Negative ANN article about Cirrus

wanttaja said:
One would think that, due to the value of the aircraft, there had been more-formal documentation of the agreement. But it's possible that neither side has any paperwork to back their claims.
Click to expand...

The Notice of Lis Pendens mentions a security agreement, so I suspect there is formal documentation in place. It also mentions that a complaint has been filed, but I can't find any record it (11-CA-1186) on the Clay County Circuit Court website.

If anyone is near the Clay County Courthouse, they could always stop in an ask for a copy of the complaint.
 
Last edited:
Steve Foley said:
The Notice of Lis Pendens mentions a security agreement, so I suspect there is formal documentation in place. It also mentions that a complaint has been filed, but I can't find any record if a lien on the Florida UCC website, and I can't find the complaint referenced (11-CA-1186) on the Clay County Circuit Court website.
Click to expand...

Does a lien that is recorded with the FAA show up in the state records as well ? Does the UCC filing happen in the state the entity is registered in ?
 
weilke said:
Does a lien that is recorded with the FAA show up in the state records as well ?
Click to expand...

Probably not, but I thought I'd check.

Does the UCC filing happen in the state the entity is registered in ?[/QUOTE]

It should be filed in the state where the debtor is located or incorporated.

I bet it's also attached to the complaint.

I found the docket for the case:

Logout My Account Search Menu New Civil Search Refine Search Back
Location : All Courts Permalink HelpRegister of Actions
Case No. 2011-CA-001186
Cirrus Design Corporation vs Kindred Spirit Aviation, LLC§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Case Type:Contract IndebtednessDate Filed:09/02/2011Location:Circuit CivilJudicial Officer:Skinner, John HUniform Case Number:102011CA001186A001XX File Custody/Location: File RoomParty Information

Lead Attorneys
Defendant
Campbell, James R
5291 Air Park Loop E
Green Cove Springs, FL 32043



Defendant
Kindred Spirit Aviation, LLC
5291 Air Loop E
Green Cove Springs, FL 32043



Plaintiff
Cirrus Design Corporation
4515 Taylor Circle
Duluth, MN 55811


Jason Ward Johnson
  Retained

jason.johnson lowndes-law.com Events & Orders of the Court
OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS09/02/2011 Civil Cover SheetCivil Cover Sheet

09/02/2011 ComplaintComplaint

09/02/2011 Exhibits Filed into EvidenceA - D

09/02/2011 Notice Lis Pendens/RecordedNotice Lis Pendens / recorded

09/06/2011 20 Day Summons Issuedas to Kindred Spirit Aviation, LLC

09/06/2011 20 Day Summons Issuedas to James R. Campbell

09/06/2011 20 Day Summons Issuedas to:Kindred Spirit Aviation LLC
09/06/2011 20 Day Summons Issuedas to: James Campbell
09/19/2011 Request for Admissionsplaintiff's
09/19/2011 Request for Production/To Produceto def's
09/19/2011 Notice of Serving Interrogatoriesplaintiff's notice
Financial Information
Plaintiff Cirrus Design Corporation Total Financial Assessment 485.00 Total Payments and Credits 485.00 Balance Due as of 10/11/2011 0.00 09/02/2011 Transaction Assessment 485.0009/02/2011 Payment Receipt # 2011-43386 Johnson, Jason Ward (485.00)
 
Last edited:
Steve Foley said:
It should be filed in the state where the debtor is located or incorporated.

I bet it's also attached to the complaint.
Click to expand...

Somewhere in part1 of the rantings, he mentions that there was some uncertainty as to who the plane was actually given to. If there is a way to find out what the official corporate name of ANN is it could be filed under that name.
 
weilke said:
Somewhere in part1 of the rantings, he mentions that there was some uncertainty as to who the plane was actually given to. If there is a way to find out what the official corporate name of ANN is it could be filed under that name.
Click to expand...

Since the lawsuit is against James R Campbell and Kindred Spirit Aviation, LLC, it would be either of those.

It's probably not filed with the Secretary of State, as the FAA filing should suffice. I also don't think the security agreement gets filed, only the notice.

The docket for the lawsuit shows four exhibits. I really wish I was near that courthouse.
 
I've never paid much attention to ANN and knew nothing of JC so reading this was interesting. I started out somewhat sympathetic to his plight, but the longer he prattled on and the libelous he became, those sympathetic feelings faded. Unless he's got some really good provable facts to back all this up, I'd be surprised to not see some legal action based on defamation. Sheesh. Get a grip!
 
