InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 236
Posts 4480
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/29/2016

Re: None

Thursday, 12/07/2023 4:28:38 PM

Thursday, December 07, 2023 4:28:38 PM

Post# of 63447
BYOC has now filed a lawsuit against the Jean and here Attorney. Gee it only took them years to bring suit against here and just pay the fee for doing so. Any coming that files a lawsuit against an individual has to pay a fee, don't remember how much but it's definitely worth it. BYOC screwed up on not having certain important documents like exhibit 296 due to missing the window for discovery. This one exhibit would have most likely shown the fraud by Jean.


Plaintiff’s lead counsel, Warner Law, was surprised to receive service of the
attached summons and complaint on November 20, a new lawsuit brought by
Beyond Commerce, Inc. against both George Warner’s law firm, Warner Law, LLC
and Jean Mork Bredeson, the plaintiff in this case (the new complaint is dated the
same day (Nov. 17) as our status conference with the Court about rescheduling
trial). The new complaint purports to state claims for “conversion by wrongful
levy,” “trespass by wrongful levy,” “civil theft,” “receiving stolen property,” and
unjust enrichment.
These claims arise in the context of Plaintiff’s attempts to collect on the judgment
for $2,464,496 issued by Your Honor in this case against BYOC on June 14, 2023.
BYOC counsel had objected to Plaintiff’s collection efforts in emails and we
suggested that they cite their legal authority for claiming Plaintiff’s efforts were
unjustified and/or that they bring their objections before Your Honor but,
obviously, they decided on a different tactic.
While this latest maneuver by BYOC and its lawyers may or may not form the
basis of Rule 11 sanctionable conduct, a violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3
(Candor Toward the Tribunal), or other guardrails to curtail over-zealous,
vexatious, and unreasonable attorney misconduct, this certainly complicates this
case and, in particular, rescheduling trial. Thus, we wanted to make the Court
aware of this development.
January trial dates now seem infeasible, regardless of the schedules of the parties,
counsel, and witnesses. We will update the Court as we evaluate the ramifications
of this latest development and decide how we need to proceed with respect to the
later trial dates proposed by the Court on November 17 (i.e., 3/11-3/29).
December 1, 2023
27-CV-20-3476
Thank you,
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
12/1/2023 4:51 PM
Seth Leventhal