Illegal Search and Seizure
A former landowner who had horses illegally seized without a hearing,and was accused of 25-65 counts of "animal abuse", was acquitted of all charges after a jury trial in Lassen County. A motion in criminal court should have been set for the illegal seizure; if proven, there should have been no criminal charges since the evidence would not be allowed. There was a 1538.5 and it was lost, but we were not able to view the pleadings.
A horse rescue (The Grace Foundation of Northern California) worked with both animal control and the bank attorney Timothy M. Ryan, of Irvine, for Wells Fargo, to take the animals (they did not buy them or have a seizure hearing) ...but when things started to fall apart, the attorney that directly worked with the rescue was fired or removed from the case, and the rescue turned down a fairly large offer to settle.
The rescue went through 3-4 attorneys and in the end, the CEO of the rescue refused to attend trial (since she would have lost) and her 501(c)(3) was later shut down and evicted from the ranch. One of the KEY mistakes was that the rescue should have filed her case in Lassen County, not El Dorado County. The bank attorney then got case moved to Orange County on procedural grounds. Had it been filed in Lassen, the case might have ended differently as Lassen County was becoming weary of the bank attorney.
Land owner used to have a horse riding business on the land. Notably, the banks, especially bank of America, admitted in 2012, they did not "own" the land. More than 39 pages on Google kept replaying the story.
After 5 years of litigation, based only on the purported claim that these banks had standing to the real property (they claimed they did but did not produce title or note), the banks obtained void orders which said they owned a first priority deed on both the land and improvements. The bank attorney then worked with an animal rescue (Grace Foundation of Northern CA) to wage a
national defamation campaign against the land/livestock owner.
The bank attorney for Wells Fargo got the animals illegally seized by claiming exigent medical circumstances which did not exist, failed to have a deprivation hearing, no warrant, and no opposition was allowed in court. Further, the "rescue" vet did not even find that the seized animals needed medical attention. The rescue vet also REFUSED to testify in event of the owner's trial.
This seizure was done by bank attorney drafting a motion, ex parte, for the "Receiver" he got appointed, which was a rents and profits receiver, not an equity receiver. The attorney then acted as if he was the Receiver, by having the animals seized improperly. The "Receiver" herself didn't even know what was going in, in reality.
Note: The 3rd DCA appeal results came in with a result that the interlocutory nature of the issue was not ripe for appeal and thus the Court did not actually have jurisdiction. The banks then filed for a clarification request as to the order which essentially found the "Receiver" appointment was essentially unsound (perhaps voidable or errant, we did not see the ruling yet.)
The bank or banks have not taken back the property or improvements as of January 2016; owner rancher is now living in the premises as the Judge made an order that the Receiver was terminated and horse owner moved back to the residence. However, we found that the Trustee's attorney was approached by the banks to buy out the litigation rights in the bankruptcy, as to the property; apparently the court granted this, and now the Trustee's attorney has a motion to get paid. Unfortunately, this leaves the former land owner with virtually nothing, except possibly his exempt property. What that exempt property is, remains to be seen.
It seems the Grace Foundation non profit, was evicted from the 600 acre property in El Dorado Hills. After the post seizure hearing, we are not sure where the owner's equines went or who bought them. We understand many animals were "adopted" out, but most of the horses that were seized were not rescue animals; that is, they were purposely bred for sale (Trotters) and one immediately became a mounted police horse. (If the other co-owner's settlement is any indication, she obtained a settlement of allegedly $200,000 and she also claimed to have lost horses in the seizure.) Co-owner worked with the banks whereas ranch owner refused to do so. It has been estimated due to the length of this case, the banks have spent millions in legal fees.
Many of the stories written by Mike Roberts (Auburn Journal) that we have seen, are completely one sided, and show knowledge only
of The Grace Foundation's side, which was faulty at best. The Grace Foundation purposely took and helped animal control
in their effort to help banks take owner's land back. Then Lassen and the bank attorney clobbered the rescue when she filed
the case in the wrong county. To be honest, The Grace Foundation made the horse owner into a monster but he was not
such a character. and for that, The Grace Foundation has paid dearly since they lost almost everything, including their reputation.
The Grace Foundation was also sued by the bank attorney on anti SLAPP and the rescue's insurance allegedly paid out a six figure
sum on the alleged defamation by the CEO of Grace. Even worse, allegedly the AG's Charitable Trust unit had to investigate Grace's
non profit, and we believe because Grace CEO personally loaned the non profit money, she was taking back the donations to pay
herself, and there was no board of directors. A group which cannot adhere to the non profit governance rules should not be taking
donations from the public.
http://www.auburnjournal.com/article/grace-foundation-files-lawsuit-against-banks-over-susanville-horses
A former landowner who had horses illegally seized without a hearing,and was accused of 25-65 counts of "animal abuse", was acquitted of all charges after a jury trial in Lassen County. A motion in criminal court should have been set for the illegal seizure; if proven, there should have been no criminal charges since the evidence would not be allowed. There was a 1538.5 and it was lost, but we were not able to view the pleadings.
