.Holahan
2049CenturyParkEast
Suite3180
LosAngeles,CA90067
Fax:(707)586.
2983
d
h
o
l
a
h
a
n
@h
o
l
a
hanlaw.com
AttonwyforEdraD.Blixseth
lam readilyfamiliarwiththefil
qn,spracticeofcollectionandprocessing
c
rrespondenceformailing.UnderthatpracticeitwouldbedepositedwithUPSonthatsame
do
aywithpostagethereonfullyprepaidintheordinarycourseofbusiness.1nm awarethaton
motionofthepartyserved,serviceispresumedinvalidifppstalcancellationdateorpostage
meterdateismo'
rethanonedayafterdateofdepositformailinginaffidavit.l
23
ldeclareunderpenaltyofper
juryunderthelawsoftheStateof'coloradothatthe
24 foregoingistnleandcorrect. ..
N13-a enver,Col
E
x
e
c
u
t
e
d
o
n
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
7
,
2
0
orado.
25
26
27
28
C 'topherJ.Conant
POS
(76 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
43 of42112
of 111
Cal.BarNo,244597
73017thStreet7Suite290.
Denver,Colorado80202
'
Teleghone:(303)298-1800
E
mail:cconant@conantlawyers.
com
AttorneyforTimothyL.Bllxseth
4 Facslmile:(303)298-1804
6
8
supErtloltcourcroycAI-IFoRxIAFoRTIIEcoux'
rvoyRIVERSIDE
9 InretheMarriageof:
casexo.RIDIxD91l52
gReassignedtoDept.10fromDept.F501q
DECLARATION OFROBERTWHITEFORD
and
l2
Judge:sharonJ.Waters
R
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
t
:
Ti
mo
t
h
y
L
.
Bl
i
x
s
e
t
h
uearing:Jan.14,2013
l3
Time:8:30a.m.
14
Dept.10
15
16
j'
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION0FROBERTWHITEFORD
(77 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
44 of43112
of 111
1,RobertWhiteford,doherebydeclareunderpenaltyofper
juryofthelawsoftheStateof
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Californiaasfollows:
lamovereighternyearsofageandhavepersonalknowledgeofthefactstestified
toherein.
Withrespecttomyexperienceandknowledge,Ihercbyincorporatebyreference
myswornstatementssetforthinapriordeclarationthatlfiledintheMontanabankruptcycourt,
Paragraph2,whichisattachedheretoasExhibit1.
OnSeptember25,2012,DennisL.MontgomeryhadanApplePowerMac65
9
10
11
12
13
computer(serialnumber68531lIURUO)deliveredtomebyBrianCalhoun.Thijcomputer
containedoneharddrive(ModelWD3200AAKS,SerialNumberWCAWFD924346).
OnSeptemberzs,2012,Mr.Montgomeryhadaharddrive(Model
WD3200AAKS,SerialNumberWCAWFD940504)deliveredtomeviaUPS(TrackingNumber
1Z7F4Y152468329746).ThisdriveisaSATAharddrivethatwasnotinstall
edinacomputeror
14
15
l6
17
18
19
20
externaleilclosure.Thisiscommonlyknownasalbaredrive''.
Mr.MontgomeryinformedmethatthesedeviceswereEdraBlixseth'sandthat
Ms.Blixsethleftthesedevicesinhiscustodyandcontrol.
Uponreceivingthesedevices,lmadeforensicimagecopiesofthefilescontained
thereon.TheprocessofmakingtheseforensicimagesensuredthattheG'metadata''ontheGles
waspreservedunalteredsothatauserofthefilescouldreviewtheCimetadata''onthesefilesand
fromthatt'metadata''determinethatdatethatthet5liwerecreatedandthelastthattheywere
modified.
From thePowerMacharddrive1retrievedthefileknownasdsNotesonthe
MSA.doc''.lreviewedthemetadataonthisfileandfoundthatthisdocumentwascreatedon
09/20/200909:33:37andlastmodifiedon10/23/200915:31:49.
8. From thebaredrivelretrievedthedocumentknownasSDl-lpoints.pdf'.
reviewedthemetadataonthisf5leandfoundthatthisdocumentwascrqatedon07/17/2011
19:18:10andlastmodifidon07/17/201119:18:1l.
9. From thePowerMacharddrivelretrievedthefileknownastCMyDearest
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
j '
DECLARATIONOFROBEFTWHITEFORD
(78 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
45 of44112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
Jack.doc''.Ireviewedthemetadataonthisfileandfoundthatthisdocumentwascreatedon
10/25/200915:59:42andlastmodifiedon10/25/200916:3.4:20.
1reviewedinformationon1hePowerMactodetermineifthecomputerclockhad
beenalteredinsuchawaythatwouldallow ausertomanipulatethemetadatacontainedonthe
Glesthereon.Ifoundnoindicationofanysuchtampering.
Ideclartunderpenaltyofper
juryoftheIawsoftheUnitedStatesthattheforegoingistrue
8 andcorrecttothebestofmyknowledge.
9
DATEDthis3rddayofJanuary,2013.
10
Dated: Janualz3,2013
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Robe
iteford
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECI-ARATIONOFROBERTWHITEFORD
'
(79 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
46 of45112
of 111
Exhibit1
(80 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
47 of46112
of 111
09-0O014-RBK Doc#:473-3 Filed:01/16/10 Entered:01/16/1012:48:30 Page1of194
MichaelJ.Flynn,AdmittedProHacVice
OneCentralPlaza,Suite240
Boston,MA 02108
Telephone:858-775-7624
Facsimile:858-759-0711
Email:mike@mifesc.com
AttorneyforPlaintiff-lntervenor
TimothyL.Blixseth
UNITED STATESBANKRUPTCYCOURT
FORTHEDISTRICTOFMONTANA
CaseNo.08-61570-1I-RBK
lnre:
JointlyAdministeredwith08YELLOWSTONEMOUNTAW CLUB,LLC,
61571,08-61572,and08-61573
eta1.,
Debtors.
Chapter11
TIMOTHYBLIXSETH,anindividual,
Adv.Pro.No.09-00014and
consolidatedwithAdv.No.09-00017
Plaintiff-lntervenor,
MARCS.KIRSCHNERAASTRUSTEEOF
THEYELLOWSTONECLUBLIQUIDATWG
TRUST,
DefendantandCounter-plaintiff.
AFFIDAVITOFROBERT
WHITEFORDINSUPPORTOF
MOTIONFOR SANCTIONS
(81 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
48 of47112
of 111

1,RobertWhiteford,deposeandstate:
1. Iam overeighteenyearsofage.Ihavepersonalknowledgeofthefactsstated
herein,andifcalledasawitness,Icouldandwouldtestifycompetentlytothem.
2. Iam anITconsultantwithextensiveexperienceintherecoveryofdatafrom
computerstoragemediaandrecoveryofMicrosoftExchangeandMicrosoftOutlookdata.
Atrueandcorrectcopyofmycurriculum vitaeisattachedheretoasExhibit1.
3. IwasretainedbyTimothyBlixsethto,amongotherthings,conductaforensic
examinationofcertainharddrivesthatwereobtainedfrom JoryRussell,awitnessinthe
abovecase.
From August3,2009throughAugust22,2009,lconductedanexaminationof
theharddrives,Iookingspecificallyforemailthathadbeendeletedandinaddition,
attemptedtorecoverfilesthathadbeendeleted.
lnthisregard,Ireviewedandrelieduponthedeletedfileanalysisperformedby
GuidanceSoftware,anotherforensiccomputerexpert.GuidanceSoftwarereceivedthe
imagefilesfrom theJoryRusselldrivesand scannedthedrivesfordeletedfiles,those
folders/fileswhichcouldberecovered,anduseractivity.Thosefilesprovidedtomeand
createdbyGuidanceSoftwareareattachedheretoasExhibits2-7.
6. AttachedheretoasExhibit2isthespreadsheet''SonyVAIO Laptop-Deleted
fileIisting,'whichdisplaysa1Iactivefileswhichweremarkedasdeleted.
AttachedheretoasExhibit3isthespreadsheet''SonyDesktop- Deletedfile
Iisting,''whichdisplaysaIIactivefileswhichweremarkedasdeletedonthed'desktop''hard
drive.
(82 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
49 of48112
of 111
09-00014-RBK Doc#:473-3 Filed:01/16/10 Entered:01/16/1012:48:30 Page3of194

l
8. AttachedheretoasExhibit4isthespreadsheetttsonyVAIO Laptop- Recovered

FoldersfileIisting'whichdisplaysthefolders/fileswhichwereabletoberecoveredonthe
drives.
AttachedheretoasExhibit5isthespreadsheetSonyDesktop-Recovered
FoldersfileIisting''thatdisplaysthefolders/fileswhichwereabletoberecoveredonthe
drives.
1O. AttachedheretoasExhi
bi
tfisthespreadsheetd
'Ini
ti
ali
zeCase-sonyDesktop''
thatshowstheuserswhichhaveaccountsontheDesktopandtheassociated
dates/timesforeachuseraswellasthedate/timetheOperatingSystem wasinstalled.
AttachedheretoasExhibit7isthespreadsheet''InitializeCase SonyLaptop.''
ThisdocumentshowstheuserswhichhaveaccountsontheDesktopandtheassociated
dates/timesforeachuseraswellasthedate/timetheOperatingSystem wasinstalled.
12. GuidancealsostatedinitstransmittalIetterthatitrana'datefilter''onthe
deleteddata,fortheLastAccesseddate/time,from June23,2009topresentand
exportedtheresultsintotwospreadsheets,''Sony-vAlo- Laptop- DeletedFile
Listing-O6232009-Present.xIs''and''Sony-VAIO Desktop-DeletedFile
Listing-O6232O09-Present.xls,''whichshowthefilesdeletedfrom theIaptopandthe
desktopafterJune23,2009,thedateonwhichlunderstandthebankruptcycourthad
orderedtheproductionofthedrives.TheseareattachedasExhibits8and9,
13. lnadditiontoreviewingthefilesobtainedbyGuidanceSoftware,Iattemptedto
review andrecoveremailfrom JoryRussell'sdrives.lwasabletolocateanofflinedata
filecalledan.OSTfile,whichisaMicrosoftOutlookfilethatstoresemailsentand
(83 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
50 of49112
of 111
O9-OO014-RBK Doc#:473-3 Filed:01/16/10 Entered:01/16/1012:48:30 Page4of194

received,contacts,andotherinformationthatresidesonaMicrosoftExchangeserver-it
isessentiallyadatafileforMicrosoftOutlook.
14. Thelargestandmostcurrentsetofemailthatwasrecoveredfrom Jory
Russel'smachineswastheMicrosoftOutlooko#linefolderfileIocatedontheSonyVAIO
Laptop.ThedriveusedwasGuidanceSoftwareEvidence#110-00175.Emailswere
foundinafilenamed:
z64l46-EolAsony-vAlo- LaptopcDocumentsandSettingsuoryLocal
SettingsWpplicationDataMicrosotoutlookoutlooko.ost
Inordertoview thedataintheOSTfilethatlhadlocated,Iused''Advanced
ExchangeRecoveryv2.0'softwaretorecoveremailsfrom the.OSTfiletoa.PSTfilethat
hcanbeviewedusingMicrosoftOutlook2003ornewer.Atotalof60,132itemswere
recoveredfrom thisOSTfile.Therecovereditemsincludeanyrecoverabledeleted
messages.
16. However,ltisnotpossibletodeterminethetotalnumberofemailsdeletedfrom
anOutlookPSTorOSTfile.AIIemailmessagesarestoredinadatabaseformat.When
oneormoremessagesaredeleted,itisonlypossibletorecoverthemessagesfora
Iimitedamountoftime.Theabilitytorecoverdeleteddataisgreatlyreducedovertimeas
thecomputerandOutlookisused.Ifthedatabaseiscompacteditisimpossibleto
recoverdeleteditems.
Inpadicular,everymonthitappearsthattherewerehundredsofemailssent
andrecei
vedbyMr.Russell.However,thenumberofsentmessagesfrom October1,
2008toOctober31,2008intherecoveredOSTfiledi
#ersfrom thePSTfilesthatwere
(84 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
51 of50112
of 111
09-00014-RBK Doc#:473-3 Filed:01/16/10 Entered:01/16/1012:48:30 Page5of194

