Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 1 of 16

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 458-2

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 2 of 16

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 458-2

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 3 of 16

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 458-2

EXHIBIT "A"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 4 of 16

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

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL
The Native Voice Fc ~

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 1 of 9 Page 5 of 16
home

ell

OU I-

Re ':ltio1 S

ace t us

suosr

Welcome to The Native Voice
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Welcome to the The Native Voice newspaper, the largest native newspaper in the worl latest Headlines
Wo lfc hil d eCe". v, Unite,g Sta te s: An eXclu sive intervi~w with attorney f:rick Kaardal 0IJJneJ~9~~ound.potenjl~L9JJtcome,and _LmpllcaJlons
gtJ!:Its-':lig!:l::p-r91iLeJ~ws _l!j!

OJ

I

~

lu-Tokece, (0 er Day)~ Yiho r s ty- wo peT5On::. from ttl Indian M of '862. In Minnesota One of the 'Loyal Mdew kanten , 110 nam because Ih y believed in (ivi 19 In pea with the United Stale arad the 5 t . The linea! d c Jdanls of this band r ow t plslnliffll In t c'ass-acnon lawsuit , Welfchlld at Bl v , The Un tad Stat for breach of trust r nslblll. An

..... silence can be and silence ofte viewed as some a· of wrongdoing. " challenges call for and a steady he Interview with for Tom 0; WEWIN: Warne Women fo r Indian I with FounderlDirec Cobell lawsuit r testifies in Fun SI Cecelia Fire Thu Sovereignty is not these are 0

Honoring, Rem Praying for Ou exclusive Interviev of Pte . Lori A

Wo lfchild et al. v . United Stat es An exclusive interview with att orne y Erick Kaardal. attorney , on the background. potential outcome . and imp licati ons of t his high-profile la vsuit seek ing da mag es for breaches in U.S. trust resp onsib ility in relation t o the Mdwak anton Dakot a Band of th e Great Sioux l'l ation Not ice to plaintiff ' : TIl e dea dline for application has been extended to June 23. 2006

http://www.nativevoicemedi a.com/index .cfm

6/ 1112006

The Native Voice

Page 2 of9

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 6 of 16

Part One in a continuing se ries By Lise Balk King The Native Voice There have been countless greivances - personal. political and legal against the United States for wrongs do ne to Indian people sin ce the formation of this Country . Many have been brought to the attention of the general public, a smaller numbe r have been tried in court, and a few have been actually been succ essf ul in their effort to mak e th e government account able for the injustices. Wolfchild et al. v. United States is one of those rare examples. This court case, fil ed in the U.S. Federal Claims Court in Washin gton. DC in 2003 by the Minnesota law firm, Morhrnan and Kaardal. PA . has been successful in arguing th at a breach of trust respon ibility has happened, and that ce rtain compensation is due to th ose parties who have been damaged by this breac h of trust. These people are , as named in the court case , all direct lineal descendants of the original members of a sma ll band of Dakota Sioux called the "Loyal Mdewa kanton .·· These people signed a contract with the U.S. Government , were given tracts of land in Minnesota. and w ere promised the "'excl usive and equal benefit" of said lands. The lawsuit conte nds that these benefits have not follow ed the descend ants "exclusively and equally " as inten ded , and the U.S. Federal Court has concurred. Not only does the outcome of this lawsuit promise paym ent of dam ages for past mismana gem ent of trust responeibilites, but it may have far reaching consequences for those Indian communities th at have, up until the decision of this cou rt case , been the sale beneficiaries of the "benefits ' of th e original lands. They are the Shakope e Mdew akanton Sioux Community and the Prairie Island Indian Com munitie of Minnesot a. Th ose lineal descen dants wh o parti cipate in Wo lfchild et al. may be provided th e opportunity to become members of these communities and therefore may reap the current benefits of "said lands: including significant casino revenues. In the case of the Shakopee. owners of reportedly th e second-most profitable gaming ope ration in Indian country. the cha nges co uld be earth shatte ring. Each of the 186 membe rs of this community receive per-capita payments of over one million dollars per year. The urrent membership has been suc cessful at severely restricting ent rance of new members, including those with proof of adequate blood quantum and direct blood lineage. It is feasible that Wolfchild et al. v, Unit d States could open up Shakopee's membership to include all lineal descend ants identified in this lawsu it. there by re-distributing their per-cap ita payme nts from under 200 members to over 4,000 members. The geographically less-advantaged Prairie Island Commu nity has not been as successful in their gaming ventures. and has a different set of enrollment and per-capita payme nt guidelines. This portion of th e lawsu it asking fo r compensation of "exclusive and equal benefit" into the future, has been by nature controversial. The Shakopee Community has been generous to the other . less financ ially successful Sioux tribes. donati ng millions of dollars each year to wort hy cause s and projects. They have been invited to partici pate in th is lawsuit as plai ntiffs, as has Prairie Island, Both Comm unities have declined the invitati on. Til e third comm unity in question. the Lower ioux. has had a majority of their members ente r into the lawsui t as Plaintiffs. In April. their Cou ncil election yielded a three -fifths majority in favo r of the Community's participation in the lawsuit. and th ey have voted to have the Commun ity at large join as a Plaintiff. There is a significant amo unt of work being done to identify the actual lineal descendants of the "Loyal Mdewakanton" for the purpose of compiling an

