ALERT! WARNING !
ORDERS TO JAIL ELOISA FROM DECEMBER 10 2008 TO JANUARY 6,20081
LATEST HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION OF WELLER ON ELOISA
DECEMBER 3 2008 AND DECEMBER 10,2008 ,ORDERS TO JAIL ELOISA FOR 20 DAYS
After Judge Weller had given to my husband 95% of our acumulated assets during the marriage in his February
22,2008, Finding of Facts and Decree THAT HAS VIRTUALLY LEFT ELOISA WTH NO CASH ASSETS, THELATEST
HARASSMENT FROM JUDGE WELLER ARE TWO (2) ORDERS FROM WELLER TO INCARCERATE ELOISA 20 DAYS
IN JAIL: FOR ELOISA TO SURRENDER TO THE WASHOE JAIL TO SERVE TWO 10 DAYS OF JAIL SENTENCES.
1) THE DECEMBER 3,2008 ORDER WAS FOR FAILURE TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF OPPOSITION TO COURT
MASTER RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER OF AUGUST,2008 INVALIDATING HER FIRST ORDER TO JAIL ELOISA ON
JULY24, 2008 BASED ON TRUMPED UP ALLEGATION AND A SET UP TO AN ORDINARY EPO AFTER COURT
MASTER REALIZED THAT WHAT SHE WAS BEING DICTATED TO BY PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO COMMIT ELOISA 40
DAYS IN JAIL ON A CIVIL CONTEMPT WAS WRONG AND AGAINST THE LAW , AN ADMISSION OF ERROR.
PLAINTIFF OPPOSED THE ORDER I N SEPTEMBER,2008. ELOISA WAS ORDERED TO REPLY TO THE OPPOSITION
BY NOVEMBER 10,2008 WHILE REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY. THE
ELOISA WAS INFORMED BY HER ATTORNEY THAT A REPLY TO THE OPPOSITION WAS NOT NECESSARY TO BE
SUBMITTED BY NOVEMBER 10,2008 AS A SETTING FOR HEARING ON THE OPPOSITION WAS SET ON NOVEMBER
3,BY THE JUDGE FOR A HEARING IN DECEMBER 16,2008.
THE DECEMBER 3, 2008 ORDER FOR ELOISA TO SURRENDER TO SERVE THE 10 DAYS JAIL SENTENCE,
INCLUDED THE ORDER TO DECLARE THE DECEMBER 16,2008 HEARING "MOOT". ANOTHER HARASSMENT ON
ELOISA TO PREVENT HER FROM SUBMITTING TO THE SUPREME COURT THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR
HER APPEAL THAT WERE DUE DURING THE TIME
SHE WAS ORDERED TO SURRENDER AND SERVE JAIL SENTENCE. ELOISA IS ON PROPER REPRESENTING
HERSELF IN HER APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT.
2) THE DECEMBER 10,2008 ORDER OF JUDGE WELLER, ORDER FINDING ELOISA FURER IN CONTEMPT;
REQUIRING HER ARREST." ELOISA FURER IS REMANDED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE WASHOE COUNTY JAIL FOR
A PERIOD OF 10 (TEN) DAYS. MS. FURER IS TO TURN HERSELF IN ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 6,2009. MRS.
FURER SHALL BE RELEASED NO SOONER THAN 10(TEN) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF HER ORIGINAL ARREST".
THIS ORDER TO COMMIT ELOISA TO JAIL IS DUE TO " MRS FURER HAS MADE CONTEMPTUOUS STATEMENTS IN
DOCUMENT RECENTLY FILED WITH THE COURT" (SEE ORDERS HERE EXHIBITED)
ELOISA WILL NOT SURRENDER TO THE WASHOE COUNTY JAIL. THESE ORDERS ARE INVALID AND ILLEGAL THAT
DID NOT MET ANY OF THE AUTHORITY OF NRS 199.350,22.010 nd 22.030. THE CLOSEST THAT THE FINDINGS OF
WELLER THE ORDER MAY APPLY TO, IS ARTICLE NO.7 ENNUMERATED BY WELLER UNDER NRS 199.350,
ONLY IF THE STATEMENTS OF ELOISA WERE FALSE OR GROSSLY INACURATE REPORT OF ITS PROCEEDINGS.