provided.Thereare71messagesthatareintherecoveredOSTthataremissingfrom
thePSTfilesontheevidenceharddrivesforOctober2008.
Idecl
areunderthepenal
tyofperjuryundertheI
awsoftheUni
tedStatesandthe
StateofMontanathattheforgoingistrueandcorrect,this12thdayofJanuary2010.
/s/R& A/freN
RobertWhiteford
(85 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
52 of51112
of 111
Exhibit1
(86 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
53 of52112
of 111
O9-0OO14-RBK Doc#:473-3 Filed:01/16/10 Entered:01/16/1012:48:30 Page7of194
ROBERTWHITEFORD
4202SorrentoValleyBlvd.,SuiteS
SanDiego,CA92121
(619)741-4579
E-mail:robert@bcsus.com
EDUCATION
CoastalCarolinaUniversity,Conway,SC
PursuedB.S.,ComputerScience,1998-2000
NorthlandCollege,Ashland,WI
PursuedB.S.,ComputerInformationSystems,1996-1998
PROFESSIONALEXPERIENCE
ITServicesCompanyOwner
BusinessComputerSolutions,SanDiego,CA
February2003-Present
ProvideITconsultingservicestobusinssesandindi
viduals.Supportcomputer
networksranginginsizefrom homeofficestocompanieswithover1000employees.
SupportIargeemailsystemsincludingMicrosoftExchange2000-2007.Perform data
recoveryandforensicwork.
SeniorNetworkTechnician
NetworkResourceslnc.,LaMesa,CA
February2002-February2003
ProvidedITconsultingservicesforcustomersandtrainednetworktechnicians.
Deployedandmaintainedfileservers,emailserversandworkstations.Performeddata
recoveryandforensicwork.
NetworkTechnician
TheAutomatedOffice,Fullerton,CA
June1996-February2002
ProvidedITconsultingservicesforcustomers.Deployedandmaintainedfileservers,
emailserversandworkstations.Pe/ormeddatarecoveryandcomputerrepair.
(87 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
54 of53112
of 111
1
2
PROOFOFSERVICE
1,CluistopherJ.Conant,declm'
e!
lamaresidentoftheStateofColoradoand:vertheageofeighteenyears,andnot
apartytothewithinaction.Mybusinessaddressis73017'
HStreet,Suite200,Denver,CO
4 80202.OnJanuat.
y7,2013,1servedthewithindocumentts):
5
6
7
8
DECLARATION OFROBERTWHITEFORD
IW bytransmitti
ngviafacsimilethedocumentts)Iistedabovetothefaxnumberts)set
forthbelow onthisdate.
I--I b
yllp
a
eid
satteedsa
boiv
as
enlv
lo
a
fu
yl
pc
ri
en
pg
at
ih
d,
no
tc
hu
eme
Unn
it
tl
es
d)l
Si
t
ma
le
ai
tn
De
ne
va
el
re
,d
Co
oe
ra
dp
oe
awi
ddt
rh
esp
so
es
dt
ag
se
st
eh
te
fr
oe
1o
4hn
10
11
12
13
above.
I
Z
UPSfbllowingthet'
irm'sordinarybusinesspractices.
IZ
IZ
14
15
v
atheeleacdtr
ma
il
rvice.Thedocumentts)listedabovewereservedviae-mail
toi
do
rn
ei
sc
s/
ee
eslis
tes
de
.
B
yhavingacopydeliveredpersonallytoMr.Holahan'sofficeattheaddresslisted
below
DennisJ.Holahan
2049Cent'uryParkEast
Suite3180
LosAngeles,CA90067
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
u
u
chtheenv
l
ocp
v
e
ahoevnemi
eli
vder
asdid
re
soe'rddaes
inc
da
i
cs
ae
td
eds
on
ae
tt
a
he
et
dosb
ee
rvd
ie
cl
ei
li
sr
te
.dSv
ui
c
velg
oh
pt
ed
wa
s
ey
po
te
ds
f
livel'yby
y'
ax:(707)586.2983
d
n@h
a
an
a
om
Ah
to
tola
rh
na
ey
foro
El
(jh
ra
ol
.w.
sjc
kx
set.
h
Iamreadilyfnmiliarwithttlefinn'spracticeofcollectionandprocessing
correspondenceformailing. UnderthatpracticeitwouldbedepositedwithUPSonthatsame
daywlthpostagethereonfullyprepaidintheordinarycourseofbusiness.1amawarethaton
motionofthepartyserved,serviceispresumedinvalidifpostalcancellationdateorpostage
meterdateismoret
hanonedayalerdateofdepositformailinginaffdavit.g
lacre
dterpenaltyofperjuryundert
helawsoftheStateofColoradothatthe
ingistruI
ed
ae
nod
oru
rn
ec
forego
ExecutedonJanual'
y7,20'
1-3-:tDenver,Colorado.
ristopherJ.Conant
POS
(88 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
55 of54112
of 111
CHRISTOPHERJ,CONANT
Cal.BarNo.244597
2 73017P'Stroet,Suite200
Telephone:(303)298-1800
4 Facsimile:(303)298-1804
Email:cconant@conantlawyers.com
5 AttorneyforTimothyL.Blixseth
6
7
8
SUPERIORCOURTOFCALIFORNIA FORTHECOUNTY OFRIVERSIDE
9 InretheMazriageof:
CaseNo.R1DlND91152
1() Petitioner;Plaintiff
EReassigl
wdtoDept.10fromDopt.F501)
11
DE
LARAT
CHRI
coC
xA
x'rINION
SUPOF
POR
TOFSTOPHER J.
R
ES
PO
oa
oy
xNDENT'SREQUESTF.ORAN
and
12 Respondent:TimothyL.Blixseth
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Judge:SharonJ.Waters
Hearing:January14,2013
Time:8:30a.m.
Dept.10
DECLARATIONOFCHRISTOPHERCONANT
(89 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
56 of55112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
1,ChristopherJ.Conant,doherebydeclareunderponaltyofperjuryofthelawsofthe
StateofCaliforniaasfollows:
1havepersonalknowledgeoftheforegoingfactsandifcalledupontodoso,could
andwouldtestifybeforethecourtregardingthesnme.
Inm counselforTimothyL.Blixsethintheabove-referenoedcaseand1a1nalso
counselfol'Mr.Blixsethinanumberofotherlitigationmattersinvolvinghim.
AttachedheretoasExhiblt1isatnzeandcorrectcopyofexcerptsfrom the
depositiontranscriptofEdraD.BlixsethtakenonDecembel'14,2012aswellasExhibits1and
11tothattranscript,
AttachedheretoasExhibit2isatrueandcorrectcopyofaletterdatedJune10,
2008toEdraD.Blixsethfrom herdivorcecounselDanielJaffeadvisingMs.Blixsethofa11the
risksassociatedwithherenteringintotheMSA.ThisdoculnenthasbeenfiledwiththisCourt
previouslyandanyprivilegeassociatedwitkthisdommlentwastmequivocallywaivedwhenMr.
HolahanfiledithimselfwiththisCourtonNovember1,2011inCaseNo.RlC1115247.This
docmnentwasfoundontheemailscontainedinharddrivesofthecontrollerofBlxware,LLC,
JoryRussellthatheproduoodtoMr.BlixsethandWesternCapitalPartnersLLCinJulyor
Augustof2009.Mr,Russell'sproductionoftheseelnailstoM1'.BlixsethandWesternCapital
PadnersLLCisthersttimetllatMr.Blixseth'sattorneys,includingMichaelFlynn,eversawthe
letterattachedasExhibit2.
5. 1alsorepresentMichaelJ.FlynninlzissuccessfuleffortstodenyDennisL.
MontgomeryhisbanknptcydischargeandlrepxesentMr.Flynninhisstatusasacreditorand
interestedpartyinMr.Montgomery'sbankruptcycasependingintheU.S.BankruptcyCourtfor
theCentralDistrictofCaliforniwCaseNo.2)10-bk-18510.Mr.MontgomelyowesMr.Flynn
24 approximately$800,
000inoutstandingjudgmentswhichwerenotdischargedi
nMr.
25 Montgomery'sbankruptcy.
26
AspartofMr.Flytm'sjudgmentenforcementeffort
sajainstMr,Montgomery,he
27 subpoenaedM1'.Montgomexytoobtaindocumentsatdelectvonodatathatwouldevidenc,
eany
28 pam entsowedtoMr,Montgomeryfrom anythirdpmliesainclutlingMs.Blixset'
h.Inresponse
1
DECLARATIONOFCHWSTOPHERCONM T
(90 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
57 of56112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
tothatsubpoena,Mr.MontgomeryturnedovertheelectronicdatathatisreferencedinMr.
Montgomery'sdeclaration.
7. Toverifytheauthenticityofthedocumentfilesontheelectronicstoragedevices
andcomputersthatMr.MontgomeryproducedtoMr.Flynn,andtodeterminethedatesthatthe
filesthereonwerecreatedandlastmodified,Mr.FlpmandMr.Blixsethandtheirlawyers
retainedcomputerexpertRobertWhitefordtoanalyzethemetadataontheseelectronicstorage
devicesandcomputersandthefilesthereonandreporttoMr.FlynnandMr.Blixseththe
infonnationrevealedbythismetadataandwhetherthereappearedtobeanytamperingor
manipulationwiththeelectronicstoragedevicesandcomputerswhichmightsuggestwhetherthe
infonnationcontainedonthemetadatahadbeentamperedwithoraltered.
8. AttachedheretoasExhibit3isatl'
ueandcorrectcopyofexcerptsfrom a
December2009depositiontranscriptofEdraD.Blixseth.
9. AttachedasExhibit4heretoisatrueandcorrectcopyawarrantforMs.
Blixseth'sarrestissuedbytheU.S.DistrictCourtfortheDistrictofColorado.TheColorado
federalcom4issuedthiswarrantaAerholdingMs.Blixsethincontemptforfailuretoobeyacourt
order.lhavepersonalknowledgeofthestatusoftllisarrestwan'antbecauselwascounselof
recordfortheparty/creditorthatsoughtthiswarrantagainstMs.Blixseth.Thiswan-antisstill
outstandingagainstMs.Blixseth.
1declareunderpenaltyofperjuryofthelawsoftheStateofCaliforniathattheforegoing
20 istrueandcorrect.
21
22 Dated: January7,2013
23
24
25
26
27
28
'
Christo e . onant
2
DECLARATIONOFCRRISTOPHERCONANT
(91 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
58 of57112
of 111
Exhibit1
(92 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
59 of58112
of 111
Edra D. Blixseth,Volume I
December 14,2012
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

DISTRICT OF MONTANA
IN RE:
EDRA D.BLIXSETH,
Debtor.
)
)
) Case No.09-60452-7
)
RICHARD J SAMSON,aSChapter7Trustee )Adversary NO.10-88
of the Estate of Edra B1ixseth,
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
TIMOTHY BLIXSETH; DESERT RANCH LLLP;
DESERT RANCHMANAGEMENT LLC;AND DOES )

1-5,
)
Defendants.
)
)
Deposition of:
Volume 1:
Date:
Reported by:
EDRA D. BLIXSETH
Pages 1 through 305
December 14,2012
James Matthews,CSR No. 7916
Page 1
YATES COURT REPORTERS
800.669.1866
(93 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
60 of59112
of 111
Edra D.Blixseth,Volume I
1
2
3
4
5
6
December 14,2012
Deposition of EDRA D.BLIXSETH,Volume I,taken

on behalf of the Defendant Timothy B1ixseth, before James
Matthews,a Certified Shorthand Reporter,commencing at
the hour of 9:18 a.m.,on Friday,December 14, 2012,at
131-A Stony Circle,Suite 500, Santa Rosa, California.
7 APPEARANCES:
8
9 For the Plaintiff and the Witness:
10
LAW OFFICES OF DENNIS HOLAHAN
11
BY: DENNIS HOLAHAN
12
Attorney at Law
13
3640 Kelsey Knolls,Suite 832
14
Santa Rosa,California 95403
15
707.623.9116
16
17 For Defendant Timothy B1ixseth:
18
STILLMAN & ASSOCIATES
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BY: Phi1ip Stillman

Attorney at Law
300 Southpoint Drive,Suite 4206
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
Page 2
800.669.1866
(94 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
61 of60112
of 111
December 14,2012
1 APPEARANCES (CONT'D)
2
3 For Defendant Timothy B1ixseth
4
HATCH, RAY,OLSEN & SANDBERG,LLC
5
BY: Christopher J.Conant
6
Attorney at Law
7
730 Seventeenth Street,Suite 200
8
Denver,Colorado 80202
9
303.298.1800
10
11 FortheTrustee Richard Samson (Appearing telephonically)

12
DATSOPOULOS, MACDONALD & LIND, P.C.
13
BY: David B.Cotner
14
Attorney at Law
15
201 W.Main Street,Suite 201
16
Missoula,Montana 59802
17
406.728.0810
18
19 For the Trustee Richard Samson
20
DAVIS,WRIGHT & TREMAINE, LLP
21
BY: Bradley R.Duncan
22
Attorney at Law
23
1201 Third Avenue,Suite 2200
24
Seattle,Washington 98101
25
206-622-3150
Page 3
800.669.1866
(95 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
62 of61112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
December 14,2012
INDEX
Deposition of EDRA D.BLIXSETH,Volume I
Taken on Friday,December 14,2012
Examination by:
MR. STILLMAN
Afternoon Session
Page
6
139
Exhibits:
1 November 5,2008 e-mai1 from Dennis to Edra
B1ixseth and previous e-mai1
2 Affidavit of E. B1ixseth in Support of B1ixseth
Family Investments,LLC's Emergency MotiOn fOr a
Temporary Restraining Order and Orderto Show
15
Cause Regarding Preliminary Injunctionand for
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Expedited Discovery
Agreement between Tim and Edra Biixseth dated
June 4,2008
Apri1 16, 2008 e-mail from Zemosv@aol.com to
Jory Russel1 and previous e-mails
Assumption Agreement
U.S.Department of Justice letters to Timothy
B1ixseth dated November 8,2007 and December 12,
2007
3
4
5
6
Page
69
101
129
155
168
200
25 (Continued)
Page 4
800.669.1866
(96 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
63 of62112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
December 14,2012
Exhibits:
Page
7 August 11, 2008 e-mail from LearGz to dennis and 214
previous e-mail
8 OrderApproving Waivers and Reieases
227
9 December 29,2008 e-mail from LearGz to Sam Byrne 245
10 Amended Complaint
250
11 Notes on the MSA,including amendments and the mini 268
settlements
12 Tax Analysis Memo
279
13 June 26,2008 letter from Timothy Blixseth to Edra 293
Blixseth signed by Edra Blixseth and copy signed
by Timothy Blixseth
14 June 1O,2008 letter from Jaffe to Edra Blixseth
294
15 November 2, 2011 letter from Holahan to Kolodny, 3O3
Conant, Hatch and Flynn
Page 5
800.669.1866
(97 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
64 of63112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
December 14,2012
EDRA D. BLIXSETH
having first stated that she would testify the truth,the
whole truth,and nothing but the truth,testified as follows:
EXAMINATION BY MR.STILLMAN
MR.STILLMAN: Q.A11 right. Good morning,Mrs.
Blixseth. We've agreed we're going to be a little bit
informal and call you Edra since there's obviously also Tim
Blixseth,so we'll refer to Tim as Tim and you as Edra if you
don't mind.
A. Perfect.
Q. Good. We've never met?
A. No.
Q. My name is Philip Stillman and I'm one of Tim
Blixseth's lawyers. We're here obviously for your deposition
in Adversary Proceeding Number 88 that's pending in Montana
Bankruptcy Court in the bankruptcy case that you had filed
personally.
So before we get started I know you've been deposed
and testified many times, so we'll kind of fast forward
through that. But you understand of course you're testifying
21 today under penalty of perjury?

22
A. I d0.
23
Q. And you understand that the court reporter is
24 taking down everything and the idea here is to 1et me get a
25 complete question out and you get a complete answer out
Page 6
800.669.1866
(98 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
65 of64112
of 111
December 14,2012
1 examined on and gone through many times with various

2 attorneys?
A. Correct. Youjustaskeditina differentway,so
4 I wasn't sure.
5
Q. No problem. So 1et me get started with some kind
6 of basics. What's your current address?
7
A. 202 North Crescent, Beverly Hills, California
8 90210.
9
Q. And is that a condominiumora house?
10
A. It's a condominium.
11
Q. Do you own that or do you rent that?
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A. Neither. I'mjuststayingthereforthetime
being.
Q. Okay. How long have you stayed there?
A. A year and a half. A little over. Maybe three
quarters.
Q. Who owns that condo?
A. The landlords, I believe.
Q. Well, 1et me ask it in a different way. Who let's
you stay in that condo for the last year and a half?
A. It was part of an agreement that I had with
Discovery Land for something I was doing for them.
Q. Okay. And who was the agreement made with at
Discovery Land?
A. Sky Joyner.
Page 8
800.669.1866
(99 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
66 of65112
of 111
1
December 14,2012
A. Yeah, I think it's maybe a year and three quarters.
2 Iwastrying to think afterI just answered it.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q. And you had said that Discovery Land was letting

you stay there?
A. Yes.
Q. And are they paying the rent for that property?
A. They were.
Q. Okay. They were. When did that stop?
A. That stopped I Want to say -- I want to say
September. October.
Q. Of this year?
A. Of this year.
Q. And why did that stop? If y0u know?
A. Because the part -- my agreement with them what I
was doing that kind of wound down on what I was to doing and
so it stopped.
Q. What was the rent on that property if you know?
A. I think it's 75. 7500.
Q. 7500 a month?
A. Yes.
Q. And they were paying that rent?
A. They were paying that rent.
Q. And you weren't paying that to them,correct?
A. I'm not clearon what you're asking me.
Q. They were paying the rent to whoever owned the
Page 22
800.669.1866
(100 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
67 of66112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
December 14,2012
property,correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay, And you didn't have to pay Discovery Land
anything?
A. Well,that was part of what they were taking care
of for my compensation.
Q. And that was part of your compensation?
A. Correct.
Q. For the --whatever work you were doing for
Discovery Land?
A. Correct.
12
Q. Andwhat has changed in September/octobersuchthat
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they're no longer paying the rent?

A. Because as I said,the things that I was doing,
something might come up in the future where I would go back
to something like that,but the things I was doing at the
time were kind of done. Or
Q. Okay.
A. -- you know,it would be redundant for me to go
back and do certain things again, so and the furniture -that has been long over.
Q. Okay.
A. As I stated. So
Q. So who's taking care of the rent now?
A. It's being worked off from the deposit that they
Page 23
800.669.1866
(101 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
68 of67112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
December 14,2012
made.
Q. H0w much of a deposit did they make?
A. I believe it was three months. I could be wrong on
that,but I think it was.
Q. Do you have any other residence that you would call
a residence where you customarily would occupy?
A. No,I don't.
Q. So other than this property in Beverly Hills you
have no other residences?
A. No,I do not.
Q. Do you own any other homes anywhere else besides
that?
A. N0. Besides that. I don't 0wn that.
Q. Other than the place where you are now,do you own
any homes?
A. But I don't 0wn where I am now so it's a difficult
question to answer.
Q. I understand. It was a badly phrased question on
my part. Do you understand the question now?
A. Could you just
21
Q. Other than -- than the place where you're living
22 now,the condo in Beverly Hills,do you own any other
23 property?
24
A. Okay, but you still asked it the same way. So if
25 answer -- I don't own the place in Beverly Hills. So -- and
Page 24
800.669.1866
(102 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
69 of68112
of 111
December 14,2012
1 some of thosethings,I mean,that were just logically the

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
other person's.
Q. So Blxware was the logical -A. Correct.
Q. F0ryou to get?
A. Correct.
Q. Okay. But that was an important part of your
ongoing business plans after the divorce,wasn't it?
A. I I had such high hopes for it. Yes. It was
totaiiy part of and frankiy,one of the reasons that I
even got involved in the tech was that nobody else knew but
Tim and I were already talking some things, not knowing if we
were going to be together, and part of the things that we
agreed that might be easier on our personal relationship was
not to have so much work reiationship together. And so
that's why in early '06 that was one of the things we had
hired hired Dieter Huckerstein to come in as Tim resigned
as CEO,I resigned as COO, Dieter Huckerstein came in. So it
was going to maybe be gradually where Tim and I could be more
of a couple than a business couple,so the tech was what I
got interested in and what I was looklng at.
22
Q. Okay. And so 1'11just this 1'11 just give you
23 this as an exhibit, and ask you about it, and let's mark this
24 Exhibit 1.
25 (Whereupon Exhibit 1wasmarkedfor

Page 69
800.669.1866
(103 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
70 of69112
of 111
December 14,2012
identification.)
2
MR.STILLMAN: Q. Let me know When you've finished
3 reading it.
4
A. Okay.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(Pause.)
Okay, I've read it.
Q. Have you seen that e-mail before?
A. I must have because I wrote I wrote the bottom
part of it. So
Q. So Exhibit 1 is an e-mail it's actually two
e-mails. So one is from Dennis to Edra Blixseth. And I
assume that's Dennis Montgomery, correct?
A. It is.
Q. And below that is a -- another e-mail from
LearGz@aol.com,and that's your e-mail address,orwas one of
your e-mail addresses?
A. Yeah,it was my e-mail address until Tim Blixseth
took it over last year and I don't have access to it now.
Q. Okay. Until 2011 it was your e-mail address?
A. Ten or eleven.
Q. Okay. And and dennis@ncoder.net,that's Dennis
Montgomery's e-mail address,correct?
A. This is the last time I had -- yeah, had
communication with him that was his address
Q. Okay. When was that the last time you had
Page 70
800.669.1866
(104 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
71 of70112
of 111
December 14,2012
1 or Dennis says you said something, it is or isn't in the

2 transcript.
3
A. Okay.
4
Q. Do we have copies of this?
5
MR.CONANT: YeS.
6
MR. STILLMAN: Yeah.
7
THE WITNESS: Are We done with this?
8
MR. STILLMAN: Q.Oh, n0, nO. We've gOt plenty of
9 that.
10
MR.HOLAHAN: YOu'Ve gOt 50 minutes. Next exhibit.
11 (Whereupon Exhibit 11was marked for

12
identificationx)
13
MR. STILLMAN: Q.I'm going to put Exhibit 11 in
14 front of you. You've seen this document before?
15
A. Um-hum.
16
Q. And -- that's yes?
17
A. I have seen this document before,yes.
18
Q. And the green -- is -- as we've seen before your
19 customary way of commenting?
20
A. Edra's comments.
21
Q. Yes. Edra's comments in green, correct?
22
MR.HOLAHAN: HO1d on one second.
23
(Pause.)
24
MR.STILLMAN: Why don't I aSk a question while
25 your counsel is -Page 268
800.669.1866
(105 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
72 of71112
of 111
December 14,2012
1
2
MR. HOLAHAN: N0rhold On a second. Sorry.

