• Appellants Brief in Arden Van Upp and Sam Sloan vs David Bradlow (2/3)

    From samsloan@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 13 01:32:31 2017
    [continued from previous message]

    By these Notices of Appeals, the undersigned hereby reinstate 13 notices of appeals previously timely filed but never acted upon or heard in this case plus several motions to withdraw the reference and motions to disqualify Judge Carlson previously made.
    The grounds of these appeals include among others that although Arden Van Upp has been debt free since early 2010, Judge Thomas E. Carlson repeatedly refuses to release Arden Van Upp from bankruptcy and has retained jurisdiction over her and over this
    case for the last seven years until today. Although Judge Thomas E. Carlson officially retired several years ago, he insists on retaining jurisdiction over this case. Although Arden Van Upp is entitled to an income tax refund in the amount in excess of $
    110,000 from the IRS based on income tax returns filed by the tax preparer hired by the trustee, the trustee David Bradlow has blocked and refused for four years to cooperate in obtaining the return of these funds to Arden Van Upp, apparently because the
    Trustee wants the money for himself as his fees. The Homestead Exemption that Arden Van Upp was entitled to receive in the amount of $75,000 was exempt funds but nevertheless Arden Van Upp never got the money because the attorneys illegally took the
    money as their fees. Bankruptcy Judge Thomas E. Carlson is guilty of Elder Abuse and Sexual Abuse because the debtor Arden Van Upp is an elderly woman and Judge Carlson dismissed the charges of Elder Abuse made against himself. The Trustee and the
    Bankruptcy Judge illegally sold the Bourn Mansion located at 2550 Webster Street, a historic 28-room mansion, for the ridiculously low amount of $2.79 million when the appraised value was then $8.5 million (it is worth much more now) and then paid almost
    the entire proceeds of $2.79 million to themselves and their attorneys as fees, with the debtor and/or her estate receiving none of this money.
    The debtor Arden Van Upp is a successful real estate investor far more qualified than the trustee, his attorneys or the bankruptcy judge. Due to her financial acumen, the debtor Arden Van Upp had assembled a financial real estate empire through her own
    talents and abilities and had a net worth in excess of $9 million dollars. She had the funds in hand to refinance all of her own buildings by September 2009 and accordingly made a motion to dismiss her own Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition. Instead, the
    Bankruptcy Judge violated the debtor's legal and constitutional rights to dismiss her own voluntary bankruptcy petition and denied several motions made then and since that time to dismiss her own petition thereby making the debtor essentially a financial
    prisoner subject to his control of Bankruptcy Judge Thomas E. Carlson even to this day, eight years later.
    Bankruptcy Judge Thomas E. Carlson issued an order to Sam Sloan “which required him to remove certain libelous statements from various internet sites” that the judge considered derogatory with reference to the Trustee and to the Judge himself,
    although Sam Sloan had no power to remove these statements from the Internet as most of the websites were owned by Google and none of them were owned by Sam Sloan. Judge Carlson then ordered the amount of $127,000 paid to the Trustee and his attorneys
    from the Estate of Arden Van Upp for “legal work” done to obtain a default judgment against Sam Sloan, although no legal work was done.
    Judge Carlson ordered $250,000 paid to the Trustee and $1.5 million dollars paid to Counsel for the Trustee, all from the funds belonging to Arden Van Upp, although the trustee and his attorneys did no work that benefited the debtor or her estate.
    Neither Sam Sloan nor Arden Van Upp were personally served with any of these motions or orders.
    Judge Carlson states that Sam Sloan was served in Document #264 at 2550 Webster Street. However, Document #264 was filed by Iain MacDonald, not by the trustee or his attorney. Both Arden Van Upp and Sam Sloan had been evicted from 2550 Webster Street by
    the Trustee by the time of Document #264 as the judge was well aware and had never received them. Then Judge Carlson states that Sam Sloan was served by simple first class mail at an address in the unrelated litigation in Texas in which Sam Sloan was a
    defendant, in the suit brought by Susan Polgar against the United States Chess Federation in her unsuccessful takeover attempt where Sam Sloan was a member of that board of directors. Apparently Judge Carlson does not realize that service by first class
    mail especially out of state is not valid legal process.
