Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
DR 1102 (A) (1) James Leuenberger knowingly engaged in unethical and criminal
behavior against the Josephine County Circuit Court, Judge Thomas Hull, Judge
Linda Baker, Judge Daniel Simcoe, and Defendant Deborah Swan.
Page 1 of 77
1
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. I did not send a written notice of intent to appear to James Leuenberger
because of the fact that I did appear and I did answer to the original complaint.
C. Leuenberger made this statement to mislead the facts in order to cover up his
violations.
D. The facts of my timely appearance and my timely answers can be found within
the self authenticated evidence, starting with the UPS tracking number.
Page 2 of 77
E. This tracking information can be verified by clicking the UPS tracking link,
and entering the following tracking number: 1Z4E716V0121316819
Page 3 of 77
2
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. August 11, 2014, was the 30TH day and the final day to answer and appear,
therefore I made my appearance and I answered to the complaint.
B. August 11, 2014, was not the 31st day after service.
C. August 11, 2014, was the 30th day, and the day I timely made service.
Page 4 of 77
Page 5 of 77
B. August 11, 2014, is the 30th day, and is the same day Leuenberger began to
draft the premature order for the default judgment.
Page 6 of 77
C. August 11, 2014, was the same day his office employee Michele Wilkinson, at
9:05AM, signed for my UPS proof of delivery.
Page 7 of 77
D. August 11, 2014, is the same day Leuenberger had his employee Michelle
Wilkinson, notarize his sworn affidavit, claiming he had not received my
answers or any notice of any other appearance.
Page 8 of 77
3
DR 1-102(A)(3)
A. This statement by Leuenberger, shows his attempt to circumvent the truth
about the details of when he knowingly began to file for the default judgment.
B. The evidence can also be found in the court records, filed by James
Leuenberger the day after the Oral Argument, for the Objection Hearing on my
MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT ORDER AND JUDGMENT.
D. The following clips are copied and pasted off of the record. The full copy is
attached as EXHIBIT B.
Page 9 of 77
Page 10 of 77
C. Pursuant to page 2, lines 13 - 15, Around 12:00 Noon, on August 11, 2014,
After he mailed the above described documents, shortly after noon,
Leuenberger then opened his office mail box , and discovered the UPS parcel
which had my answers, affirmative defense and counter claim. DR 1-102(A)
(3)
D.
should have contacted the clerk and told the clerk to hold off on the default when
the papers arrive at the court. DR 1-102(A)(3)
(1) Pursuant to page 2, line 16 - 17, the first action Leuenberger then takes, is he
scanned my answers, affirmative defense and counter claim, and emailed a
copy to Ed Snook, the Plaintiff.
Page 11 of 77
(2) The attached email is the proof that Leuenberger and Snook had already made
the decision to enter this false default judgment against me, by claiming they
never received my answers or appearance. (EXHIBIT C)
(3) The email that Leuenberger sent to Ed snook , clearly proves that there was no
need to explain or discuss any details with Snook. (EXHIBIT C)
(4) This type of communication it is self evident that both Leuenberger and Snook
intentionally and knowingly began a default, before the legal time had expired.
DR 1-102(A)(3)
4
Page 12 of 77
1 min 50 sec
yes you did send answers and appeared, but its not
considered filed yet because there is no money on it yet
5
A. Leuenberger, Ed Snook and the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk, knowingly pushed
this default through the court, knowing it was procured by fraud, deceit, false
facts, false sworn affidavit. DR 1-102(A)(3)
Page 13 of 77
B. The court granted this motion due to the clerk Civil Shonk assisting with
pushing it through, knowing it was false. DR 1-102(A)(3)
C. The judges signed off on the default, due to the fraud and deception that has
been played against the court and judges without their full knowledge of the
true facts about my answers and appearance . DR 1-102(A)(3)
Page 14 of 77
D. Leuenberger continued to file more fraudulent judgments upon the court, and
was awarded a supplemental judgment by Judge Baker, while knowing this
Supplemental was fraud. DR 1-102(A)(3)
E. Leuenberger also was awarded attorney fees by fraud, claiming he had been
following the rules ORCP68. DR 1-102(A)(3)
F. The judge added 9% interest, then placed a lien against me for $49,999.99.
DR 1-102(A)(3)
6
A. Leuenberger is attempting to deceive the BAR without the truth and the facts.
B. The motion I filed against this Default Judgment, was a MOTION TO
VACATE VOID DEFAULT ORDERS AND JUDGMENT .