MR.STILLMAN: I'm Sorry.
MR.HOLAHAN: Ijustneedaminute.
MR.STILLMAN: Sure.
5
6
(Pause.)
MR.HOLAHAN: We're going to Object to this exhibit
7 as work product.
8
MR. STILLMAN: Okay.
MR.HOLAHAN: We're going toObject to this exhibit
10 as work product. I helped the client prepare this document.
11 Andit's --wasworkproduct. I'm going toobject to that.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
MR.STILLMAN: Okay.
MR.HOLAHAN: FOr y0u to make it an exhibit or to
ask any questions.
MR.STILLMAN: Well,it's already been made an
exhibit,and the client has said that this is her comments in
green. So her comments are obviously not work product,
Dennis.
MR.HOLAHAN: HO1d it.
MR.STILLMAN: SO that's the way it goes on that.
MR.HOLAHAN: Okay. This exhibit,to be -- to be
accurate,this exhibit which is called Notes on the MSA,
including amendments and the mini settlements,Edra's
24 comments ingreenwas prepared in conjunctionwith her

25 attorneys,and so as such it iswork product andsubject to
Page 269
800.669.1866
(106 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
73 of72112
of 111
December 14,2012
1 theworkproductprivilege. Soweobjecttoitbeingmadean
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
exhibit and request that you not makeanexhibit to Ahis

deposition based on that,and we also don't want her to
answer any questions based on it.
MR.STILLMAN: Well,it's going to be an exhibit.
Any work product to the extent it's even applicable has been
waived.
MR.HOLAHAN: HOW? Where is it waived?
MR.STILLMAN: It'S been -- I'm nOt even going to
get into it. It's going to be an exhibit. You have your
rights to make a motion if you want.
MR.HOLAHAN: Okay.
MR.STILLMAN: And that'sjust
that's it.
14
Q. But you remember the context, Edra?
15
MR.HOLAHAN: She's not going to answer any
.
16
MR. STILLMAN: Q. DO yOu rememberWhy that document
17 was created?
18
I'm not talking about the contents,we're talking
19 about creation now. We're not talking about the contents.
20
Q. Do you rememberwhy that was created?
21
A. Not exactly.
22
MR.COTNER: Excuse me,Phil.
23
MR.STILLMAN: Yeah?
24
MR.COTNER: I Couldn't quite hear Dennis's
25 objection.
Page 270
800.669.1866
(107 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
74 of73112
of 111
December 14, 2012
1
MR.HOLAHAN: MyObjection,Dave,isthatthis
2 document -- did you hearmyfull objection?
3
MR.COTNER: I did, but I didn't you,in your
4 explanation you described communications between lawyer and
5 clientwhich Itrust you meanyou're also objecting on a

6 privilege basis;is that right? And I'm not sure if you
7 indicated that in yourobjection.

8
MR.HOLAHAN: I'm Objecting to it On the basis Of
9 work product. You're right. And attorney-client privilege.
10
MR.COTNER: Okay,thank you.
11
MR.HOLAHAN: It'S communications betWeen Edra and
12 her attorneys. And it's also attorney work product. So
13 we're objectingto this exhibit being made --this document

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
being made an exhibit to this deposition, and I'm instructing

the client not to answer any questions about it.
MR.COTNER: Thanks, Dennis.
MR.CONANT: Did yOu work On the document, Mr.
Holahan?
MR.HOLAHAN: You're nOt asking questions here.
MR.STILLMAN: YOu haven't laid any foundation for
why that would be work product at all.
MR.HOLAHAN: I don't have t0.
MR.STILLMAN: Sure,what makes this this is
Exhibit 11,and there's now a11 in green is Edra's
acknowledged is her comments -- and then -- there's
Page 271
800.669.1866
(108 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
75 of74112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
December 14,2012
there's -- I'm -- I only see and maybe you can help me

out because I'm trying to understand why this would be
work product -- but a11 I see is Edra's comments about each
one.
MR.HOLAHAN: AndWe'vemadeOurObjections.
MR, STILLMAN: Wait a minute,Dennis,please. A11
see is Edra's comments and I don't See anything at a11 in
this document other than Edra's comments.
MR.HOLAHAN: YOu don't have to See anything.
MR.STILLMAN: Perhaps you Can tell me where it is
on this document that you believe to be a work product.
MR. HOLAHAN: This document was prepared pursuant
to communications between Edra and her attorneys. It's also
work product. It came out of my office. It's work product.
And it was prepared pursuant to communications between Edra
and her attorneys. So it's work product.
MR. STILLMAN: What attorneys? You?
MR. HOLAHAN: Me.
MR. STILLMAN: Okay. Edra and you.
MR.HOLAHAN: Work product and attorney client
privilege.
MR.STILLMAN: Let mejust make Sure I g0tit. I
23 appreciate your help. So you -- you tell Edra to prepare

24
MR. HOLAHAN: NO.
25
MR.STILLMAN: -- Some analysis,and then she
Page 272
800.669.1866
(109 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
76 of75112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
December 14,2012
prepares it. Right?

MR.HOLAHAN: I'm nOt going to go into how or
how the document was prepared.
MR. STILLMAN: Well,the reason I go into it is
because it doesn't -- I'm looking at it. I don't see
anything at al1 other than Edra's comments. So I'm not sure
7 just because you tell Edra to write something down -- it

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
doesn't mean that that becomes protected in any way. She's

got she's writing her analysis there.
MR.HOLAHAN: She Was Communicating her analysis to
me. I'm her attorney. It can't be simpler than that.
MR. CONANT: YOu don't need to raise your voice,
Mr.Holahan.
MR.STILLMAN: Don't Worry about.
MR.HOLAHAN: That's the Communication between Edra
and her attorneys. It's privileged and it's work product.
MR.STILLMAN: Well I guess we'll flag that for
another day.
A11 right,let's get onto the next paragraph then.
MR.COTNER: Before we move on,Phil,what's the
status of that exhibit with regard to making it part of the
record?
MR.STILLMAN: Well,it's in the record. It's
24 Exhibit 11. And Dennis is objectingto it being inthe

25 record.
Page 273
800.669.1866
(110 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
77 of76112
of 111
December 14,2012
MR.HOLAHAN: I'm Objectingto it beingmade an
2 exhibit as attorney-client communication and as an attorney

3 work product.
4
MR.COTNER: I understand a11 that. So Phil, is it
5 my understanding that we are not attaching Exhibit 11 to the
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
transcript?
MR.STILLMAN: NO,we are attaching it to the
transcript. It's a marked and authenticated exhibit.
MR.HOLAHAN: Wh0 authenticated it?
MR. STILLMAN: Edra and nOW you. SO it's nOW,any
privilege, to the extent there was one, has been long since
waived. So
MR.HOLAHAN: And how is it waived? Why don't you
tell us how it was waived if you're going to attach it as an
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
exhibit.
MR.STILLMAN: It is going to be attached as an
exhibit.
MR.HOLAHAN; HOW is it Waived? HOw is the

privilege waived if this is the first time -MR.STILLMAN: Dennis, I'm nOt going to get into an
argument with you.
MR.HOLAHAN: Why not? This is a serious matter.
MR.STILLMAN: I agree,and I am -- and S0 iS this
24 lawsuit.
25
MR. HOLAHAN: When waS it waived? It's a simple
Page 274
800.669.1866
(111 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
78 of77112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
December 14, 2012
question.
MR.STILLMAN: Dennis, I'm nOt ansWering your
questions. I'm going to continue with the examination
because I only have 45 minutes left today.
MR. HOLAHAN: Okay,let's gO.
MR.STILLMAN: If you want to argue about it 1'11
argue we'll argue and argue and use up the time and then
we'll -- that will be it and we'll come back again another
day.
MR.HOLAHAN: Okay.
MR.STILLMAN: So I'm trying to get as much done as
12 I can.
13
MR.COTNER: Phil? Let me make a suggestion that
14 Exhibit 11 be placed under seal as part of the record at
15 least until we can determine if some kind of privilege
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
protects it from being part of the public record,and if that

can't be agreed upon then I would request that the court
reporter not publish the exhibits until we have an
opportunity to present the issue to the court.
MR.CONANT: Mr.Holahan,please place the exhibit
back.
MR.COTNER: I'm Sorry?
MR.HOLAHAN: DO y0u have a Copy Of this forme?
MR.CONANT: Yeah,we have a copy.
MR.STILLMAN: We didn't give you a Copy?
Page 275
800.669.1866
(112 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
79 of78112
of 111
December 14,2012
1
MR.CONANT: We gave you a black and white copy.
2 You have a copy.
3
MR.STILLMAN: Oh,I've got the black and white
4 copy. I'm sorry. Here,you Can have my copy. There you go.
5
MR.HOLAHAN: Thank you.
6
MR. STILLMAN: Q.A11 right. So now let's talk
7 about misrepresentations made during the divorce proceedings.
8 Let's just go right to let's say paragraph 24.

9
10
11
12
Have you had a chance to read 24?

