Powers v. Puka – Plaintiff’s Statement Of Discoverable Information (PSDI) – Part 1

by | Sep 28, 2023 | Family Disputes

Powers v. Puka - plaintiffs statement of discoverable information

Link to the written Timeline Of Events in the Powers v. Puka lawsuit.

Below is a Visual Timeline Of Events.

Previous relevant communications.

Settlement Offer To Marjorie Puka, Janette Golay, and Charmelle Puka

  1. Restore promises, good faith, and friendly relations
    1. Restore the promise of the 612 property amendment and/or entire irrevocable trust or verify that Denise Powers is receiving her fair one-third of her inheritance.
    2. Pay Joseph and Lucinda a family discounted rate of $1,500 monthly. 
    3. Admit & agree that we all made mistakes, do what’s right & fair, and let’s move forward.
      A mutual mistake occurs when the parties to a contract are both mistaken about the same material fact within their contract. They are at cross-purposes. There is a meeting of the minds, but the parties are mistaken. Hence the contract is voidable.
  2. OR — We aim for — FULL JUSTICE
    1. Avoid God’s grace
    2. Be judged by sinful men in secular courts of justice

Your non-response will indicate your refusal to have a meeting of the minds and will cause a lawsuit aiming to strike the clause – in the Petition to Approve Settlement to terminate and dissolve the Marge Puka Irrevocable Trust (drafted by David Taylor – Trust Protector) and The Puka Private Annuity Trust – via breach of contract due to fraud, duress, misrepresentation, unconscionable (procedurally & substantively), undue influence (recent family death), unfair surprise, lack of notice, lack of meeting of the Minds, et al.

How To Measure Unconscionable

Interrogatory question. 

  1. Would you have accepted the offer that we accepted? 
  2. Explain why you would or would not have voluntarily cut yourself out of your own $1,000,000 inheritance.

Powers v. Puka – Plaintiffs Statement Of Discoverable Information (PSDI) – Part 1

Since Joseph Powers and Lucinda Nevarez are not legally married and common law marriage does not exist in Idaho, in order to dissolve the trust and/or void the lifetime 612 property tenant contract with the trust, the trustee was also required to receive a signature from Lucinda Nevarez, who is also a party to the 612 property lifetime lease contract, authorizing consent to break a valid contract.

Existence of a Valid Contract

  1. An offer
  2. Acceptance of the terms by both parties
  3. Consideration (i.e., a bargained-for exchange of promises)
  4. A meeting of the minds as to the material terms
  5. Execution and delivery of the contract

In addition to breach of contract, we will also be pursuing a claim for tortious interference with a contract, plus maximum punitive damages. 

We believe the evidence will show, without a shadow of a doubt, that there was clear and intentional extreme undue interference with the contract offered to Joseph Powers and Lucinda Nevarez, on behalf of the trust.

11Dec23 Grantor trespassed on the plaintiff’s property and requested entry that was unannounced and without invitation after a recent family death three days earlier and fraudulently misrepresented to one of the two required parties to sign a unilaterally altered contract with lack of notice containing an unconscionable clause for an unnecessary written contract for a simple oral agreement for property transfer that breached settlement contract that parties made on 28Nov23 via audio recording.

An audio recording of Marjorie Puka, Kevin Powers, and Joseph Powers clearly documents a meeting of the minds for the purchase of the 612 property for $250,000.00.

Circumstantial evidence indicates that even though Janette was entitled to a fair one-third of her share of the inheritance, she was still not happy.

Janette apparently believes that she is the only one not benefiting from the trust, even after Puka, Charmelle, Denise, Kevin, et al, branded Janette as a predator. Marjorie’s husband Tom had allegedly disapproved of how Janette’s husband – Kelly Golay – managed his finances and wanted to protect Janette’s inheritance from Kelly.

In order to protect Janette’s one-third of her inheritance from potential financial mismanagement by Kelly, Puka’s entire legal team fortified the trust agreement that prevents a predator from preying on a living elder’s finances, and a financially intemperate husband.

The somewhat twisted logic that Joseph was pressured to agree to, allowed his sister Andrea to get relief and reunite with her grandmother Puka, before Andrea’s death nine (9) days later.