    The document allegedly served states that the complaint is attached but no complaint was attached and Sam Sloan has never received nor seen the complaint since it has been sealed. Bankruptcy Judge Carlson and the Trustee and his attorneys threatened
    Arden Van Upp that if she objected too strongly to all of this he would convert this case to Chapter 7 and sell her two remaining buildings located at 2807 & 2809 Steiner Street and at 1019 Ashbury Street that had a combined appraised value of $6 million
    and pay the entire $6 million to themselves as fees. They had a motion pending to do exactly this, Docket #533, when Judge Carlson finally conditionally dismissed this bankruptcy.
    Substantially because of all these improper if not illegal acts by Bankruptcy Judge Carlson and the Trustee and his attorneys, although Arden Van Upp had a net worth of nine million dollars when she filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in July
    2009, she is now left with nothing, zero, and is destitute. In all or almost all of the events enumerated above, Bankruptcy Judge Thomas E. Carlson far exceed the jurisdiction of a Bankruptcy Judge as set forth and explained by the United States Supreme
    Court in Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011) and thus all of this is null and void as without jurisdiction and her house at 2550 Webster Street and her money must be returned to her.
    Arden Van Upp never agreed and would never agree to any aspect of the so-called settlement of this case. Her residence located at 2550 Webster Street, the Bourn Mansion, was stolen from her. The house had an appraised value of $8.5 million. She had on
    hand the money needed to refinance the mortgage to the houses. Saxe Mortgage Company, the previous lender, had agreed to refinance the properties and accordingly her attorney had filed a motion to dismiss this case. This all happened in 2009 just a few
    weeks after she had filed this Chapter 11 Bankruptcy case.
    Instead, the trustee and his attorneys wanted to steal her money so they sold the house for the ridiculously low amount of $2.79 million or $6 million less than what it was worth.
    She filed a notice of appeal and has filed a notices of appeal from virtually every order entered in this case. Altogether 13 notices of appeal were filed. None of her notices of appeal have ever been heard. The bankruptcy judge simply ignored them and
    proceeded as though nothing had been filed.
    She also filed numerous motions to disqualify and remove Judge Thomas E. Carlson from this case. Under California Law, she had the right to remove one judge from a case and she has attempted to exercise this right many times. Judge Carlson ignored her
    motions to remove him and just proceeded as though nothing had been filed.
    She made motions to withdraw the reference so as to put this case under the jurisdiction of a district court judge. These motions were also ignored by Judge Carlson.
    The sale of her personal residence at 2550 Webster Street was completely illegal. No auction was held. No newspaper notices were made or published of the impending sale. If an public auction had been held, the same would have drawn at least the appraised
    value of $8.5 million and probably much higher.
    The so-called settlement also settles claims of “Elder Abuse” made in her behalf. Obviously, she could never agree to “settle” that claim.
    She understands that under the famous Marshall Case, a Bankruptcy Judge is essentially a magistrate and has no jurisdiction to do anything more than make routine rulings of the sort made in a normal bankruptcy case. There is nothing routine about this
    case. Thus the bankruptcy judge had NO JURISDICTION to do any of the things he did.
    The bankruptcy judge authorized a suit against her friend Sam Sloan and authorized the payment of $125,000 in legal fees to the attorney for the trustee to sue Sam Sloan. This money was taken out of her estate from the proceeds of the sale of 2550
    Webster Street. This is ridiculous. Why should she be forced to pay $125,000 to bring a suit against her friend of many years who is trying to help her?
    Two of her former attorneys objected to the payment of these outrageous fees but their objections were sealed by Judge Carlson. She is demanding a full reimbursement of the $125,000 paid to the crooked attorney for the trustee.