C. This motion first was filed on September 7, 2014.
D. I received a Notice for an Objection Hearing to be held on November 12, 2014.
E. October 20, 2014, I filed for a Motion for Telephonic Appearance and it was
denied.
F. October 22, 2014, Judge Daniel Simcoe wrote on the Order why he denied my
motion for Telephonic appearance. This motion is attached as EXHIBIT D.
Page 15 of 77
Page 16 of 77
A. The note above from Judge Simcoe, claims that Leuenberger told the court he
did not receive a copy of my MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE,
and if or when he does he objects.
Page 17 of 77
A. October 23, 2014, The very next day, Leuenberger then contradict what he had
just told Judge Simcoe the day before, and now admits on court record that he
did receive my Motion for Telephonic Appearance.
Page 18 of 77
F. This all was intentional by Leuenberger to prejudice the court against me.
7
Page 19 of 77
Leuenberger has not addressed any of my motions. Leuenberger has only made
false claims, denys receiving some of my motions, and contradicts himself without
any fear of being in violation of the rules.
Leuenberger has continued to make false claims all through this case.
I was not aware of the fraud and the false representation made to the court, about
my answers and my appearance, until I received a copy of Leuenbergers
NOTICE TO THE COURT.
This is when I contacted another clerk who works in the archives, and requested a
copy of the entire case file.
I wanted to see every document that has been filed in this case by Leuenberger.
On October 31, 2014, I was sent a email with a left side and a right side.
This is when I discovered that the default judgment was presented to the court,
falsely claiming I never appeared, or sent my answers before the time expired for
me to appear.
Page 20 of 77
The entire default filed by Leuenberger was procured by false statements, fraud,
and false representations, claiming I never appeared or sent my answers to the
clerk or to Leuenberger.
This attempt of Leuenberger, to deceive the BAR, to believe false claims of facts in
his response to my complaint, is another violation pursuant to Rule 8.4.
The record is the self authenticated evidence which proves that Leuenberger and
his client Ed Snook, knowingly used this court to commit the crime of extortion,
by fraud, perjury, concealing documents, filing false sworn affidavits, all of which
are crimes
OBJECTION HEARING
ORAL ARGUMENT
During the November 12, 2014, Objection Hearing, I made an oral judicial notice
of the fraud, false sworn affidavits, and false representation made by James
Leuenebrger on each of the records he filed.
The following is on record, from the oral argument.
Page 21 of 77
The following are the actual statements made between Judge Hull and Leuenberger
during the Objection Hearing on November 12, 2014.
J.
Leuenberger denied numerous times receiving my answers and claimed to the court
that I did not make any appearance. The Objection Hearing was held in Judge Hulls
court.
K. James Leuenberger made the following statements which can be found in the official
court records of this oral argument:
19 min 45 sec. There was no misstatements, there was no violation of
Rule17 regarding the sign a pleading for the motion that
matter, that I was not saying anything misleading or asking in
violation of the law or asking for something that Mr. Snook
was not entitled to.
L.
Ed Snook was not entitled too a $50,000.00 default judgment with attorney fees.
Page 22 of 77
A. Leuenberger had the opportunity to correct the false statements he made about my
answers and my appearance.
B. Leuenberger chose to continue with the false claims that I had not answered or
appeared at all.
20 min 38 m sec
Page 23 of 77
A. Leuenberger has a legal duty to the court, to not knowingly make false claims
as facts.
B. Leuenebrger and his client Ed Snook both are knowingly committing fraud
upon the court, by continuing to commit perjury.
C. Leuenberger did receive Deborah Swans answers and I did make my
appearance before the time expired.
Judge Hull then asked Leuenberger if Deborah Swan still had not made any
appearance or answered.