IT IS THE OPINION OF ELOISA THAT JUDGE WELLER HAD REPEATEDLY AND CONSCIOUSLY MADE BLATANTLY
MALICIOUSLY WRONG, (ERRONEOUS) VINDICTIVE AND RACIALLY MOTIVATED
ORDERS AGAINST ELOISA, THESE STATEMENT OF ELOISA ARE SUPPORTED BY DOCUMENTATIONS OF FACTS
AND EVIDENCE THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL THAT ARE COMPREHENSIBLE BY ORDINARY INTELLIGENCE OF AN
ORINARY HUMAN BEING. AS TO THE LOGIC OF TRUTH
THE TRIAL AND CONSPIRACY
IN THE FAMILY COURT OF JUDGE CHUCK WELLER, JUDGE SCHUMACHER, COURT MASTER CAROLE COOKE,
SENIOR JUDGE MANOUKIAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, GAMMICK AND HIS DEPUTY, HELTZER , IN
CONSPIRACY WITH ATTORNEYS SHAWN MEADOR AND DON ROSS OF WOODBURN AND WEDGE, OUR ESTATE
PLANNING ATTORNEYS IN 2002 AND MY HUSBAND OF 25 YEARS, ANDREW EARL FURER, A HARVARD TRAINED
ECONOMIST AND LAWYER. SHAWN MEADOR BECAME THE DIVORCE COUNSEL OF ANDREW FURER IN
JANUARY 2004 BEFORE A WAIVER WAS SIGNED BY ELOISA IN APRIL 4, 2004. NOT KNOWING THAT THEIR
ESTATE PLANNING IN 2002 BECAME THE TRUST AGREEMENT AFTER ANDREW HAD INSTRUCTED THEIR TRUST
ATTORNEY ON THE DAY OF THE SIGNING TO CREATE HIS OWN TRUST FUNDED BY OVER $50 MILLION OF THE
PARTIES ASSETS WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF ELOISA
BEFORE THE ESTATE PLANNING WHICH BECAME A TRUST AGREEMENT,(ELOISA DID NOT KNOW THE
DIFFERENCE) ANDREW WAS SECRETLY MEETING WITH THEIR TRUST ATTORNEY AND WITH HIS NOW DIVORCE
ATTORNEY IN 2002.
A DRAFT OF THE TRUST AGREEMENT WAS DISCOVERED BY ELOISA IN 2005 AFTER THE PARTY SEPARATED.
ELOISA HAD SIGNED A POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT IN MAY 5,2004 AFTER ANDREW HAD BEGGED HER NOT TO
DIVORCE HIM IN JANUARY 2004 AFTER ELOISA HAD ASKED FOR A DIVORCE. ELOISA ASKED FOR A DIVORCE
IN AFTER ANDREW HAD THREATENED TO EMBARRASS HER IN THE PHILIPPINES IN JUNE 2003 BEFORE THE
AUGUST 2004 CELEBRATION WHEN SHE WAS THE HERMANA MAYOR FOR A CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION OF THE
OUR LADY OF THE ASSUMPTION IN MANILA. THE THREAT WAS : "I WILL TELL EVERYONE DURING THE
CELEBRATION THAT THE MONEY YOU ARE SPENDING FOR THE CELEBRATION IS MONEY YOU ARE STEALING
FROM ME AS YOU DO NOT HAVE MONEY OF YOUR OWN".
THINKING THAT ANDREW WAS REPENTANT FROM THE THREAT WHEN HE WAS BEGGING AND CRYING, " I DO
NOT WANT A DIVORCE, I LOVE YOU, WHY RUIN OUR LONG MARRIAGE, I CANNOT TRUST ANYONE WITH OUR
MONEY,WHY PUT YOUR SON THRU THE STIGMA OF COMING FROM A BROKEN HOME"ETC. , ELOISA AGREED
TO A POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO "RECONCILE THEIR MARRIAGE AND THE PARTY WILL
CONTINUE TO BE MARRIED AND LIVE TOGETHER UNTIL SUCH TIME WHEN ONE OF THE PARTY WOULD ASK FOR
A DIVORCE OR SEPARATION.... PLAINTIFF DID EXACTLY THIS ONLY IT WAS TOO SOON ; PLAINTIFF VIOLATED
THE STATUE OF THE PNA, BY INVITING WOMEN TO THE MARITAL HOME BEFORE THE INK WAS DRY, SIXTEEN (
16) HOURS AFTER THE PNA WAS SIGNED BY THE PARTIES. THEN OPTED FOR THE MSA. ( See exhibit under
Affidavit of defendant and supplement to July 24, 2004 Contempt trial filed July 22,2008)
It is necessary to tell the following long story to prove the calmly planned elaborate scheme to divorce
me, and defraud me of the community property assets of over $ 80 Million. The threat to embarrass me
in the Philippines was a set up to hurt my feelings and make me angry enough to ask for a divorce.
Remember that the estate planning that I suggested in 1999 to protect our son while a minor, if
something happens to us as we had planned to travel extensively now became ATRUST
AGREEMENT. I had already forgotten about the Trust Agreement signed in 2002, that was supposed
to be a estate planning. I had no problem signing the trust agreement as the purpose for it was to
protect our son . The trust agreement stated that if Andrew dies first I get all the assets. If I die first
Andrew gets the assets. If we are both dead and our son was a minor our two trustees, who were my
childhood friend residing in the US and my niece in the Philippines a CEO of their Company. these
was the only thing I wanted to see in the agreement. It did not enter my mind that my husband would
cheat me or do what he did with the trust agreement. I did not find out about his own trust that was
funded by the majority of our assets. The Marital home was listed in the trust that I signed I thought
along with the cars. Until now I do not understand how the Marital home became his.
