-2-
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
NETSPHERE, INC., §
MANILA INDUSTRIES, INC., and §
MUNISH KRISHAN, §
Plaintiffs. §
§ Civil Action No. 3-09CV0988-F
v. §
§
JEFFREY BARON, and §
ONDOVA LIMITED COMPANY, §
Defendants. §
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE: SECOND MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
RECORD WITH NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE ROYAL FURGESON:
COMES NOW JEFF BARON, and moves this Court to grant leave to file
the following motion to supplement the record with the evidence attached as
Exhibit A:
A. WHAT THIS EVIDENCE PROVES
EXHIBIT A - THE RECEIVER’S EMAIL
This email:
(1) Establishes that the receiver is not an impartial and indifferent person.
The email proves the receiver is clearly an advocate and not acting with
impartiality, and has therefore breached their duty as receiver and their
assessment is invalid because it is an assessment of an advocate. See
Texas American Bancshares, Inc. v. Clarke, 740 F.Supp. 1243, 1253
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 518 Filed 05/05/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID 18664
-3-
(N.D.Tex.1990) (receiver “owes a duty of strict impartiality”).
(2) The email also establishes that receiver’s assessment has not been
reasonable, nor unbiased. For example:
a. The email proves that to the receiver’s assessment, evidence
that Mr. Lyon’s billing rate was $40.00 per hour is “not
evidence” and does change the receiver’s assessment nor (to
the receiver’s mind) controvert Mr. Lyon’s claim for
payment at the rate of $300.00. The fact that Mr. Lyon was
paid at $40.00 per hour, and the evidence proves he was
billing at that rate, to the receiver is “no evidence”.
Notably, the evidence the receiver views (and argues) as
“no evidence” clearly and unambiguously establishes that
even after September 2010, Lyon was clearly charging
$40.00 per hour, not the $300.00 he is now claiming. In this
evidence Mr. Lyon, in his own words, states that his rate is
$40 per hour. He notes that allows ‘more bang for the
buck’. Yet, to the receiver’s view, this is not evidence
which controverts Mr. Lyon’s ‘claim’ that his rate was
$300.00 per hour, and is therefore due over $75,000.00.
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 518 Filed 05/05/11 Page 2 of 4 PageID 18665
-4-
b. The receiver views the proof that after the global settlement
was reached Taylor made no claim to any additional
‘contingency’ fee due, and instead stated expressly “We'll
probably have a very small bill that will go out at the
first of September, but that should be the last one” as
“no evidence” to controvert Taylor’s current claim that he
has a near $80,000.00 past due fee.
B. WHY THE EVIDENCE WAS NOT RAISED EARLIER
This material was in the exclusive possession of the receiver.
C. RELIEF REQUESTED
Jeff Baron requests the Court to consider this evidence with respect to the
Court’s consideration of the receiver’s motions.
Jointly and in the alternative Jeff Baron requests this Court to remove the
receiver as biased, and if a receiver is to be appointed, appoint an unbiased and
impartial receiver who is not an active advocate against Jeff.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Gary N. Schepps
Gary N. Schepps
Texas State Bar No. 00791608
Drawer 670804
Dallas, Texas 75367
(214) 210-5940 - Telephone
(214) 347-4031 - Facsimile
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 518 Filed 05/05/11 Page 3 of 4 PageID 18666
-5-
E-mail: legal@schepps.net
COURT ORDERED TRIAL
COUNSEL FOR JEFF BARON
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that this document was served this day on all parties who receive
notification through the Court’s electronic filing system.
CERTIFIED BY: /s/ Gary N. Schepps
Gary N. Schepps
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 518 Filed 05/05/11 Page 4 of 4 PageID 18667