20 min 55 sec
she was allowed to file a motion,after the judgment was entered. 2No the
answer was not filed and received by the court before the order of default
1Leuenberger
knowingly made a false statement. Leuenberger knows that he entered a default judgment
after I had legally answered and appeared.
2Yes,
an answer was filed and received by the court before the order of default judgment was entered by
Leuenberger.
Page 24 of 77
judgment 3well, She appeared when she was allowed to file a motion after the
njudgment was entered. 4No the answer was not filed and received by the court
before the order of default or the judgment of default , so I believe Ms Swan
A. The entire above statement by Leuenberger was made to deceive the court.
B. Leuenberger did receive my answers and Leuenberger knew the clerk also
received my answers on August 11, 2014.
C. Therefore Leuenberger is making a false claim that my answers were not
filed or received before the order of default judgment, is another false
representation by Leuenberger, knowing it is false.
D. I made my appearance when the court was served my answers.
E. The UPS Proof of delivery tracking number 1Z4E716V0154650066 shows
Josephine Circuit Court received the UPS delivery on August 11, 2014, at
10:41 AM.
F. Leuenberger made the false claim upon the court as a fact, by stating I was
allowed to file a motion after the judgment was entered.
G. Judge Hull then interrupts Leuenberger and asks if Leuenberger disagrees with
what I had orally noticed the court about my answers and appearance.
3I
4Yes
the answer was filed and received by the court before the order of default or the judgment of default ,
Page 25 of 77
Page 26 of 77
The filing of pleadings and other documents with the court as required by
these rules shall be made by filing them with the clerk of the court or the
person exercising the duties of that office.
ORCP says the following: Appearance is made by filing with the clerk
ORCP 7 :Filing is made upon the date of mailing.
A. Judge Hull believed Leuenbergers false statements he made.
B. Since the OJIN court register did not have any entry of my answers, counter
claim, or affirmative defense, entered into the OJIN register.
C. Leuenberger and Snook were fully aware that both he and the civil clerk
received my answers, affirmative defenses and counter claims on August 11,
2014, before the time to appear had expired. VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) (b)
D. On August 13, 2014, Leuenberger received a call from the civil clerk.
E. The clerk contacted Leuenberger when she received Leuenbergers documents
that he mailed to the court to file for the default order and judgment.
F. The civil clerk informed Leuenberger that on August 11, 2014, she did receive
my answers on time.
G. The civil clerk explained there was a delay with my fee waiver application.
Page 27 of 77
H.
Leuenberger told the clerk to continue with the default judgment anyway.
VIOLATED RULE 3.2 (a) (b)
I.
A. Leuenbergers actions are clear violation of ethics and his duty to correct his
actions by not continuing to commit fraud upon the court, as well as not
continue to use the court to unlawfully extort money out of me.
B. In the above statement by Leuenberger, when he says, as far as I know,
Leuenberger did know that I was not trying to deceive the court and he knew
that certificate of service was a typographical mistake. Leuenberger is trying to
do anything he can to paint a false light to prejudice the court against me, This
is not ethical and is a violation of Rules of Professional Misconduct.
Page 28 of 77
C. This mistake was already corrected, and Leuenberger and I already discussed
this mistake.
Judge Hulls attitude becomes more indifferent towards me as this hearing
continues to
due to the constant false statements that Leuenberger continues to use against me.
At 24 min 19 sec, I state:
Yes Sir. I would like to state there has deception on my side when it comes to
the certificate of service. When I realized I had a typographical error, I
immediately corrected it, and I actually called mr. Leuenberger on the phone,
and let him know it was a mistake. I immediately sent in a motion to correct it
and add it to the case. It was just an error on my part, just a mistake. So that was
corrected. The tone of voice by Judge Hull was obvious that the judge was not
believing anything I was saying during this hearing.
HULL:
Anything else?
Page 29 of 77
Judge Hull discussed with the court clerk Cameron, what was
entered in the OJIN register.
Leuenberger should have requested the civil clerk Cheryl to be
called in to answer a couple of questions.
But instead Leuenberger had already swayed the judges opinion,
so when I requested to have the clerk called in, the Judge denied
me.