Joseph and Puka did not have a meeting of the minds to dissolve an agreement that gave Joseph back the house, after Puka’s death.

Joseph and Puka had a meeting of the minds and agreed to transfer property for $250,000.00, to settle a dispute, provoked by Janette & Charmelle, that kept Puka from spending time with her granddaughter on her deathbed – plus time with living family, now.

Then three days after family member Andrea’s death, Puka misrepresents a contract that dissolves an irrevocable trust that gives Denise Powers the 612 property, as part of Denise’s one-third inheritance, which was then agreed upon to be gifted to Joseph Powers.

Allegedly, a new trust was created that cuts Denise completely out of her fair one-third inheritance and also removes the 612 property distribution, after Puka’s death.

Puka, Kevin, and Joseph originally made the property purchase deal with Puka to end the dispute with the intention of giving Andrea special grandma Puka time together, before her death.

The dispute resolution was originally intended to reconcile the family.

  • Marge Puka used Andrea as a bargaining tool.
  • Between September 1 to November 28th, Marjorie Puka never visited Andrea on her death bed.

Joseph agreeing to buy the 612 property was not meant to open the door to more deceit and further family divide.

Who’s idea was it to dissolve the trust, cut Denise out, and cut Joseph out?

Without too much logical inference, it’s hard to imagine Marjorie Puka originating this idea on her own merit and free will.

After reviewing all of the circumstantial evidence available, without using court powers, it’s reasonable to come to the conclusion that Janette (and possibly Kelly) came up with this idea to interfere with Joseph and Lucinda’s contract that allowed Joseph and Lucinda to occupy the 612 property until Margorie’s death.

Once Janette Golay and Charmelle Puka seized control of the trust (as co-trustees), tricked parties into signing a bad faith deal, and wrote Denise completely out of the will; they attempted to convince the family that Denise has mental problems that requires professional help.

Despite Joseph’s readiness to put an end to the family disputes; Charmelle, Janette, and Marjorie decided to take advantage of a sensitive situation by claiming Denise is the one with mental problems.

I can tolerate quite a bit of humbug, however, I do not have the patience to handle continual escalations of deception and trickery in perpetuity.

  1. Fool me out of a house that you gave me, fine (I have my own full life to live).
  2. Project your own mentally ill behaviors onto others, not ok.

Puka, Janette, and Charmelle claiming Denise is ill while asserting they’re healthy, is asinine.

Y’all know that y’all provoked Denise’s warrior capabilities when you put her in charge as trustee, and then told the entire trust team that Janette Golay and Kelly Golay are predators who will cause problems.

Exactly what happened, is that Janette caused problems and Denise attempted to stop a predator from preying.

At the time of this writing, I have still reserved my final judgment until I personally examine all of the admissible evidence for myself, firsthand.

Since Marjorie, Janette, and Charmelle refuse to respond to any of my reasonable legal inquiries, questions, and rebukes, the only foreseeable answer to exposing the truth is by using court powers.

Ideally; Marjorie, Janette, and Charmelle will come to Christ and expose the truth voluntarily before we decide to have a court reveal more of the truth than we require/desire for peace of mind.

I can typically communicate with any communication, however, I can not communicate with no communication.

Silence is the death of relationships and families.

The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.

I currently do not see any other form of cold indifference, as the silent treatment that I did not do anything to deserve.

The radical shunning from multiple members of my family without the common courtesy of a direct or indirect rebuke is not kind or Christ-like, in my humble opinion.

Before Joseph or Lucinda knew that Marjorie, Janette, or Charmelle had a problem with us, they had already spoken to a lawyer and had demand letters in the mail on their way toward unilateral enforcement, with no meeting of the minds.

In fact, the meeting of the mind was actively rejected and refused by Marjorie, Janette, Charmelle, and entire trust team – as documented in the audio recording linked to below between Joseph and Janette – and more.

And tacit agreement from demand verification letters from two lawyers.

After reviewing the audio recording of Janette Golay and Joseph Powers, it’s apparent that no meeting of the minds occurred before their unilateral decisions and actions against Joseph and Lucinda.

Janette admits to talking to others about Joseph and Lucinda’s private contract before Joseph or Lucinda has a chance to either defend themselves or communicate with the allegedly disgruntled parties.

