Free Reply in Support of Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Mar 22 07 04:19p Barb Jordan (4so) 275-4745 Pd
I DECLARATION OF BARRY JORDAN
2
3 BARRY JORDAN, being of suitable age and of sound mind, upon his personal .
4 knowledge, declares and states:
5 1. I am the Respondent in an action pending in the United States District
6 Court, District of Arizona, regarding Petition No. 24, Case No. CV 03-1825 PHX PGR.
7 2. I scheduled a meeting with the Receiver through his counsel, Mr. Murphy.
8 The meeting was scheduled for February l8, 2005. But when I arrived, there was a court
9 reporter and much of the meeting was conducted as a deposition. I had no prior notice of
10 any deposition nor was I present with legal counsel.
ll 3. Following the deposition, and off the record, Mr. Murphy showed me a
12 copy of a Complaint and a Default Judgment against me (and others) in a case brought by
I3 the Chapter 7 Trustee of Charles Thomas Brown, and asked me questions about it. I told
It Mr. Murphy that I was unaware ofthe case or the judgment, and that I had no culpability
15 or fault regarding the claims of that action.
I6 4. Mr. Murphy and I had a discussion on how and why I set up the East
17 Maricopa Holding Trust and the Roger Mills Trust, and on how I purchased the 84th St.
18 Property. Following the deposition and our discussion Mr. Mtnphy stated that he was
19 satisfied that my motives and actions were good and that I could get on with my life.
20 5. I had prior meetings with Mr. Murphy and his staff. In November of 2003,
21 I discussed the deed to the Property and the trust documents with Mr. Murphy’s assistant,
22 Chris Schmidt. When I asked her why the Receiver had tiled a Lis Pendens against the
23 Property, and what hiterest of the Receiver was, she told me that it was because the
24 beneficiary ofthe trust on the deed was listed as American Assets Limited Trust, which
25 was a receivership entity.
26
Case 2:03-cv-01825-PGR Document 343-2 Filed O3/22/2007 Page 1 of 3

l\/lar 22 07 04:lQp Barb Jordan (480) 275-4745 D2
1 6. I also had a meeting with Mr. Warfield and Mr. Murphy, along with my
2 attorney, on February 12, 2007. At that meeting Mr. Murphy stated that he had filed a
3 Lis Pendens against the Property because it was titled in the name of American Assets _
4 Limited Trust, as trustee. This statement contradicts the information give to me by _
5 Christine Schmidt in 2003. When I appeared in the office of the Receiver for the meeting I
6 I noticed a straight jacket on a coat rack with the name "receiver" on the back of it. It
7 appeared to be in jest, however I feel just as if I have been in a straightjacket for the last
8 three years with the Property tied up by the Receiver. At that meeting I recounted the
9 current state of the Property, and pointed out that took several months to sell in a good
10 market back in 2001 when I purchased it. I further pointed out that with the required
11 repair items, it would take perhaps close to $100,000 to bring it up to saleable condition,
12 and that with required disclosures it might be on the market for almost one year. I
13 explained that it is residential Property close to Shea boulevard and may be seen as worth
14 the land value only, which may only be $600,000. I also brought up other items of
15 disclosure which might impede the sale of the home or cause liability concerns for the
I6 Receiver. Mr. Murphy said if we had known this material sooner , he would have acted
I 7 differently.
lg 7 . Immediately following the hearing on January 9, 2007, Mr. Murphy
19 approached me and my attorney and suggested that we might be able to reach some type
20 of settlement with the parties and clear up the issues. My impression was that Mr.
21 Murphy was acknowledging that a mm or injustice had just been done to me (as though
22 he realized the implications of showing me in a bad light to the court).
23 8. I can only wonder if the Receiver and Mr. Murphy have pursued this
24 Property to accrue more fees, evidenced by the fact that when they agreed to sign off on
25 the Lis Pendens and a settlement , they agreed contingent on payment of their legal fees
26
Case 2:03-cv—O1825—PGR Document 343-2 Filed O3/22/2007 Page 2 of 3

Mar 22 07 04:19p Barb Jordan (4so) 275-4745 @3
1 and receiver fees. When I asked him how much they were, Mr. Murphy replied they had
2 not figured them up as of yet.
3 9. I feel that Mr. Murphy took advantage ofthe fact that I was not represented
4 and surprised by the deposition proceeding on February 18, 2005. I had not been
5 informed of any deposition and Mr. Murphy told me we were having a meeting. I was not
6 given any opportunity to read and sign the transcript, and no one told me I had that right.
7 lf I would have been given a chance to explain my answers, I would have explained, as I
8 did at the hearing, that in setting up the Crown Oil and Gas Trust I did not intent a gift to
9 my children, but rather a testamentary intention that they receive the Property at my
I0 death, and I would have explained that I set up these business trusts to keep from being a
11 target for hivolous lawsuits.
I2 10. Pursuant to Rule 80(i), Ariz. R. Civ. Proc., I declare under penalty of
13 perjury that the forgoing statements are true and correct.
14 I/x
15 "ll
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Case 2:03-cv—O1825—PGR Document 343-2 Filed O3/22/2007 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01825-PGR

Document 343-2

Filed 03/22/2007

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01825-PGR

Document 343-2

Filed 03/22/2007

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01825-PGR

Document 343-2

Filed 03/22/2007

Page 3 of 3