http://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/11/2006

The Native Voice

Page 3 of9

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 7 of 16

accurate and complete Plaintiffs list for this case. If you believe that you are a direct lineal blood descendant. you have until June 23. 2006 to submit your application for cons iderati on. A.!1 of the information relevant to this pursuit. including research. history. court documents and rulinqs . the original 1886 and 1889 census lists that form the origina l members of the "Loyal Mdwakanton." and a list of current plaintiffs can be found on the Morhman and Kaardal, PA website: wwwmklaw.com. (Please do not contact The Native Voice with your inquiries. We will direct you to contact the law firm) Lise Balk King: First of all. how did this lawsuit get started and how did you come to be involved in this issue regarding the Mdewakanton Dakota? Erick Kaardal. PA : Oddly enough I was born in Redwood Falls, [Minn.). and my family has been there for a long time. That's right next to Morton and Lower Sioux. And my father has a State Farm Insurance Agency and always had good relations with the members of Lower Sioux. Then I went on to go to college and law school and I started my practice here in [Minneapolis/St. Paul) which incl uded civil rights work. My father. after his retirement. was friends with a few elders from the Lower Sioux and they heard about some of the case wor k that we were doing in the legal arena including a case we had won in the U.S. Supreme Court involving civil rights. One of the elders, Morris Pendleton. asked my fath er if he could meet with me about issue s of grieva nces or complaints he had regarding how the federal government was working with the lineal descendants [of the original Mdwakanton). Then after that. Morris and I met for about an eightee n month period and we worked through the different grievances and issues. At times I was thinking the re wasn't any way I could help them and other times I was thinking, "Well there is some promise here." Then I started doin g some investigations factually and legally and then it really took off when Morris introduced me to others including Dr. Barbara Buttes 'the lead anthropologist and historia n fo r the Mdwakan ton) and that's when we decided to do it. At the time, I didn't expect to 'in. I just thought that these people deserved having their question. their claim. put to a proper forum because I think that they had not been treated properly. So. that's kind of whe re it was; with a civil rights background . I was looking to help people and sometim s it takes a lot of conversation to figure out if a lawy er can help people . We had that conversa tion and then we filed the lawsuit. I
http ://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/11/2006

