Michael Ioane and Acacia Corporate Management, LLC are the Plaintiffs in an ongoing civil case against the Defendants, United States, Steven Booth and Louise Booth, husband and wife.
On June 6, 2012, Ioane and Acacia Corporate Management, LLC filed a response to the Defendants Motion for Reconsideration. A hearing has been scheduled to be heard on June 25, 2012 at 1:30 pm. The location of the hearing shall be at the District Court in Fresno, California, in front of the Honorable Judge Anthony W. Iishi. One shall only assume such a hearing is allowed due to the courts procedural rules. Thought it makes one wonder why Iishi did not simply read the evidence, filings, and authority prior to making a hearing date. If he had then either a phone conference or a judgment in the mail would have been appropriate and saved a lot of wasted time and money.
Ioane and Acacia are objecting to the government, a very bad attorney whom is working for the Justice Department, Attorney G. Patrick Jennings, and Mr. and Mrs. Booth for the simple fact that they failed to file any claim or reconsideration motion within the allowed amount of time from the original judgment date. The stipulated judgment date was back in September 25, 2007. According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure a 28-day time limit is to be strictly enforced by the courts and all parties of a relevant case. Whether the Defendants believe they had an actual argument for a counter claim or not their required to adhere to the law and its deadline.
Furthermore, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure along with significant case law state that “If the action proceeds to judgment without the interposition of a counterclaim as required by subdivision (a) of this rule, the counterclaim is barred.” Therefore, regardless if the Defendant had a counter claim, they missed the deadline years ago and so now they have no counter claim indefinitely.
In addition to the counter claim being endlessly barred from being filed, heard or granted, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state the judge must order a dismissal because a counter claim ought to be filed prior to any pleading be served on the opposite party.
During 2007 Ioane, Mr. and Mrs. Booth and the United States came to an agreement and it was to cover all claims; however, in the event of the Defendants seeking out to avoid their corrupt ways of coming up into the public eye, now are trying once again in this case to evade the system and its rules. In doing so they only proved once again how corrupt they really are.
Attorney G. Patrick Jennings is now being investigated for disbarment for being a United States Attorney and filing such harassment against Ioane. A United States Attorney knows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is one of the first set of law books he learned in college, but in this matter he has decided to ignore the Federal laws and rules that all other Attorneys must follow, and filed fibrously a fraudulent claim.
Defendants desire to disregard the settlement agreement and associated stipulated judgment between the parties, dated and authorized by the same court the hearing is scheduled to be held. Moreover, in this case Defendants waived their opportunity to file any motions on numerous occasions during the last five years. The Booths had their own attorney for many years and especially during the criminal case. This lawyer was given authority by the Booths to handle such counter claim filings, and if necessary to file a complaint with the Treasury Inspector General of Tax Administration, which he did. In the complaint to the Inspector, Attorney John Reedy stated his clients had NO ownership interest in the real property in question within this case. Yet, now they file a motion along side the United States government stating the contrary.
During this case and the criminal proceedings, the government along with Dr. Booth and his wife, have done nothing less than attack, harass and intimidate Michael Ioane. The government lawyers involved in these cases, including Attorney Jennings from California, has not only lied during the proceedings, but encouraged the Booths to do the same or face harsh penalties for not doing so.
Dr. Booth and his wife have committed perjury and truly are now scared to face prison time over a perjury claim and contempt of the plea agreement. Look at the Defendants, Motion for Reconsideration, which is loaded with oratory language and unsupported “so-called facts.” Simply, the Booths are looking for a way out of a business deal they no longer wish to be involved in and are using this case to attempt to get out of it. Not only is it expected for the Judge to deny this motion, but to award Ioane any Attorney fees generated from this outlandish hearing. In addition, it shall be seen whether Judge Iishi does the right thing and reports these illegal acts being committed within his courts.