Free Clerk's Judgment - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 14.4 kB
Pages: 3
Date: February 28, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 627 Words, 3,976 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/35412/578.pdf

Download Clerk's Judgment - District Court of Arizona ( 14.4 kB)


Preview Clerk's Judgment - District Court of Arizona
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lawrence J. Warfield, Plaintiff,

v.

Michael Alaniz, et al., Defendants ___________________________

) ) ) JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE ) ) CIV 03-2390-PHX-JAT ) ) ) ) )

x

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Judgment is entered as follows: As to defendant Leonard Bestgen, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $1,000; Constructive Fraud claim $10,400; Negligence per se claim $32,000; Arizona Securities Laws claim $10,400; and Unjust Enrichment claim $1,000; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $32,000. As to defendant Robert Carroll, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $800; Constructive Fraud claim $8,300; Negligence per se claim $37,000; Arizona Securities Laws claim $8,300; and Unjust Enrichment claim $800; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in

Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT

Document 578

Filed 02/28/2007

Page 1 of 3

favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $37,000. As to defendant Rudy Crosswell, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $700; Constructive Fraud claim $7,100; Negligence per se claim $31,900; Arizona Securities Laws claim $7,100; and Unjust Enrichment claim $700; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $31,900. As to defendant Charles Davis, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $2,000; Constructive Fraud claim $19,900; Negligence per se claim $109,900; Arizona Securities Laws claim $19,900; and Unjust Enrichment claim $2,000; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $109,900. As to defendant Paul Richard, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $1,400; Constructive Fraud claim $14,300; Negligence per se claim $64,700; Arizona Securities Laws claim $14,300; and Unjust Enrichment claim $1,400; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $64,700. As to defendant Patrick Wehrly, Inasmuch as the Verdicts are on the following claims in the following amounts: Federal Securities Laws claim $700; Constructive Fraud claim $7,100; Negligence per se claim $39,000; Arizona Securities Laws claim $7,100; and Unjust Enrichment claim $700; and inasmuch as these amounts are not cumulative; accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of the Receiver, Lawrence J. Warfield, in the amount of the highest verdict, $39,000.

Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT

Document 578

Filed 02/28/2007

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants Leonard Bestgen, Robert Carroll, Rudy Crosswell, Charles Davis, Paul Richard and Patrick Wehrly with respect to Plaintiff's Negligence claim, Conversion claim, Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act §44-1004A(1) claim, and Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act § 44-1004A(2) claim.

DATE: February 28, 2007

RICHARD H. WEARE, Clerk/DCE By: s/L. Fettis Deputy Clerk

Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT

Document 578

Filed 02/28/2007

Page 3 of 3