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 4 of9 Page 8 of 16

Now we re wo rking hard on the genealogy , because it is important to us and to everyone to get resolution on t his and we' ve resol ved that the best way to get an expeditious result is to do the genealogy ourselves and not to rely on the gov ernm ent. I know that man y oth er instances of these cas es get re olv ed in t he sense that liability is esta blished but the settlemen t fu nds are never distri buted because t he gene logy is not finishe . Or another wa y. the accounting is not finished in the Cobe ll ase and so forth. So in our case. we saw that it was very important. if we w ant to get this case done with justice. that we com plete t he genealogy . And to the credit of every plai ntiff. and we re going to be at about 5.000, each one of t hem und ersta nds that the y wa nt t o wait because by waiting anel making sure that everyone's pulled in we can move forward. King: In that regard. there has been a lot of rumor abo ut w ho is eligi ble. how they're eligible and how the number of peop le affects the final outcome . Yo u just got an extension for the lawsuit. wh at is that exte nsion for? Kaardal It' s for plaintiffs joining the lawsuit. T he deadlin e has been extended to June 23 . The y can either file a claim directly or they can use an atto rney to file a claim. t hat wo uld be a motion to interven e and a complaint and interv ention. King: So. what are t he requirements for jo ining this suit? I
http://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6111/2006

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 5 of9 Page 9 of 16

great-grandparents are. that' s something. For those people who are. and I'll use the phrase "full' of Dakota blood, it's a difficult task to find out who all your Dakota great-great grandparents are and each of them needs to be searched, We 've had a case whe re a person that was Dakota had to search all 32 great-great grandparents, and the n on the 32nd one being searched found the connection, So those who are just kind of getting started. we're very symp athet ic because we've been doing it for three years. helping people find their ancestors, Even more importantl y. were helping them prove their lineage through Dr. Buttes and her expert opinion. I
htlp ://www .nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/11/2006

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 6 of9 Page 10 of 16

baptismal records, or hos pital records if you ca n get them King: Because you can put someone on your probat e, who is not necessarily [biologically connected] you can say, 'I adopted this child? Kaardal: Exactly, or particularly death certificates, because wha t's being recorded is the death, it's not who the parents are So, with prob ate records, if it s adjUdicated, maybe yo u have a good record to support the court's findings, We unde rstand the unfairness and arbitrariness of people not being trust benefi ciaries when they are adopt ed in, but were trying to correct what we see as a huge injusti ce at Shakopee, An d, that is, a small gro up of people has a co-opted the trust corpus of the federal govern ment and we 're trying to fix th at So it's not going to be a perfect wor ld when we're done, but we're hoping it will be a more perfect world, King: Wha t can you tell me about those folks who are out there circulating false information on the reservations? Kaardal We identified, through complaints th at were filed through our offi ce, th at a Becky Red Earth has been transmitting information, appare ntly with the sponsorship of the Yankton Sioux Tribe, and that information has not been useful. In fact for tw o years, we've kind of bee n battling with Becky Red Earth providing inf rmation that is inaccurate,When she's out there giving peopl e bad information, th e res ult is th ey're copying documents, they're maki ng up lists and they' re payi ng FedEx fees or ove rnight fees and sending us informati on, but it's bad informati on. So, if you can imagine, over half the stuff we received on April 20t h (the previous application dead line) was mostly from the Yankton area or th at part of South Dakota (where Red Earth is circulating), and it w as not good information So wh en people were filling out th e cover sheet say ing who their ancestor was on the 1886 census, it w asn't a pers on actually on th e '1836 census. (Please note: There are NO alte rnate or additional lists) That is problematic for two reasons : one, these people may think the y're qualified and they ar not and Wi O, they may be qualified for the suit but they have not done enough work to prove their lineage and they are saying, ' Oh. w e're qualified, We're done," King: So they think their work is done and actua lly it's not? Kaardal: That's right And that's our principle concern and the n on the other hand there is a damage that is done if someone is told that they're qualifiecl and then they are not going to be qualified , that th ey are not a lineal descendant then there are unrealistic exp ectatio ns, Then on th e other side, and this j ust makes me gasp. in one instan ce we have an affidavit wher e Becky Red Earth has told someone that they are not qualified, where it appear s they will be qualified or may be qualified. and that's awtul. So. we need to work through that and reed ucate these people that they need to keep wo rking until they either prove or disprove lineal descendence King: There's also a rumor that the more people wh o participate in this lawsuit, the less money each peron will receive in the eventual settlement Is this true? I
http://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/11/2006