    She is also being held liable for the damage to the house caused by Jeffrey Petrizze. In no way is she responsible for that. Jeffrey Petrizze was given the keys to the house by Osama “Sam” bin Friej, the real estate agent hired by the trustee. Arden
    Van Upp had Jeffrey Petrizze arrested many times and took out orders of protection against him.
    Recently, Jeffrey Petrizze got out of jail or mental hospital and once again he has been seen perched on the top of 2550 Webster Street like “the fool on the hill”. She is in no way responsible for that.
    The house located at 2550 Webster Street has remained unoccupied ever since it was resold by Judge Carlson in 2010. Nobody is living there. She is demanding the restoration of the house at 2550 Webster Street as her personal property. She is also
    demanding reimbursement of all fees including attorneys fees and trustees fees paid to the trustee and his attorney.
    Since the entire amount of $2.79 million was paid as attorneys and trustees fees and none of it was paid to her, she is demanding all of it back.
    She was told that if she did not agree to the so-called settlement of September 24, 2012, then the trustee would convert this case to Chapter 7 and sell her two remaining properties located at 2807 and 2809 Steiner Street and at 1019 Ashbury Street and
    take the entire amount of $6 million which would be the proceeds from the sale of the two remaining buildings and pay it to themselves as fees. This was extortion on their part for which they should be disbarred.
    The appointment of a trustee was illegal and wrong. A trustee is to be appointed only if the debtor is doing something wrong. She was doing nothing wrong.
    She was previously in bankruptcy from 1992 to 2000 and a trustee was never appointed. She got back into bankruptcy after her previous bankruptcy had been dismissed in 2000 because the City of San Francisco got a default judgment against her in the amount
    of $950,000 (nearly one million dollars) for failure to earthquake retrofit her house on time. Because of this default judgment, she could not get refinancing on her house because her house was not worth that much in excess of the mortgage. However, once
    that default judgment was lifted, she was able to refinance her properties without difficulty.
    However, once a trustee was appointed she could not refinance her house without his permission and he was unwilling to give that permission because he wanted to sell her house and get the money for himself and for his attorneys.
    At that time her assets were $13 million and her liabilities were $4 million so her net worth was $9 million. The trustee saw an opportunity to take the whole $9 million for himself and did so.
    The Bourn Mansion is a 28 room mansion that has been designated as a historical landmark. There is a book written about it: “Last Bonanza Kings: The Bourns of San Francisco” by Ferol Egan ISBN 0874177863. To sell it for the paltry sum of $2.79
    million is ridiculous. On 20 September 2009, the SF Examiner called the sale “a steal”.
    Judge Carlson was corrupt and unfair. He wanted to sell her house at Christmas time. The bidders wanted him to wait until after Christmas but he insisted on selling it quickly before Christmas.
    Judge Carlson was horrible, terrible. People think the bankruptcy courts are there to help them. Instead, as she tells everybody, the bankruptcy courts are there to help themselves to your money.
    When she went to her house after the sale, the police were there and they would not even allow her to go in to get her toothbrush. They threatened her that if she made any objection to the so-called settlement they would take away her two remaining
    properties. However, they cannot threaten her like that any more because her two remaining properties are now gone. All she has left is a shopping cart they gave her to push down the street.
    Samuel H. Sloan moves to vacate the default judgment entered against him in this case as Bradlow vs. Sloan, Adv. Pro. No. 10-3040, which labeled him as a “vexatious litigant” and authorized the use of the debtors funds to file suit against him, on
    the grounds there was no service of the summons and complaint, or of the judgment or any other papers and pleadings in this case and he has never been notified and still cannot find out what this case is all about. It is unfair and prejudicial and
    harmful to him to call him a vexatious litigant with no reason and without giving him an opportunity to defend myself and to file a counterclaim if so advised. The statement that he is a “vexatious litigant” shows up in his credit reports and makes
    it difficult or impossible to find a suitable place for him and his family to live.
