afitzy
Former Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2019
- Messages
- 11,285
- Reaction score
- 126,557
Just putting this article on the issue back into this thread (was posted in prior thread) about the litigation with GF/FORE as it addresses some of the issues that were being discussed today:That's true. But sometimes we don't know what banks they're using. And we can't just examine their computers without asking. So we ask for their records or access.
Even then, they can fight those requests on various grounds. A big one would be carte blanche access to computers. That would likely not be allowed. We have to have narrow requests.
So they have to produce the records or information that lets us know where the record are. Then they sometimes refuse to. So we have to file a motion to compel. And it goes on and on.
Missing Woman’s Mother: Estranged Husband Owes Family $2.5 Million in Loans
Quote from article:
"But Fotis Dulos in November provided the court cancelled checks showing that at least $670,000 of that had, in fact, been paid back. That led a judge in September to order that Gloria Farber could attach just $500,000 in Fitos Dulos’s assets to the case—far less than she’d been seeking".
"Yet Gloria Farber then said she realized that she’d “had difficulty securing all of the decedent’s [Hilliard Farber’s] bank records and documentation in regard to the lending relationship” between her deceased husband and Fore Group, according to a second amended complaint filed Jan. 10".
"A closer look at financial records showed that Hilliard Farber had lent Fore Group $9,851,158 between 2004 and 2016 and that Fotis Dulos had repaid $7,309,326, meaning there’s an unpaid balance of $2,541,831, according to the Jan. 10 filing".
"Gloria Farber had been wrong to limit the claims “for amounts due in connection to the purchase and resale of properties located in New Canaan and Avon, Connecticut,” according to a Motion to Amend and Increase Prejudgment Remedy".
“However, through discovery, the plaintiff has become aware of substantial funds due and owing from the defendants [Fotis Dulos and Fore Group] to the plaintiff well beyond what was originally alleged,” Gloria Farber said in the motion".
"She’s now seeking a prejudgment remedy of $3 million. Fotis Dulos objected to the new figure, saying his mother-in-law already “had her day in court on this issue.”