Judge Hull stated at 28 min 33 sec:
I dont see anything about additional document including the
application being filed. But I dont know. Are they
Page 30 of 77
usually done that way or is it just the waiver filed without the
documents?
Page 31 of 77
HULL:
JIM :
HULL:
JIM:
JIM:
Page 32 of 77
HULL::
JIM:
HULL:
JIM:
HULL:
HULL:
JIM:
HULL:
Okay.
HULL:
Page 34 of 77
HULL:
SWAN: Yes sir if you look at the court, at the file, i don't know if
its been entered, cause Im not their, but you can even ask
your clerk cheryl yourself. i was told on the 11th she
received my answers. i was told on the that the hold up for
why my,i was under the impression, that she entered
me as my appearance and I answered. The hold up, I was
under that impression,and I have all this on recorded
conversation, I record everything because this use all new
to me, and because I am in Texas. Cheryl told me on the
12th that she has spoken to Mr Leuenberger.
Mr leuenberger was informed that I did appear and they did
receive my appearance and my answers, but the hold up was
my fee waiver application. and Cheryl then asked Mr
Leuenberger, what do you want me to do? Mr Leuenberger
told Cheryl to go ahead and enter a default. This is exactly
what she told me. I've got the recorded conversation and
the transcripts.
Page 35 of 77
little note that sure said she put on there, the he, that most likely
the judge will not enter a default . this is what your clem cheryl told
me. okay. and i have it on record, so then i calmed down, and i was
required by cheryl or some reason to get a notarized statement from
my parents claiming that i have them helping me with my bills right
now. so that took an unnecessary delay by the clerk. but this is what
she told me i had to do in order to get my fee waiver approved . i
asked her if i could fax this stuff into her, she told me no, it has to be
sent over in the mail. Now its Thursday and i'm trying to find a way to
send it over night to Oregon, because the first time when I ant my
answers and appearance it cost 120.00 next day air ups to your court .
i did
not have the money, and i called her again. and i asked her
can i please fax this to you, because i had just gotten done reading the
rules of faxing, and records are allowed to be faxed. she tells me again
you're not
allowed to fax. her and i got into to a little
confritation on the phone. and she hangs up on me. i called back and i
talked to lisa. lisa said Deborah, you are allowed to fax your proof of
the bills and stuff, and i will take care of it. that is what lisa told me.
so there are a lot of dynamics that happened about this fee waiver, but
my point it is that i sent and I appeared and I answered to this
complaint, that was filed against me. I made my appearance and i
made my answer All the other stuff is a complete violation of my due
process and there is not suppose to be any kind of discrimination when
it comes to the status or your income. iIm having finical issues in my
life, and that should not be able to hold me back to step forward and
defend myself from a claim against me. and that is what this whole
thing has turned into,. this fee waiver application is restricting my
rights to my own due process of law. and that is the right to be heard,
and a right to appear. okay. and any appellate judges would side with
me and the supreme court also has a lot of case law that there
should never be any sort of price tag related your righted to the
judicial process. and that is what Leuenberger did get my
appearance and did get my answers. and if I have to appeal his I
will, cause Ive got the proof to it. and i will file a suit affiant you
r clerk if i haver to get her to speak honestly because cheryl
knows all the details involved here. ands so does lisa, and so does
JUDY.
Page 36 of 77
JIM
SWAN
Yes sir
JIM
SWAN
No I did not subpoena any of them to appear
today.
But I can though. Can we have a
continuance and
have them appear?
HULL
SWAN:
HULL:
all
SWAN:
HULL:
will.
SWAN:
court?
HULL:
time, I
SWAN
Page 37 of 77
HULL:
SWAN:
HULL:
Well I cant tell you what to do. I cant tell you what
you need or don't need. This is your opportunity to a
hearing. You obviously knew about the time for
the hearing , this is the time to present the material. It does
not keep going. We don't continue and continue ad continue,
okay? So right now this is the hearing time and this is when
you have the opportunity to present what you want to okay.
SWAN
Okay.
SWAN
JIM
inaudible
HULL
SWAN:
Mr Leuenberger
JIM:
SWAN
HULL
umm maam,
SWAN
Yes sir
HULL
he
Okay you can ask a question but you cant ask him what
thinks his opinion is of the law.