    Sam Sloan has a legitimate interest in this case because he has been a long time resident of 2550 Webster Street and he hired and paid Iain MacDonald $15,000 or $20,000 to appear in this case. See Document #125
    He is also moving to unseal all the PACER files to this case and to vacate the order that required Google to remove all references to this case from the Internet. He knows about that order even though it does not appear in the court record because Google
    notified him apologetically that it was required by court order to remove his Blog, the Sam Sloan Blog, from Google.
    He sees that several files that were previously on PACER are no longer there or are not available. If one tries to read these documents it says, “This document is not available.” This makes it difficult if not impossible to find out what really
    happened in this case, so these files must be restored.
    The debtor and her attorneys and advisers filed 13 notices of appeal in this case. The sealing or removal of these files makes it difficult if not impossible for any appellate judge or judges to review this case and see what happened.
    The trustee David Bradlow and his attorneys Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP have claimed and have received more than $125,000 (one hundred twenty five thousand dollars) in attorneys and trustees fees in this case Bradlow vs. Sloan alone and have received
    total fees in the amount of well over one million dollars in fees. They have paid themselves this money from the proceeds of the sale of residence of the debtor where she resided located at 2550 Webster Street, San Francisco California, that was sold
    without jurisdiction for $2.79 million whereas the appraised value was $8.5 million.
    That entire $2.79 million was gobbled up by the Trustee and his attorneys as fees. The debtor received none of these funds. The winning bidders were Gregory and Gloria McCandless who just happened to be in the court room on that day on another matter.
    The Bourn Mansion, 2550 Webster Street
    When it later developed that they did not have the money and could not afford to pay $2.79 million, the bankruptcy judge just ordered the Bourn Mansion to be sold to somebody else for same amount without holding another courtroom auction. All this was
    illegal and improper.
    That sale was illegal null and void as in violation of the principles set forth in the United States Supreme Court decisions of Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S.Ct. 2594 (2011) and Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Bellingham, Chapter 7
    Trustee of Estate of Bellingham Insurance Agency, Inc., ___ U.S. ___, No. 12-1200 (June 9, 2014). Arden is moving for a reimbursement to the debtor of the house and all trustees and attorneys fees in this case.
    This should have been a relatively simple Chapter 11 Reorganization that could and should have been wound up in three weeks especially since there was a qualified lender Saxe Mortgage Company ready to loan her the funds necessary to refinance who had
    also previously financed her properties and who later did again refinance her properties.
    Instead, the Trustee and his attorneys wanted to earn big bucks by selling her properties, earning commissions and legal fees, and caused this case to drag on for four years with the last court filing Filed & Entered: 08/02/2013 with 552 docket entries
    on PACER with the attorneys paying themselves over a million dollars in legal fees and the trustee taking a quarter of a million in trustees fees.
    The three Van Upp properties, 2550 Webster Street, 2807-2809 Steiner Street and 1019 Ashbury Street, were all bundled together into one mortgage. Thus they could not be divided. Instead the trustee sold the building on Webster Street and Saxe Mortgage
    Company refinanced the other two buildings the very next day. Saxe Mortgage Company provided enough money to refinance all three buildings, but the trustee would not allow it. The sale of the one building and not allowing the largest building to be
    refinanced was criminal theft for which the trustee and his attorneys should be prosecuted, especially since the kept all the money as “fees”. The sale must be reversed and the money returned.
    In looking through the case file on PACER she cannot see any evidence of any legal work being done by counsel for the trustee in this entire case. There are no legal briefs, memorandums of law, case citations, affidavits, declarations, findings of fact
    and conclusions of law found anywhere in this case. There is no evidence of legal work of any kind in the Bradlow vs. Sloan aspect of this case nor in the Arden Van Upp Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Therefore she is demanding full reimbursement of all legal
    fees paid in this case, which amount to more than one million dollars.
