Negative ANN article about Cirrus

[wanttaja]

I don't believe that anyone ever proposed to depose KSA and Campbell jointly (i.e. in the same deposition), they just requested that the two depositions be scheduled back-to-back to reduce the burdens of travel.

Re-reading it, I think you're right. Guess if Zoom had met his deposition date last month, we wouldn't be having this issue. I see his lawyer says that Campbell is in Japan right now. JAL must be hiring.

I can't help but wonder if Cirrus' unilateral scheduling of a deposition was primarily to encourage Campbell to find new counsel quickly. He was given 30 days last time, and took 90. Much quicker this time; met the limit imposed by the judge.

BTW, assuming Campbell missed both his dates last month and the one last week, that's five depositions in a row he's missed (counting his last lawsuit).

Yeah, but that was 'two lawyers ago'

Actually, Campbell's on his fourth lawyer in this case....he had two, to start with.

It's a moot point now, but how do process disagreements like this work, with switching lawyers? If the first lawyer in a case demands the process be handled a certain way, can a subsequent replacement lawyer force the process back the other way?

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Activity really picking up. Attached is Cirrus' response to Campbell's request for a protective order. One thing that comes out is that the two depositions scheduled last month were cancelled as a courtesy to the departing attorney. The exhibits are, for the most part, previous filings in this case.

A notice of hearing has been filed in relation to this motion. From the docket, it appears to be February 26th.

Also, depositions have been re-scheduled for April 4th.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Trial date set: 6/13/2013. Pre-Trial meeting a week earlier.

Will post the court order when received.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[KSMooniac]

What are the odds they will actually make it into a court room?

 

[weilke]

What are the odds they will actually make it into a court room?

Low

 

[wanttaja]

What are the odds they will actually make it into a court room?

Well, I'd guess they're scrambling right now trying to come up with an out-of-court settlement. But I think handing over the aircraft is a non-negotiable item for Cirrus, and I don't think Campbell will go for that.

But I guess I'm unclear on how Campbell could otherwise derail the court date. It's not a criminal trial, and he has a lawyer to represent him. If he's scheduled to testify and is not there, does the judge *have* to delay the case?

There was a tantalizing clue in Campbell's motion for the protective order. His new attorney, in a message addressed to Cirrus' lawyer, said, "I am further concerned about your implying, albeit loosely, that the Court may hold my client in disfavor or be irritated at my client on one level or another."

If the referenced conversation WASN'T just an attempt to psyche out the new guy, it could indicate that the judge isn't going to cut Campbell any slack.

By the way, what happens at the pre-trial meeting a week before the trial date?

Ron Wanttaja

 

[flyingron]

With the action against KSA, the lawyer is the one making the appearance. In the action against Jim, they can enter a default judgement against him if he doesn't appear.

 

[Pilawt]

By the way, what happens at the pre-trial meeting a week before the trial date?

Not sure about Florida procedure, but typically such pre-trial conferences deal with procedural and housekeeping matters in advance to avoid delays during the trial iself. It might involve letting the court know how many witnesses will be called; pre-marking of exhibits; any scheduling problems for witnesses (e.g., a particular expert will only be available Thursday afternoon, or some such thing); special tech accommodations that will be needed (equipment for Power Point presentations, depositions on video, etc.). Motions in limine might also be made, asking the judge to limit or exclude certain evidence in advance, to forestall delays for arguments, legal research, etc., while witnesses are on the stand. If it is a jury trial, specifics about the jury selection process might be discussed, such as how much time each side will be allowed to ask questions of the prospective jury panel.

It's kinda like the umpires and the managers going over the ground rules before the National Anthem at a baseball game.

 

[Steve Foley]

Trial date set: 6/13/2013.

Anyone got tickets? Ticketmaster is sold out.

 

[weilke]

By the way, what happens at the pre-trial meeting a week before the trial date?