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 7 of9 Page 11 of 16

has been give n to the Minnesota Mdewakanton world and everyone has th e chan ce to participate . So what we 've add ed to that is th is element that we 're so concerned about due process that we think it includes edu cating and informing eve ryone. King: Let's talk about fa mily members sharing documents. Kaardal: We need to persu ade the genealo gical research ers in the fa milies to work togeth er to find the necessary documen ts. The most successful people in South Dakota in qualifying thr ough very difficult journeys - having to go six or seve n ge nerations bac k - have worked togeth er. We have had ex amples of fa mily members from five or six different reservations working together to fin d th e critical do cuments. That's the best, that's ideal. Because. imagine 32 gr eat- grandparents. t hey could have bee n scatt ered too: so different fam ily members wo uld know diffe rent information about different great-great grandpa rents. King: How do you win this case ? You have already been told by the court t hat t he trus t responsibility has been breached. and therefore there is a responsibility for the U.S. govern ment to repair that. correct? Kaardal: That's right. I t hink the best way to descri be the case is that. principally it's about getti ng damages for the past and so we 're t rying to establish the se breach es so that '!'Ie can get damages fo r the past misconduct of t he f ede ral government. As a seconda ry matter. we're t rying to get prospective relief and fix it for the futu re. The way the prospective relief is going to have to wor k is ... if I' m speaking to a group of Mdewak anton. I always tell t hem '"I'm looking at you. because you have many voices here as lineal descendants of Lower Sioux as th e Lower Sioux Community." The lead plai ntiff on t he lawsuit. Sh eldon Peter s Wo lfchild. is now the Chairman of Lower Sioux an d he's firmly committed to the case . The othe r voice t hat is very im portant is th e organ ization. or non-profit corporation. called the Minn esota Mdewa kanton Dakot a Oyate and theyve been holding ann ial conventions for the iast two years and t hey're going to meet agai n on May 20. That's a voice for th e linea l descendants and what the lineal desce ndant s need to decide is w hat they want fo r the future. So. t his is in the hands of the descendants through the se two org aniz ations. King: So. there are tw o pa rts to this lawsuit: one is that the plaintiffs are going to get money from the United States Treas ury for past harms don e ancl then. W/O . they're all lookin g at the inclusion as direct beneficiaries of the original trust land revenues into the future . There is ta lk that this includes the possibility of enrolling in the Shak opee Community and becoming beneficiaries of t he current casino rev enues Is this true? Kaardal: Yes . But. there are papers that very clearly stated t hat t he Shako pee Community was base d on a constitution which w as the product of a breach of trust by th e United States, so theres an issue of whether t his would be an opportunity for the lineal descendants to reorganiz e t he government. Because we have one tru st beneficiary class, some lineal descendants think th at one gove rnment may be appropriate . So you have one genealogical list. and then you could have some local governments: the n you cou ld have a Minnesota Mdewakanto n Nation. To think about it. we're at 5.000 lineal descenda nts now and w e know th ere's a

http://www .nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/11/2006

The Nati ve Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 8 of9 Page 12 of 16

few hundred more in comm unities that aren 't participating in the lawsui t. It would be a fantasti c thing to have the Dakota fi nally reunited after they were forced into the diaspora back in 1862. 1863 and for ward. Then again , some of the Dakota aren 't line al descendants of the May 20. 1886 list w ho would not be Minnesota Mdewa kanton Dakota Oyate based on the 1886 statutes beca use the membership was sepa rate. But. t hen again, it isn't about correcti ng all the wor ld's problems . it' just about correct ing the injustice at Shakopee, I
http://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

