Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : SLJB - Sulja Brothers Building Supply, Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nash363 who wrote (883)	11/30/2006 4:29:18 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1681

I'm still trying to understand the story. You were the escrow attorney and you had a fiduciary duty to payoff all debts. Petar, you say, also specifically gave you "instructions [to]to pay off some debt on his behalf, my fees and disbursements and to pay the balance to him." So LEGAL TITLE beonged to YOU - you were the PAYEE - in trust - with very specific obligations. You say that Petar deposited the check into YOUR trust account. You say the check was certified which means the funds were separated in the payor's account and could not be called back. As an attorney in this situation, I assume you got this information from the bank. Would you not call the bank and discuss this with the bank? Do you have a copy of the check that you can post here? Also do you have a reference to the litigation you say you filed with the bank and, if possible, any documents that I'm sure others here would find most useful. You specifically state that you do not know who allegedly altered the check and no charges were filed. That says a lot. Was the certification stamp of the bank altered? If so, I would think you would have a defense to your problems with the bar. In fact, this would be a criminal matter. Quite frankly, there is something missing here. The story so far does not make a lot of sense. Altering a bank stamp to make the check look like a certified check is a criminal offense. Your story apparently has been before 2 triers of fact, the local criminal authorities and the bar association. If the story is as you state, and I am assuming much, I admit, between what you have posted, then it appears that neither have believed the story. If you believed a certified check was in your account, then it is unlikely that the bar association would have sanctioned you. With respect to your statement that the choice of payment was Petar's, as escrow agent, would you not have a duty to payoff liens and debts, per the closing, before disbursing to Petar? Did you not have a duty to clear title to the asset that was the subject of the closing? I assume this is why you thought you needed to resign from the Bar as a practicing attorney. In reading the other posts, you seem to be claiming a relationship between Petar and the payor to defraud you. You sued the bank, but, for some reason did not sue the payor or Petar. You mention in your last post that criminal charges require a higher standard of proof. However, there are preliminary stages, e.g., indictment, grand jury, etc., where a much lower standard of proof is required. Did any of this come to pass? Or did those who would bring charges just dismiss doing so because there was insufficient evidence to even establish reasonable or probable cause, very low standards of proof? Furthermore, in a civil case, the standard of proof would be much lower. For some reason, you did not sue the payor or Petar civilly. Again, something does not make sense. For the bashers to gain traction from this story, they need more. I sympathize with you and feel badly and I hope that you get justice. However, you are posting to a board that really wants some hard core substance and not just allegations, that, so far, have failed to sway anyone to go after Petar. Criminal authorities have not gone after Petar. You have not sued him civilly. The bar association apparently did not believe the facts as you presented them. So, it looks like you have a theory and now that Petar is in the news, in a rather negative story, it seemed to be a good time to bring your theories to message boards for a stock company even though the company has no relationship to your theory. Thanks for responding and good luck.