A Small Sample Of Our Opening Admission Questions

You can expect to receive admission questions on a monthly bases between filing the lawsuit and the final trial.

Monthly admission questions will be to make sure nothing new has popped up or changed as we attempt to uncover information that’s reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence.

  1. You have been correctly named in this case insofar as your legal name is concerned.
  2. You have been properly served as a party defendant.
  3. Process is sufficient with regard to you in this case.
  4. Service of process is sufficient with regard to you in this case.
  5. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case.
  6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over you in this case.
  7. Venue is proper in this Court.
  8.  
  9. Admit that Plaintiff and Former Trustee entered into a contract regarding the property owned by the Trust.
  10. Admit that under the original contract, Plaintiff was permitted to live in the home for the duration of the Grantor’s life.
  11. Admit that the Trust Protector initially represented Grantor, Successor Trustee #1, and Successor Trustee #2 in the Trust’s claim against Plaintiff.
  12. Admit that the Trust Protector withdrew from the claim against the Plaintiff on 19Oct22.
  13. Admit that Successor Trustee #2 informed Plaintiff that payment responsibilities regarding the property lay with the Plaintiff.
  14. Admit that the Plaintiff attempted to make payments to the Trust using various electronic methods.
  15. Admit that the Plaintiff received no clear instructions on how to properly make payments to the Trust.
  16. Admit that Plaintiff believed the original contract was being honored due to the lack of response to the Demand Verification letter.
  17. Admit that Lawyer #2’s Demand Letter addressed the purported lease agreement/life estate.
  18. Admit that the said Demand Letter was only sent to the Former Trustee and not to the Plaintiff.
  19. Admit that the Plaintiff deposited a check with the Trust at the Trust Bank to honor the original contract.
  20. Admit that the MEMO section of the check mentioned it was for tax and insurance for six months.
  21. Admit that Successor Trustee #2 took possession of the check and did not cash it.
  22. Admit that the Plaintiff sent a Demand Verification letter to Lawyer #2, Successor Trustees, and the Grantor.
  23. Admit that Plaintiff made six settlement offers.
  24. Admit that all six settlement offers made by the Plaintiff were rejected by the Successor Trustees and the Grantor.
  25. Admit that the Grantor made an unannounced visit to the Plaintiff on 28Nov22.
  26. Admit that during the said visit, the Grantor did not want to discuss the ongoing legal matters.
  27. Admit that the Grantor expressed reluctance to see Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter until the legal disputes were resolved.
  28. Admit that on 7Dec22, Plaintiff’s sister passed.
  29. Admit that on 11Dec22, the Grantor again made an unannounced visit to the Plaintiff.
  30. Admit that during this visit, the Grantor coerced the Plaintiff into signing a new agreement.
  31. Admit that the agreement signed on 11Dec22 was drafted by Lawyer #2.
  32. Admit that the Plaintiff purchased the Property under duress.
  33. Admit that Plaintiff’s payment for the property included a cash down payment, a private loan from Plaintiff’s dad, and additional cash for lost CD interest.
  34. Admit that the new mortgage amount was significantly higher than the original mortgage.
  35. Admit that the total pay off under the new terms is significantly higher than the original.
  36. Admit that the tax for 30 years under the new terms is much higher than the original.
  37. Admit that on 25Feb23, Successor Trustee #2 expressed concerns about Former Trustee’s mental health.
  38. Admit that the new mortgage represents a 285.172% increase from the original.
  39. Admit that the tax under the new terms represents a 189.14% increase from the original.
  40. Admit that Plaintiff’s attempts to honor the original contract were consistent.
  41. Admit that no validation or substantial evidence was provided by Lawyer #2 or the Trust in response to Plaintiff’s demands.
  42. Admit that the original contract did not specify any rent obligations on the part of the Plaintiff.
  43. Admit that the Grantor’s initial agreement with the Plaintiff did not involve the Plaintiff paying rent.
  44. Admit that the changes proposed by Lawyer #2’s Demand Letter represented a deviation from the original contract.
  45. Admit that Grantor’s sudden change in attitude towards the dispute came after the visit on 28Nov22.
  46. Admit that Lawyer #2’s involvement in the case ended after the 28Nov22 visit by the Grantor.
  47. Admit that the Plaintiff has consistently sought clarity regarding his obligations to the Trust.
  48. Admit that the Trust has made inconsistent claims regarding the Plaintiff’s responsibilities.
  49. Admit that Successor Trustee #1 communicated that the Grantor was not honoring the original contract.
  50. Admit that the Plaintiff has shown a willingness to resolve the matter out of court.
  51. Admit that Plaintiff’s dad made an offer to buy the home to resolve family disputes.
