"Something's Up" In America's Big Berg
featuring
Selected Poems from The Alaska Mystery Collection
and The Tree Series
by Paula Marie Rose
UPDATE: February 9, 2008. I received a signed copy of an Order relating to "Second Motion for Explanation", which is the title Mr. Grant used on his paperwork, and on this Order for the Judge to sign, when replying to my Motion entitled "Motion for Explanation for Unauthorized Brokerage Account Access and Transactions", filed on December 30, 2008.
I have smudged out the name of the Judge, the CCI who also received a copy, and the other court staff. I must have misheard the court staffer I spoke with about this Order previously, and see that the mailing date, not the signature date of the Judge, is February 2, 2009. It is unclear what Motion this Order is relating to, as to my knowledge, after checking with court staff, there is no Motion on file with the name of "Second Motion for Explanation".
And while Mr. Grant's certification and signature state that he mailed the CCI and me copies of this Order, or presumably, his draft copy which he was wanting the Judge to sign, the date relating to his signature is Jan. 29, 2008. How can that be a true statement? I didn't receive a copy during 2008, and nothing relating to the TD Ameritrade account was filed in a Motion by me until December 30, 2008; that's eleven (11) months after Mr. Grant signed this paper.
After speaking with the Family Law Self Help Center, it appears that I seem to have misunderstood what kind of information should be included in a Motion on the actual page bearing the title of "Motion". The Center staff cannot give actual legal advice, but they can provide forms and information as to how the paper flow works. They have been very helpful and polite, even when they might not have been able to provide answers to my questions. Apparently, a Motion is more about telling the Judge what you want from the other party, and not about offering an opportunity to have the opposing party explain the situation, or stating the facts as to why one is filing a Motion. I'm not an Attorney, and have no legal training. I usually like to give another person the opportunity to share their side before accusing them of anything, it appears that I've been completing the forms incorrectly to satisfy my bottom line, and I may have left loopholes open.
I'll post my orginal Motion at a later point. Mr. Grant's statement of "...does not request any relief that the court can grant in the context of a child custody modification proceeding."
That is true, and he's using a technical twist to his advantage. My December 30, 2008 Motion might not have been worded exactly right, but the Order I wrote for the Judge to sign, and the associated documents I provided for everyone to review, clearly stated what had occurred and what I wanted.
The Property Settlement Agreement and the Child Custody Agreement have the same case number, and were signed by the same Judge on the same date in 2006. I suggest that the court system might want to consider assigning either a number for a Child Custody Matter, and a variation of it for the Property Settlement Agreement such as XXXXXX (CCA) and use the same XXXXXX followed by (PSA) to eliminate confusion by all parties.
UPDATE: February 4, 2009. I received the Order which Paul H. Grant, Attorney At Law, had prepared for the Judge to sign, and was to have been included in the reply previously mailed. I had to request a copy of this Order twice from Mr. Grant, as it wasn't included in his initial reply. Note that the date is incorrect, as his signature appears below the date of Jan. 29, 2008, which may have been a typo.
I filed the original Motion on the TD AMERITRADE account issue on December 30, 2008. I had previously stated under the "Daily Items and Updates" section on December 22 that I was doing so. It appears that Mr. Grant and party started the spin machine immediately after reading it, because my documents weren't mailed to them until the afternoon of December 30, 2008.
My Motion and associated backup are below, and do note that Mr. Grant chose to change the title of my Motion in his reply, and on the Order that he submitted for the Judge to sign.
I checked with the Court Staff this morning, and apparently, the Judge signed the Order on February 2, 2009 as written by Mr. Grant. I'll believe it when I see the signed copy, because the incorrect title and lack of clarity about the subject matter is too vague. The line of "Parties are not required to "explain" their conduct." is a complete showstopper. Alaska isn't the Wild West, and when someone does something wrong or unlawful, an explanation is clearly appropriate. A Property Settlement Agreement signed by a Judge is a legal document, and all parties must abide by the terms.
To date, I have filed One (1) complete Motion on the TD AMERITRADE issue, and the Court Staff I spoke with didn't have another in the file. So what is Mr. Grant talking about? How did one Motion morph into two? And where is the other Motion, and who filed it? And how can a Judge deny a Motion when the Order doesn't match the Motion by named title? Are we all discussing the same matter?
All of the other documents and pages will be below the Affidavit of Eric Swanson, below.
Below is the Affidavit of Eric William Swanson which I received on January 20, 2009. It relates to the Motion that I filed on December 30, 2008 entitled "Motion for Explanation for Unauthorized Brokerage Account Access and Transactions", which I shall post at a later date.
It is notable that the office of Mr. Paul H. Grant, Attorney At Law, produced such an incomplete and inaccurate document, while attempting to pass off the contents as true statements. The lack of a Notary Seal and signature should make this document invalid. Eric is entitled to speak, write, or swear to whatever he believes are true and correct statements, and has done so.
Apparently, he didn't read and review the emails and other documentation that I provided with the Motion; some were between he and I, others were between TD Ameritrade and me. Dates, times, names, actions, and much other true and factual details are provided in those documents. Some can be seen under the section of this story "TD AMERITRADE: Uncooperative Customer Service, Who's Being Paid?"
Below is the pertinent page from our Property Settlement Agreement, which was signed by the Judge on October 3, 2006. I will not include all pages of the Agreement, to save space. In the second paragraph under Item 6. it clearly states that "...Wife will receive jointly held stocks valued..."
There's no getting around the fact that this TD AMERITRADE Account was my sole property, and had been so, since the Judge signed the PSA Order on October 3, 2006. Eric's claim that he wanted his name removed as a joint owner does not give him the right to access my account without my permission, or knowledge, almost two (2) years later. He made password changes, trades, and instructed TD Ameritrade staff to close the account; all without my prior consent or knowledge.
His Affidavit and recollections are posted below this page.
MOTION FOR Explanation for Unauthorized Brokerage Account Access and Transactions
(I have to scan and load these documents separately, due to technical limitations. Should be posted on Feb. 15)
Copyright this business. All rights reserved.