Based on what has happened so far, it will revolve around the petition of the current KSA lawyers to be released from the case .

 

[wanttaja]

BTW, thanks, Jeff, for the summary.

Based on what has happened so far, it will revolve around the petition of the current KSA lawyers to be released from the case .

It's interesting to examine the record. Campbell got his first two lawyers in October, 2011, and they filed their motion to withdraw in January 2012. About three months. Campbell's third lawyer came on board in late May 2012, and they filed for release in early December. About seven months. That's an average of five months for the previous lawyers to get so fed up that they ask for release.

The fourth lawyer came onboard a bit over a month ago, a bit more than five months to what has been set as the trial date. In the interim, he's got to get Campbell to show up at at least one deposition, and to finally answer the interrogatories served back in October.

But, of course, with a trial date set, he'll find it *extremely* difficult to get the judge to release him.

Anyone got tickets? Ticketmaster is sold out.

Not so fast, my friend. If you buy a ticket to see the three-legged bearded lady, make sure the three-legged bearded lady is going to be on stage.

I can't judge the merits of the case, but if his lawyer tells him the odds of winning are low, he may not even show up. Gives him a bit more flexibility, if he can deny knowing about it. Remember his hand-written motion last year, implying that no one told him that his lawyer had withdrawn?

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Anyone got tickets? Ticketmaster is sold out.

If one of us *does* show up, they might become part of the show. Back on one of his other cases, the wife of a RAH-15 member showed up in court. Campbell didn't like her there (though he didn't know who she was), objected to her presence, and the judge questioned her before allowing her to remain.

Maybe I should show up.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Jim Logajan]

If one of us *does* show up, they might become part of the show. Back on one of his other cases, the wife of a RAH-15 member showed up in court. Campbell didn't like her there (though he didn't know who she was), objected to her presence, and the judge questioned her before allowing her to remain.

Maybe I should show up.

Ron Wanttaja

Get there by making it a cross country trip in the Fly Baby!

 

[kyleb]

If one of us *does* show up, they might become part of the show. Back on one of his other cases, the wife of a RAH-15 member showed up in court. Campbell didn't like her there (though he didn't know who she was), objected to her presence, and the judge questioned her before allowing her to remain.

Maybe I should show up.

Ron Wanttaja

What's the trial location?

Florida is close enough it is tempting to zip down just to watch. Zoom on the stand should be very entertaining.

 

[wanttaja]

What's the trial location?

Florida is close enough it is tempting to zip down just to watch. Zoom on the stand should be very entertaining.

It's in Green Cove Springs, I assume it's at the main courthouse at 825 N. Orange Avenue. The Honorable John H. Skinner is the judge, he seems to have Courtroom 12. I'm going to get a copy of the order setting the trial date, I assume it'll have more information.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Steve Foley]

Not so fast, my friend. If you buy a ticket to see the three-legged bearded lady, make sure the three-legged bearded lady is going to be on stage.

I've got a friend with tickets to a Who concert from 1979 that never took place. I understand they're worth more than face value.

 

[wanttaja]

It's in Green Cove Springs, I assume it's at the main courthouse at 825 N. Orange Avenue. The Honorable John H. Skinner is the judge, he seems to have Courtroom 12. I'm going to get a copy of the order setting the trial date, I assume it'll have more information.

Judge's order setting the trial dates is attached.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Judge's order setting the trial dates is attached.

One thing interesting about the hearing this week: It was supposed to decide on whether to grant Campbell's request for a restraining order, and to decide on a trial date. The notices from both lawyers, pointing out that the issue of the restraining order will be settled in the judge's chambers on the 26th of February, are attached.

The judge issued an order regarding the trial date (posted earlier), but no mention yet of his decision on the restraining order. Guess it's taking a bit more time to prepare.