  52. Admit that the Plaintiff’s sister shared a close bond with the Grantor.
  53. Admit that Lawyer #2’s Demand Letter alleged that Former Trustee acted without the Grantor’s knowledge or consent.
  54. Admit that the Plaintiff consistently sought a method to send money to the Trust.
  55. Admit that the Grantor’s motivations in the dispute were influenced by family dynamics.
  56. Admit that the Plaintiff faced increased financial burdens due to the new terms imposed.
  57. Admit that the original contract between Plaintiff and Former Trustee regarding the property existed.
  58. Admit that the Plaintiff was initially expected to make electronic payments to the Trust.
  59. Admit that Successor Trustee #2 held the Plaintiff responsible for the alleged unpaid property payments.
  60. Admit that the Trust did not cash the check deposited by the Plaintiff at the Trust Bank.
  61. Admit that the Grantor visited the Plaintiff’s home on 28Nov22.
  62. Admit that the Grantor had no prior invitation or notice for the visit on 28Nov22.
  63. Admit that the Grantor coerced the Plaintiff into signing a new agreement during the visit on 11Dec22.
  64. Admit that this agreement was made three days after the passing of Plaintiff’s sister.
  65. Admit that the new mortgage agreement value is significantly higher than the original contract.
  66. Admit that the new agreement’s tax, insurance, and HOA fee estimates are also higher than the original contract’s estimates.
  67. Admit that the Grantor allegedly fired Lawyer #2 shortly after visiting the Plaintiff on 28Nov22.
  68. Admit that the Grantor expressed a desire to see the Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter before she passed away.
  69. Admit that the Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter passed away on 07Dec22.
  70. Admit that the Plaintiff’s agreement on 11Dec22 was made while grieving the loss of his sister.
  71. Admit that the Plaintiff purchased the property under duress.
  72. Admit that the Plaintiff paid a down payment of $71,000 in cash for the property.
  73. Admit that the Plaintiff accepted a private loan from his father for $181,000.
  74. Admit that the Plaintiff also paid $5,000 in cash to his dad for lost CD interest.
  75. Admit that the damages calculated by the Plaintiff are based on the difference between the original agreement and the new terms.
  76. Admit that there was a noticeable increase in total mortgage, tax, insurance, and HOA fees in the new agreement.
  77. Admit that Successor Trustee #2 emailed the Plaintiff on 25Feb23 expressing concerns about the Former Trustee’s mental health.
  78. Admit that the Former Trustee texted the Plaintiff conveying a message about not seeking revenge.
  79. Admit that the NOTICE OF INTENTION TO FILE SUIT was given on 28Jul23.
  80. Admit that the Grantor was reluctant to see the Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter until the property dispute was resolved.
  81. Admit that the Grantor knew about the Plaintiff’s sister’s health condition.
  82. Admit that the Trust initially planned to represent both Grantor and Successor Trustees in the claim against the Plaintiff.
  83. Admit that the Trust’s refusal to cash the check caused distress to the Plaintiff.
  84. Admit that the Plaintiff faced duress during the property dispute.
  85. Admit that the new terms proposed by the Trust were unfavorable to the Plaintiff.
  86. Admit that the Plaintiff was under emotional stress due to his sister’s health and passing during the property dispute.
  87. Admit that the Plaintiff’s financial position was affected by the terms of the new agreement.
  88. Admit that the Trust had knowledge of the Plaintiff’s financial situation.
  89. Admit that the Grantor’s visit and actions on 11Dec22 were not pre-discussed or pre-agreed upon.
  90. Admit that the new terms significantly increased the Plaintiff’s financial obligations.
  91. Admit that the Grantor’s actions influenced the decisions made regarding the property.
  92. Admit that the Trust did not take into consideration the Plaintiff’s emotional state during the dispute.
  93. Admit that the Trust acted in its own best interest, overlooking the welfare of the Plaintiff.
  94. Admit that Lawyer #2 played a significant role in drafting the new agreement.
  95. Admit that the Plaintiff’s father assisted in facilitating the property purchase by offering a loan.
  96. Admit that the Plaintiff’s agreement on 11Dec22 was not a result of fair negotiation.
  97. Admit that the Plaintiff had shown willingness to settle the dispute multiple times.
  98. Admit that the Trust disregarded multiple settlement offers by the Plaintiff.
  99. Admit that the Trust’s actions placed a significant emotional and financial strain on the Plaintiff.
  100. Admit that the Grantor’s decision to visit the Plaintiff on 11Dec22 was unannounced.
  101. Admit that the Grantor was aware of the passing of the Plaintiff’s sister before visiting on 11Dec22.
  102. Admit that the Plaintiff’s emotional state was a factor during the property purchase on 15Dec22.
  103. Admit that the Plaintiff’s decisions during the dispute were influenced by external pressures and duress.

