356 Registry Lawsuit Update

For off-topic posts only (i.e. non 356 related content). No politics, religion or obscenity. Play nice!
Locked
Message
Author
Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#316 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

Today, July 21, 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio dismissed, upon the defendants' motion, the case filed in federal court. For details, go to http://www.pacer.gov/ where you'll need to open an account which will cost you nothing unless you become a heavy user.

User avatar
Vic Skirmants
Registry Hall of Fame
Posts: 9276
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: SE Michigan
Contact:

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#317 Post by Vic Skirmants »

Thank you, Rosemary, for keeping us up to date.
Cheers.

User avatar
C J Murray
356 Fan
Posts: 9158
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: 30MI WEST OF PHILA
Contact:

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#318 Post by C J Murray »

Hey Vic, did you get a gentlemanly note of concession upon your victory? That was a victory for you guys, right? Maybe you'll get one after the Ohio victory. KTF
'57 Speedster
'59 Sunroof
'60 Devin D Porsche Race Car
'63 Cabriolet "Norm"
'67 911 S Original Owner
'03 Ferrari 575M
'09 Smart Passion

User avatar
Gordon Maltby
Registry Hall of Fame
Posts: 377
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Twin cities
Contact:

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#319 Post by Gordon Maltby »

On Monday, July 21, 2014, the Judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, dismissed the the suit filed by R. Stephen Heinrichs against all the current and several former 356 Registry, Inc., trustees and officers personally and individually. The dismissal was based on the Motion to Dismiss the attorneys for the the trustees and officers filed on their behalf. The litigation in the Ohio State Court remains pending with a Trial date of November 17, 2014. The status of the Ohio case will be announced as it progresses.
 

Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#320 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

Rosemary Sampson wrote:Today, July 11, 2014, Mr. Heinrichs submitted his motion requesting that a partial summary judgment (that is, without trial) be entered in his favor and against the Registry in the Ohio state court as to some of the litigated matters. The motion asks the court to determine, among other things, that all members are entitled to the records Mr. Heinrichs and others have sought for many years now. A full copy of the motion is available on the court's web site. http://www.franklincountyohio.gov/clerk/cio.cfm
On July 23, 2014 the trustees filed the Registry's motion to compel discovery in the state court action.

On August 1, 2014 the trustees filed the Registry's opposition to the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in the state court action.
Last edited by Rosemary Sampson on Thu Aug 07, 2014 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
C J Murray
356 Fan
Posts: 9158
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: 30MI WEST OF PHILA
Contact:

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#321 Post by C J Murray »

Deleted by moderator
'57 Speedster
'59 Sunroof
'60 Devin D Porsche Race Car
'63 Cabriolet "Norm"
'67 911 S Original Owner
'03 Ferrari 575M
'09 Smart Passion

Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#322 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

On September 24, 2014 the trial court in Ohio state court entered two orders that might be of interest to my fellow club members. The notices of decision are posted on the court's web site which if you haven't used it before you can click through here: http://www.franklincountyohio.gov/clerk/cio.cfm. The rulings are, naturally, what count, not my summary.

The court partially granted Heinrichs's motion for summary judgment. The court validated his claim in Count One that he (and presumably any member) is entitled to those records - see the opinion itself for a more detailed discussion. The court makes a detailed analysis in the ruling but a "snip" of the bottom line follows.
Count One Ruling.JPG
The court found that there are some triable issues of fact as to Count Two, although it found conclusively, without the need for trial, that Steve Heinrichs was wrongfully expelled by the trustees, thus granting his motion in part as to Count Two. The defendant club, due to what the court has held were the wrongful actions of its trustees, will be liable for damages that Heinrichs can prove were caused by that wrongful expulsion.
Wrongful expelling ruling.JPG
The other motion, which was granted in large part as stated by the court, was the trustees' motion to compel discovery from Steve Heinrichs. The order does not lend itself to "snipping" as readily as the other order does so the holding is summarized as follows. The order compels Heinrichs to produce: 1. Heinrichs's financial records pertaining to two books on Porsche; 2. Heinrichs's correspondence, if any, with Wolfgang Porsche that refers to the R or its officers/trustees; 3. Correspondence with Bill Sampson, to be produced in camera for the court's inspection; 4. Correspondence to/from R members referring to trustee elections or candidates. Read the decision itself if you are interested in the court's reasoning and further details as to its rulings.