A. Three lines.
Q. Okay.
A. Do you want me to read the whole thing or do you
13 wantto just start asking questions?

14
Q. 1'11 ask questions unless you feel the need to read
15 the whole paragraph.
16
(Pause.)
17
A. Okay.
18
Q. Well,we've already discussed,haven't we,this
19 morning,that as of April 2008 you knew that it was serious
20 financial problems with the Yellowstone Club,correct?
21
A. Correct.
22
Q. And so what representations were you relying on
23 that were regarding BGI,the Yellowstone Club and other
24 assets and liabilities under his control when negotiating the
25 MSA?
Page 276
800.669.1866
(113 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
80 of79112
of 111
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
q
rlp.(!rli
s
Ecra1
'
i
39
:xsetl)i
'!
2xw
qe!ndil
F
'
,
o'at!
.
,
)
RE:Gov
Wednesday,November05,20087:32:00PM
Ihaveneverwaiveredfromyoursi
deonemi
nute.Iam notbailingfromanything!IoweaIotof
money,
andthatreali
tyisinfrontofthis.ImovedfromBellevue15monthsago,andhave
tobeg,borrowandstealtogethere,andstayhere.
Mytoxicmessi
sLiner,Flynn,andBellevue.ChrismanassuredmebeforeImovedthiswouldaIl
beresolved.Webothknowwhereheendedup.
F
rom:LearGz@aol.com(mailto:l-earGz@aol.coml
Sent:Wednesday,November05,20087:22PM
To:dennis@ncoder.net
Cc:nickolasrhodes@yahoo.com
Subject)Re:Gov
beyondthefunding............ihave40mmtiedupinthisbeingastlccess.ihaveneverwaveredonmysupport,even
whenithurtmepersonally.itisaIlof-ourfutureandnotourpast.dennis.pleaseunderstandwhatyouaredoing
tomebyactingasifyouaregoingtobailoutonthis.blxwareisalIicareaboutforgoingfol
-ward.therestisjust
stuffihavetodealwithtoridmyselfofthecleanupoftoxicmesses.
Thismessageandanyattacheddocumentsmaybeconfidcntial.privlegedofboth.lf'youarenottleint
endedrecipi
ent,youarenotauthorizcdlo
open,readscopy,More,distribuleorusethisinfonnati
oninanyway.Failuretocompl
ywiththisnoticcmaybcaviol
ati
onofapplicabl
eIasvs
concerningtherecciptol
-electroni
cmail
.lfyouhavercceivedlhi
stransmir
ysi
oninerror,pleasenotif
y
'thcsendcriml
ncdi
atlybyreplyi
ngl
othi
s
e-mailandthendel
etethi
smessage.Thankyou.
***********%**
AOLSearch:Youronestopfordirections,recipesandaIIotherHolidayneeds.
SearchNow.
(
j
:
//
.
a:Mo
chobm/
W1
2o38
0
98a4o9l8
/a
rh
et
dt
lr=
hp
or
p
//seI
aa
r.
c
lop
gr
.o
amo
ol.cc
oI
m/z0o0
o0
80
/0
l0
l7
/o5
4x
/1
h2
a1
p2
p7
y9
-h
lid2ax
y1
s2
-0
fr
o7
m-s
eo
aI
r?
ch/?
nci
d=eml
cntussearoooooool)
Novirusfoundinthisincomingmessage.
CheckedbyAVG-http://www.avg.com
Versi
on:8.0.175/VirusDatabase'
.270.8.6/1766-ReleaseDate:11/4/20088:26AM
1
XHI
BI
T ,
..Y E
-
/. v
vC.1ffz<z/f
,
fN.
(114 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
81 of80112
of 111
NotesontheMSA,includingamendmentsandtheminisettlements
(E(
1ra'scommentsinGreen)
FullMSA-Paaes1-42-CaseNo.RmIND91152intheRiversideCountv.CA
K 1ofPage1says,t'ThisStipulationisenteredintoforthepurposeof
compromisingandsettlingcontestedissuesbetweentheparties.Ifforanyreason
thewaiversandreleasesinthisStipulationarenotacceptedbytheCourtandthis
Stipulationbecomesnullandvoid,orthisStipulationfailsforanyotherreason
whatsoever,nothingcontainedhereinshallbeanadmissionoffactorastatement
a
gainsti
nterest.Eachgartyhasrefrainedfrommakingcontentiousstatements,or
assertingpositions,whlchmightcausetheothertobeupset,sothatcompromise
andsettlementcouldbepromotedandachieved.''
Doesn'tthisrightheregiveustl'
lev'('
)utzstogoafteranythinguze'
w'antandtohavethe
elltireN/ISAnullanclvoid'
.
7
Also,renyeloberthat1u''
asconzllletelyfl-tlzellotltofalltheconlpaniesandt.
1lly
inforlllation'
f
l-olushol-tlyafte1-1.t'
iledfol-divorce(l3ec.06)untiliustatbeforetlleclosing
ofthefintl11
.,
%
1SA.
K 4ofPage2-ReadaIIofitandA-C
Tlleycouldusethisasal1argttnnentthatw'eagreednottogobacktotl)evaiuesoftl'
le
assetsveagreedtotake,lNvillgointothedifferentassetsas'
wegt7throughthis,butolle
tbingtllatsllouldbepointedouthere,is'riln;sveryoy.
k.
'lltestinlonyil'
ttllefanlilycoull.
1'
.
-IeluacleIuanyl'alsestatenlents.'
h&/hen1n.
z
otlldpointtllatotlttotlleJudge!.
'z
5
'atel-s,iler
respoosey.
vasalAvaysthatTil
m,beinggiqr
'tntheCaptionoftheSlliptitleforotlrassetsby
her,lladasduciaryl-esponsibilitytollle,ifit'
tvasfottj'
ldtllat17esvasnottellingthetruth.
?
'
-f'
N
ew-examplesofthisnrouldt'
le'I
-inlstatingtllattileirNvasnocolulntlnitycash.
11
,ow',
vvllenI1eurastaking.
14
-.
lndslkornBigSpl'ingsReality(llotpayingcol.
nll)issionstothesales
elling
people):SunriseRidge(notpayingtheIlal4llel-stheirshare'
tvhenhetookt
klndsl
.,s
colulllunityassetsandusingtheftlndsyvithotltadivisiengirentolue,a1-1:1thel-earenlchre
exmuples.
Tim alsoliedinahearing'
when'
f'
tvastllk
.
eillgtostopC.1r
1fron)buyillgti'
tegolfcourselots.
First,hehadasalespersol),Ericlwadd.llt
7ttheX'PofSales,yvl'
lich'
wotlldbemole
standarll,sublni'
tana'
flidavitsupp.ol-tingTinl-sclailnofthevalueoftheLots.Tilnstated
tltat1)oconllnissionsvverebeingpaidforthesale0.
ftheseI-otstt)CH.Yet:laterlve1511:1
outthatnoneotherthel)Eric.
Laa
ddvvasprolmised50Ok-.ofwhich250k-vvaspaidt()hiln.
Ericlaterf'iledastlitallclgo'
ta.J-uc
-lgnlentagainstlnetb1-greaterthenthisamount.
K 8ofPage4alIofpage5-Ct
tnyouJ'
eadandtelllllei'
fyouthinkthisisbindlpgt7r
itgoestothefraudthatwetatkedabotlt?
:
-7@ <p: EXHIaIT
j
'.
t
e
.
'
k
p
>
c, - .
K
>m:f
//j.
zg/.g
s
w
(115 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
82 of81112
of 111
* 16ofPage6andalIreferencestoBGIstockbelow
TllisisNvherethingscottldgetalittlegreytowhatissvrittenaqvhatw-assaidalldvvhat'
was
intended.i
kletalcillgtheB(J'
1stocknzastheBzayto15nallygetPCandCasaCaptivainto
l
myiegalovvnershipaerbeingavardeditinthesecondluinisettlelnent.lf).
'ouw'illgo
baclkallclreadthose,yotlvvilli'
inllthatTil'
nal'
!dhisaccountaatsw-ereto15ndavvaytoget
botl)ot-tlleseassetsintol
mynajnevvithoutcreatingtaxissucs.TakingtheBGI.stocknow-,
inthet
5nal.
h,
'
ISA,lsvasl'
oldRvouldresolve.this.?'
&1so-sinc:.
INvasalsotakingtheN.
'
'C
entities,itseeluedlikeallaturaltosin'
lplytakeTinn'sow-llershipofthestoclk.
(RcnleinbersiftlloughalloftlpestockNvasinl-ilpp'snalne,itvvasstillacol
ulllunity
propertyasset.)
lsventintothisagi-eenlentstillhviththetlllderstandingthatbotllTilnandGeorgeitlack
I'adtoldnlethattlleBGI.notesto-f171asvvellastlle'I-i1MJ3iixsethnotestoBGItvvhich1'
.
endedul
3w'ithasvvell.)NvotlldllaveasvayofNvorkingthelnotltasJzearsv/elltalolgas
iforgiven''A,
vlRell'
s
r
$.
'cneeded'
thetax'
vvriteofi's.Tilulladalwayssaidthat.l'
tvillgointO
thisinluoredetail'
tvhen1tallci
'
tbotlttheTalnel-elldotransfer-btlt'Filualsosaidtlpatabtlut
the40n1'
ntbi-tllat.
lftheaboveAvouldhavebeenasityvastoldtomest'llentheYCDsvvouldhavepaidtheCS
loano'
l't
'viththeproceeds'
f'
t-oln'
Lotsales.
Upol'
ttheclosil'
lgof-the'
N4Sjk
.,thebankaccoulitslladbeelldrainedancl/orNvere
overdralvn.Patcangointolnoredetailsofthatasuzell.r,(717course-vvasnotcountingt'
)1,.
t'
his.Botl)pNmaerical'
l'
.
Banl.
:andPalIuIlesel-taccountsuzerelilcethis.
111additiolt,thebooksalldrecoi-dsthatvvereturnedovercannotl)ereconcilecl.'I-hetrail
balances(lonk
7tjave,z
xgaill:Pi
'
tCax
lgoi1
3tOnlol
edetailOnthi
s.
Therew-erecontractsandpayablesllpatr.
ln'
ilmenteredintoa'
fterknowinghvevveregoingto
beclosillgtheh,
'
ISA.BobSunlpteremploymelltcontracttbrone.
1 (a)ofPage7
C.
BStl
nrisel7al
4nel
s,LLCistl
t
eooethalp
kz
l
bses:
'4oole(5/C7scontroiler)toldnnethat
Tin4hadtakentheftlndsw-henthingssoldalldhadnotpaidthe)7al4lel-sinthis.
Tim hada1s0signeclagreementsf'
rosomemallagementforSt.h.ndrewsafteroursigning
ofknowing1wasgettillgtllis.14edidthistlothi1hYDIandinYC'
$.
''.
S
K (c)ofPage7-Thisdidnol
'happel)and,5N;
ehadissuestryinglol
nal
ceitllappen.
L
'
1 (e)ofPage7-Tal
kto',
%ndyf7attenalotl
tthis.ltAvasbroughtt1pintheUICCvs.
CSand-I-il1)Blixsethvvithhon,Tin'
lboughtandsoldthistohillselfBythetime1
gotit-hehadtakenthevalueoutofitdtllillgthetinle1Nvast'
iozenotltofthe
businesses.N-Chad:114expel'
ttestifyw'ithhoAvthisw-ashandled.
(116 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
83 of82112
of 111
* B.ofPage9-YCj%w-asinsolventvvhelllI
-eccivedit.-I.
-hew-aythisisNvritten,1.
'
vvouldIlave1)oyvayofknovvingthat.
* CofPage10and(1)-(3)
hgain,A'ndyPattenNvillbehelpfulhere.Tiludidnotdisclosethatl)ehadtakenlmillions
oklt0fBigSpringsRealitybeforethisandhadnotpaidcomlmissions.Therehasbeen
soluetl
ningl'
sledagaillsthin'
lol1this,>tl
n.
d)?
zwrillhavetlledetails.Thisisalsowrherehe
statestllatEricLadd'
vvaspaidacomlnissionforthe(JolfCourse'
LotsaletoCH.ln .
falnilycotlrthetestifieclthattherevvasnoconlnlissionstobepaid,Llutl)ealreadyhadthe
dealNvithF-ric,n'hiell1believeishonrhegotErictogivetllestatelnentofvaltte.Tlle'
krp
ofSalessllouldhavedonethat,fitveretobedone,bttthecouldnotbe-Gbought'-.A..
hr
')
f
5001cvvasnotllearlyvvhatu'asovvecl.totl'
tesatespeople.lkllou!thatCharlievvoultlbe
I'
tappytotalkAvitllyouabottttheexactaloounts,btltthisshouldalsobeinNvhat'
was'
lileci.
A'tthetitneTilmdidnotpaythel
m,yr
v.
'l'
tich'
wasmuchlollgertllen-3()-60claysinarrears-'
hetoldthelnthatthefnoneyYs.
'
asneededtf
q
)'
YCop.eratiolls.-l-lle)'latef'fotllldotltthattlle
'
fndsNvel-etlsed601-boatslipsandothertllillgsfbrTi1)1.Thisvvasalsk7durillgthef-frozen.
out''l7allfbrIuenbutBigSpf-ingsv/asinTilnDsnan1eandtherefo
-reacomncunitypropel-ty
asset..
4tthelimehe'
wastakingfundsoutof-BigSpringsforhisuse,hebvasalsostating
inI
klrtilycourtthattllere'
k
vasnoconlmLtnitycasll'
llou,.
* D ofPage101dtlreadyadcllessed13igSkylkidge,at
aove.Pleaseno1(
ethatBigSky
'
Ridgew'
aspartot
'the5'
*C!Cllapter11.
K EofPage11.
lk
.gainthisxvasalreadyatldressedregarclingSunl'iseRidgean:l
.zlosesAzloorestatingthat'l-il'
rltoldthefulldsaskkhl
-soAvnpersollalpiggybankf'
allddidnotpaythepal4ners.7-il'
ndidnotdisclosetltis.Thisvvasalsoconlluunity
cashflow'.
K G ofPage11-1'llisisagoodonefortlles'
s'esternclailus.
* H ofPage11Thisdidnothappenaildendedupbeingpartoftheh'QBK.
K AIIoftheassetslistedthatTimgot,siartingon1.ofpage12yhadthevalue
thatwasperceivedandnounforeseenliability.
* 17.ofPage14
-1!st
Atthetimeofsigningthis?TinztoldlnethatthLehlondgroupwoulddthis,./
tobel-idofhin),I)ygetting1.0to2.0mm ondosing..
1entleduphavingtt'
lpaytheln
8mn1oftlke35n1111(
1)gotfronzC1'
l,togetthem tosignoff.Ihvastogetthisbaclkh-on'
l
NrC,astheyn-eregoingtobetheownersoftheseBshftresandllotn1eperstlnally.Of
courseyouknow't'
llatditlnotllftppn.(Renzmnberasqvcll,1.didnotreallyget
35mn)fron)C1lsbutbnly22n)n1.Tilnhadborro3ved1.
3mn11,-0:11thenzin2007and
1tt
l()l
toverthatprornissorylottwhenlgottheFal
uilyC'olnpoundbacl
tq)
(117 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
84 of83112
of 111
K 20.ofPage14Thisisnot.abigdeal,butTimtooknlostofthisout.Soluethings
werktbrotl
glltbackbytlleYCenlployeesthatrellpoveditperhisdirectiononce
theyknew'thatllewasnottotal
teit,butnotnearlyall.tN.
l.
'
aybetilisiswllerehe
gottheideathatlvvotlldtakeTnoreoutofl76'
.
7)
K (3)ofPage15including(a)-(d)
ThisisvvhereTinltransfbrredTanlarindotohilnself,beforetlqef'
inaldivorcedecree.lle
statedto1nethatGeorg'
ecotlldIlelpntec1()thesanle011thispropmissoo,notetoYDI.i'
ts
theyhadintendedtodoh'
&'
eiththeothel-l'
lotesforthenloneytllatvastakenti-op'
ntlleCS
loan.'
H.ew-entotltofhisTvaytonlalcethisclear,ashealsostatedtha.
thedidnotNvalltto
haveanytaxisstlesfromgettiqlgl'
ranlal-indoin1
4isllan'
lewhenthefundsthalptlrcllasetlit
vveretfol'
ntheC.Sloan.0fcourse1):)taxesNverepaidonanyol?thatl'
uolley,208mlmaasit
'
wasbookedasaIoanandnotadiviclen.Thisisthepointofthe'
UC(7
-fi1illgagainst'
vrinn.
-17llatsuitcolltillttesinFeb20.
1().4.tldyPattenalldTroyGreenlseldcal)btIlelpt-tllhel-e.
M CofPage16
Ttllksa.
1)tlCaiscosplopertyvvasalsoptlrchasedy'
vithCSloa.
l4fialld-snyetR'im tvas
aurardedtllis'
vvitlloutllavillgtopaybacklhef'
tllldsf
sorthepurchaseprice.Ithinkthis,
el-anlel-lld'oiulcltheotllertllingsgotosl
-lovvthat,havingnletakeontlleentireproluissoi-y
l'
lotesfora1ltl'
le'
Itlnclstakenoutbyl3G.1andtllenTiln,vvotlldnotbeaf
'
airdivisionof
propel-tyn1.infact,lhadtopaybacktlloseIlotesand-'
I-ill)gotal1of'tllosepropel-ties.l3)
otherAxoe
rclszjustTul
'
l
tsandTant
erendoaloneaccott
lltlb'rover701
1
11
)ofthe208171
41
takelloutsplustheotherthillgstllat11egotiTltllet
5lali
h/IS-Aandtlletvolllinisettlellents.
jL'l)ehadnottol(J
'nzetha.
ttllosenotescotlldbesvorkedoutanotherw'
ayandtheyqvere
neverintendecltobepaidbacksvouldlhavethougl'
tttakingthatonA.N'
1'
.
)givinghiln
theseassetsfl-eeandcleal-w-asafairdivisioll?NO.
K 0.ofPage18
llaterfoundoutthatyvhothat-vastl-ansferredtos'
vasJim lDolan.'
Fllereitreseveraltllillgs
thetirneofnlyQtfi-ozenout''.JimDolanisalsoathil-d
thatvel'
etlnnsfef-redtt)1
)inndu.
i
-ilpg
partnerof'
1'
.
-iluTsin.
'
$'esternPacii
',icTiluberColnp.any.l4eisalso'
whoTil'
nsold,Nvell
undep-valued,0Lll-personalinterestinthe.
17BO1
-1)Bozernan.Jim Dolanisalsotheone
thatprolmisudtobepayingthe8121noteontinle,yetadlll.
ittedto1uealldotllel-sthatl)e
w-astalkingsvitl'
lTilllatthesaluetinteaboutthepaylnent.TinzNvastellingothersthat
.
Jin-lw'asnotgoingtobelmakillgtllepaynlenttokeepnleoutoflnoney.
lclon;tknow?vvherethisl'
itsil1,btttthel-eisllot&nypartofInyassetstllatlNvasavarded
thatTim ditlnotcallpeoplealldinterfere'
withJ'
nebeingabletodotllingsforthegood
andbenetltoflnysel.l'
lecolltactedAlanItyeabotltmyIoanspuzhichptltAlaninfearof
hiscollateralin111ysllareofBFl.'
.
I-ilnhadnocurrentbusinessTvithAlal)andhisbank.
H.
econtacted.
$'
-arrel)Treppregardil'
lgBlxvvareandcatlseda1lkindso1Dissuethel'
eAvllel'
e
wecouldI)()tmoveforward.IZIehil-ecl*
N
,
..
'
likeF1ynn-hvhouzasDenais5.
1lawyerand
(118 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
85 of84112
of 111
handledthirlgsfbf-Blx'
v/are.11eandNz
likeFlynnstal4edaI
lresscannpaignagainstlMe.
'
5
'z
.lanyrepot-tershaveconf'irlnedthatTiluorFlynnAvouldcallthen'
landtellthen)Nvhereto
goandlookthingsupthatAverefiledintheRenocourts.These'
were'
15ledby17lylln.
.
:
'
l
a
n
y
t
i
n
l
e
s
J
t
l
d
g
e
C
o
o
k
N
v
o
u
l
c
l
n
o
t
l
e
t
t
h
e
l
u
s
t
a
n
d
,
b
u
t
t
h
e
d
a
ma
g
e
v
v
a
sdoneasthe
.
repoi-tinghaclalreadyhappened.j%'btl'
ntlstknockXlike'
Flynnof'
fthe'
N?
1.SA.lmatter.Nve
lleedtodosvhateverittal
tes-norlnatterAvllat.urehi
tvetot
5le.
H.
edoesstillhavebusillessTvitl).
Pa11mDesert'
NationalBank,btttcontinuedtogivethelu
lnisinfornlationaboutlnybttsinessesandlue.
A'syotlguysAvellknow'lhadt()borrovl)R()I1eJ'frolnl'
nyfrieldslikei)u14Stlgarnlanand
otherstostayaliveduringthislilne.
K 25.ofPage20
'
l-hisisanotherarea.tllt'
ttwAndl,Pattencal)lltzlpyouunclerstand.-l.
-llerella.
sbeell
sol
nethingfiledagi
ti
nstTil
ninl
'
egi
trdtotl.
ehal
'
t
cllingof
-thisLot.Ilehadjtlstbefbrehe
i-solditlohiinselfuzitl'
l11t7casl)clovvnandap/-onlissorylloteofzq'nl'
n''hadplacedavalue
of3.4mm o1)it.YC'
-l
-tast'
iledtllisagainsthiln.PaulN'
loorelniglltalsohaveadditional
int
'brnnatio1).
terthfzclosingot'the1k'I
'SA-lfoundoutthatTiluendedupsonlehoAvgettingthis'
lwotto
zkf
z
thenlal)tllathepurchasedX-nnlel'
ndt'
lfTon'
l.1believethatTil
'
nnevel-intelldecltopaythis
2n1mtoN-t
J'justlikeal1theotherprolnissorynotehelladsi
gnedvvith'
YC/Nr'
DI
.
,
K C.ofPage22Readandtelllnesvhatyouthinkofthisolle.
* E./F.G-ofPages22/23
lveneverreceivedproperbooksanclrecordsnlninutesanclotherthings.Patcangointo
thisnlore.BFesl'illcayearlater:havenotbeenabletof'
igurelntlchot-tllisotltuithhoAv
t11e)/turnedvvhattheydidovei-.
K J.ofPage23
ltstatesheretllatasofJunel:2008lwastt7receiveallcashetc.............againsPatcan
tellyotlhowtjlings'
weretbu-nedovertotls.Til'
nalsoenterttdintoseveralcontractsthat1.
LsvoofAvhich1havementionedalready.7f.
'il'
nalsotoldmethathehadpaida110f'YC
payabiescurrenth
vitlladeall
1edidvvithB.faynePri
l'
n(theotherthi
rdovvnero1'B/P'
1I
Thisturnedoutnottobetrue.ItalkedtoNN
vayneabotltthis.lnJttdgeTuckers
c'ourtrooln,BobSunlpter,onTiln'sbellalftinAprilorszlayof2008-statedasmuchas
well.
K Pages24/25/26/27inreferencetotaxesIwanttotalkaboutinourmeeting,as
itistoohardtoputinaI1inthisoverview.
(119 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
86 of85112
of 111
* (a)ofPage27
Intel'estingthattheyadnpitherethattheresvascoluIntlnitycashtlow't'
TonlBigSprings,
BigSkylkidgeLLCandSunrise'
RidgeI.z1wC.andthatTil'
ntookal1ofthatnloney.This
w'
asduringthetin'
ltlthatheAvdsstatingthatthereBras1197colnlllunitycashtlovv.1.hadto
borrov/
'nloneytojustliveduringthistime,asldidnotgetaI
lel
Mlyoftel
nporal
yspotlsal
suppol'
t1101-1()r1gtenuafter.1diclnotcatchthisbefore.
* 33.ofPage29
-(
llisisNvhereTroyGreentseldhadakl-ield-;daytlttrillgtlzetJO.Cvsf-SandTim .
B1ixsetll.
.Tij'
nstatedol'
)tllestandthatthe-icornel-stol'
leofthe.
N'
fSz%f'
orllil'
nD'vvasmetakingover
llis'
iitluciaryresponsibilityforanyandal1ofhisactiollsinthebusinessthatl.
1eha.
drul'
l
and1got.ltvvoklldbenzorthapllonecalltollil'
uonthisone,.
Al
-ldyPattenyvasthereas
uzell.-I''r(7ytoldlnethatl1.
edid11(
7ttllinkthattl'
tisal-eaoftheNIS,
A.vvotlldstnndupasl
couldnotllold-1'im harlulessl'
lt7rtakeonllisactiollsiftherevverefraudandotllert
'lliklgs
illvolved.1.
,ofcourseyuntil'I-ill)statedthatincotlrt,didnottllinki1)a-l'
p.
''
w'a.
ytllatthc
Rocornerstolte''oftllehzI'
SA,but1
'Nvassurelyavvaretlatittvasilnpoftanttollin'
l..
lLlovcan
lgetarotllldthisisstte??
K 35.ofPage30
lrlereisvvliereIthink'
vvehaveal
.II.
L
JG.
Eupsideit7youc'an'
lindinthe.layvwrilerethis
tVctivel-0al1l1OtStal
-ld.AS1toldyou,NvhenJafr'
eputtogetlerthe51ingfol.sllousalsuppol-ts
itIltsnciledotltatover2.0mm perl'
nontl)-btlt1nevel'exllectedtogetthat.
'
l-in'
lI-elleatedlysaidatsolnellointthattherevvasnoluorecolnnalnityc.ashf'1ovv.kk'e
lavesincefoundoutthatthi
svvasnottrue.1
1eiustkeptal1thentoneyforhinlsetf.
Becausehew'
assayingtherevvasl1ocasl)flo-tv-1hadtobon-ovvlnoneytolive011-v-hen
thereAvasinfactftlndstbrthecol
mlmunity.