A Small Sample Of Our Potential Opening Interrogatories

  1. Do you contend someone or some entity other than you and/or Plaintiff was negligent? If so, please identify each person or entity you claim as negligent and state all facts presently know
  2.  
  3. Please provide a complete copy of the original contract between Plaintiff and Former Trustee regarding the property.
  4. Detail any and all responsibilities of the Plaintiff under the original contract.
  5. State the reasons for the Trust Protector’s withdrawal from the claim against the Plaintiff on 19Oct22.
  6. Identify all individuals who had knowledge of the original contract between Plaintiff and Former Trustee.
  7. Detail the instructions, if any, provided to the Plaintiff regarding electronic payments to the Trust.
  8. Explain why Lawyer #2’s Demand Letter was addressed only to the Former Trustee and not to the Plaintiff.
  9. Please provide copies of all communications between Lawyer #2 and any representative of the Trust regarding the property dispute with the Plaintiff.
  10. State the reason(s) for the Trust’s rejection of each of the Plaintiff’s six settlement offers.
  11. Explain the basis upon which Successor Trustee #2 made the determination that the Plaintiff was responsible for payments regarding the property.
  12. Identify any and all communications between the Grantor and Plaintiff between 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.
  13. Describe in detail the Grantor’s visit to the Plaintiff on 28Nov22.
  14. Please provide a copy of the agreement signed by the Plaintiff on 11Dec22.
  15. Explain the justification for the new agreement terms and the decision to have Lawyer #2 draft this agreement.
  16. Detail the reasons for Grantor’s decision to visit the Plaintiff on 11Dec22 without prior notice or invitation.
  17. Identify any witnesses present during the Grantor’s visit on 11Dec22.
  18. State the reason(s) for the Trust not cashing the check deposited by the Plaintiff at the Trust Bank.
  19. Explain why Successor Trustee #2 did not cash the check given by the Plaintiff.
  20. Detail any communication, if any, between the Grantor and Lawyer #2 between 28Nov22 and 11Dec22.
  21. Describe the reasons for the discrepancies between the original and new mortgage values.
  22. State the reasons for the change in tax and insurance amounts between the original contract and the new agreement.
  23. Identify any and all communications regarding Former Trustee’s mental health and explain the relevance to the property dispute.
  24. Please provide a copy of the NOTICE OF INTENTION TO FILE SUIT dated 28Jul23.
  25. Describe the basis and calculations used to determine the damages claimed by the Plaintiff.
  26. State any and all reasons for the Grantor’s reluctance to see Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter until after the legal disputes were resolved.
  27. Describe all interactions, if any, between the Grantor and Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter between 1Oct22 and her passing on 7Dec22.
  28. State the reasons for Grantor’s decision to allegedly fire Lawyer #2 after visiting the Plaintiff’s home on 28Nov22.
  29. Identify any individuals who advised or influenced the Grantor’s decisions during the period from 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.
  30. Detail any and all reasons for the increase in the total payoff amount between the original terms and the new agreement.
  31. Describe all interactions, if any, between the Plaintiff and Successor Trustee #2 between 1Jan23 to 31Jul23.
  32. Identify any and all considerations provided to the Plaintiff for agreeing to the new terms on 11Dec22.
  33. Explain the determination of the $5,000 cash paid to Plaintiff’s dad for his lost CD interest.
  34. State the reasons for the Grantor’s actions towards the Plaintiff after the passing of Plaintiff’s sister.
  35. Detail any and all discussions or considerations regarding potential eviction of the Plaintiff from the property.
  36. Identify any professionals, experts, or advisers consulted by the Trust regarding the property dispute with the Plaintiff.
  37. Explain the Trust’s decision to initially represent both the Grantor and Successor Trustees in the claim against the Plaintiff.
  38. Detail any communications, if any, between the Grantor and Former Trustee between 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.
  39. Describe all actions taken by Successor Trustee #1 regarding the property dispute from 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.
  40. State the reasons for any changes in the property’s HOA fees between the original and new terms.
  41. Identify any and all documents or communications that validate the obligations claimed by Lawyer #2’s Demand Letter.
  42. Describe any actions taken by the Trust in response to Plaintiff’s Demand Verification letter.
  43. State any considerations given by the Trust regarding potential harm or duress to the Plaintiff during the ongoing dispute.
  44. Explain the basis of the claim that the Former Trustee acted without the Grantor’s knowledge or consent.
  45. Detail any and all communications between Lawyer #2 and Successor Trustee #2 between 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.
  46. Identify any witnesses present during the Grantor’s visit on 28Nov22.
  47. State the reasons for the Plaintiff’s payment methods, including the cash down payment and private loan from Plaintiff’s dad.
  48. Explain the basis for the tax calculations under both the original and new terms.
  49. Describe any discussions or considerations regarding Plaintiff’s dad’s offer to buy the home.
  50. Detail the reasons for the Grantor’s alleged decision to make amends and visit Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter after 28Nov22.
  51. Explain the significance, if any, of Plaintiff’s dad’s daughter’s genetic condition to the ongoing property dispute.
  52. Identify any and all individuals who advised or influenced the Plaintiff’s decisions and actions between 1Oct22 to 31Dec22.