    The attorneys for the Trustee stated they were entitled to be paid $125,000 for their “legal work” in removing information about this case from the Internet. They did no legal work. It was clearly illegal and indeed unconstitutional to remove
    information about this case from the Internet. Remarks were made about this case in which there was widespread public interest in which postings were negative about the Trustees, the attorneys for the trustee and about the Bankruptcy judge.
    Since the Bankruptcy judge has since retired there is nobody around who remembers what really happened in this case, so these files and internet postings must be restored.
    She is aware that the Bankruptcy judge entered an order prohibiting the debtor from filing a bankruptcy case for five years and that five years has not expired. However, she needs to explain that the debtor is suffering from a case of senile dementia.
    Her mind was not clear. She has been unable to recognize who her real friends are. She had allowed two fraudster persons to take over her affairs. They are Linda Catron and Mike Ragland, whom we call “Motorcycle Mike”, to distinguish him from other
    persons named Mike. Arden Van Upp defended them both and said they were just wonderful.
    The Bankruptcy judge entered an order that if the Debtor should sue the Trustee or his attorneys or file for another Bankruptcy again within five years, this case could be reopened and the Trustee could go after and sell her two remain properties and
    take them as fees as they have done for the 2550 Webster Street property.
    That order is now moot because the two remaining properties of the debtor Arden Van Upp were sold at public auction on the steps of San Francisco City Hall on August 2, 2016. As the winning bid of more than six million dollars was exactly one penny more
    than the amount of the mortgage, the net proceeds of this sale was exactly one penny, so the debtor is now penniless as she does not have two cents to rub together.
    The winning bid was $6,061,164.41 and the mortgage plus fees was $6,061,164.40 or one penny less.
    Because of the activities of Linda Catron and Motorcycle Mike, the debtor Arden Van Upp has lost her two remaining buildings, the building at 2807-2809 Steiner Street and the building at 1019 Ashbury Street. These were sold at public auction on the steps
    of city hall on August 2, 2016 for one cent more than the mortgage lien against the houses. Thus, the total proceeds Arden Van Upp will receive from this sale of her two remaining buildings will be one cent.
    This happened because of the activities of Linda Catron and Motorcycle Mike. They were fighting each other like two vultures circling over a dying animal.
    Arden Van Upp had received a written offer from a qualified buyer to pay $6,600,000 (six million six hundred thousand dollars) which was above and over the mortgage lien of six million. She accepted that offer but when Linda Catron filed a Chapter 13
    Bankruptcy Petition supposedly in Arden's behalf on July 1, 2016, Case No. 16-30742, this effectively rendered void the offer to buy the Van Upp properties for $6,600,000.
    The party that made the offer to buy for $6,600,000 is the same party who submitted the winning bid of $6,061,164.41. Thus the winning bidder paid $539,000 less than he had offered to pay.
    Due to being senile, Arden Van Upp still did not fully realize that she lost $539,000 because of her “friend” Linda Catron. Indeed, only two days later when she was in the residence, she heard Linda Catron say to her “Joe is working with lawyers in
    L.A. who will reverse the whole thing.”
    Sam Sloan was living in Bronx, New York but as Arden is an old friend since 1966, when he heard about these events he flew out from New York City arriving in the early morning of July 28, 2016, in time for the hearing before Judge Montali on that day. He
    was present in the courtroom when Arden Van Upp read a script that he had seen Linda Catron write out for her to read. He heard Arden say that she has a lawyer in L.A. named Jeremy Faith. Arden does not know Jeremy Faith but Linda told her to say this.
    Sloan was present in court when Judge Montali dismissed this latest bankruptcy case.
    Since then, Linda Catron has filed in the name of Arden Van Upp a case in San Francisco Superior Court entitled Arden Van Upp vs. Northern California Mortgage, 16-553424. Linda Catron has filed six motions for a Temporary Restraining Order in that case.