611112006

The Native Voice Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

ATTACHMENT "1"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 9 of9 Page 13 of 16

millions of dollars individually Kaardal: Again. I can say that I dont know that beca use w e haven't been allowed to do any discovery , But my advice to clients is that the case isn't going to be completed until we get all of lineal descendants in. so we have got to continue to Nark on that. An d then after we finish that. I think we '1'1111 be allowed discovery and w e'll find out what the potential damages are, My recommendation to people w ho are prospective lineal descend ants is to hurry up and get the ir wo rk done and then well find out. To me. the issue of being a landowner. a trust beneficiary. at Shakopee or Low er Sioux should be sufficient motivation to get your documents together and then with respect to cash payment for past. we' ll see how that goes . Now with respect to prospe ctive relief, I'm absolutely convinced that the consequence of this case that the lineal descendants will be receiving eq ual per capita paym ents and whether that' s a little money or a lot of money but I am going to look at the lineal descendants and say. -It's up to you , If you decide for a reason that you're not going to manage the casino well, or manage the casino at all. it's up to yo u, Or you want to have one casino or other busines ses it might end up being quite profita ble for you." ., to be co ntinued..,check the next issue of The Native Voice for Part Two of the inte rview ' l ith Erick Kaardal. attorney

copy right c 2003, all rights reserved.
Native Vo ice Media
Phon e - 1-800-449-8176
Webs ite Design by


d igi tal e n eav r s
Digital Endeavors, Inc. ancl NativeRadio.com

http://www.nativevoicemedia.com/index.cfm

6/1112006

Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

EXHIBIT "B"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 14 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

SHELDON PETERS WOLFCHILD, et al., Plaintiff(s), Vs.
) ) ) ) ) ) )


) AFFIDAVIT OF TAMARA TORDSEN

UNITED STATES,

) ) ) ) )

No. 03-2684L

Defendant,

)

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

COMES NOW, the above-named affiant and states the following to be true to the
best of her knowledge: 1. Your affiant states that she is the lead researcher for the Julia DuMarce

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

1


Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

EXHIBIT "B"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 15 of 16

2.

Your affiant states that she is a duly enrolled member of the Sisseton-

Wahpeton Oyate and resides at 3928 Brookside Drive, Rapid City, South Dakota 57702. 3. Your affiant states that she was in attendance at an open meeting of the

Julia DuMarce group in Pierre, South Dakota on or about August 26,2006, when Mr. Fred Arrow, Sr. and his wife Shirley Arrow-Abdo attended. 4. Your affiant states that Mr. Arrow approached Mr. Montana with his wife

Shirley Arrow-Abdo to discuss retention of the Julia DuMarce groups' attorneys for representation ofMr. Arrows' family in the Wolfchild v. United States Case No. 03 2684L. 5. Your affiant states that after some discussion between Mr. Arrow and Mr.

Montana, that Shirley Arrow-Abdo attempted to speak to Mr. Montana about representation of her family and Mr. Montana asked her whether she was represented in the matter of Wolfchild v. United States Case No. 03-2684L. 6. Your affiant states that Shirley Arrow-Abdo stated that her family was

represented by Mr. Horn from Yankton, South Dakota. 7. Your affiant states that Mr. Montana indicated to Shirley Arrow-Abdo that

he would not discuss any representation of her family until such time as they had terminated their agreement with Mr. Horn. 8. Further your affiant states that she was present on a conference telephone

call with a member of the Leedom family sub-group with Jon Brings an assistant researcher on or about March 10,2007, at which time Mr. Leedom stated he was told by a family member that he would need to execute an attorney agreement with Mr. Horn.

2


Case 1:03-cv-02684-CFL

Document 458-2

EXHIBIT "B"

Filed 05/10/2007

Page 16 of 16

9.

Your affiant states that Mr. Leedom stated that he was informed that Court

desired his family to be all represented by the same attorney. 10. Your affiant states that she and Mr. Brings attempted to inform Mr.

Leedom that such was not the case and that Mr. Horn should not be meeting with his relatives as they were all represented by the Julia DuMarce group attorneys. 11. Your affiant states that the foregoing is true and accurate to the best of her

knowledge and belief. DATED this

IfL7'f of May, 2007 day

~a:::;;;~
Tamara Tordsen ) ) ss:
)

STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF TREMPEALEAU

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

SEAL Notary Public

My Commission Expires:

(p ~. (S

.~

()'i

3