I was not asking Leuenberger what his opinion is. I was asking
how does my sending my answers to the court, not constitute
making my appearance ass he just stated.
Page 38 of 77
SWAN: Okay well that why, let me ask him one more question if
you don't mind why then on all these orders
of default did you falsely state that you have not
received any appearance or answers or my intent of
my appearance?
JIM
Every order that you have filed states that you have not
received any answer or any appearance from me or any
intent of my appearance.
HULL
All right.
HULL
Thank you.
HULL
Page 39 of 77
5162.355
James Leuenberger knowingly issued and delivered to the Civil Clerk Cheryl
Shonk, in Josephine County Court, documents that in form and substance, falsely
simulated the action of entering a false default judgment against Deborah Swan for
$49,999.99.
(2) False swearing is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 184; 2013 c.218 20]
Page 40 of 77
164.085
THEFT BY DECEPTION
A. James Leuenberger and Edward Snook, committed theft by deception, through
their willful and deliberate intent of committing fraud, by making multiple
false representations to the Josephine County Court about Deborah Swan.
B. Defendant James Leuenberger procured a false default judgment against the
Plaintiff for $49,999.99.
C. James Leuenberger created a false impressions of law, value, intention and
State of mind, that he knew are not true.
D. Leuenberger and Ed Snook, have both failed to correct this false impression
about Deborah Swan, which they intentionally started on August 11, 2014.
Intent to defraud means that person acts with conscious objective to take property from another
person by deception. State v. Reynolds, 246 Or App 152, 265 P3d 22 (2011)
6
Page 41 of 77
E.
F.
James Leuenberger has prevented Judge Thomas Hull, Judge Lynn Baker, and
Judge Daniel Simcoe, from acquiring the truthful information involving
Deborah Swans appearance, affirmative defenses, answers, and counter
claim, that Deborah Swan sent on time to James Leuenbergers office, on
August 11, 2014, at 9:05 A.M..
Page 42 of 77
(d) Cheryl Shonk, the civil clerks statement to Deborah Swan, on August 12,
2014,`, when Cheryl confirmed to Deborah that she spoke with James
Leuenberger, and he confirmed he did receive her answers, counter complaint,
and affirmative defense on time.
(f) Leuenbergers email to Ed Snook on August 11, 2014.
E.
The following statements we're stated on court record in Judge Thomas Hulls
court room on November 12, 2014, as well as Leuenberger response he filed
to the court on November 13, 2014. The following is from the response he
filed.
F.
November 12, 2014, During the oral argument, Deborah Swan judicially
noticed Judge Thomas Hull, of this fraud, false representation, and
misconduct.
Page 43 of 77
HULL
SWAN
HULL
Page 44 of 77
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
HULL
Page 45 of 77
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
HULL: When you say it was sent, does that mean the day you
forwarded it here?
Page 46 of 77
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
Page 47 of 77
HULL
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
Page 48 of 77
Carry on
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
help
HULL
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
me
HULL
you
Page 49 of 77
SWAN
HULL
at it
SWAN
HULL
SWAN
Page 50 of 77
HULL:
SWAN:
HULL:
Okay, carry on
SWAN:
Page 51 of 77
Page 52 of 77
Page 53 of 77
Page 54 of 77
Page 55 of 77
Page 56 of 77
Page 57 of 77
SWAN
HULL
H. These facts are pertinent to the disposition of the courts for approving or
denying a motion for a default judgment.
Page 58 of 77
FRAUD
A. The fraud, false representation, and misconduct, that has been perpetrated by
James Leuenberger, and Edward Snook, is how they were able to place the
$49,999.99 fraudulent default judgment against Deborah Swan.
B. August 11, 2014, James Leuenberger knowingly sent to the Josephine County
Court, a motion for a DEFAULT AND GENERAL JUDGMENT, with a false
supporting affidavit, for the intent to defraud and make false representation.
C. On August 13, 2014, James Leuenberger knowingly mis lead the court by filing
these false motions, where he stated as a fact, claiming that he had not received
Deborahs answers, and that he has no knowledge of Deborah Swan having any
intent to appear.