A horse rescue (The Grace Foundation of Northern California) worked with both animal control and the bank attorney Timothy M. Ryan, of Irvine, for Wells Fargo, to take the animals (they did not buy them or have a seizure hearing) ...but when things started to fall apart, the attorney that directly worked with the rescue was fired or removed from the case, and the rescue turned down a fairly large offer to settle.
The rescue went through 3-4 attorneys and in the end, the CEO of the rescue refused to attend trial (since she would have lost) and her 501(c)(3) was later shut down and evicted from the ranch. One of the KEY mistakes was that the rescue should have filed her case in Lassen County, not El Dorado County. The bank attorney then got case moved to Orange County on procedural grounds. Had it been filed in Lassen, the case might have ended differently as Lassen County was becoming weary of the bank attorney.
Land owner used to have a horse riding business on the land. Notably, the banks, especially bank of America, admitted in 2012, they did not "own" the land. More than 39 pages on Google kept replaying the story.
After 5 years of litigation, based only on the purported claim that these banks had standing to the real property (they claimed they did but did not produce title or note), the banks obtained void orders which said they owned a first priority deed on both the land and improvements. The bank attorney then worked with an animal rescue (Grace Foundation of Northern CA) to wage a
national defamation campaign against the land/livestock owner.
The bank attorney for Wells Fargo got the animals illegally seized by claiming exigent medical circumstances which did not exist, failed to have a deprivation hearing, no warrant, and no opposition was allowed in court. Further, the "rescue" vet did not even find that the seized animals needed medical attention. The rescue vet also REFUSED to testify in event of the owner's trial.
This seizure was done by bank attorney drafting a motion, ex parte, for the "Receiver" he got appointed, which was a rents and profits receiver, not an equity receiver. The attorney then acted as if he was the Receiver, by having the animals seized improperly. The "Receiver" herself didn't even know what was going in, in reality.
Note: The 3rd DCA appeal results came in with a result that the interlocutory nature of the issue was not ripe for appeal and thus the Court did not actually have jurisdiction. The banks then filed for a clarification request as to the order which essentially found the "Receiver" appointment was essentially unsound (perhaps voidable or errant, we did not see the ruling yet.)
The bank or banks have not taken back the property or improvements as of January 2016; owner rancher is now living in the premises as the Judge made an order that the Receiver was terminated and horse owner moved back to the residence. However, we found that the Trustee's attorney was approached by the banks to buy out the litigation rights in the bankruptcy, as to the property; apparently the court granted this, and now the Trustee's attorney has a motion to get paid. Unfortunately, this leaves the former land owner with virtually nothing, except possibly his exempt property. What that exempt property is, remains to be seen.
It seems the Grace Foundation non profit, was evicted from the 600 acre property in El Dorado Hills. After the post seizure hearing, we are not sure where the owner's equines went or who bought them. We understand many animals were "adopted" out, but most of the horses that were seized were not rescue animals; that is, they were purposely bred for sale (Trotters) and one immediately became a mounted police horse. (If the other co-owner's settlement is any indication, she obtained a settlement of allegedly $200,000 and she also claimed to have lost horses in the seizure.) Co-owner worked with the banks whereas ranch owner refused to do so. It has been estimated due to the length of this case, the banks have spent millions in legal fees.
Many of the stories written by Mike Roberts (Auburn Journal) that we have seen, are completely one sided, and show knowledge only
of The Grace Foundation's side, which was faulty at best. The Grace Foundation purposely took and helped animal control
in their effort to help banks take owner's land back. Then Lassen and the bank attorney clobbered the rescue when she filed
the case in the wrong county. To be honest, The Grace Foundation made the horse owner into a monster but he was not
such a character. and for that, The Grace Foundation has paid dearly since they lost almost everything, including their reputation.
The Grace Foundation was also sued by the bank attorney on anti SLAPP and the rescue's insurance allegedly paid out a six figure
sum on the alleged defamation by the CEO of Grace. Even worse, allegedly the AG's Charitable Trust unit had to investigate Grace's
non profit, and we believe because Grace CEO personally loaned the non profit money, she was taking back the donations to pay
herself, and there was no board of directors. A group which cannot adhere to the non profit governance rules should not be taking
donations from the public.
http://www.auburnjournal.com/article/grace-foundation-files-lawsuit-against-banks-over-susanville-horses