I find it curious that Cirrus is agreeing to a trial date before getting a deposition from Campbell or Campbell responding to overdue Interrogatories. It might be that the judge will address these issues in his ruling.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Two from Campbell's attorney. The first is a notice of Deposition, for the 4th of April. I originally thought this was, perhaps, the rescheduled Campbell deposition. It's not, it's for an officer from Cirrus.

The second is a notice that says Campbell intends to try to recover attorney's fees from Cirrus. If Campbell wins the suit, that's a reasonable suggestion.

There was a third filing that I'm not posting, it's just a notice from Cirrus' lawyer indicating when he would not be available for a deposition or trial.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

I find it curious that Cirrus is agreeing to a trial date before getting a deposition from Campbell or Campbell responding to overdue Interrogatories. It might be that the judge will address these issues in his ruling.

Still nothing added to the record about the judge's decision, but it looks like Campbell's attorney has served Cirrus with a set of Interrogatories, and has finally answered Cirrus'. Nothing yet on a date for Campbell's deposition.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[jm0045]

Just noticed that Campbell's new darling, Diamond, has all but shut down due to the collapse of a funding deal with Dubai. Just a skeleton crew on board to support current customers, and the jet program has been shut down too. It seems that foreign investment is critical to GA in these times, and Cirrus' decision to get a Chinese partner, while deplorable to Campbell, kept the company in business and the jet program alive. It's just business.

 

[wanttaja]

Just noticed that Campbell's new darling, Diamond, has all but shut down due to the collapse of a funding deal with Dubai. Just a skeleton crew on board to support current customers, and the jet program has been shut down too. It seems that foreign investment is critical to GA in these times, and Cirrus' decision to get a Chinese partner, while deplorable to Campbell, kept the company in business and the jet program alive. It's just business.

I thought the Canadian branch of the company (which was developing the jet and has run into financial problems) is different from the company that builds the DA-20 et al (the company that pays Campbell to be its friend). In any case, neither company is based or builds airplanes in the US, which seems to qualify them as "foreign investment."

Ron Wanttaja

 

[jm0045]

I thought the Canadian branch of the company (which was developing the jet and has run into financial problems) is different from the company that builds the DA-20 et al (the company that pays Campbell to be its friend). In any case, neither company is based or builds airplanes in the US, which seems to qualify them as "foreign investment."

Here's a link that pretty well explains the relationships: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Aircraft_Industries.

I wonder if Zoom knew Diamond was looking for Chinese partnership too?

Joe

 

[wanttaja]

Still nothing added to the record about the judge's decision, but it looks like Campbell's attorney has served Cirrus with a set of Interrogatories, and has finally answered Cirrus'. Nothing yet on a date for Campbell's deposition.

Today's update shows that Campbell has been scheduled for a deposition, both individually and as representative for the LLC. The date isn't shown on the online listing; I'll give it a few days to see if anything else shows up, then order the filings and post the date.

My guess is that this will preclude the judge having to rule on the two motions from last week...it was all about getting Campbell scheduled for a deposition, and he's scheduled now.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Judge's order setting the trial dates is attached.

Ron Wanttaja

Well...that's interesting. This filing (originally dated 2/26/2013) has been removed from the online case record.

Another filing with the same name was added today, dated 3/5/2013.

The original filing had some typos on it; obviously copied from a prior order. Check out the date on the last line before the judge's signature of the copy I posted.

A "Trial Set Memorandum" was also added today.

I'll give it tomorrow to see if anything else shows up, then, order copies of these and the Campbell deposition notice.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Well...that's interesting. This filing (originally dated 2/26/2013) has been removed from the online case record.

Another filing with the same name was added today, dated 3/5/2013.

The original filing had some typos on it; obviously copied from a prior order. Check out the date on the last line before the judge's signature of the copy I posted.

Missed this the first time...looks like the trial date has moved, from 6/13 to 6/18. That's probably the reason the order was re-filed.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Got this week's filings, rather than post all of the documents, I'll just summarize. Dates correspond to the date on the online listing of the court documents...generally the filing date for each is a day or so earlier.