I guess another big issue that raises with me is the inter dealings between an obvious vendor and journalist who maintains they are neutral. Me thinks there should be some disclosure for this kind of dealing. Buying someone lunch, etc, is fine. Giving them a plane is quite different. If there was a note in exchange for services with each based on FMV; that's good, but really ties the vendor to the journalist and seems to me to give the vendor quite a bit of power in the relationship.

For those of you in the journalism business, what are your thoughts?

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I guess another big issue that raises with me is the inter dealings between an obvious vendor and journalist who maintains they are neutral. Me thinks there should be some disclosure for this kind of dealing. Buying someone lunch, etc, is fine. Giving them a plane is quite different. If there was a note in exchange for services with each based on FMV; that's good, but really ties the vendor to the journalist and seems to me to give the vendor quite a bit of power in the relationship.

For those of you in the journalism business, what are your thoughts?

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

Good question, but that's more a question of ethics than legality...?
 
zaitcev said:
Look, psychopath or not, it should be easy to answer this: did employees of Cirrus broke into FBO's hangar and disabled ANN's airplane, or did they not. There is a police report, right?

-- Pete
Click to expand...

This is the same man who has filed false police reports in various cities and caught at it, got banned from sun and fun, got caught out by his (then) wife for faking a phony death threat to himself, called my employer accusing me of threatening his life, etc... it goes on and on. He's got a documented case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (pretending to be a doctor and an airline pilot for example), etc .. etc.. He's done more harm to aviation than any of his ventures has ever contributed.

http://www.ousterhout.net/zoom.html
 
zaitcev said:
Look, psychopath or not, it should be easy to answer this: did employees of Cirrus broke into FBO's hangar and disabled ANN's airplane, or did they not. There is a police report, right?

-- Pete
Click to expand...

Did they break in, or were they let in?

Did they disable ANN's airplane, or had it already been repossessed, making it Cirrus' airplane.

If Cirrus has/had a valid security interest in the plane, they can repossess, so long as they do so without a breach of the peace.

Campbell spins a good tale here, but his version is particularly one-sided.
 
Steve Foley said:
Did they break in, or were they let in?

Did they disable ANN's airplane, or had it already been repossessed, making it Cirrus' airplane.

If Cirrus has/had a valid security interest in the plane, they can repossess, so long as they do so without a breach of the peace.
Click to expand...

Does Florida require a 'Notice of lis pendens' to be filed prior to a repossession attempt on a plane, boat or automobile ? It was my (possibly incorrect) understanding that for a portable asset like car or boat, the holder of the security interest has the right to 'self help' without prior notice (or by serving the notice at the time of repossession).
 
flyingron said:
This is the same man who has filed false police reports ...
Click to expand...
I was not interested in smear dossier, just the facts pertaining to this specific case. I've seen even more ridiculous character assasination instances before. The whole point is to get beyond the circle of she said, he said.
 
zaitcev said:
I was not interested in smear dossier, just the facts pertaining to this specific case. I've seen even more ridiculous character assasination instances before. The whole point is to get beyond the circle of she said, he said.
Click to expand...

So far only James Campbell has made statements and claims; couldn't find any statement from Cirrus.
 
Jim Logajan said:
So far only James Campbell has made statements and claims; couldn't find any statement from Cirrus.
Click to expand...

It goes to the old legal adage: "If the law is on your side, argue the law. If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. Otherwise, bang on the table and shout a lot."

Lots of table banging and shouting from 'ol Zoom.

I suspect Cirrus will bring facts and the law into play when/if this reaches the courts.
 
zaitcev said:
I was not interested in smear dossier, just the facts pertaining to this specific case. I've seen even more ridiculous character assasination instances before. The whole point is to get beyond the circle of she said, he said.
Click to expand...

It's not a "smear dossier" It is the truth by one of the innocent victims of Campbells previous legal vendettas. It's entirely relevant. You've got an unstable pathological liar. Those who like Jim, don't know him. Those who went to arbitrate the "unfair" detractors pretty much came around in short order. Anybody remember Tony Pucillo?

All we have hear is "ZOOM SAID."

Frankly, it defies credibility that a company like Cirrus did any of the crap he's complaining about. If they did the police and the feds would be all over them.

As for why Cirrus hasn't said anything. Let us put as the famous lawyer Louis Nizer one did with regard to libel/slander suits. Having someone lie about you often is like having mud splashed on your overcoat. You can vigorously rub at it and end up just smearing it around and making it a difficult to clean up mess. On the other hand, you can let it be for a period of time and it will dry up and flake off leaving little trace.