lftlteassetsvvouldhavebeenNvhatIAvasleadtobelievetheyTvereAN'l'
.
)ifTinzhadnot
staltedhiscalnpaignto-tcrtlshanddestroyher''.. ..(kthentunledinto--keepalt
'erher
blltilsheiscnlshedordeadz'
)........1
.vvouldnotI
laveneededthespotlsalsupport.
Btttthefactsarenow'clearthatthereAvascash1l
'on'thatlshouldhavereceivedattl'
le
tin-teIxkvasfrozenout.Theassetsandlmoreovertlleliabilitiesthat1Avaslnisleadabotlt,
)tolnaintail)Illy-lifestyle,Avhicl)isthelettt
zrof
vverestkch(ornotsuchasfarasassetsgo.'
tlpefanl.
ilylavv,
',letalone,anylifestyle.1anlsittinghttreinaChapter7.
l
'
-astyearataboutthistil
ne.justbeforesi
gningthe5'
I.
SASlhadl
nanageableliabilities,no
nponeyborronzedagainstPorcupineCreel
tnorCasa.Captiva.ThefkctisthatTiluknen.,
exactlyNvhat1)e'
vasdoingalldurllatJwasgettingnlyselfilltosn.rhicl)iswllythe
corllerstoneofthek
.J
%
ISA
'
'.tol'
litn,vvasNvhatitvvas.
(120 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
87 of86112
of 111
lflhadk-novvjlallyofthis,1.vvoklldnothaveSettledinthe'
wzity1did.1.'kvotlldhavebeel:
grantedbothtelnpandlong-terluspousalsupport.lwouldnothavehadtocontinuelo
borrovvl'
noneytolive.1vvoklldnothaveborrtnved351
411ntogetthe5IS/Nclosed.
R
enlelnber,ofthe1e35
1
:11
u,1personallyo'llygotlju
stover1.
01
u1
1
)ofthat.Therestvventto
Tilnc)rtoX-C.Tl'
pal-ttllatNventtoYC.shotTlc'
havebeenpai(1bitcktoIz-le:ifthingstllere
vvereastheywerepresented.
1.1)CA familylavv,a25yearmarriagewiththeincomeandtaxreturnstllatwehadawould
havegivenmeaveryniceannualincomefrom spousalsuppol'
t.
rJ 36.-44.ofPages30-34Yougtlysaregoil1gtohavetoreadalldtellmelvhat
yotlthillk,
* Reallyforyouguys.........it'salltherepsandwarrantiesyouwillhavetotell
n'
lewhatyouthink.
* 64.ofPage41
Itt
linkthishelpstlstojusti
fy.
vl
z
.
l
yvveare'
l
slingourl
uotionsol'
ltlleNz
l'
'
sr
NintheBI
4.cotl
rts
inN'lolltana-clon'tyotl?.
pvenlenli
lervvellaveaddedhelptherefkonn.the13
'14JudgeNvho
lovesus,alldlpates-1.
-il)'
ia3lds'likeFlynn.?
&tthispointtheycouldnotgetadecentrtling
il)theil'favor1:
1-01,
).
)tllatJtldgeif'tlleytried.Eitilel-Nvay,S'
BandBShavethingsil'
.
lplacejn
thatcourtfoon'
itohelptts.'
A''
enuedt()luakestlrethevalidityoftlleSr
ISAneverelldstlp
.
beingdecidedbyJudge'
h2
.
$laters.''
l-llatu'ouldbeaniglltlllarefora1l0(
'
-us.
ObviouslylhavellottnentionedthecollapseoftlleUSeconolnyil'
ttllisdocuiment,antl
clon't'
wanttogodovvllthatroacl.Doll'tletthatbeconleanisslieil7tlle'
N/
JSAlmatter.
Okay,IlmostIikelygaveyouluorethenyouwantedandit-snotingreatorder.S()ny.
Letn4eknow'ifsomethingdoesnotluakesense.Ithink,
1()eElniglltbeofsomellelpllere
too.
A-tntlg.uysshotlldalsoreadthetkssigllnnentOfCotnpanyInterestsAgreenlentandthe
ztssulmptionAgreenlent.Thereal-eseveralthingsin'
theluinisettlelments,likeTil'
nw-csto
k'eeppayingtheoverheadtbrPC,butthatendedashesaidtlteresvasnoctnnllntlnitycash
1l
'05,
/.N&'enow'knovFtherew-aszso.
I.an'
lnotsurew-herew'
ecant'
ittllatin.
Hopethisllelps.'
Edl-a
(121 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
88 of87112
of 111
Exhibit2
(122 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
89 of88112
of 111
DANIELd.UmF'FE*TA
BRQCEA.CLCMENS*tA
BILUAMS.RYDEN'
DAVIDM.LUBOFF.
CBARLF.SK.WAKE
NANI;YBRADEN'PARKCR
ADDDA.MARON
ROBERTW,SFANLEY**
SANDRA@,MENDELL
FRISCDFAYEN
JAFFEAvl7CLEMENS
LAG RS
4aaNORR CAMDE:
KDRIVE,SUI'
IE 1100
BEVERL.
YHILLS,CALIFORNIA*210
*C
f
N
MmMt
nLDs
E
kt
FD
AA
ML
ILYtAw
C
A
t
z
A3e
B
oc
mzz
q
DkrOFINLC
9
8
5
G
1
*
1
2
2
1
2
*
N
4
T.
DASMY
RYR
A>M
ON
tA
FEP
j
.R
t>J/
.
ML
AC
NOMA
DC
4r
#*D
Ak
O
AA
XrrFmm PPAXCVSN
C.
()MI
VLEPHDNE
(3t1)554
:,./*7'
.
:
F'
ACSiMILE
fal0)27I-83I3
LORNAA.RIF'
F.C.P.A
OF'COUNSEL
MARKE MAHLER
June10,2008
#IAE'MAILANDU.S.MAIL
Ms.EdraBlixseth
42765DunesView Road
RanchoMirage,CA92270
Re: MarriageofBlixseth
DearEdra:
Lastweek,youandGeorgeMackcraftedaproposalforapadialdivisionofreal
propedy,personalpropedyandcedainbusi
nesqinterest.Yousignedandsenti
ttoTim
Ni
thoutconsul
tingourfirmz LastFriday,wefecel
vedanal
teredveyi
onofyourdraftfrom
T
lm'
sattornjy,StephenKolodny.Youhavei
nstructedustoasssstyouinprepari
nga
revisedverslonofMr.Kolodny'sproposedstipulation.Youhaveexpressedthatthismust
beaccomplishedquickly.
eel
i
mi
nfoTrm
artei
o
ab
outctahneotr
u
oj
esats
etsea
ndrtl
i
aebi
i
toi
epsoy
u
proposWe
etoh
da
iv
ld
wi
tt
hed
Tii
m.
he
fn
ore
,we
fu
fee
rv
na
ol
oe
pin
lot
nha
os
wh
me
h
pl
r
so
ed
a
re
tw
dllre
nlt'
a
gcolo
orr
dmagTI
rjmeme
fo
e
derr
a
y
hg
av
eeame
rignh
tto
oufl
u
sp
nr
ae
ns
ceia
dis
od
su
ebfa
ro
ann
dta
pr
py
ro
ag
ls.
aP
lsl
oa
fs
fe
aiu
rn
ma
ks
et
tn
vd
alt
uh
eat
fr
oomu
neutralthirdparties?andthatbyenteringintoafinalsettlement,withoutthebenefitofthose
things,youaferiskingmakingabaddeal.
Youhaveexpressedtousthatyoubelieveyoucancreatevalueoutoftheassets
youwouldbereceivingandthatyouhaveplannedoutandmadepfovisionsforyourcash
fl
owfortheatI
eastthenextt
wel
vetoei
ghteenmonthsandbeyoqd.WehaveI
imited
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
o
f
y
o
u
r
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
p
l
a
n
s
a
n
d
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
s
e
e
n
o
r
p
a
f
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
l
n
c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
y
o
u
rcysh
flowanalysis.Weknowyouareasophisticatedbusinesspersonandthatyouarerelypng
nnyourownbusinessacumeninanalyzingtheMacksettlementoffer.
Werespectyourdeci
siontoproqeedwi
ththi
sprgposedsettl
ementandwewi
lldo
w
h
a
t
e
v
e
r
we
c
a
n
t
o
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
F
s
e
t
t
l
e
me
n
t
I
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w1
t
h
y
o
u
r
w
i
s
h
e
s
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
q
i
t
i
s
our
dutytoadviseyouofthestgnificantrisksthatweseeinthisproposedsettlement.
te
rd
o
ma
e
twoo
hp
s
epnhyoonfetwi
h
osuthan
you
y
i
l
andtaxYaets
to
rn
ea
yy
s,
awte
Ls
inp
ee
rn
Ytaanpkp
er
lex
vi
itzgt
ol
iy
ng
ve
ry
lnr
deotn
at
ilh
ma
het
risyk
ad
twe
sr
ec
ei
ln
t
hteop
rq
o
sbeutt
e
me
ntt
net.fol
t
d
akie
to
I
ome
ngt
ac
fsth
os
eac
rnes,
i
n
th
l
spI
es
te
ted
r,
tl
Iw
an
ea
dg
tr
oee
ome
ut
lin
rw
yo
ou
ul
int
wr
ti
n
go
so
oofp
thu
ete
ma
jh
oro
n
ks
th
to
wn
ece
se
(123 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
90 of89112
of 111
Ms.EdraBlixseth
June10j2008
WaiverofFudherDiscovely
Timhasbeenincontrolofthecommunityassetssinc,
eDecember.2006.Wehave
o
b
t
a
i
n
e
d
s
o
me
d
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y
d
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
c
o
u
r
s
e
o
f
t
h
i
s
I
i
t
i
g
y
t
i
on,butourdi
scoveryisnot
compl
ete.Moreover,inthediscoverythatwehaveobtalned,wehaveIeafnedthatTim
d
i
vn
eid
g
ni
s
a,nt
ac
mo
s
of
or
mmu
l
t
y
neby
srk
th
tn
hd
el
at
roto
n
th
Yo
mi
-se
ed
tts
lei
me
nc
ts
su
hu
an
st
We
sc
le
qPan
c'
i
f
i
cmo
Ti
m
et
roaa
ns
dse
Tt
u
saa
C
aq
l
c
so
.kTi
hu
se
,j
l
t
I
s
possible,andevenprobable,thatTlm hasdivertedcommun'
l
tyfundstoTamarindooreven
toentitiespreviouslyawardedtohim.W'
lthoutconductingfudherdiscovery,wehaveno
waytotel,Accordingtothesettlementproposalthatyouareconsi
deri
qg,bothyouand
T
i
m
w
o
u
l
d
w
a
i
v
e
a
n
y
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
r
i
g
h
t
t
o
o
b
t
a
i
n
d
i
s
c
q
v
e
r
y
a
n
d
y
o
u
a
r
e
wa
i
v
lngyourri
ghtsto
recovercommunityassetshiddenormisappropnatedbyTlm.
eec
tl
e
tspero
l
srosc
l
aTtehs
hoatt
c
t
sfa
ofath
IiabilitieT
shb
lounrr
ge
in
nt
gs
te
ot
e
ame
chans
ttp
ho
as
ta
hl
eao
ho
en
tt
ae
kmp
es:
et
p
ee
na
ti
ah
llq
laa
bl
l
ly
ltig
ee
st
o
Bl
GI
ne
d
theYell
owstoneCl
ub?reenormous.Youal
readyknow thatYell
owstoneCl
ubowes
approximately$309milllontoCreditSuisseFirstBoston,andTimcontendsthatBGIowes
$243mi
ll
i
ontoYell
owstoqeCltlb.Inaddi
ti
onuyouknowthatTimhasahi
stolofpromi
si
ng
Y
e
l
o
w
s
t
o
n
e
a
s
s
e
t
s
t
o
t
h
l
r
d
p
a
r
t
i
e
s
i
n
s
i
d
e
d
e
a
l
s
.
Y
o
u
a
l
s
o
k
n
o
w
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
r
e
a
J
e
ma
ny
disgruntled members and B shareholders.In addition,there is a possibllity that
CrossHprborCapitalPartnersmaysueBGland/ortheYellowstoneClubinconnection
w
i
thTi
m'sfai
ledattempttoselsqbstanti
all
yal
IoftheassetsoftheYelowstoneCl
ubto
CrossHarbor.TheremayalsobellabilityexposurefromYellowstoneClubemptoyees.To
suTmari
ze,youkngwtherearesi
gni
t
icantli
abil
i
ti
esassociatedwiththeassetsthatyouare
t
adkdln
g
,nbault
y
o
u
jleosn'
tfkwnhow
eyxoauct
l
y
hnoowtyI
a
r
gaewtahe
y.m
a
y
bre
v
a
n
ddt
hyeir
erma
y
bgetm
a
n
y
mToir
e
a
i
t
i
o
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
o
i
c
h
a
r
e
e
t
r
e
S
q
f
q
,
K
o
l
o
n
s
e
f
u
s
i
n
o
h
a
v
e
m
fepfesentandwarrantthatallofthedangerousposslbllities.above,havenotoccurred.
WaiverofFinalDeclarafionofDisclosure
SandraMendelsyntyouql
etteronJune5,2008regardingthelegalobl
i
gati
onto
exchangeFinalDecl
arabonsofDl
scl
osufe('FDDO)atorpri
ortoentryofafi
naljqdgment.
A
sSandraexplainedi
nhqrI
etter,wai
vi
ngFDDSdoesnotrel
i
eveyouandTl
rpofthe
obligationtodiscloseinwntlngtoeachotheressentiallyallofthesameinformattonthal
woul
dneedtobediscl
osedi
nanFDD.I
fyouandTi
mdonotexchangethi
si
nformati
on,
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
r
i
s
k
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
j
u
d
g
m
:
n
t
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
e
t
a
s
i
d
e
i
f
o
n
e
o
f
y
o
u
l
a
t
e
r
d
e
c
l
d
tochallengeit.lknowthatsnalityIsverylmpodanttoyou,solwantyoutounderstandthe
is
s
ri
sk.Youcancpunteradtheri
skthatTi
mmighttrytosetasi
dethejudgmentbymaking
surethatyourdlsclosufesafecdmpleteandaccurate.
AsstlmptionofTaxLiabili
ty
he
sh
et
eu
ma
er
n
ql
s
p
ohv
ds
eesttt
hm
at
uGwei
l
a
heest
!
a
x
a
l
i
l
i
eA
sporj
h1
e,
enti
tiesTw
hiq
ytl
o
etrp
er
coepi
v
na
gli
nrt
ei
l
e
ey
no
t.
or
gs
esu
Mmae
cktt
l
fi
edli
ab
ti
h
,
s
lt
1
2
9lq
8
dj
po
sl
b7
o,
njtu
ht
at
t
t
ht
eTYi
ell
ol
w
st
ol
ne
Ccl
u
bMp
hp
ar
d
ai
ne
t
ta
xa
b
l
em
pl
o
f
i
t
oi
f
a
pp
r
o
xi
i
m
a
te
ly
$
5
0
m
l
o
n
I
n
2
0
0
h
a
m
p
o
w
e
b
a
k
o
x
m
a
t
e
l
y
$
3
5
l
l
i
o
n
n
t
o
c
a
p
t
a
l
y
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
t
l
r
e
s
,
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
s
l
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
p
q
a
n
t
o
m
l
n
c
o
me
'
f
o
r
B
Gl
a
n
d
f
o
r
y
o
u
.
Ma
c
y
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
t
e
s
t
l
f
i
e
d
t
h
a
T1
m/BGldi
dnotpayanyestlmatedtaxesfor2007.I
fyouareasqqmlngthetaxli
abll
tl
est
,
youcouldendupwithveryhlghtaxes,possiblyinthetensofmllllonsofdollars,withno
(124 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
91 of90112
of 111
Ms.EdfaBlixseth
June10,2008
r
ec
ao
dr
y
so
cesa
od
fd
i
nl
cd
ome
om
chht
6
,i
T
i
m.r
eo
ce
v0
ed
l
ydara
I:
co
mmu
nit
v
I
n
pe
aunrd
e
youfrw
i
thwoh
ni
e
aol
fpoafyt.
heInta2x00
l
i
a
li
t
y
F
ri
2
07neta
hr
i
s
ju
dgme
n
t
requl
resyoutotakeal
Itaxobl
i
gati
onseventhoughyousawnoneo?thei
ncome.
lnaddi
tiontoassumi
nqthetaxli
abil
i
ti
qsfortheincomeassoci
atedwi
ththebusi
ness
e
t
e
st,
unmkl
nlg
Ylte
i
aib
lf
ty
fo
t
hxet
avnis
er
lqri
toaT
m.
We
un
nt
di
ei
rs
ay
no
duta
hr
ae
ta
Lj
l
no
ea
rs
Ysa
e
ev
z!
ta
sxgl
i
v
nf
j
yo
urt
a
ar
d
cf
e
co
of
nT
ca
em
ml
gnd
to
hi
s
ni
d
ot
her
pfogertytransfersyHowever,w:Aanttopol
ntoqtthqttherei
sapossl
bli
tythatyottorthe
e
ie
srto
fe
c
ve
d
uuwl
ll
n
uhreI
aprg
l
as
be
il
l
t
e
as
aareu
lt
fy
o.t)
oe
bwl
i
g
aetl
ql
ns
trn
ab
nt
s
fe
prb
oe
pe
rt
yeti
o
-r
imby
py
uo
rs
an
tt
t
oct
foept
oasxeI
d
t
ti
l
es
me
nt
gtqe
moe
nt
Lr
i
k
i
s
,
f
yoto
u
e
vle
a
nts
e
rqlp
er
GI
oneentl
tl
esforanyreason,you
wi
lr
Iikwea
lynt
et
noct
or
un
ef
rr
sp
iml
ar
tt
ay
xo
pu
rt
oo
bf
leB
ms
.ortheYelowst
F
i
na
l
yn
,j
ni
aasnstutm
iql
gsa
l
o
f
th
e
l
i
ay
i
l
i
ti
e
s,o
f
Br
G
1
an
dst
hr
e
Y
e
l
l
o
w
s
t
o
n
e
e
ntI
i
ti
e
s,
y
o
uwak
r
e
a
s
s
u
mi
n
g
s
i
g
l
f
c
a
x
s
u
e
s
.
S
p
e
c
z
c
a
l
l
y
t
h
e
e
i
s
a
e
i
o
u
s
t
a
x
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
l
t
h
!healegedI
qansfrqmtheYelowstoneenti
tl
qstoBGI
gWeknowyotlhavedi
scussqdthl
s
I
ssueextensl
velywl
thyourtyxlawyersatLl
nerYankelevi
tzandthatyouarerel
yl
ngon
t
hem?andnotus,fortaxydyl
cq:Hgwever?wefeelobli
gatedtopoi
ntoutthi
sissuetoyou
herebecausethepotenbalIlabllitytsveryIarge.
Assumnfi
onofLawsuits
e
rre
l
e
me
oepo
saolwpro
idm
ty
uwi
l
aoss
etMo
dolfatn
LeMonT
dh1
1lc
au
ws
uq
l
tt
ss
,e
at
st
we
lln
atsptr
h
Sn
Iav
ws
ultt
.ha
Yo
uowi
llal
ls
tu
ame
keat
the
IeaLs
han
lf
hd
e
MacAdhurandRhodeIslandsuitscYoutoldusyesterdaylhatyoubelieveyoucanwork
o
u
t
a
ssaeti
s
f
au
ct
oere
ylayr
ra
np
e
meen
tbwei
t
h
t
hre
L
e
M
osnhllppl
ai
n
ti
f
f
se,m
Snt
o
w
an
j
andyoB
shaWh
reho
l
de
r
s
b
e
c
a
u
y
o
f
o
u
h
a
v
a
t
t
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
q
wi
t
h
t
h
h
a
n
T
I
m
e
s
v
i
l
e
w
e
believethatyoudohaveamuchbetterrelatlonshipwiththesepeoplethanTim does,we
a
rennqeyvf
e
heyl
e
nu
ce
db
th
t
hie
i
gsht
i
l
l
to
e
c
eyrt
mml
ay
mt
u
nuti
o
mo
rr
ot
m
qs
us.cYoo
cme
oul
d
eal
atk
ny
gm
on
gs
nt
i
f
i
cs
ae
ne
tt
I
la
bir
l
i
ti
eo
svb
ahse
su
ni
g
hm
esa
:mI
aowus
lsf
a
n
d
I
ndjl
e
mt
nhi
f
ys
l
n
gl
Twi
m
.it
Y
oT
uhc
osu
l
dri
ak
l
s
osb
e
re
qb
ue
i
refd
tor
i
n
c
ui
r
sbig
nyi
f
i
c
awh
nta
t
toeme
y
'
s
f
e
e
s
ln
j
e
f
e
n
n
g
e
e
a
s
u
s
.
e
e
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
a
do
e
d
n
y
o
u
e
n
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
nsksandcalculatingyourcashflow.
ObtaininnLLGIpterqstswithOtherPartners
Accordi
ngtgyouragreementwi
thTi
m,asweunderstoodi
t,youwi
lberecei
vi
ng
vari
ousl
imi
tedI
iabll
i
Wcompanyi
nterests.SeveralofthoseI
imi
tedIi
jbil
i
tycompanieshave
m
n
or
i
ty
s
Ogfl
owri
ty
me
mb
ers
,s
alalefe,Dt
cl
p
erwHu
l
thcT
adi
ve
rs
eme
toymb
ouedr
u.
rin
th
ho
espeami
stn
fe
mo
nt
hs.
Fo
re
ev
xe
ar
mp
es
te
ki
emsta
en
indhhaasve
ab
1e
0e
%n
interestinYellowstoneClubWorld,LLC;BobSumpterhasa25% interestinYellowstone
Homebuilders,LLC;an entity owned byJim Dolan hasa 50% interestinThumb
Development,LLC.
O
n
ce
yo
onusi
b
e
gto
mse
t
he
m
a
no
as
geer
o
f
tj
eusael
li
mTit
eo
dqI
i
ai
b
i
l
i!
yi
cu
oa
ml
pa
n
iehsa,vyeot
uhw
i
ll
h
atv
e
f
i
d
u
c
i
a
f
y
r
e
s
p
b
i
l
i
e
t
o
w
a
r
d
t
h
i
n
d
i
v
l
d
s
.
h
e
n
d
l
v
d
s
w
i
l
e
r
i
g
h
l
o
sueyoufoqanybreachesofthosefi
duci
aryduti
es.Itwoul
dberi
skyforyoutobeI
n
businesswlthpeoplewhohavebeenalignedwithTim andadversetoyou.
(125 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
92 of91112
of 111
(126 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
93 of92112
of 111
Ms.EdraBli
xseth
June10,2008
NotFilingtheStinulationwi
lhCourt
Thecurentsettl
ementproposalprovi
desthattheprovi
si
onsofthestiqul
ati
onwi
ll
notbefiledwlththeCourtJbutthatallofthewaiversand releasescontalnedinthe
s
tipulati
onwilbefi
l
edwi
ththeCpurt.Thismeansthattheonlyporti
onofthedealthatwil
becomeaCoudorderisthepodlonwherebyyouandTimreleaseeachotherofalIclaims,
i
ncl
udingcl
aiqlsforspousalsupportandcl
aimsonbehaj
fofyoursel
vesandyour
respectivebuslnesses.
Bynotfilingtheentirestipulationwi
ththeCourt,youarekeepingthestipulation
pri
vate,whi
chweunderstandyouFoul
dl
iketodo.However,thesti
pulationi
sonl
ya
c
o
n
t
r
ae
ct
,ta
n
d
nd
otnaoc
o
u
ddowrd
e
r,
uent
i
lol
t
i
s
fi
l
ej
wpi
t
hrt
a
ns
dwsj
g
n
e
d
b
y
te
henC
q
uert
.fBte
catu
s
es
i
to
i
s
c
o
n
f
i
d
n
i
a
l
a
n
t
f
i
l
e
i
t
h
t
h
C
u
d
,
t
h
l
r
j
a
i
e
l
l
n
o
t
h
a
v
o
t
l
c
p
h
e
e
r
m
youragreement.l
fTi
menteredi
ntotransactlonsthataffecttheassetsbelngawqrdedtof
you,youmayhvegrlaterdimcul
tyundoi
ngthosetmnsacti
ons.Credi
tqrsofTImmay
haveaneasiertimegolnga'ercommuni
t
ypropertythatyourecei
vethanfthejudgment
hadbeenfiledandreported.
Waivers
TheproposedsettlementcontemplatesthatyoueachgveupalIpotentialclaims
a
g
a
i
n
s
teachother,Fhetherknownorunknown.Afterthesettl
ementi
sconcl
tl
ded,you
coulddiscoverthatTIm haslootedthecompaniesandyouwouldhavenolegalrecoufse
againsthim.
o
tl
eme
ohc
nteimp
e
hat
e
vrj
i
g
oobuta
spousaTlh
se
upppr
op
do
fs
re
od
ms
Teit
m.
Abn
st
ea
nl
tst
isowa
verl
?ayt
os
ut
wo
uy
ldou
haavr
ew
tha
ei
ln
gg
htatl
or
s
eh
et
kto
sp
si
anl
?upport.Ifyourbusi
nessventuresturnotl
ttobeI
esssuccessfulthanyouhadhoped,or
l
t
ia
i
ti
e
s
tutr
o
re
th
nqkvweeyxopuercnl,
en
wo
sde
ff
inyaonucri
a
lb
pi
ol
s
i
ti
on
hnao
nuytot
ub
ne
owmo
an
tic
ipaan
tew.hIa
ft
yy
oo
uu
wa
gy
ho
tu
toma
sey
ek
sd
pouupsi
anla
su
ppr
o
now,youwillneverbeabletoseekspousalsuppodfrom Tim inthefuture.
j
d
ra
,mg
j
oboi
st
oei
mrip
l
esme
ntywoh
at
eavner
daekcei
si
o
n
sry
oudmdaekceis.ioHnosw.ev
ehro,i
tei
sta
l
s
o
m
y
j
o
b
t
o
I
n
f
o
r
m
y
o
u
f
t
h
s
k
s
o
u
c
m
i
n
f
o
me
1
p
h
a
t
t
h
e
informationaboveishelpfultoyouindecidinghowtoproceed.Pleasedonothesitateto
callmetodiscusstheseandanyotherissues.
InyourJune4,2008e-mail,youadvisedusthati
fwe'Signoff'onthedealyou,
yourself,madeandsignedwithTim,youwouldnotholdusresponsibleforanydamages
9
oumaysufferi
ngoingfqfwardwi
thyot!
rdealwhi
chhassomanyunknownpi
t
fall
s.By
countersigningandreturnlngacopyofthlsletter,youareconfirmingthatourfirm,andour
(127 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
94 of93112
of 111
Ms.EdraBlixseth
June10,2008
Iawyers,areinnowayresponsibleforthisagreement.Youshouldgetoutsidecounselto
reviewthiswaiverbeforesigning.same.
Sincere
.'
t
'
.
Danle . affe
ofJAFFEANDCL ME S
Dsll'
.spm
cc: William S.Ryden,Esq.
S
a
d
ra
PI
.
dEeRl
qoioo3.
FZ
I
Cn
L4
EN
SVL
EMe
DILEn
TT
I1
E.BEDs
6s
w
Ju.,y :.
2008
THEABOVEISUND S.
T-O
.ODANDAPPROVED.
.e.
A
F....
EDRABLIXSETH
(128 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
95 of94112
of 111
Exhibit3
(129 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
96 of95112
of 111
Edra D.Blixseth - December 17,2009

