PRG vs. JC

[Half of life is just showing up, as the saying goes. Except within the first 20 days after a complaint is served on you in Florida, however...in that situation, it makes up the other half of life as well.]

You wrote on June 27, 2009 at 10:30am: Another lawsuit was filed against Johnny Chisholm (and his OMW companies: CPCE and Reunion Events) last week, this one by the OMW lighting company, Production Resource Group, in Florida state civil court in Orange County (Orlando). Images are posted [below]:




As you may recall, the lighting company (PRG) was mentioned in Chisholm's unsuccessful emergency motion to lift the TRO during Gay Days:


...with the amount claimed owed to them being $163,543.68, according to the schedule that was filed with the motion.

If you look at the filing activity in this new lawsuit, you'll see that PRG was able to get an emergency garnishment order against Chisholm's bank accounts, on the same day the suit was filed (I haven't checked whether they are the same as the frozen accounts, but my guess is they are).

I have to say this is legally highly unusual. Pre-judgment garnishments like this (like the Preliminary Injunction in the Bardfield case) are very rare; to get them, you have to convince the judge your case is both a slam-dunk, AND there is high probability that the defendant will abscond with funds otherwise. And this state court judge in Orange County took less than a day to answer both these questions in the affirmative.

The web site for PRG is here: http://www.prg.com/

---

You wrote on July 21, 2009 at 7:22pm: A watershed event today in the Chisholm cases: PRG, the lighting company for OMW who was reportedly owed $163,543.68 from Johnny Chisholm, has WON it's state court case against Johnny Chisholm personally, and his OMW companies Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC, and Reunion Events, Inc., by default.

I repeat, PRG has officially WON it's case. Johnny Chisholm had 20 days to file an answer to the summons, and apparantly...he did not. Hence, a default judgment was entered against Chisholm and the two companies at the Orange County courthouse today. See [image below]:


The case file number is 2009-CA-018933-O.

---

You wrote on August 7, 2009 at 5:08pm: Today's Chisholm court news: Orlando-based OMW lighting company PRG filed a couple Motions for Final Judgment in the state court case it won against Chisholm by default a couple weeks ago; if approved, these motions will set the damages PRG is entitled to....

---

You replied to your post on August 10, 2009 at 4:11pm: No new Federal filings today, although the PRG state court case file is officially now marked "CLOSED." The motion for final judgment was approved, so whatever PRG was asking for, it got.

---

You wrote on August 20, 2009 at 4:45pm: Well, just when you thought things couldn't get any stranger...

No activity in the Federal cases today. I was about to call it a day, when on a lark, I decided to check the now closed state court case, filed by the lighting company PRG vs. Chisholm and OMW. The case that was defaulted on, for apparantly $100K+.

Well, imagine my surprise as I saw that six days ago, motions by Chisholm and his OMW compainies to set aside the default judgments:


This is something that is legally possible to do, however, it is very difficult. Basically you have to have a really REALLY good excuse as to why you let a case slip into default in the first place.

So, I'm wondering WHO the attorney is who filed motions six days ago, on behalf of Chisholm AND his corporations, and lo and behold...


Yep, it's the formerly reluctant Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr. The same atty who motioned to withdraw for the federal cases over a month ago, due to not being paid. And now, all of a sudden, he finds it in his heart to LEAP into action for Chisholm to reopen the closed state court case.

I don't know what to make of this, obviously...to say that defending lawsuits in this manner (ie, letting cases default, then try reopening them with a lawyer who supposedly quit earlier over being unpaid) is "strange" would be an understatement.

Well anyways, we are back up to three cases I'm tracking...stay tuned on this Facebook event page, where "the party starts here!"

---

You wrote on September 11, 2009 at 4:26pm: New activity in the closed-but-Chisholm-trying-to-reopen state court case: Chisholm files 3 Motions to Withdraw:


Unfortunately, I can't access the actual filings here, but my guess would be these are motions by attorney Fehr to withdraw from representing Chisholm, this time from the state court case.

Perhaps this is happening because a new Chisholm attorney mentioned in the last post will be taking over. Or perhaps not. We'll see...

---

You wrote on October 1, 2009 at 5:47pm: ...and in other Chisholm court related news, various sources have tracked down a judgment lien filed by PRG against Chisholm, in the state case it won by default. The actual amount of the judgment (which I was never really sure about) turns out to be $316,230.86 (and compounding, at 8% interest):