Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Correction On Facts

*** UPDATE *** COURT OF APPEALS REPUBLISHED THE DECISION TO CORRECT OUR FACTUAL CORRECTIONS BELOW!  click here for link

After reading the Appeals decision, while we are thrilled that we beat all odds and got the decision overturned, one thing that really stood out to myself and Casey was where the court wrote that I never responded to any settlement offers, and that my conduct in the trial rose to the level of a $100,000 fee award.  Here's some reasons why:
  1. Judge Juhas made a determination that our settlement offer was reasonable, whereas Marci's was "totally unreasonable".  That is not conducive to settlement when your settlement offer is 5x over what the court found. 
  2. Marci filed a divorce suit in Canada, seeking property division and support, and soon after being turned away for support in Los Angeles, she went to Canada.  This is commonly known as "forum shopping", and the Canadian court sanctioned her for this action.
  3. Barbara Hammers, according to sworn testimony, told a witness that her settlement strategy was to "ask for the moon".  This pressures the other party into an unfair settlement, and is confrontational.  Hammers then told the witness if "Gary wanted to do that, the cost would be prohibitive, because 'the person with the most money pays all the fees in a divorce."
  4. Marci claimed an ownership interest in my invention, "The Lightsphere" because years before the Lightsphere was invented, I fashioned tissues into the shape of a Coleman Lantern, and that was the basis for a multimillion-dollar settlement.
  5. Marci sought "permanent spousal support" of $10,000 a month, after we were divorced, and despite the fact that she left a well-paying ($60,000 a year) job to move to Seattle to live with a man she had met on the internet.
  6. Marci Kington's expert witness Donald J. Miod testified in court that his analysis for the domain name garyfong.com was $1.8 million dollars, because we were one of the pioneers of website traffic. (The judge ruled Miod's opinion was "flawed in many respects" and ruled that the website was worth less than $5,000)
  7. I believe the testimony from Pictage's counsel Josh Baker, of O'Melveny & Myers, speaks for itself regarding the conduct of Marci (who was represented at the time by Barbara K. Hammers) in a motion to compel a witness.
  8. Attorney Barbara K. Hammers and Armine Baltazar filed and argued in court that I should be thrown in jail in contempt for an order that I had paid in full for attorney's fees.  That hearing was thrown out in minutes.
  9. Attorney Barbara K. Hammers contacted one of my deposition witnesses to "warn" him that he was being subpoena'd for a deposition should he "plan to try to avoid it".
Those eight instances are expanded to further detail below.


No comments:

Post a Comment