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
In re
EDRA D.BLIXSETH,
Debtor.
In re Ye1lowstone C1ub, LLC,
Debtor
TIMOTHY L.BLIXSETH,
P1aintiff,
vs.
OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED
CREDITORS,
Defendant.
Deposition of:
Date:
Reported by:
)
)
)
)
) Case NO.:09-60452-RBK
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) Case No.:09-00O14
)
)
)
)
)
)
EDRA D. BLIXSETH
December 17, 2009
Stephanie P. Borthwick
c.s.R. No. 12088
Yates Court Reporters 800.669.1866
(130 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
97 of96112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Edra D.Blixseth - December 17, 2009

Deposition of EDRA D. BLIXSETH, taken on behalf of
the Plaintiff, before Stephanie P. Borthwick, a
certified Shorthand Reporter, commencing at the hour of
9:14 a.m. Thursday,December 17, 2009, at the offices
of Yates court Reporters, 74-967 Sheryl Avenue,
Palm Desert, california.
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff Timothy L. Blixseth:
MICHAEL FLYNN, ESQ
Attorneys at Law
BY: MICHAEL FLYNN, ESQ.
6125 E1 Tordo
Rancho Santa Fe, California 92062
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
(858) 756-0771
For the Debtor, Edra D. Blixseth:
LAW OFFICES OF DENNIS HOLAHAN
Attorneys at Law
BY: DENNIS HOLAHAN, ESQ.
2049 Century Park East
Suite 3180
Los Angeles, California 90067
(310) 286-3344
Page 2
(131 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
98 of97112
of 111

1
2
DESCHENES & SULLIVAN

Attorneys at Law
BY: GARY DESCHENES, ESQ. (Via Speakerphone)
4
5
309 1st Avenue North

Great Falls, Montana 59401
(406) 761-6112
7
8
9
10
11
12
For Marc Kirschner,Trustee:

BAILEY & GLASSER, LLP
Attorneys at Law
BY: BRIAN A. GLASSER, ESQ.
209 Capitol Street
Charleston,West Virginia 25301
13
(304) 345-6555
14
15
16
17
18
19
MULLIN HOARD BROWN, LLP