1. "Notice of Serving Interrogatories"- 3/1/2013: Defendant's notice that they have answered the last set of Cirrus' Interrogatories.

2. "Notice of Taking Deposition" - 3/4/2013. Campbell is scheduled for a deposition next Wednesday (13 March), a combined deposition as an individual and as a corporate representative of Kindred Spirits Aviation.

3. "Trial Set Memorandum" - 3/5/2013. A form filled out by hand, noting the attorneys involved, with various options ("non Jury" "contract") filled in or checked. This looks to be the notes that was kept when the attornies met with the judge to set a trial date.

4. "Order Setting Non-Jury & Pre-Trial" - 3/5/2013. Formal order from Judge setting the pre-trial meeting for June 6th, and the trial itself for June 18th. Turns out, contrary to my last posting, that the trial date hadn't changed...the online listing showed it as the wrong date, but the previous filing had the same court dates as this one. Interestingly, this new order has the same date typo as the previous one.

5. "Witness/Expert Witness List" - 3/6/2013. Cirrus notifying the other attorney and the court that they intend to have a handwriting analyst testify. Analyst's name is Richard Orsini, of Jackson Beach Florida. http://www.richardorsini.com/bio.html

Ron Wanttaja

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Is it possible to order the transcripts of a deposition?

 

[wabower]

If I'd thought about it, I would have contacted them a about expert work on this one. It would have been fun to attend the depositions.

Got this week's filings, rather than post all of the documents, I'll just summarize. Dates correspond to the date on the online listing of the court documents...generally the filing date for each is a day or so earlier.

1. "Notice of Serving Interrogatories"- 3/1/2013: Defendant's notice that they have answered the last set of Cirrus' Interrogatories.

2. "Notice of Taking Deposition" - 3/4/2013. Campbell is scheduled for a deposition next Wednesday (13 March), a combined deposition as an individual and as a corporate representative of Kindred Spirits Aviation.

3. "Trial Set Memorandum" - 3/5/2013. A form filled out by hand, noting the attorneys involved, with various options ("non Jury" "contract") filled in or checked. This looks to be the notes that was kept when the attornies met with the judge to set a trial date.

4. "Order Setting Non-Jury & Pre-Trial" - 3/5/2013. Formal order from Judge setting the pre-trial meeting for June 6th, and the trial itself for June 18th. Turns out, contrary to my last posting, that the trial date hadn't changed...the online listing showed it as the wrong date, but the previous filing had the same court dates as this one. Interestingly, this new order has the same date typo as the previous one.

5. "Witness/Expert Witness List" - 3/6/2013. Cirrus notifying the other attorney and the court that they intend to have a handwriting analyst testify. Analyst's name is Richard Orsini, of Jackson Beach Florida. http://www.richardorsini.com/bio.html

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wanttaja]

Is it possible to order the transcripts of a deposition?

I vaguely remember either discussing it as part of this thread or in conversation with the Clerk of Court's office. In any case, transcripts are available from the Court Recorder.

There's a charge... I believe it's the same as the copying charge for the legal paperwork, but since the transcripts can cover hours of testimony, it might amount to hundreds of dollars. I think the parties in a case get a copy for free, so if we can get Wayne on as an expert witness, we're golden.

That was the nice thing about being Tony's client...he sent me transcripts of not only our case, but from the bankruptcy and the Sun-N-Fun lawsuit as well.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[wabower]

About 2" of paper per witness in each of the last two cases, IIRC. Was that in the same ball-park as yours?

I vaguely remember either discussing it as part of this thread or in conversation with the Clerk of Court's office. In any case, transcripts are available from the Court Recorder.

There's a charge... I believe it's the same as the copying charge for the legal paperwork, but since the transcripts can cover hours of testimony, it might amount to hundreds of dollars. I think the parties in a case get a copy for free, so if we can get Wayne on as an expert witness, we're golden.

