Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+ My 7/4/05 Complaint to the Arizona State Bar, "I request that you disbar Joseph Udall, Kathleen A Biesterveld and Kevin D Quigley

[Christine]

State Bar of Arizona
Attorney Complaints
4201 N. 24th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 86326

July 4, 2005

Re: Joseph Udall, Kathleen A Biesterveld and Kevin D Quigley

To Whom It May Concern:

I am hereby submitting my complaint about the attorneys submitting entirely false statements to the Phoenix federal court for the purpose of obtaining dismissals from Baker v. Capital One Bank, et al, CIV-04-1192-PCT-NVW.

Joseph Udall
The Law Firm of Joseph M Udall PLC
18 E University Suite 201
Mesa, AZ 85201-5947

Kathleen A Biesterveld and Kevin D Quigley
Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP
One Renaissance Square
Two N Central Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2391

Statement of Facts:

On 10/4/04, Mr. Udall filed his motion to dismiss Capital One Financial Corporation and he knowingly, willfully and maliciously lied to the court.

Specifically, Mr. Udall falsely stated in the second paragraph of Section I of his Motion to Dismiss:

Plaintiff has several accounts with a wholly owned subsidiary of Capital One Financial Corporation, namely Capital One Bank. All of the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint against “Capital One” refer to these accounts with Capital One Bank.

This is a totally false statement.

In my 10/27/04 objection to Mr. Udall’s motion to dismiss I wrote:

"Capital One attorney Joseph Udall claims in his Motion to Dismiss, p. 2, lns. 14-16: “Plaintiff has several accounts with a wholly owned subsidiary of Capital One Financial Corporation, namely Capital One Bank.  All of the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint against “Capital One” refer to these accounts with Capital One Bank.”

Plaintiff believes Mr. Udall’s statement to be false. Mr. Udall represented Capital One in plaintiff’s 2003 suit, he should have reviewed plaintiff’s memorandum and exhibits in that action pertaining to the many different Capital One entities. [Exhibit B-23] 

Several of plaintiff’s current exhibits are actually identical and identify “Capital One, F.S.B.”  Plaintiff believes that she has at least two accounts with “Capital One, F.S.B.” as per the 6/3/04 letter, listing “Capital One, F.S.B.” as creditor, [Exhibit B-5] and according to the CRAs’ credit reports. [Exhibits B-7,8]"

Despite my 10/27/04 objection and exhibits and my notarized, sworn affidavit certifying the authenticity of my exhibits, Mr. Udall maliciously continued to lie.

On 11/5/04, Mr. Udall stated in his reply on page 2, top:

"Moreover, in the second paragraph of Section I of COFC’s Motion to Dismiss, COFC clearly indicates which entity issued Plaintiff’s credit card accounts: Capital One Bank."

On 11/17/04, the Court wrote:

“Capital One’s motion acknowledges that its subsidiary Capital One Bank is the entity with which Plaintiff did her credit card business and is the proper defendant in place of Capital One Financial Corporation.” [emphasis added]

The Court granted leave to amend my complaint “to substitute Capital One Bank as a defendant in place of Defendant Capital One Financial Corporation.”

In my subsequent First Amended complaint I substituted Capital One Bank, Capital One F.S.B. and Capital One Services, as all these entities issued and serviced my Capital One credit cards. I had properly stated and documented these claims in my 10/27/04 objection to the Capital One motion to dismiss, my exhibits and my sworn notarized affidavit in support thereof.

Capital One then retained Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP to file the 1/31/05 motion to dismiss all 3 substituted Capital One defendants for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and I again amended my complaint.

On 6/3/05 Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP filed a motion to dismiss Capital One, F.S.B. and Capital One Services from my Second Amended Complaint inter alia because I “was not granted leave to amend to add Capital One, F.S.B. and Capital One Services as defendants.”

While Capital One may have supplied false information to the attorneys, I certainly hope that attorneys are expected to review the opposing party’s filings, exhibits and affidavits.

1. First Mr. Udall maliciously made the entirely false statements to get Capital One Financial Corporation dismissed, resulting in the order to only substitute Capital One Bank

2. Then Ms. Biesterveld and Mr. Quigley not only failed to notify the court of Mr. Udall’s lies, but they resorted to utilizing the court’s ruling based on these lies in their motion to dismiss Capital One F.S.B. and Capital One Service.

3. Additionally, they submitted the 6/3/05 sworn declaration of Capital One Services Manager Christopher Lane, knowing that it contained at least one FALSE statement.

I request that you disbar Joseph Udall, Kathleen A Biesterveld and Kevin D Quigley.

Sincerely,



Christine Baker

c: posted at http://www.creditsuit.org/, http://www.fight-back.us/forum/, http://www.junkfaxsuit.info/ with the links to the actual filings and exhibits. Permission is granted to reproduce and disseminate this complaint in its entirety for non commercial purposes.

[Christine]

I spent the weekend scanning, removing account numbers and SSNs and then posting my exhibits and all the Capital One related filings:

The Capital One filings and exhibits

The direct links to some of the key exhibits:

10/27/04 Exhibit B-3 -- 3/16/04 - Chris Lane, “ERC Dept. Manager, Regulatory Operations” at “Capital One” e-mailed

Obviously, Mr. Lane knows that the people he manages report credit data to the bureaus.

7/4/05 -- Exhibit J: the 12/21/01 fax from Tanya Morris, Capital One Services

Mr. Lane had asked me to remove Ms. Morris contact info at my CreditForum.org Capital One posting

The 6/3/05 Capital One Services Manager Christopher Lane Declaration He claimed that Capital One Services never accepted payments.

My 10/27/04 Exhibit B-6 -- 8/5/04 - VISA statement only refers to “Capital One” and “Capital One Services.” Specifically, the payments are to be made to "Capital One Services."

Note that I had submitted my Exhibits B on 10/24/04 -- this is not surprise documentation. At Capital One lying and committing perjury is the perfectly normal thing to do. And as my litigation proves, the judges have NO problem with that whatsoever - the corporations get the dismissals based on lies. This is NOT the first time and I regret waiting so long to file this complaint.

I already had lawyers tell me that it's perfectly ok for lawyers to lie, it's basically their job.

I've never seen any references to those "mandatory" lies and perjury on the lawyers' or the courts' web sites.

I have read that lawyers are "officers of the court." And of course the purpose of this exercise is to document the corruption of the US legal system. I'm no longer so naive that I expect any kind of sense for right and wrong from a Bar Association.

The AZ State Bar falsely accuses me of practicing law.