Well the news now is that the judge had me write the order to enter a default Judgment which could have been void, or dismissed as late as appeals court because number 1 Arsehole refused to make an appearance, He cam in claiming that he should be the new trustee, When I asked Rob if he liked my strategy he was first freaked out that I wouldn't take the trustee position and instead asked the Judge to rule in favor of Arsehole number 1.
BTW, after the last dirtbag was disqualified said the case was so forked up he doubted they would find another dirtbag to represent them,. But he did show up with a sh8bag that works for a douchebag, all with the graduate degree. I know the douchebag and arm length acquaintance of mine, someone I know not to trust, and people tell me the same about his sh8bag employee. I know first hand well enough not to let him have his hands of anything of mine as it will become his, so since he's being payed with stolen money it's an issue. Dad knew him and hated guts, too but he was a lawyer, so I did discuss the case with him, and he did shoot me a price for a retainer. We have a history and I have discussed the case with him. It should be easy to disqualify them because he gained information from me a s a prospective client. An interesting typo and I came up with "Risk Moore and Associates " law firm. I even intentionally put that typo in my pleadings (Judges do have a sense of humor, too). I have asked that both of the Rick Moore and associates law firm be present at their disqualification/ conflict of interest hearing.
Anyway, to the point, the Judge has been patiently waiting for an accounting and for him to show up. I asked that his motion to become Trustee be granted. You know the old saying
be careful what you wish for. 
It is ready to be file stamped at 0800 tomorrow morning and the Judge should be able to have an order written up without a hearing. I might tweak it slightly.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CLEVELAND COUNTY
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Michael G. Priestley, in his capacity as Trustee )
of the JOHN J. PRIESTLEY TRUST, under )
Agreement dated August 14, 1997 )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) Case Number: CJ-2013-1044
)
)
John Priestley Jr., )
)
Defendant. )
)
_______________________________________________________________________
REPLY TO RESPONSE- Suspend/Remove/ Replace
Patrick Priestley has made his appearance and the Defendant moves that his appearance and motion to be enjoined as a necessary party be granted as a matter of law. Out of expediency concerns expressed, Defendant moves that Patrick Priestley’s motion to become Trustee is granted as he is listed in order successor trustee as contained in the four corners upon conditions. Patrick is ordered to post a performance bond. Patrick Priestley is ordered to immediately post deed of his real property in Buckeye, AZ documented in Michael Warkentin CPA’s interim accounting as it is directly purchased with Trust funds. To wit: RIATA WEST UNIT 1 MCR 842-16 Lot 233.
Patrick is ordered provide a proper and accurate accounting with inventory of stocks and accounts at the time of the death of the settler, receipts for all expenses, and the current assets that document the CPA’s pleading that “they have saved 1/3” of the estate which is the Defendant’s share, to include all details of Account ending in “0930”. He is to provide this to the Defendant post marked within thirty days of this order give or take a few (3) days. Patrick is also ordered to appear in person at this court within 60 days on _______, 2016 with an accounting in hand. Patrick is required by the four corners of the trust the to obey all the laws of Arizona, and by statute required to obey the laws of both Oklahoma and Arizona. Patrick is informed that his failure to appear and provide proper accounting on this date can result a fiduciary arrest warrant under Arizona Statutes for failing to complete this task. And that his failure to complete and appear in Court with this accounting will be sanctioned by the Honorable Jeff Virgin who has been patiently waiting for an accounting and his appearance so that he can write an order that is not void. Failure to provide this accounting will also be grounds for immediate removal as trustee.
Patrick has expressed years ago that “he wants to get this thing settled as much as you [ defendant ] do.” (In Exhibit) He has paid an approximately $5,000 retainer with his attorney, has a retirement income, and consents to do this completely without compensation as he has errantly expected of others.
His recently retained attorney is not allowed to bill any hours in completing this task because she has nothing to offer for moving this task forward that the Defendant cannot do. His Counsel should temporarily be suspended as counsel until a hearing on a conflict of interest for and for which she has failed to obtain consent from all parties, and upon hearing disqualified. Any retainer received by Shanda Adams or the Risk Moore and Associates law firm from the necessary party will be returned to the Court upon her/their disqualification. Both of the Rick Moore Associates will appear at the conflict of interest hearing.
As Co-trustee, any legwork needed done in Norman visiting banks, and brokers or witnesses will be done by the Defendant John Priestley Jr. at a cost of $250 a day with a half day minimum devoted any task or multiple tasks on any single day and done in good faith and good time to help him meet his deadline. The Defendant/ co-trustee’s pay is to be paid out of the same account that his retainer came out of. The Defendant is paid for his efforts on Friday for the pay period ending Wednesday. The Successor Trustee will communicate directly by e-mail with the Co-Trustee who will promptly complete tasks within reason in good faith and in a timely manner.
The Court will finds that Patrick Priestley avoided becoming a party to any litigation since very shortly after the statutory deadline for accounting which was due by statute in March of 2012. The Court finds that his delays are tortuous behavior. The Court finds that he has avoided multiple summons by certified mail and U.S Marshals. Honorable Judge Virgin has been impatiently waiting to write a valid order because of his delays. Because of this four year delay, any claims of the former trustee as Plaintiff that have not been dismissed for latches, statute of limitations, clean hands doctrine, or failure to prosecute are now dismissed for latches, statute of limitations, clean hands doctrine, and failure to prosecute. The Successor Trustee is denied standing as a Plaintiff and his motion to stand in the shoes of the Plaintiff Trustee is denied.
As to Defendant’s counterclaims for tortuous interference, the Supreme Court has unanimously approved that the questions of law for relief for tortuous interference and involvement of under 766 and 766(b) as well as punitive damages. The Defendant’s Motion to name the trust itself as a party is granted. See WILSPEC TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. DUNAN HOLDING GROUP, CO. LTD. 2009 OK 12 204 P.3d 69 Case Number: 106174 Decided: 02/10/2009
The Successor Trustee he is required and is Ordered to have a working proposal on a strategy of how he and the former trustee and other beneficiaries and non beneficiaries will repay “loans [or embezzlements]” and to replace stocks according to statute” which their counsel described in years ago and which is in exhibit. All necessary parties to the case will consent to the proposal once an agreement is made. He is required to have this in hand within 60 days at his bond hearing on the ________ of April, 2016. All necessary parties to this case and the agreement to be ratified are bound by penalty of sanctions in event of default.
Respectfully Submitted this ___________day of March of 2016