A Small Sample Of Our Potential Opening Productions Requests

  1. Original Contract: Produce any and all original contracts between the Plaintiff and Former Trustee regarding the property.
  2. Payment Records: Produce all records of payments made by the Plaintiff towards the property.
  3. Demand Letter: Produce the Demand Letter sent by Lawyer #2 to the Former Trustee.
  4. Settlement Offers: Produce all six settlement offers made by the Plaintiff.
  5. Bank Records: Produce any records showing that the Plaintiff deposited a check at the Trust Bank.
  6. Visit Logs: Produce any logs or records of the Grantor’s visits to the Plaintiff’s home on 28Nov22 and 11Dec22.
  7. New Agreement: Produce the agreement signed by the Plaintiff on 11Dec22 for the purchase of the property for $250,000.00.
  8. Lawyer #2 Communication: Produce any communications between the Grantor and Lawyer #2 from 28Nov22 onwards.
  9. Mortgage Comparisons: Produce any documents comparing the original mortgage terms to the new terms from 11Dec22.
  10. Email Communications: Produce the email from Successor Trustee #2 sent on 25Feb23.
  11. Former Trustee’s Text: Produce the text message sent by the Former Trustee on 25Feb23.
  12. NOTICE OF INTENTION TO FILE SUIT: Produce the full notice given on 28Jul23.
  13. Health Records: Produce any documentation or communication referencing the health condition of the Plaintiff’s sister.
  14. Check: Produce the uncashed check deposited by the Plaintiff at the Trust Bank.
  15. Property Tax Records: Produce all property tax estimates, payments, and comparisons for the property.
  16. Insurance Estimates: Produce all insurance estimates for the property under both the original and new terms.
  17. HOA Fee Estimates: Produce all HOA fee estimates for the property under both the original and new terms.
  18. Down Payment Records: Produce records of the $71,000 down payment made by the Plaintiff.
  19. Private Loan Agreement: Produce the loan agreement between the Plaintiff and his father for $181,000.
  20. Lost CD Interest Payment: Produce records of the $5,000 payment made by the Plaintiff to his father for lost CD interest.
  21. Trust Bank Records: Produce any and all records related to the Plaintiff’s account or transactions with the Trust Bank.
  22. Damage Calculations: Produce any documents or worksheets detailing the Plaintiff’s damage calculations.
  23. Trust’s Responses: Produce any responses from the Trust to the Plaintiff’s settlement offers.
  24. Grantor’s Communications: Produce any and all communications between the Grantor and Lawyer #2 between 28Nov22 and 11Dec22.
  25. Property Valuation: Produce any property valuation or appraisals conducted before 11Dec22.
  26. Property Purchase Records: Produce any and all records documenting the property purchase on 15Dec22.