D. This information is pertinent to the disposition whether a default order and
judgment, attorney fees and money award would be allowed according to the
rules of default judgments to be granted. 7
7Under
Page 59 of 77
165.102
OBTAINING EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS BY DECEPTION.
A. James Leuenberger and Edward Snook knowingly committed the crime of
obtaining, and the execution of documents by deception, with intent to
knowingly defraud and injure Deborah Swan, to acquire a substantial benefit
for himself, and Leuenbergers client Ed Snook.
Page 60 of 77
B. Leuenberger and Edward Snook, knowingly allowed the court to approve false
money awards and damages, at the expense of Deborah Swan, knowing the
judgments and money awards and damages were procured through fraud,
theft, false representations and deceit.
C. Leuenberger, the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk, and Edward Snook both
knowingly concealed the facts about Deborah Swans answers, affirmative
defense, counterclaim, fee waiver application, and appearance, that Civil
Under Former Similar Statute (Ors 165.205)The accused must have intended to defraud the injured party, made a false pretense,
the latter must have relied on the false representation believing it to be true and must thereby have been induced to part with
something of value. State v. Clermont, 9 Or App 141, 495 P2d 305 (1972),
Page 61 of 77
Clerk Cheryl Shonk, James Leuenberger and Edward Snook all received on
time, before the time expired, to deceive the Josephine County Judges.
D. This criminal concealment was perpetrated by the Civil Clerk Cheryl Shonk,
Leuenberger and Ed Snook, to enter the false default judgment, order of a
money award, damages and attorney fees to be unlawfully forced to be paid
by Deborah Swan.
E.
On August 11, 2014, James Leuenberger and Edward Snook, knowingly sent
false, fraudulent documents to the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk.
F.
On August 15, 2015, James Leuenberger and his client Ed Snook, knowingly
deceived Judge Thomas Hull into signing a fraudulent General Judgment and
Money Award, with post judgment interest at 9% per annum, attorney fees
and cost disbursements which are falsely claimed to be in accordance with
ORCP 68.
Page 62 of 77
An accused acts knowingly under the ABA Standards when he has "conscious awareness of the nature or attendant
circumstances of the conduct but without the conscious objective or purpose to accomplish a particular result." ABA
Standards at 17. The Oregon criminal standard for a "knowing[]" mental state articulated in ORS 161.085(8) and the
ABA standard for "knowing" conduct describe the same state of mind. Therefore, as to the convictions for false
reporting and improper use of the emergency reporting system, the record establishes that the accused acted with at
least a knowing state of mind.
Page 63 of 77
C. The records that have been filed in this case is the self authenticated
evidence of fraud, misconduct and misrepresentation.
D. The records show where Leuenberger has claimed that the Defendant did
not appear nor does he has any knowledge of the Defendant appearing.
E. The confession by James Leuenberger during the objection hearing, that he DID
receive the Defendants answers, affirmative defense and counter claim, clearly
proves this default judgment is not legal.
Annotated ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3; cf. DR 7-102(B)(1); see
also DR 1-102(A)(3) (lawyer may not engage in conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation).
Leuenberger has admitted on court record, in his response to the Judicial Notice I
orally made during the Objection Hearing help on November 12, 2014, in Judge
Thomas Hulls courtroom.
TITLE 18
2071
Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
A. Deborah Swan filed and deposited with the civil clerk Cheryl Shonk in
Josephine County Circuit Court, and with employee Michelle Wilkinson, at the
Page 64 of 77
D. Cheryl Shonk, the civil clerk knowingly concealed Deborah Swan's answers,
affirmative defense, counter claim and fee waiver application.
Page 65 of 77
E. Leuenberger thought he was emailing Judge Hull, but instead he sent the email
to Judge Hill out in Linn County.
F. When Judge Hill opened up the email and discovered what Jim was doing,
Judge Hill responded to Leuenberger by reminding Leuenberger that this type
of communications with a judge is not legal.
Page 66 of 77
6.21 Disbarment
Page 67 of 77
Page 69 of 77
EXHIBIT C
Page 70 of 77