Jury Verdict in favor of the Spencers

5/27/09

Spencer v Jim Forbes & John Zenith

Jim Forbes attorney for 39188 and 40000, 42544; David Williams & Peter Talia

John Zeniths attorney for 42544; David Williams

David Williams stated, to the court, that he intends to appeal the 12-0 decision: transcripts will show that David Williams was responsible for both malicious  lawsuits, threatened his client, "staged" an incident involving his client in order to file a lawsuit, appealed a clearly frivolous lawsuit and was sanctioned and so much more. The trial transcripts are submitted to the Appellate Court. Is attorney David Williams going to risk being disbarred for his egregious actions in these malicious lawsuits? 

LIABILITY

 Was James Forbes actively involved in bringing or continuing lawsuit 39188 against Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Did James Forbes make a full an honest disclosure of all the important facts known to him to  his attorney?

12 NO

 Did James Forbes reasonably rely on his attorney advice?

12 YES

Did lawsuit 39188 end in Eileen Spencer's favor?

12 YES

 Would any reasonable person in James Forbes' circumstances have believed he had a right to continue lawsuit 39188 after the court ruled that his initial lawsuit 39188 failed to state a valid claim against Eileen Spencer.

12 NO

Did James Forbes act primarily for a purpose other than succeeding on the merits of the claim in lawsuit 39188

12 YES

Was James Forbes conduct a substantial factor in causing harm to Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Was John Zenith actively involved in bringing or continuing lawsuit 39188 against Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Did lawsuit 39188 end in Eileen Spencer's favor

12 YES

Was James Forbes actively involved in bringing or continuing lawsuit 40000 against Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Did James Forbes make a full and honest disclosure of all the important facts known to him to his attorney

12 NO

Did lawsuit 40000 end in Eileen Spencer's favor

12 YES

Was James Forbes a party to the service of summons on Eileen Spencer in 39188

12 YES

Did James Forbes intentionally use this legal procedure to harass and intimidate Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Was James Forbes conduct a substantial factor in causing harm to Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Did John Zenith serve summons on Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Did John Zenith intentionally use this legal procedure to harass and intimidate Eileen Spencer

12 YES

Was John Zenith's conduct a substantial factor in causing harm to Eileen Spencer

12 YES

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Eileen Spencer has suffered irreparable  harm as a result of lawsuit 39188 and 40000

12 YES

Money damages are inadequate to compensate Eileen Spencer for her injury.

12 YES

A permanent  injunction requiring court approval before James Forbes can commence future litigation against Eileen Spencer or John Spencer is warranted considering the balance of hardships between the parties.

12 YES

The public interest would be served by such a permanent injunction.

12 YES

Eileen Spencer has suffered irreparable harm as a result of lawsuit 39188 and 40000 aided by John Zenith.

12 YES

A permanent injunction  requiring court approval before John Zenith can commence future litigation against  Eileen Spencer or John Spencer is warranted considering the balance of hardships between the parties.

12 YES

The public interest would be served by such a permanent injunction

12 YES