Rosemary Sampson

Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#323 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

Trial of both Stephen Heinrichs's suit against the Registry and the Registry's suit against Stephen Heinrichs has been continued to January 27, 2015. More information is available on the court's web site.

Rosemary Sampson

REGISTRY DISMISSES BASELESS SUIT

#324 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

On January 19, 2015, Dominic Chieffo, the attorney retained by the trustees, dismissed without prejudice the (frivolous?) suit they had him file in our name against Mr. Heinrichs. Two years were wasted on their suit aka counterclaim. It was always utterly without merit and a waste of our money. Thank you to the trustees for finally deciding to do the right thing in that regard. A copy of the dismissal is below.

Jury trial of Mr. Heinrichs's suit in Ohio State Court, a substantial portion of which he has already won, is pending.
Dismissal.jpeg

User avatar
Steve Proctor
356 Fan
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:15 am
Location: Spring Hill, TN

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#325 Post by Steve Proctor »

Rosemary...good of you to keep us up to speed. I'd like to telephone you personally for detailed information regarding the proceedings. Please email a phone number and a good time to discuss. Thanks,

STP
STP
Steve Proctor
Member Since 1977
VIN 84757

Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#326 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

Steve Proctor wrote:Rosemary...good of you to keep us up to speed. I'd like to telephone you personally for detailed information regarding the proceedings. Please email a phone number and a good time to discuss. Thanks,

STP
Steve:

I emailed you twice with the number for the only phone we have at the moment and never heard from you. So, if you missed it, try EDITED TO DELETE # NOW THAT STEVE HAS IT. Forgive what I forlornly hope will prevent bot harvesting of the number.
Last edited by Rosemary Sampson on Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Steve Proctor
356 Fan
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:15 am
Location: Spring Hill, TN

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#327 Post by Steve Proctor »

Got it. Thx,

STP
STP
Steve Proctor
Member Since 1977
VIN 84757

Rosemary Sampson

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#328 Post by Rosemary Sampson »

Trial of the remaining issues in the case is now scheduled for April 6, 2015.

User avatar
Jerry Henning
356 Fan
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:38 am

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#329 Post by Jerry Henning »

Oh Rosemary!
You seem to be falling down on the job. You usually provide us such detailed blow-by-blow coverage of developing events, but not in this case? It sometimes appears that you perhaps mimic (or parrot), word for word what your husband has posted on another website, but why now the lack of fair and complete communication to our members on these current events? Do they not need to know the details?

For those interested in your husband's recent comments and commentary, here is a link to the posted information:
http://www.abcgt.com/forum/13-Open-Topi ... =528#25445

To paraphrase your usual postings:
"On February 17, 2015 the trial court in Ohio state court entered six orders that might be of interest to my fellow club members. The notices of decision are posted on the court's web site which if you haven't used it before you can click through here: http://www.franklincountyohio.gov/clerk/cio.cfm. The rulings are, naturally, what count, not my summary."

Jerry Henning
The Warm Sunny Florida Gulf Coast

User avatar
C J Murray
356 Fan
Posts: 9158
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: 30MI WEST OF PHILA
Contact:

Re: 356 Registry Lawsuit Update

#330 Post by C J Murray »

Hi Jerry,
We're headed to Sebring this morning to steal some of your sun. Thanks for the update and the link. I doubt the lack of reporting from the Sampsons has anything to do with the SH legal setbacks. I think Bill, the great legal mind of the couple, has been unable to pry himself away from the ABCGT forum where he is also known as "Bill Sampson AKA Reverend Moon(er)" and has responsibility for legal reporting and adult entertainment. This surely is time consuming.
Cliff

Deleted by Monitor
'57 Speedster
'59 Sunroof
'60 Devin D Porsche Race Car
'63 Cabriolet "Norm"
'67 911 S Original Owner
'03 Ferrari 575M
'09 Smart Passion

Locked