John, Ron W, and I and others who have suffered at the hands of this psycho aren't going shut up just because some newbie like you thinks you know better than we do.
 
JC is bat-**** crazy.

Last year his dead wife was talking to him from the hereafter.

'Nuff said.
 
denverpilot said:
JC is bat-**** crazy.

Last year his dead wife was talking to him from the hereafter.

'Nuff said.
Click to expand...
How does that make him crazy?

There are whole groups of people who think that some 2000 year old dead guy can hear their thoughts, sometimes talk to them in their heads and still make things in the universe happen. We don't label them crazy.
 
Last edited:
Jim Logajan said:
So far only James Campbell has made statements and claims; couldn't find any statement from Cirrus.
Click to expand...
Pretty standard, sadly. The first thing Campbell ever does in a dispute is threaten to sue. The threatened party then talks to a lawyer, who tells them to not say anything more. So Campbell wins the PR war, just by issuing a threat. His is the only voice publicly heard until it goes to trial, and Campbell's lawsuits almost never go to trial.

The only real exception is the first Sun-N-Fun case, where a SNF rep gave a brief summary of their justification for banning Campbell and some of the history. Since the hearing was just over Campbell's request for an emergency injunction, they didn't get into much detail. The judge dismissed both Campbell's request for an injunction and the suit itself.

Ron Wanttaja
 
ScottM said:
There are whole groups of people who think that some 200 year old dead guy can hear their thoughts, sometimes talk to them in their heads and still make things in the universe happen. We don't label them crazy.
Click to expand...

I do.
 
ScottM said:
How does that make him crazy?

There are whole groups of people who think that some 2000 year old dead guy can hear their thoughts, sometimes talk to them in their heads and still make things in the universe happen. We don't label them crazy.
Click to expand...
kyleb said:
I do.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't see Campbell's claim of talking to the dead as proving him a nutjob. I think it's pure invention, trying to get him some sympathy.

It's like his claiming that he's a target of a Sino-Minnesota terrorist conspiracy. No one can prove it isn't happening. He probably figures he can capitalize on the 10th anniversary of 9/11.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Oh, I don't see Campbell's claim of talking to the dead as proving him a nutjob. I think it's pure invention, trying to get him some sympathy.
Click to expand...
Well, my imaginary girlfriend is pretty awesome too, so I can sympathize.
 
wanttaja said:
The judge dismissed both Campbell's request for an injunction and the suit itself.
Click to expand...
And most amusingly at one point in the proceedings the Judge told Campbell to govern himself accordingly.
 
ScottM said:
How does that make him crazy?

There are whole groups of people who think that some 2000 year old dead guy can hear their thoughts, sometimes talk to them in their heads and still make things in the universe happen. We don't label them crazy.
Click to expand...

A veiled reference to Christ, making this a mean-spirited, unjustified religious slur which has no place on this forum, sir.
 
ScottM said:
There are whole groups of people who think that some 2000 year old dead guy can hear their thoughts, sometimes talk to them in their heads and still make things in the universe happen. We don't label them crazy.
Click to expand...

Hyper-religiosity is in fact, a component of many presentations of schizophrenia and other mental disorders.
 
Ah yes, ZOOM Rises Again...
Perhaps DC Comics is missing out by not publishing his story line...

OK, sarcasm aside... I am not involved in any way with the antics of ZOOM... I don't have an axe to grind with him... And as far as I know I am the only person who was subscribed to his failed magazine that he has not threatened to sue at least once - after stiffing me for my subscription money... Let me recount my one and only meeting with ZOOM...

It is Sun-N-Fun, oh-dark thirty in the morning roughly 20 years ago... I get up really early so I had just had my shower and shave and I am shuffling towards the food vendors row hoping to find some insomniac vendor who has coffee on... Sunrise is just a slight (and I mean slight) lessening of darkness in the East...

As I am passing an exhibitor's booth I hear voices, from which automatically I look towards the sound... There are two men in there lit by a small camping lantern bent over some airplane parts and one takes a flash picture at that moment... I probably slowed down, but my feet kept moving towards the possibility of coffee... The guy with the flash looks up, sees my dim form, leaps over the display table (I mean leaps it like a gazelle which surprised me for one a bit rotund), crouches behind the table and points the camera as though it is a weapon, and fires off a burst of flashes at me... That stops me in my tracks... He remains crouched there with the camera pointed at me like a gun... I raise one hand in a gesture of question, the crouched one neither moves nor makes a sound... The vendor standing to one side looks at him, then looks at me, and finally shrugs his shoulders... This tableau lasted maybe three heartbeats and I lose interest in the schizo-affective with the camera and move on... Later that day I pass the booth again and recognize the vendor there as one of the two that morning... I identify myself and ask who the loose cannon with the camera was... He laughs and says, 'oh, that was zoom'...