That was the nice thing about being Tony's client...he sent me transcripts of not only our case, but from the bankruptcy and the Sun-N-Fun lawsuit as well.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Why don't they offer an electronic (PDF) version for a lower fee? We gotta stop killing trees just so we can charge to make copies.

 

[weilke]

Why don't they offer an electronic (PDF) version for a lower fee? We gotta stop killing trees just so we can charge to make copies.

It's not the copying. This is how the court reporter makes his money.

 

[wabower]

I mark them up as I read them. Technically I think you're supposed to make all the corrections on the pages provided at the end of the document, but I don't like to pass up the opportunity to correct it the same way I've done every other document since Noah. Once the proof-read is done, transcribing the changes to the back is easy.

Why don't they offer an electronic (PDF) version for a lower fee? We gotta stop killing trees just so we can charge to make copies.

 

[wanttaja]

Two more additions to the case file today:

03/15/2013 Request for Production/To Produce
3rd Request for Production/To Produce to Defendant, James R. Campbell
03/15/2013 Request for Production/To Produce
3rd Request for Production/To Produce to Defendant, Kindred Spirit Aviation, LLC

Cirrus' previous Request for Production came after Campbell's response to Interrogatories; Campbell responded to the second set of Interrogatories a couple of weeks back, so it's likely that this is related to those. The previous Request for Production asked for copies of documents Campbell mentioned in his Interrogatory response, so it's probable that this request is along the same lines.

However, Campbell's deposition was scheduled for last Wednesday. If it occurred, it's likely Campbell make claims to holding some items of evidence. This Request for Production may be related to those claims.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[flightwriter]

...

However, Campbell's deposition was scheduled for last Wednesday. If it occurred, it's likely Campbell make claims to holding some items of evidence. This Request for Production may be related to those claims.

Ron Wanttaja

Looks like it occurred, judging by Zoom's latest "Barnstorming" vociferation on Aero-TV. Also puts the tone of this "news" item in its proper context: http://tinyurl.com/FairandUnbiased

 

[wanttaja]

Looks like it occurred, judging by Zoom's latest "Barnstorming" vociferation on Aero-TV..../QUOTE]

Pretty sure you're right. There was a lot of attention paid by counsel regarding this deposition, including a hearing with the judge about its scheduling. If it HADN'T happened last Wednesday, I'm sure we would have seen a filing either from Cirrus howling for blood or a joint note with new date/time.

Oddly enough, I followed that link you posted and the darn thing wouldn't stay closed. Every time I hit the "close" button on the window, it would pop open again....

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Jim Logajan]

If it HADN'T happened last Wednesday, I'm sure we would have seen a filing either from Cirrus howling for blood or a joint note with new date/time.

Oh yeah - skip to 10:20 of this video for confirmation ("Had to deal with... 9:30 in the morning to 5:30 ..."):

 

[flightwriter]

Oh yeah - skip to 10:20 of this video for confirmation ("Had to deal with... 9:30 in the morning to 5:30 ..."):

The segment reads very much like a "Zoom's Greatest Hits" reel. One could easily substitute the Cirrus references for Sun 'n Fun, or Chuck Slusarczyk.

Oddly enough, I followed that link you posted and the darn thing wouldn't stay closed. Every time I hit the "close" button on the window, it would pop open again....

That's one way to build page views, I guess!

 

[jm0045]

Oh yeah - skip to 10:20 of this video for confirmation ("Had to deal with... 9:30 in the morning to 5:30 ..."):

He's still on his "it's all about journalistic freedom" kick. No one is infringing on his First Amendment rights. He can write whatever he wants, but what he does not have the right to is to is for Cirrus to continue advertising with him, even if their stopping is in reaction to what he's written, or to give him an airplane.

The First Amendment says the Government can't retaliate against you for expressing your opinion; Cirrus is entitled to take any legal action it wishes against him.