  27. Mortgage Details: Produce any detailed breakdowns of the mortgage calculations, including terms and interest rates.
  28. Legal Counsel Communications: Produce any communications between the Trust and their legal counsel from 28Nov22 to 28Jul23.
  29. Electronic Payment Records: Produce any records or logs of electronic payments the Plaintiff was initially expected to make to the Trust.
  30. Trust Meeting Minutes: Produce any minutes or records of Trust meetings discussing the Plaintiff or the property.
  31. Legal Agreements: Produce any other legal agreements or contracts involving the Plaintiff and the property.
  32. Financial Assessments: Produce any financial assessments or background checks conducted on the Plaintiff.
  33. Witness Statements: Produce any witness statements or testimonials regarding the Grantor’s visits to the Plaintiff’s home.
  34. Payment Demands: Produce any demands or notifications sent to the Plaintiff regarding property payments.
  35. Bank Statements: Produce bank statements showing the Trust’s financial transactions from 01Nov22 to 15Dec22.
  36. Trust’s Mortgage Records: Produce any mortgage records of the property prior to the Plaintiff’s involvement.
  37. Communication Logs: Produce any logs of communication between the Trust and the Plaintiff from 01Nov22 to 28Jul23.
  38. Legal Strategy Documents: Produce any internal memos, emails, or documents discussing the legal strategy against the Plaintiff.
  39. Property Ownership History: Produce any documents detailing the ownership history of the property.
  40. Loan Offer Details: Produce any details, terms, or records of the loan offered to the Plaintiff by his father.
  41. Trust’s Legal Counsel Records: Produce any billing records, invoices, or payment details for legal counsel hired by the Trust.
  42. Trust’s Decisions: Produce any written decisions or resolutions made by the Trust related to the property dispute with the Plaintiff.
  43. Internal Correspondence: Produce internal correspondence within the Trust regarding the property or the Plaintiff.
  44. Lawyer #2’s Termination: Produce any records or communications related to Lawyer #2’s termination or end of service.
  45. Mortgage Breakdown: Produce a breakdown of the new mortgage, including principal, interest, term, and any other charges.
  46. Contractual Obligations: Produce any documents detailing the Plaintiff’s contractual obligations under the new agreement.
  47. Grantor’s Statements: Produce any written statements or affidavits by the Grantor regarding the property dispute or interactions with the Plaintiff.
  48. Property Photos: Produce any photos or visual documentation of the property taken between 01Nov22 and 15Dec22.
  49. Legal Notices: Produce any other legal notices or formal communications sent to the Plaintiff between 01Apr22 and 28Jul23.

