Free Request - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

.1 ua iaocxmizxr is IN PROPER rom Acc0RD1NG
y ro FEDERAL AM:/on LOCAL RULES AND rimcncss
;‘ ASD IS Srrsnzcr ro REJECTION BY rss comm. 4
,·» 1 M_ h @.1.11: —;;_FlLED ___,______LODGED
IC ac am ra
15934 Hespenma Siva. §.M.gs. 3 ll —— “E°E"’E° —-—°°PY
2 San Lorenzo, Cai omia 458
(510) 3Ss-6176 APR 2 5 mf
3 CLERK U S O1STRiCT COURT
4 DISTFHCT OF AFilr.`i'.Ojl;li»f*j_UTY
. ...1.
5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
7 ESTATE OF JOSEPH J. STUDNEK, by No. CV-O4-595 PHX MHM
and through its PERSONAL
8 REPRESENTATIVE, JOSEPH M. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL
1 STUDNEK, NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF
9 DEF EN DAN T MICHAEL
Plaintiff and CAMBRA’S MOTION FOR
IO Countcrdcfcndant RECONSIDERATION OF
DEF ENANT’S OPPOSITION
11 v. TO MOTION TO ENFOREC
THE SETTLEMENT
12 AMBASSADOR or GLOBAL MISSIONS AGREEMENT AND T0
UN LIMITED HIS Successons, A DTSMTSS THE COMPLAINT
13 DUE TO PLAINTIFF S LACK
CORPORATION SOLE, 8, NCVACIEI OF STANDING
14 corporation Sole; EL SHADDAI
MINISTRIES AND HIS SUCCESSORS, A
15 CORPORATION Soma, A Nevada
16 corporation; SECOND CHANCE
I CHRISTIAN EVANGELISTIC
17 MINISTRIES, a California corporation;
18 BISHOP OF FAITH VISION NOBLE
HOUSE AND HIS SUCCESSORS, A
19 CORPORATION SOLE, a California
corporation; JOSEPH L. WILLIAMS and
20 MONICA C. CISNEROS, as husband and
21 wife; WILLIAM JOE LITTLE, JR.;
MICHAEL CAMBRA and GLORIA
22 CAMBRA, as husband and wife; JOEL
23 DAVID and CINDY DAVID, as husband
and wifc; KEITH AARON VANN and
24 TRISHA VANN, as husband and wife,
25 Defendants and
Countcrclaimant.
26
27
28 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
ase 2:04-cv—OO595-I\/IHIVI Document 208 Filed O4/25/2007 Page 1 of 4


y 1 Defendant Michael Cambra ("Cambra") hereby requests that the Court take
2 judicial notice of the following documents attached as Exhibits A and B. This request
3 is made pursuant to Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and the authorities
4 cited below. This request is made in comiection with Cambra’s motion to dismiss the
5 Amended Complaint for Damages filed by plaintiff ESTATE OF JOSEPH J.
6 STUDNEK, by and through its PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, JOSEPH M.
7 STUDNEK.
8 BASIS FOR REQUESTING JUDICIAL NOTICE
9 On a motion to dismiss, a court may take judicial notice of matters of public
I? record in accordance with Federal Rule of Evidence 201 without converting the
12 motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment. Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250
13 F .3d 668, 688-689 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Mack v. South Boy Beer Distributors, Inc.,
14 798 F .2d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1986)). Courts may take judicial notice of documents
ig outside of the complaint that are capable of accurate and ready determination by
p 17 resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid.
18 201(d); Wietschner v. Monterey Pasta Co., 294 F. Supp. 2d 1117, 1109 (N.D. Cal.
19 2003). Courts can take judicial notice of such matters when considering a motion to
ii) dismiss. Wietschner, 294 F. Supp. 2d at 1109; MG1C]ndem. Corp. v. Weisman, 803
22 F. 2d 500, 504 (9th Cir. 1986). As explained further below, the Court may take
23 judicial notice of Exhibits A through B.
24 Exhibit A is a Power of Attorney signed by Joseph M. Studnek, who had
ig power-of-attomey of the Estate of Joseph J. Studnek. The Power of Attorney was
27 signed over to "The Office of the Ambassador of Global Missions Un1imited—Larry
28
No. CV—04-595 PHX MHM - 2 -
Request for Judicial Notice of Cambra
se 2:04-cv—OO595-I\/IHI\/I Document 208 Filed O4/25/2007 Page 2 of 4