So for the skeptics on here who do not understand why the hard opinions of ZOOM on here, you have not watched the docudrama he makes of his life over the past decades, like many of us have...

Now as far as Cirrus - if they entered into ANY business dealings with him they did not do their due diligence... And they will get their just deserts... For Mr. Campbell it is just another chapter in the adventures of ZOOM...

denny-o
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I guess another big issue that raises with me is the inter dealings between an obvious vendor and journalist who maintains they are neutral. Me thinks there should be some disclosure for this kind of dealing. Buying someone lunch, etc, is fine. Giving them a plane is quite different. If there was a note in exchange for services with each based on FMV; that's good, but really ties the vendor to the journalist and seems to me to give the vendor quite a bit of power in the relationship.

For those of you in the journalism business, what are your thoughts?

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...


Journalism no longer exists. It is all Infotainment now. There is no longer a distinction between "News" and "Infomercial".
 
Dr. O said:
Ah yes, ZOOM Rises Again...
Perhaps DC Comics is missing out by not publishing his story line...

OK, sarcasm aside... I am not involved in any way with the antics of ZOOM... I don't have an axe to grind with him... And as far as I know I am the only person who was subscribed to his failed magazine that he has not threatened to sue at least once - after stiffing me for my subscription money... Let me recount my one and only meeting with ZOOM...

It is Sun-N-Fun, oh-dark thirty in the morning roughly 20 years ago... I get up really early so I had just had my shower and shave and I am shuffling towards the food vendors row hoping to find some insomniac vendor who has coffee on... Sunrise is just a slight (and I mean slight) lessening of darkness in the East...

As I am passing an exhibitor's booth I hear voices, from which automatically I look towards the sound... There are two men in there lit by a small camping lantern bent over some airplane parts and one takes a flash picture at that moment... I probably slowed down, but my feet kept moving towards the possibility of coffee... The guy with the flash looks up, sees my dim form, leaps over the display table (I mean leaps it like a gazelle which surprised me for one a bit rotund), crouches behind the table and points the camera as though it is a weapon, and fires off a burst of flashes at me... That stops me in my tracks... He remains crouched there with the camera pointed at me like a gun... I raise one hand in a gesture of question, the crouched one neither moves nor makes a sound... The vendor standing to one side looks at him, then looks at me, and finally shrugs his shoulders... This tableau lasted maybe three heartbeats and I lose interest in the schizo-affective with the camera and move on... Later that day I pass the booth again and recognize the vendor there as one of the two that morning... I identify myself and ask who the loose cannon with the camera was... He laughs and says, 'oh, that was zoom'...

So for the skeptics on here who do not understand why the hard opinions of ZOOM on here, you have not watched the docudrama he makes of his life over the past decades, like many of us have...

Now as far as Cirrus - if they entered into ANY business dealings with him they did not do their due diligence... And they will get their just deserts... For Mr. Campbell it is just another chapter in the adventures of ZOOM...

denny-o
Click to expand...

He is one of the more colorful actors in our GA drama. We have a few, some good some not so good. Jack Riley was one of my favorites.
 
I have been reading ANN for a little while now and wasn’t familiar with the person behind the scene. Only thing I WAS clear about was the writer had a serious axe to grind with the new CEO of Cirrus and a love-affair with Alan Klapmeier and that when the new guy insulted Klapmeier he stood up in his hero’s defense.
 
I ordered a copy of the complaint form the Clay County Court Clerk. I'll scan and post when it arrives by snail mail.
 
Jim Logajan said:
So far as I know, "Captain Zoom" was James R. Campbell's own chosen handle or nickname. Someone else may know why.
Click to expand...

It was the posting moniker he used when he first showed up on the USENET boards. What he wasn't prepared for was that the internet is an interactive thing. Unlike his unchecked drivel he was publishing in USAviation at the time, he was roundly taken to task by respondents in rec.aviation.
 
flyingron said:
It was the posting moniker he used when he first showed up on the USENET boards. What he wasn't prepared for was that the internet is an interactive thing. Unlike his unchecked drivel he was publishing in USAviation at the time, he was roundly taken to task by respondents in rec.aviation.
Click to expand...

Valdemort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top