Attorneys at Law
BY: STEVEN L. HOARD, ESQ.
800 Amarillo National Plaza Two
500 South Tyler
Amarillo,Texas 79101
20
21
22
23
24
25
(806) 337-1112
///
///
///
///
///
Page 3
(132 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
99 of98112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 ///
25 ///
Edra D.qixseth
December 17,2009
For the Trustee BLX:
BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP
Attorneys at Law
BY: CHRISTINE K. MIN, ESQ.
2029 Century Park East
Suite 8O0
Los Angeles, Caqifornia 90067-2909
(424) 204-4400
For the Dick Samson as Trustee of the Edra Blixseth
bankruptcy estate:
DATSOPOULOS, MAC DONALD AND LIND, PC
Attorneys at Law
BY: DAVID B.COTNER, ESQ. (Via Speakerphone)
Centrai Square Building
Suite 201
201 West Main
Missoula, Montana 59802
(406) 728-0810
For the Montana Department of Revenue:
Joel Silverman, Esq. (via speakerphone)
125 North Roberts
Helena, Montana 59604
(406) 444-7990
Page 4
(133 of 178)
Case:
Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:ID:
9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,56Page
Page:
100 of
99112
of 111

1
2
3
For CrossHarbor, CIP Yellowstone Lending:

DUANE MORRIS, LLP
Attorneys at Law
BY: PAUL D.MOORE,ESQ. (Via Speakerphone)
5
6
7
470 Atlantic Avenue

Suite 5OO
Boston, Massachusetts 02210-2243
(857) 488-4230
9
10
11
For Western Capital Partners:

HATCH JACOBS, LLC
Attorneys at Law
12
BY: CHRISTOPHER J.CONANT,ESQ. (Via Speakerphone)
13
14
15
950 Seventeenth Street

Suite 1700
Denver, colorado 80202
16
(303) 298-1800
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Also Present:
Timothy L.Blixseth
Page 5
(134 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
101 100
of 112
of 111

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
INDEX
Deposition of EDRA D. BLIXSETH

Taken on December 17, 2009
Examination By:
MR. FLYNN
MR. GLASSER
Information Requested:
Page
15, 358
319
Page Line
298 18
Questions Instructed Not to Answer:

Q. Have you made any cash transfers within 15
the 1ast year?
Q. Did Mr. Scalia purchase a Bentley from 17
Desert European Motors based on funds
that you had wire-transferred to him in
the amount of roughly $220,000?
Q. Did you report on your income tax
17
return a gift of $220,000 wiretransferred to Mr. Scalia?
Q. The amount was 230,000 that you wire18
transferred. Did you do that,
Ms. B1ixseth?
13
21
Page 6
(135 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
102 101
of 112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

A. I was never put on notice that he was a fraud.
Q. Did you have a meeting with aoseph Jonas, a
sit-down, face-to-face meeting with Joseph Jonas,in
January 2007 where he told you that Montgomery did not
possess any of the technology that he had represented to
you?
A. I don't recall who Joseph Jonas is.
Q. So is it your testimony you don't recall the
meeting?
A. I don't recall who he is, so I certainly
wouldn't recall a meeting.
Q. Do you recall a meeting in your office on
April 12th and 13th,2009,with Jack Kemp and myself and
Dennis Montgomery where we reviewed the FBI reports?
A. In 2009?
Q. Strike that.
2007.
A. In what office?
Q. In your office at Porcupine Creek on the second
floor.
A. I don't recall that.
Q. How much did you initially loan to Dennis
Montgomery?
A. There was an employment contract with Dennis
Montgomery that Michael Sandoval had drawn up, had legal
Page 31
(136 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
103 102
of 112
of 111

1 counsel draw up, and there was a signing bonus for
2 Dennis and I believe it was either a million or a
3 million and a half. I don't recall specifically which
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
one it was.
And then it was talking about his salary, which
was a hundred thousand a month. He had the right to
additional loas or bonuses based on performance and
turning over certain specific things that I don't think
that he ever actually got.
He got some additional monies when he was
purchasing a home,but I don't recall the exact amount.
Q. Okay. Did you give him loans totaling
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
$3 million in April of 2006?

A. I don't believe so, no.
Q. What is your best memory of the total amount of
money you loaned to him from Credit Suisse loan proceeds
in April 2006?
A. I can't testify to anything from Credit Suisse
loan proceeds. They came from the Tim Blixseth personal
account into -- wiring into the xpatterns or Opsprings
21 accounts.
22
Q. Did Mr. Blixseth tell you that he opposed this
23 investment and didn't want you to use the Credit Suisse
24 loan proceeds to give to Mr.Montgomery?
25
A. No,he did not.
Page 32
(137 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
104 103
of 112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Edra D.Blixseth
December 17,2009
Q. What is your best memory, regardless of the
source of the funds,as to how much you loaned Dennis
Montgomery in April 2006?
A. I've already testified to that. My best
recollection is it was a signing bonus,which was either
a million or a million and a half, and I don't recall
which one it was.
Q. So that was a loan?
A. That was part of -- I think it was a signing
bonus, actually. If it was a loan, it was a loan. I
don't remember the contract. There's been a 1ot of
contracts and things between that time frame so -Q. Did you ever forgive that loan?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you report those loans on your bankruptcy
schedules?
A. Those were monies that were into corporations
that I reported what was invested in the corporations,
but it wasn't for me personally.
Q. Are those loans still outstanding?
A. That's within the Opsprings Blxware books I'd
have to go back and look. To the best of my knowledge,
if that's how they were and they weren't signing
bonuses
Q. Just so we're clear,Ms. Blixseth,the loans
Page 33
(138 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
105 104
of 112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

have never been forgiven; is that correct?
A. I'm telling you I'm not sure if they were loans
or signing bonuses. I'm telling you that I'm not aware
if they were loans of any monies being repaid from
Dennis Montgomery to the companies. It wasn't to me,
personally.
Q. Did Mr. Montgomery ever turn over to you the
source codes that were being given to you in exchange
for those loans?
A. The reason he wasn't given the additional
money,whether it was loans or not loans,was because
the source codes had not been turned over.
Q. To this day have the source codes ever been
turned over?
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. And what is the total amount of money you have
given either in loans or salary, signing bonuses or any
other characterization to Dennis Montgomery as we sit
here today?
A. I don't recall off the top of my head.
Q. Is it over $5 million?
A. No, it's not.
Q. Isn't it a fact -- strike that.
How long did you continue to pay him a hundred
thousand dollars a month?
Page 34
(139 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
106 105
of 112
of 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Edra D.Blixseth
December 17,2009
A. Until we couldn't afford to keep the company
running.
Q. Yeah. When ws that?
A. I think April or May of this year.
Q. So from April '06 to April or May of '09 you
paid him a hundred thousand dollars a month; is that
correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. What role, if any, did you play in having him
arrested for the $1.9 million casino fraud that he was
involved in?
A. I had no role in it.
Q. In the last 60 days have you been texting
messages with Mr. Montgomery?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Have you texted messages with Mr.Montgomery
relative to the fake target letters that you and he
contrived to try to destroy the -MR. HOLAHAN: Stop. Stop.
BY MR. FLYNN:
Q. -- sale of the Yellowstone Club?
22
MR.HOLAHAN: Objection to that question. It
23 assumes facts not in evidence and this entire line of

24 questioning, I think, is beyond the scope of this
25 deposition.
Page 35
(140 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
107 106
of 112
of 111
Exhibit4
(141 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
108 107
of 112
of 111
Case1:O8-cv-O27O7-CMA-KMT Document47 Filed02/20/2009 Page1of3

UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT
FORTHEDISTRICTOFCOLORADO
WARRANTFORARREST
CivilActionNo.08-cv-02707-CMA-KMT
WESTERN CAPITALPARTNERSLLC,
Plaintiff,
EDRAD.BLIXSETHand
MATTHEW R.CROCKER,
Defendants.
To:TheUnitedStatesMarshal
andanyAuthorizedUnitedStatesOfticer
YOUAREHEREBYCOMMANDEDtoarrestEdraD.Blixsetha/k/aEdraD.Crocker
andbri
ngherfort
hwi
thtothenearestmagistratejudgetoansweran
t
O Indictment D lnformation ED Complaint X Orderofcoul'
O
P
r
o
b
a
t
i
o
n
Vi
o
l
a
t
i
o
n
P
e
t
i
t
i
o
n
O PretrialReleaseViolationPetition
D SupervisedReleaseViolation O ViolationNotice
JudgmentDebtorEdraD.Blixsetha/ldaEdraD.Crocker,wasfoundincivilcontemptofthis
Court'sorderandauthority.
ExecutionofthewarrantforarrestshallbelimitedtothecontinesoftheStateandDistrictof
Colorado.
GREGORYC.LANGHAM
NameoflssuingOfficer
CLERK
TitleoflssuingOfficer
bys/EileenVanAlphen,DeputyClerk
SignatureofIssuingOfficer
February20,2009,Denver,Colorado
DateandLocation
(142 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
109 108
of 112
of 111
Case1:O8-cv-O27O7-CMA-KMT Document47 Filed02/20/2009 Page2of3
RETURN
Thiswarrantwasreceivedandexecutedwiththearrestoftheabove-namedindividualat
DATERECEIVED NAMEANDTITLEOFARRESTINGOFFICER
DATEOFARREST SIGNATUM OFARRESTINGOFFICER
(143 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
110 109
of 112
of 111
Case1:O8-cv-02707-CMA-KMT Document47 Filed02/20/2009 Page3of3
THEFOLLOWING ISFURNISHEDFORINFORMATION ONLY:

NAME: EdraD.Blixseth
ALIAS: EdraD.Crocker
LASTIQNOWNRESIDENCE:
42-765DunesViewRd
RanchoMirage,CA 92270
LASTKNOWN EMPLOYMENT:
PLACEOFBIRTH:
DATEOFBIRTH:
SOCIALSECURITYNUMBER:
HEIGHT:
WEIGHT:
SEX:
RACE:
HAIR:
EYES:
SCARS,TATTOOS,OTHERDISTINGUISHINGMARKS:
FB1NUMBER:
COMPLETEDESCRIPTION OFAUTO:
INVESTIGATIVEAGENCYANDADDRESS:
(144 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
111 110
of 112
of 111
1
2
3
PROOFOFSERVICE
1am aresidentoftheStateofColoradoandkvertheageofeighteenyears,andnot
apartytothewithinaction.Mybusinessaddressis73017u'Street,Suite200,Denver,CO
4 80202.OnJahuary7,2013,lservedthewithindocumentts):
5
DECLARATION OFCHRISTOPHERJ,CONANTIN SUPPORTOF
RESPONDENT'SREQUESTFORANORDER
7
8
M b
r--l byplaci
ngthedocumentts)listedaboveinasealedenvelopewithpostagethereon
10
I
W
above.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
I
u
nv
etl
eeliv
ahoevnevmei
eli
er
did
re
soerddaesliveryby
inc
da
iu
cs
ae
td
eds
oc
nh
the
e
at
ao
cp
he
et
dosb
ee
rvd
ic
lie
sr
te
.d
Sv
ui
c
lg
oh
pt
ed
wa
svd
ey
poa
s
te
ds
f
UPsfollowingthefirm,sordinarybusinesspractkces.
I
Z
I
Z
v
iaelectronic/e-mailservice.Thedocumentts)listedabovewereservedviae-mail
B
ylohwavingacopydeli
veredpersonallytoMr.Holahan'sofficeattheaddresslisted
be
DennisJ.Holahan
2049CenturyParkEast
suite3180
LosAngeles,CA 90067
Fax:(707)586.
2983
d
h
o
l
a
h
a
n
@h
o
l
a
an
law.
om
AttonaeyforEdh
ra
D.
Blc
ix
seth
1amreadilyfamiliarwiththefirm'spracticeofcollectionandprocessing
correspondenceformailing.Underthatprh
acticeitwouldbedepositedwithUPSonthatsame
daywithpostagethereonfullyprepaidinteordinal'ycourseofbusiness. lam awarethaton
motionofthepartysefved,serviceisp
resumedinvalidifpostalcancellationdateorpostage
meterdateismorethanonedayafterdateofdepositformailinginaftdavit.g
ldeclareunderpenaltyofper
juryunderthelawsoftheStateofColoradothatthe
24 foregoingistrueandcorrect.
ExecutedonJanuary7,2013atDenver
,Colorado.
25
..
26
27
28
'chn o er .Conant
POS
(145 of 178)
Case:Case:
12-35986
12-35986,
08/21/2013
05/01/2014, ID:
ID:9080331,
8751547DktEntry:
DktEntry:
98-3,
56Page
Page:
112 111
of 112
of 111
CHRISTOPHERJ.CONANT27
RQOELLYCc.DEWYI
EAV
,CLE
EBKD
tl.2.cotln!OFA/PEALS
August20,2013
AtJ0212013
VIA OVERNIGHTDELIVERY
TotheClerkoftheCourt,NinthCircuitCourtofAppeals
95SeventhStreet
SanFrancisco,CA 94103
FILED
DDCKETED
IMTQ
--INfTIAL
Re: FilingUnderSealinCaseNo.12-35986
DearClerkoftheCourt:
PleasefindtheenclosedReplyinSupportofEmergencyMotionUnderCircuitRule27-3and
27-13toFileUnderSealandinSupportofRelatedMotiontoStay.OnAugust8,2013,AppellantMr.
BlixsethfiledanEmergencyMotiontoSealandRelatedEmergencyMotiontoStayProceedings.The
EmergencyMotiontoStayProceedingswasconditionallytiledundersealptlrsuanttoCircuitRule27-
13(c).TheenclosedisintendedtobeAppellant'sReplyBriefinSupportofhisEmergencyMotionto
StayProceedings.AstheMotionsPanelhasnotyetruledonEmergencyMotiontoFileUnderSeal,it
isAppellant'sunderstandingthattheenclosedReplyBriefshouldbefiledprovisionallyunderseal.
Sincerely,
By:'
..-.
-.
-.
>
.
hristop
.C0 ant
Phone:303-298-1800 Fax:303-298-1804
CcolRalnt@conantlawyers.com
(146 of 178)
Exhibit 2
(147 of 178)
2
3
4
CHRISTOPHER 1. CONANT
Cal. Bar No. 244597
730 1i h Street, Suite 200
Denver, Colorado 80202
Telephone: (303) 298-1800
Facsimile: (303) 298-1804
Email: cconant@conantlawyers.com
Attorney for Timothy
Blixseth
6
7
8
9
10
11
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

Case No. RIDIND91152
[Reassigned to Dept. 10 from Dept. F501]
In re the Marriage of:

Petitioner: Plaintiff
DEC LARA nON OF ROBERT WHITEFORD
and
12
Respondent: Timothy L. Blixseth
13
14
Judge: Sharon 1. Waters

Hearing: Jan. 14,2013
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept. 10
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION OF ROBERT WHITEFORD
(148 of 178)
I, Robert Whiteford, do hereby declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of
2
California as follows:
1.
to herein.
2.
I am over eighteen years of age and have personal knowledge of the facts testified
With respect to my experience and knowledge, I hereby incorporate by reference
my sworn statements set forth in a prior declaration that I filed in the Montana bankruptcy court,
Paragraph 2, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
9
10
11
3.
On September 25,2012, Dennis L. Montgomery had an Apple Power Mac G5
computer (serial number G853111 URUO) delivered to me by Brian Calhoun. This computer
contained one hard drive (Model WD3200AAKS, Serial Number WCA WFD924346).
4.
On September 25, 2012, Mr. Montgomery had a hard drive (Model
12
WD3200AAKS, Serial Number WCAWFD940504) delivered to me via UPS (Tracking Number
13
1Z7F4Y 152468329746). This drive is a SATA hard drive that was not installed in a computer or
14
external enclosure. This is commonly known as a "bare drive".
15
16
17
5.
Mr. Montgomery informed me that these devices were Edra Blixseth's and that
Ms. Blixseth left these devices in his custody and control.