A I Williams. It is because Williams had power of attorney as of April 15 2003, until the
2 termination period of April 30, 2004 it would be impossible for any other person than
3 Williams to have legal standing to sue on behalf of the Estate. The lawsuit was tiled ·
5 by the Estate on February 23, 2004. The problem with the filing of this lawsuit is the
6 fact that Williams had power of attomey over the Estate thereby negating the ability
7 of anyone other than Williams to file a lawsuit on behalf of the Estate. Since the
3 Estate lacked standing to sue this Court lacks jurisdiction to proceed because of both:
10 lack of iurisdiction over the subject matter, and lack of jurisdiction over the
U wm
12 This Power of Attomey is also very specific in that it states that, ". . .Q
E comylete the dissolution and donation of the estates assets to Global Missions
15 Unlimited — a coggoration sole. lt further states, "I further give and grant to my
16 attorney (Williams) in fact full power and authority to do and perform every act
17 necessary and proper to be done in the exercise of any of the powers stated above as
1; fully as I might or could do if personally present, with full yower of substitution and
20 revocation, ratifying and confirming all that my attorney shall lawfully do or cause
21 to be done by virtue of this means.”
22 The Estate therefore lacks standing to sue without authority from Williams.
ij Since Williams did not authorize this lawsuit, it automatically becomes void ab initio.
25 The Estate theoretically could have chosen to file a lawsuit aQer Ayril 30, 2004 but
26 not on February 23, 2004. The lawyer, Taz Evans has misrepresented to the court a
27 claim and should be reprimanded.
28
No. CV—04-595 PHX MHM - 3 -
Request for Judicial Notice of Cambra
C se 2:04-cv—OO595-I\/IHIVI Document 208 Filed O4/25/2007 Page 3 of 4

M I The question of standing is not subject to waiver, however: "[Wje are required
2 to address the issue even if the courts below have not passed on it, and even if the
3
4 parties fail to raise the issue before us. The federal courts are under an independent {
5 obligation to examine their own jurisdiction, and standing 'is perhaps the most
6 important of [the jurisdictional] doctrines} " See U.S. v Hayes 515 U.S. 737, 115
7 S.Ct. 2431, 132 L.Ed.2d 635 (1995). See also FW/PBS, Inc. v. Dallas, 493 U.S. 215,
8
9 at pages 230-231, 110 S.Ct 596, at pages 607-608, 107 L. Ed. 2d 603 (1990).
10 For the foregoing reasons, Exhibits A through B may properly be considered
11 by the Court in ruling on Wi11iams’ motion to dismiss.
12 Dated: Apai 21, 2007.,
13
14
15
16 Micha ICambra
17 I hereby certify that on April 21, 2007, I mailed the attached document to the
18 Clerk’s Office using the USPS System for filing and transmittal of a Notice Filing
to the following registrants:
19
20 Bradley D. Weech
21 Jeremy S. Geigle
Jackson White
22 40 N. Center Street, Suite 200
23 Mesa, AZ 85201
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant
24 bweec11@]`acksonwhitelaweom
25 j [email protected]
26
Michael Cambra
27
28
No. CV-04-595 PHX MHM - 4 -
Request for Judicial Notice of Cambra
se 2:04-cv—OO595-I\/IHIVI Document 208 Filed O4/25/2007 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00595-MHM

Document 208

Filed 04/25/2007

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00595-MHM

Document 208

Filed 04/25/2007

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00595-MHM

Document 208

Filed 04/25/2007

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00595-MHM

Document 208

Filed 04/25/2007

Page 4 of 4