Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-3

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
SHELDON PETERS WOLFCHILD, et aI., Plaintiff(s),
Vs.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant,

) ) )
) )
) )
) AFFIDAVIT OF GARY MONTANA ) ) No.03-2684L )
) )

)

Julia DuMarce; Floyd E. Redwing; ) Lily Renville; Roxanna Red Wing Puchner; ) et aI., ) )
Plaintiff(s), ) ) )
Vs. ) ) )
UNITED STATES, )
) )
Defendant. )

--------------~)
COMES NOW , the above-named affiant and states the following to be true to the best of his knowledge: 1. . Your affiant states that he is the lead attorney for the Julia DuMarce group

and has his principle place of business located at N. 12923 N. Prairie Rd., Osseo , Wisconsin, 54758 .

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-3

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 2 of 4

2.

Your affiant states that to the best of his knowledge that during an open

client meeting in Pierre, South Dakota with approximately 200 clients present, he was approached by Shirley Arrow-Abdo regarding representation in the Wolfchild v. United States Case No. 03-2684L. 3. Your affiant states to the best of his knowledge that Shirley Arrow-Abdo

had attended the Wolfchild client meeting in Pierre, South Dakota with her husband, Fred Arrow, Sr. who was attempting to retain your affiant legal service in representation of him and his family in the Wolfchild v. United States Case No . 03-2684L. 4. Your affiant states that during a break in the meeting Shirley Arrow-Abdo

approached him regarding Wolfchild v. United States Case No . 03-2684L and your affiant asked whether she was represented and she responded in the affirmative, at which time your affiant states he told Shirley Arrow-Abdo that he could not speak to her about the case unless she first terminated her attorney relationship and representation with Mr. Horn. 5. Your affiant states that Shirley Arrow-Abdo and all her family subsequent

to termination of their attorney retainer agreements with Mr. Horn, retained the legal services of Ron Volesky and Gary Montana in the Wolfchild et at. vs. Untied States, Case No . 03-2684L and have executed attorney retainer agreements with said individual attorneys. 6. Further at no time has your affiant misrepresented the outcome of this case

or made any promises to any client, but has always indicated to each and every client that monetary damages against the United States government is the only remedy available in

2


Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-3

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 3 of 4

the present suit , assuming each client meets the criteria set forth by the court for inclusion in the beneficiary group. 7. Based upon various newspaper articles numerous attorneys now

representing clients who are now plaintiffs in this case have made representations that the return of control of the 1886 lands, per capita payments from casinos and reinstatement of Mdewakanton lineal descendants to the governments of the three (3) communities was a potential remedy at the culmination of this lawsuit. See, attached Native Voice, issue June, 2006. 8. Your affiant states under oath that on or about March 10, 2007, he was

contacted by telephone by a member of the Leedom sub-group and notified that relatives from the State of Montana who were presently represented by the Julia DuMarce group attorneys had attended a meeting with Mr. Horn in his office in Yankton, South Dakota. 9. Your affiant states that this member of the Leedom sub-group indicated

that Mr. Horn allegedly stated that the Court desired that all family members of a sub group in the present lawsuit be represented by the same attorney or firm. 10. Your affiant states that he indicated that such was not the case and that

different members of any family sub-group could be represented by different attorneys and/or firms. 11. Your affiant states that during the conversation with this particular client

from the Leedom sub-group he was told that the several members of the Leedom family sub-group would be terminating their attorney agreements with the affiant and executing new agreements with Mr. Horn, based upon Mr. Horns' alleged representations that all

3


Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-3

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 4 of 4

family members should be represented by the same attorney and/or firm as per the Courts' alleged requirements. 11. Your affiant states that on or about May 8, 2007 , during a telephonic

conversation with Mr. Hom he admitted that he met with several Leedom family members who were and are represented by the Julia DuMarce group at his office in Yankton, South Dakota. 12. Your affiant believes in good faith that said actions by Mr. Hom violate

Rule 4.2 of the Rules of the American Bar Association Rules of Professional Responsibility in that Mr. Hom knowing that members ofthe Leedom sub-group were represented by Messrs. Montana and Volesky met with said individuals at his office in Yankton, South Dakota to discuss matters and issues associated with this case .

DATED this ~ chy of May, 2007

.J--.

Gary Montana STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF TREMPEALEAU ) ) ss: )

~--

--..

I do hereby certify that the above-indicated individual, Gary Montana appeared before and executed the foregoing affidavit.

S.Ei\L

My Commission Expires:

(p -15 -/ 0 ~

4