A Small Sample Of Our Potential Opening Deposition Questions

  1. Background: Please state your full name, current residence, and your relationship to the Plaintiff.
  2. Understanding of Contract: Describe your understanding of the original contract between the Plaintiff and the Former Trustee.
  3. Settlement Offers: Can you recall the specifics of the six settlement offers made by the Plaintiff?
  4. Trust Bank Deposit: Do you have knowledge of the check deposited by the Plaintiff at the Trust Bank?
  5. Demands: What prompted Lawyer #2 to send a Demand Letter to the Former Trustee?
  6. Electronic Payments: Were electronic payments ever requested or mentioned as a payment method to the Plaintiff?
  7. Visit on 28Nov22: Describe in detail what occurred during your visit to the Plaintiff’s home on 28Nov22.
  8. Motivation: What was your primary motivation for visiting the Plaintiff on 28Nov22?
  9. Lawyer #2’s Termination: Why did you decide to terminate Lawyer #2’s services?
  10. New Agreement: What were the circumstances that led to the creation of the new agreement on 11Dec22?
  11. Meeting on 11Dec22: Can you describe the exact events that transpired when you visited the Plaintiff’s home on 11Dec22?
  12. Property Valuation: How was the property’s value of $250,000 determined for the new agreement?
  13. Pressure to Sign: Did you at any point pressurize or force the Plaintiff to sign the agreement on 11Dec22?
  14. Plaintiff’s Sister: Were you aware of the health condition of the Plaintiff’s sister during these events?
  15. Payment Structure: How was the payment structure of $71,000 down and the $181,000 loan determined?
  16. Mortgage Details: Can you explain the differences between the original mortgage and the new mortgage terms?
  17. Email on 25Feb23: What prompted Successor Trustee #2 to email the Plaintiff on 25Feb23?
  18. Former Trustee’s Mental Health: What concerns did you have about the Former Trustee’s mental health?
  19. Communication with Lawyer #2: Describe all communications you had with Lawyer #2 between 28Nov22 and 11Dec22.
  20. Decision-making Process: Who were the key decision-makers regarding the changes to the property agreement?
  21. Lost CD Interest: Why was the Plaintiff required to pay $5,000 to his father for lost CD interest?
  22. HOA and Insurance: Describe how the HOA fees and insurance values were calculated.
  23. Financial Assessment: Was a financial assessment conducted on the Plaintiff before the new agreement was made?
  24. Settlement Decision: Why was the decision made to reject the Plaintiff’s six settlement offers?
  25. Legal Strategy: Describe the Trust’s legal strategy in dealing with the Plaintiff from 28Nov22 to 28Jul23.
  26. Payment Demands: Why were specific demands made to the Plaintiff regarding property payments?
  27. Internal Communication: Were there any internal discussions within the Trust about the property or the Plaintiff?
  28. Property Photos: Why were photos taken of the property between 01Nov22 and 15Dec22?
  29. Plaintiff’s Grief: Were you aware of the Plaintiff’s emotional state when you visited him on 11Dec22?
  30. Trust’s Legal Counsel: Describe the role and advice of the Trust’s legal counsel during this period.
  31. Loan from Plaintiff’s Father: Were you aware of the loan the Plaintiff obtained from his father? If so, how?
  32. Motivation for New Terms: What prompted the Trust to set the new terms for the property’s purchase?
  33. Interaction with Plaintiff: Describe any other interactions or communications you had with the Plaintiff from 01Nov22 to 28Jul23.
  34. Plaintiff’s Business: Were you aware of the financial standing of the Plaintiff’s business when drafting the new agreement?
  35. Decision on Mortgage: Why was the decision made to increase the mortgage amount?
  36. Plaintiff’s Ability to Pay: Did the Trust consider the Plaintiff’s ability to pay under the new terms?
  37. Notices to Plaintiff: What other legal notices or communications were sent to the Plaintiff between 01Nov22 and 28Jul23?
  38. Former Trustee’s Text: Are you aware of the text message the Former Trustee sent to the Plaintiff on 25Feb23?
  39. Ownership History: Describe the ownership history of the property before the Plaintiff’s involvement.
  40. Decision to Visit: What prompted you to visit the Plaintiff’s home unannounced on multiple occasions?
  41. Financial Transactions: Describe any significant financial transactions related to the property between 01Nov22 and 15Dec22.
  42. Influence on Decisions: Did any external factors or individuals influence the Trust’s decisions regarding the property?
  43. Plaintiff’s Payment Records: Were there any discrepancies or issues with the Plaintiff’s payment records?
  44. Property Ownership Intentions: What were the Trust’s intentions regarding the property’s ownership if the Plaintiff did not agree to the new terms?
  45. Health Condition Considerations: Were there any considerations given to the Plaintiff’s family health situation during this period?
  46. Role of Successor Trustee #2: Describe the role and involvement of Successor Trustee #2 in these matters.
  47. Communication with Plaintiff’s Father: Have you had any direct communications with the Plaintiff’s father regarding the property or loan?
  48. Property Value Factors: Were there any external factors or market conditions that influenced the property’s valuation?
  49. Consideration of Original Contract: How did the original contract influence the Trust’s decisions regarding the property?
  50. Future Plans: Did the Trust have any future plans or intentions for the property if not sold to the Plaintiff?