    Arden gave Linda Catron a check for $2300 for “lawyer fees” for this case. Linda Catron is not a lawyer.
    These motions for a temporary restraining order asked that the foreclosure auction be stayed and enjoined even though Linda Catron is well aware the foreclosure auction had already taken place and took place on August 2, 2016 before this case was even
    Linda Catron has taken a check from Arden Van Upp in the amount $2300 for “legal fees” to be paid to Joe Khan or Kahn who is not a lawyer. Joe Kahn is a man from Pakistan or India who lives in Calistoga California. He has a Russian wife and is said
    to be involved in intervening in a lot of bankruptcy cases in Los Angeles. Linda Catron is a known fraudster whose modus operandi is to offer to borrow money as a “bridge loan” on a short term basis such as one month or 90 days at an outrageously high and usurious rates of interest. She claims she needs this bridge loan
    because she is about to receive through a man in South Dakota $50 million dollars from a man from Nigeria and she need this bridge loan to tide herself over until the money arrives from Nigeria.
    Then when Linda Catron does not repay the loan, she claims she does not have to pay because the rate of interest was usurious.
    There are two judgments for civil fraud against Linda Catron for doing this, yet she continues to try to borrow money. She even tried to borrow money from Sam Sloan, asking him to loan her $10,000 and offering to pay him 120% or $1,000 per month as
    Linda Catron also borrows money from legitimate lenders, does not repay them, and then sues them in San Francisco Superior Court claiming she was tricked into taking the loans. Linda Catron has filed at least three civil cases like this in the last few
    months and about 40 cases like this over a period of the last several years. Linda Catron recently filed for bankruptcy in this court attempting to get out of the two civil court judgments for over two million dollars in state court. Her recent bankruptcy case has been dismissed. Case No. 14-30175
    Two of the civil judgments against Linda Catron for fraud are Noel Weeks v. Linda Catron, Case No. CGC-11-516849 in which she has a non-dischargable judgment in the amount of 1.4 Million and Yin Falk v. Linda S. Catron, et al. No. CGC-09-486921, in which
    the judgment against her is $1.09 Million dollars.
    Linda Catron has been forging the signature of Arden Van upp in legal documents she has been filing. Sam Sloan knows the signature of Arden Van Upp well as he has known her since 1966 and lived with her for more than ten years. That is definitely not the
    signature of Arden Van Upp.
    Proof that Linda Catron is the forger who filed is the signature on a certificate of service. That is the name and address and signature of Linda Catron on 2614 Sacramento Street, San Francisco CA 94115. Linda Catron has filed similar nearly identical
    cases in her own behalf as well. An example is Linda Sue Catron vs. Specialized Lending Services et all, CGC-16-551351, filed April 6, 2016. All of these documents are believed to have been prepared by Joe Khan or Kahn who is not a lawyer.
    Linda Catron has forged the name of Arden Van Upp on other documents as well. There was a tenant at 2807 Steiner Street Apartment 2 upstairs named Jeffrey Quayle. One year ago, Jeffrey Quayle was evicted from his mother's house located one block away at
    the NE corner of Broadway and Steiner Street. After Jeffrey Quayle was evicted from his mother's million dollar home, Arden Van Upp took pity on him and let him stay in her apartment 2 on a temporary basis. However, his time was up and he refused to move
    out. He produced what he claims to be a 6 year lease signed by Arden at a rent of $500 per month.
    That apartment normally rents for $3,000 per month. Now Jeffrey Quayle has produced this supposed lease for $500 per month but it contains the name and endorsement of Linda Catron, so this is obviously another Linda Catron forgery.
    Jeffrey Quayle had given Linda Catron a key to the front door to Arden's residence at 2807 Steiner Street, so Linda could enter Arden's building without the permission of Arden. All this was happening because Arden Van Upp is senile now. This also
    explains the Chapter 13 filing in the name of Arden Van Upp on July 1, 2016. When her mind was clear Arden well knew that she was not allowed to file another bankruptcy for five years and she knew the terrible things that happened to her the last time
    she filed.