6.
Upon receiving these devices, I made forensic image copies of the files contained
18
thereon. The process of making these forensic images ensured that the "metadata" on the files
19
was preserved unaltered so that a user of the files could review the "metadata" on these files and
20
from that "metadata" determine that date that the
21
modified.
22
7.
were created and the last that they were
From the Power Mac hard drive I retrieved the file known as "Notes on the
23
MSA.doc". I reviewed the metadata on this file and found that this document was created on
24
09/20/200909:33:37 and last modified on 10/23/2009 15:31 :49.
25
8.
From the bare drive I retrieved the document known as "DHpoints.pdf'.
26
reviewed the metadata on this file and found that this document was created on 07117/2011
27
19:18:10 and last modified on 07117/2011 19:18:11.
28
9.
From the Power Mac hard drive I retrieved the file known as "My Dearest
I
DECLARATION OF ROBERT WHITEFORD
(149 of 178)
Jack.doc". I reviewed the metadata on this file and found that this document was created on
2
10/25/2009 15:59:42 and last modified on 10/25/2009 16:34:20.
10.
I reviewed information on the Power Mac to determine if the computer clock had
been altered in such a way that would allow a user to manipulate the metadata contained on the
files thereon. I found no indication of any such tampering.
6
7
8
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge.
DATED this 3rd day of January, 2013.
10
11
Dated:
January 3, 2013
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
DECLARA nON OF ROBERT WHITEFORD
(150 of 178)
PROOF:. OF SERVICE
2
3
4
I am a resident of the State of Colorado and over the age of eighteen years, and not
a party to the within action. My business address is 730 I i h Street, Suite 200, Denver, CO
80202. On November 15,2012, I served the within document(s):
DECLARATION OF DENNIS L. MONTGOMERY IN SUPPORT OF

RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO LIFT STAY
6
7
o
D
10
13
14
15
16
by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon
fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Denver, Colorado addressed as set forth
above.
I caused such envelope to be delivered via overnight delivery addressed as
indicated on the attached service list. Such envelope was deposited for delivery by
UPS following the firm's ordinary business practices.
11
12
by transmitting via facsimile the document(s) listed above to the fax number(s) set
forth below on this date.
via electronic/e-mail service. The document(s) listed above were served via e-mail
to the addressees listed.
Dennis 1. Holahan
2049 Century Park E #3180
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Attorney for Edra D. Blixseth
17
18
19
I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing

correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with UPS on that same
day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on
motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage
meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.[
20
21
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Colorado that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on November 15,2012 at Denver, Colorado.
23
24
Christopher J. Conant
25
26
27
28
POS
(151 of 178)
Exhibit 3
(152 of 178)
(153 of 178)
(154 of 178)
(155 of 178)
(156 of 178)
(157 of 178)
(158 of 178)
(159 of 178)
(160 of 178)
(161 of 178)
(162 of 178)
(163 of 178)
(164 of 178)
(165 of 178)
Exhibit 4
(166 of 178)
Case 2:11-cv-00073-SEH Document 49-1 Filed 09/13/12 Page 1 of 8
Patrick T. Fox (#8071)

DOUBEK, PYFER & FOX LLP
PO Box 236
Helena MT 59624
406 442 7830 ph
406 442 7839 fax
patrickfox@doubekpyfer.com
Attorney for Appellant Timothy L. Blixseth
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA - BUTTE DIVISION
In re:
Case Nos. 2:11-00073-BU-SEH
YELLOWSTONE MOUNTAIN CLUB,

LLC, et al.
On appeal from
Bankruptcy Case No. 08-61570 and
Adv. Case Nos. 09-14, 09-18, 09-64,
10-15.
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL
DECLARATION OF MICHAEL J.
FLYNN IN SUPPORT OF PRO HAC
VICE APPLICATION
(167 of 178)
I, Michael J. Flynn, being of lawful age and duly sworn, based on my own
personal knowledge, hereby make this Declaration pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. 1746.
1.
I am submitting this Declaration in response to the allegations, the
Debtors and CrossHarbor, through counsel, have made against me in their filing of
September 5, 2012. See Doc. #41 with attachments.
2.
I am 68 years old, graduated Magna Cum Laude and was ranked first
in my class in law school, served as Editor in Chief of the Suffolk University Law
Review, clerked for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and have been
actively engaged in civil and criminal litigation since 1972. I have litigated highlycontentious cases for over 40 years. My record is particularly and notably clean,
especially given the volatility of the cases I have litigated, the powerful interests
with substantial financial resources and political connections I have litigated
against, and the seemingly unfettered schemes of my opponents, who have ranged
from powerful cults to organized crime, and who have sought to influence the
outcome of cases using their political, financial and judicial connections.
3.
The Debtors latest filing involves an alleged 30-year-old $250
sanctions order for allegedly giving documents to my co-counsel in related

scientology cases. The Debtors allege that this constitutes evidence of perjury in
my 2012 pro hac vice application. Prior to Mr. Pattens notification to Mr. Fox on
Friday, August 24, 2012, I had no memory of this sanctions order. If I did have
any memory and it was still valid, I would have stated it in my application. My
lack of memory is likely related to a global settlement with scientology
organizations in December 1986 which likely vacated this order although it does
1
(168 of 178)
not appear to be on the court record in Riverside CA. We are continuing to search
for the documents. I have no memory of ever listing this almost 30-year-old
contempt citation in numerous pro hac applications over the years in numerous
jurisdictions. Having no memory of it when I filed the application in this matter
solely to appear for the oral argument on August 24, 2012 (now moot as I did not
appear), I did not commit perjury. Given my 40 year litigation history and strict
compliance with court orders throughout that period, I also reject any claim that I
violated any court orders 30 years ago or continuing to the present in any matter. I
am presently researching this matter to determine what actually happened.
4.
Without consulting me or seeking an explanation for this matter, the
Debtors filed this and their prior filings also accusing me of perjury in connection
with a vacated Daytona , FL court order, all relating to what can only be described
as the massive, well-documented, scientology attack on me, my co-counsel, clients
and the judicial system between 1979 and 1987. Thus, it appears that their motive
for resurrecting these 30 year old litigation matters with scientology, (anything
scientology filed against me is suspect as recited below), is retaliatory for
defending Mr. Blixseth, an attempt to deprive Mr. Blixseth of effective assistance
of counsel, and part of a present campaign to crush [me] into submission
because I am defending Tim Blixseth against them while they are seeking to use
Mr. Blixseths ex-wife, Edra Blixseth, to obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in
Blixseth marital community assets. See Montgomery v eTreppid Technologies,
2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35543 at 17-18, wherein a federal magistrate judge cites
Edra Blixseths campaign to crush [me] into submission. The Debtors know that
I am the primary lawyer for Mr. Blixseths defense team and that exclusion of my
representation will severely weaken his defenses and perpetrate an injustice. This
Court should be aware, as noted by the Nevada Federal Court, that the present
2
(169 of 178)
campaign is far more extensive than resurrecting these 30-year-old, long forgotten
issues, which I will testify about if necessary. Because of the recent disclosures by
Edra Blixseths ex-partner, Dennis Montgomery, and his possession of insider
documents and emails proving the details and magnitude of her criminal conduct
involving the Yellowstone Club bankruptcy, this latest filing appears to be an
especially desperate attempt to suppress the truth integral to Mr. Blixseths
defenses in the Montana Bankruptcy Court.
5.
The September 5, 2012 filing attached a purported Scientology press
release from July 8, 1983, as well as a certified copy of a July 8, 1983 minute
order from the Riverside County, California Superior Court in In re Estate of L.
Ron Hubbard, purporting to hold me in contempt of court and ordering me to pay
a $250 fine.
6.
When I filed the pro hac vice application in this Court I had no
memory of this Order from 30 years ago, issued by a California court in the midst
of what can only be described as a litigation war involving the Scientology
organization, where they routinely filed sanctions motions, bar complaints and law
suits against me, and my clients, in multiple jurisdictions throughout the United
States over a period of seven years. These frivolous filings were all made pursuant
to the written policy of L Ron Hubbard that the purpose of the law is to harass
and destroy rather than to win. Thus, most courts routinely dismissed their
filings which were self-evidently filed to harass and destroy me and my clients.
Hubbards wife, numerous high ranking scientologists, and mobsters they
employed were convicted of a battery of crimes. The scientology cases were
ultimately settled in favor of my clients in early 1987.
(170 of 178)
7.
It has always been my understanding that all of the bar complaints,
sanctions motions, law suits, etc., had been denied, dismissed or vacated, either by
the trial courts, on appeal, or by the ultimate settlement documents. I have filed
innumerable pro hac vice applications in multiple courts throughout the United
States since 1983 and I have no memory of ever listing this purported contempt on
any application. I note that the scientology press release states that I gave
documents in an unrelated case to my co-counsel Julia Dragoyevicz. But Ms.
Dragoyevicz was ONLY my co-counsel in scientology related cases, and had
possession of the so-called Armstrong documents, which were apparently at
issue in this matter ( I am now researching these issues). See Church of Scientology
v. Armstrong, 232 Cal App 3d 1060, 283 Cal Reptr. 917 (1991), essentially
affirming the trial courts ruling after a lengthy trial.
8.
I recall several months in 1984 in which I was lead trial counsel with
Ms. Dragoyevicz. Had the contempt order not been vacated in some manner,
perhaps by the settlement documents in the DeWolf matter, I would have listed it
on the pro hac application filed in this court and in every other court for the last 30
years, but if I received the subject documents from Mr. Armstrong with Ms.
Dragoyevicz as my co-counsel, I could not have been held in contempt for giving
her the documents. As in most scientology matters, their litigation tactics were so
abusive, fabricated and frivolous, except for situations in which they manipulated
the judicial system, their manipulations were denied, dismissed or vacated. See
Sentencing Memorandum relating to several convicted high level scientologists,
attached hereto.
9.
A little context may help this Court understand the situation. In my
Supplemental Declaration filed with this Court on August 17, 2012, I gave this
4
(171 of 178)
Court a glimpse of the litigation war with the Church of Scientology in which I
was embroiled during the 1980s. As this Court read in U.S. v. Kattar, 840 F.2d
118, (1st Cir. 1988), during the 1980s I was deemed an enemy of the Church of
Scientology and due to this designation, was the target of the Churchs Fair Game
Policy, Black PR policy, and legal policy to harass and destroy, which
Policies were the Churchs (or more precisely its leader L. Ron Hubbards)
equivalent of a proclamation of war against me to have his minions and mobsters
destroy me through any means necessary. Id. at 125-126. One manifestation of
the Churchs attempt to destroy me was its use of a Boston mobster to frame me as
the perpetrator of a fraudulent check writing scheme as detailed in U.S. v. Kattar.
Such tactics were universally pursued by Hubbard against his perceived enemies.
For instance, the Scientologists instituted Operation Freakout against one of my
clients, a journalist, who Hubbard and his minions framed for writing a book
about them called The Scandal of Scientology.1
10.
At one point, I represented L. Ron Hubbards estranged son, Ron
DeWolf and in that capacity caused the In re Estate of L. Ron Hubbard case to be
filed in Riverside County Superior Court.
11.
This litigation war spanned from approximately 1979 and continued
until a global settlement in 1986-87. This litigation war was all consuming and
involved litigation spanning the nation, all of which I can testify to at the
September 14th hearing in this matter, should this Court be interested.
12.
In light of the litigation war with the Scientologists that was raging in
1983, and the subsequent settlement, and given the passage of time, I have no
1
See, e.g., generally, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freakout.
(172 of 178)
recollection of the 1983 contempt order at issue here involving documents in my

co-counsels possession. Had I recalled the matter, and had a duty to disclose it, I
most assuredly would have disclosed it to the Court.
13.
Because I deem these allegations against me to be part of a campaign
to crush [me] into submission and deprive Mr. Blixseth of effective assistance of
counsel, I am sending one of my co-counsel to Riverside County Superior court to
physically review, retrieve and copy relevant documents from the file that the
Riverside County Superior Court still maintains on the In re Estate of L. Ron
Hubbard case. I am informed that that Riverside County Superior Court possesses
6 unsealed volumes in the case as well as sealed documents.
14.
Although I am herewith withdrawing my pending pro hac vice
application to save judicial resources, because the matter may now be moot by my
non-appearance on August 24, in order to preclude any prejudice to my client, and
to permit this Court to focus on the issues relevant to my clients appeals so my
client will not be prejudiced while his appeals are pending before this Court, I am
withdrawing the application, but preparing to answer under oath any questions that
this Court may have for me on September 14th should it decide to proceed
notwithstanding the withdrawal of my application. I take these allegations against
me and this campaign seriously and look forward to the opportunity to refute his
allegations.
15.
In my 40 years of trying cases in jurisdictions nationwide, I have
sought justice for my clients who were the victims of abuse, corruption and the
criminal schemes reported in cases such as the scientology criminal matters.
Fighting injustice for my clients and exposing the truth for my clients has often put
6
(173 of 178)
my professional reputation, physical safety, life and liberty in serious peril. Mr.
Blixseth in this appeal and elsewhere in litigation in Montana has exposed and
threatened to upset the confidential relationships some lawyers appear to have with
Judge Kirscher and his staff. This relationship is one where some can speak
confidentially with Judge Kirscher and his chambers about upcoming and pending
cases (ER 846 (Docket No. 10-1)) and even feed case citations from the
bankruptcy court on the eve of his trial against Mr. Blixseth (ER 754 (Docket No.
10-1)). This relationship is also one where some enjoy weekend, cell phone and
home phone access to Judge Kirschers law clerks (and by logical extention Judge
Kirscher). ER 828, 837 (Docket No. 10-1). Thus, it is somewhat unsurprising that
this present effort to negatively impact the defense of my client would be based on
a 30-year-old questionable order against me, which is in need of research and
explication. The Debtors jumped the gun and sought to have this Court rush to
justice on the Daytona matter, which was plainly a frivolous and inaccurate filing.
I am looking into whether any of my 30 year-old files and the DeWolf settlement
documents still exist.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on September 12, 2012.
/s/Michael J. Flynn
Michael J. Flynn
(174 of 178)
Exhibit 5
(175 of 178)
(176 of 178)
Exhibit 6
(177 of 178)
(178 of 178)

Blix V YMC App # 98 - 12-35986 - Flynn Reply Re OSC

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Blix V YMC App # 98 - 12-35986 - Flynn Reply Re OSC

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

(1 of 178)

Case: 12-35986, 05/01/2014, ID: 9080331, DktEntry: 98-1, Page 1 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Attorney Michael Flynn herewith replies to the YCLTs, Cross

address these admissions, to disclose the emails of Judge Kirscher and

hominem attacks on me and co-counsel. This should alert the Court to

particularly in large money cases, of which this case is reportedly the

How Competition for Big Cases is Corrupting the Bankruptcy Courts.

bankruptcy through collusion with Edra Blixseth, the hiring of Mr.

and his mootness order, where he was subsequently ordered by the

rejected by the Judicial Conference, is benign compared to his orders on

abeyance of the misconduct investigation, and this Court is confronted

reappointment after the expiration of the time mandated for

in connection with my letter dated January 31, 2014 attached as

within the scope of our professional judgment acting as advocates for

relating to me that should compel this Court to either strike their

falsity of the few relevant issues in their pleadings, including the

Holahan allegedly not including the critical language I cited in my

Montgomery v. Etreppid Techs., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35543

appellees fantastical ruminations about what they claim I relied upon

/s/ Michael J. Flynn

/s/ Michael J. Flynn

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

In their overreaching frenzy to attack Mr. Blixseth and myself in

their Responses, (itself indicative of their failure to address the relevant

facts), the appellees conveniently misstate the essential issue in the

The appellees resort to broad conclusions about grand

conspiracies, remorse, this Court got it wrong, my failure to include

this Court of the legitimacy of the two documents on Edra Blixseths

demonstrative metadata. In order to misdirect the Court, the YCLT and

The documents exist in their unaltered form on Edra Blixseth

subsequent reliance on the credibility of Edra Blixseth, is shameful;

The authenticity of the two documents was critical to my

determination that all issues regarding disqualification should be

while the scheme to put the YC into bankruptcy was being

The Chief Judge disagrees with my assessment of the evidence

and disagrees with my advocacy and issued the OSC. Obviously, my

and misconduct complaint matters, he did not address that evidence in

In my professional judgment after 44 years of litigation, the

foundation of our entire adversarial system of justice is based on an

The Chief Judge understandably desires to protect the judges he

oversees. My duty is to exhaust all of Mr. Blixseths rights and remedies

it involves a challenge to perceived judicial bias. Almost a Billion

continued to protect Mr. Blixseths rights based upon my assessment

credibility; and my client is subject to a $40 million judgment involving

The whole matter smells.

The appellees cite a vacated 33 year old sanctions order by an

alcoholic judge in Daytona Fl, who I was subsequently informed by an

As for the continuing investigation into these matters, the roles of

The appellees have made credibility an issue, mandating an

evidentiary hearing, particularly in connection with the Edra Blixseth

critical component of my assessment of the evidence supporting

power by means of lies to blame or attack their victims or those who

and Mr. Byrnes plan to obtain a billion dollars. Judge Kirschers

preserved for further examination, must awaken this Court to justice

The financial motive for the Burkle/Byrne/Blixseth cabal to put

the Yellowstone Club into bankruptcy, have Mr. Burkle

the meaning,weightand credibility of this evidence. Butthe pointofthe

and adjudicate the factswithin appellate motionspractice,although thatis

independent and objective fact-finder. Undoubtedly further independent

hominem decendum estigitur,quum oratio argumentationem non habet.'PRO

FLACCO j 10''). Again,Mr.Blixseth and hiscounselthrough signiticant

simply whethertheYCLT'SeffortsagainstMr.Blixseth shouldbestayeduntil