    Arden Van Upp had been trying to evict Jeffrey Quayle for more than six months especially because Jeffrey Quayle has been going around telling everybody that Arden Van Upp is a drug addict and she has been having sex with Mike Ragland (“Motorcycle Mike
    ) and Ted Carroll because they have been bringing her drugs.
    Now Arden Van Upp has been left destitute and without funds and her daughter Tammy Van Upp has been left without inheritance. We hope this has earned Linda Catron a stiff prison sentence. The upside is Arden Van Upp has the opportunity to get exercise
    every day by pushing a shopping cart down the street and she does not have to worry about being sued.
    Unlike most wealthy women, Arden Van Upp never married a rich man. She made her money herself through real estate investments. Nobody helped her except Sam Sloan helped a little.
    Arden followed the example of her mother, Doris Loy Rich, who made more than one and a half million dollars through real estate investments (back when that was real money). However, Doris Rich had all that taken away from her when she was more than 90
    years old by corrupt court appointed conservators and she died penniless.
    Arden Van Upp bought her first property which was at 1019 Ashbury Street in November 1967. Sam Sloan was with her when she purchased that building. She had asked Sloan for advice on whether she should buy that building or not. George Rowan was the real
    estate agent.
    In 1973, George Rowan found another building suitable for her. That was the Bourn Mansion at 2550 Webster Street. However, prior to the closing when she bought that building, Arden was attracted to a young doctor named Dr. Laurence Badgey. She decided to
    let in Dr. Badgley as a partner in the deal, although she did not need a partner. Dr. Badgley apparently made a down payment of as much as $25,000 but never paid any more money after that.
    Dr. Badgley filed suit against Arden Van Upp in 1976. Each wanted to buy the other out. The case went on for 25 years. It was the longest running active case in San Francisco history. Both Dr. Badgley and Arden Van Upp went into bankruptcy. Bankruptcy
    Judge Dennis Montali tried the case and ruled substantially in favor of Arden Van Upp. Dr. Badgley appealed but without success.
    That bankruptcy case of Arden Van Upp was filed on June 18, 1992 and ended on August 25, 2000. Case No. 92-32965. Although Arden prevailed, she had to pay one million dollars to Dr. Badgley to buy out his half of the house and she had to pay her lawyers
    Nossaman Guthner Knox & Elliott one million dollars to represent her in the litigation. Arden's mother Doris Rich paid a retainer check to Nossaman, Gunther, Knox and Elliott in the amount of $125,000, but the Nossaman firm lost the check so Arden had to
    provide another check for that amount.
    Although Arden had prevailed and had come out of bankruptcy, she was left with debt of more than two million dollars, so she took out a mortgage secured by the three properties she owned.
    One year before coming out of bankruptcy, Arden was sued by the City of San Francisco for failure to earthquake retrofit her house on time. Arden felt she should not be required to earthquake retrofit her house because the house had been built in 1896
    and had survived all the earthquakes without difficulty plus it was built on solid rock on the pinnacle of Pacific Heights. Also, Arden did not have the money being in bankruptcy.
    When Arden failed to respond to the lawsuit, the City of San Francisco took a default judgment. As the years passed, this default judgment increased because of late charges and attorneys fees until it reached more than nine hundred fifty thousand dollars,
    nearly one million dollars by 2008.
    Sam Sloan was staying in Apartment 2 in Arden's building at 2807 Steiner Street. He was shocked when just then on July 10, 2009 Arden filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy with Mitchell Hadler as her new attorney. The Chapter 11 filing showed that Arden Van
    Upp had assets of $13 million dollars and liabilities of only $4 million for a net worth of $9 million dollars. See document 47 in the PACER file.

    [continued in next message]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)