Our shares of the Washington Mutual Stocks in 2004 was 1,149,000,000 shares. I know that the
Harvard donation of almost $6 Million came from the WAMU shares. It is understandabe for me not to
recognize that the shares of stocks even if I had seen his own trust in 2002, which I didnot, because the
WAMU shares was in the last page of his own trust in a one page document that did not state as the
WAMU shares but only the name of the investment firm and an account number when I saw both our
Joint trust and his individual trust in 2005 after we had separated.
The Post Nuptial Agreement was supposed to be signed in May 2,2004,but was moved to May 5,for
some reasons. It was agreed by the party that right after the PNA was signed they will go back to Las
Vegas to " continue to look for our home so we can sell our Incline Village home this spring and
summer" ( when Eloisa asked for a divorce in January, she had gone to Las Vegas to see the homes
she had asked a real estate agent to look for her as she was going to divorce Andrew. Andrew
insisted in coming, crying all the way to Las Vegas begging Eloisa not to divorce him.) By the time the
party reached Las Vegas Eloisa agreed not to divorce Andrew. Andrew told the real estate agent that
he did not want to see the small houses she had scheduled Eloisa to see as " we are not getting
divorced". The following day we looked at big houses from 8,000 to 12,000 square ft homes. We
continued lookinf the following three days. We did not find a house we wanted. I wanted a smaller
house as we are retired and would be traveling extensively . We have an apartment in Gstaad
Switzerland we have been leasing since 1993, we have an apartment in the middle pf Paris and
condominium in the Phlippines.The real estate agent informed us that the house of Sigfried and Roy
next to the house we looked at was going into the Market soon. Andrew was interested, he asked to
send us the brochure when in the market. We saw the pictures of the home a week later. We did not
like it as it was contemporary in design. Since we did not find I house at this time, Andrew told the
real estate agent to keep us informed of some more houses that will be in the market.
The afternoon before we were to go back home, Andrew wanted to go to the Mercedes dealership as
the new model of the SLs sports cars that just came out he was sure I would like. I Andrew I did not
need a new car. A salesman had shown us the car demonstrated the features. Andrew wanted me to
test drive it, I told him I did not want a new sports car as I love my 560 SL. Andrew told me he wanted to
me the car as a gift for my agreeing not to divorce him. I was touched. I had to accept it. Andrew
paid for it in full and wanted me to have the nice phone features. This was a gesture I thought that he
really loves me, that Andrew really did not mean the threat to embarrass me in the Philippines. Having
two cars now, we drove home in convoy in separate cars.
When we got home to Incline Andrew told me that he was going to call a lawyer to draft the Post
Nuptial Agreement after it was explained to me what a post nuptial was. He also called our real estate
agent to look for smaller less expensive home for us in Lake Tahoe for a second home for skiing and
boating as we were going to move to Las Vegas to be our permanent residence. We had looked at
different homes including a home at Fleur du Lac in the California side of the Lake where the movie
,Godfather III WAS FILMED. It was a nice home but the boat slips were small. Our 33ft Formula boat
would not fit. Andrew liked the facility, willing to buy a smaller boat. I liked the house and the facility
but the area was far from everything. I had asked Andre why he would buy a house on the California
side where he had to pay more taxes. Andrew hates paying taxes more than he had to. Andrew is a
tax lawyer. He told me it didn't matter as our main residence would be Las Vegas
While the PNA was being drafted, we continued to look for a house in Lake Tahoe for skiing and
boating. We went to visit our son at Harvard and finalize the additional donation we gave for the
associate professor in research. We did some shopping in Boston. This was around February 2004.
We came home to Incline Village and continued to look for a house in Lake Tahoe.
Our life was normal as can be. We applied for our health insurance since Keystone had taken Andrew
off their health plan. We moved our home and car insurance to AIG from State Farm. In March I was
going back and forth to the Bay area for check up with my doctor in San Jose and had some tests at
Stanford Hospital with Andrew. I did not notice out of the ordinary except when I had asked Andrew to
accompany me to my colonoscopy in March he did not want me to leave my purse with him in the car
while I was at the procedure. I did not want my purse in the hospital It was alright for me for Andrew
to leave me at the hospital and pick me up after I wake up from recovery.
I now know from his deposition that he had been visiting a DOMINITRIX in the Bay area . Andrew must
have gone to visit this Dominitrix while I was in the hospital. Also in March or April told me that he was
going to San Francisco to the Museum but he did not ask me to come. I thoughtn it was unusual for
him to go anywhere alone. This was the first time he had done this without making me come with him.
I did not suspect anything at all. Since he was taking the dogs, I had checked the car he had loaded
with the dog stuff before he retired. I wanted to make sure he had enough water and food for the
dogs. I saw a "dildo " with the dog toys in the duffle bag. I still did not suspect anything unusual
even if this was around the time that the PNA was being drafted. I wanted to ask him about the dildo
but decided not to in order not to embarrass him. Andrew never gave me a reason to suspect that he
was cheating on me emotionally or otherwise. We had been married for so long that I was comfortable
with our marriage . We had disagreements most of the time but nothing serious.
Around the middle of February, Andrew told me to that I needed my own attorney for the PNA. I had
asked him why if the purpose of the PNA was to give me my own money from here on so the incident
in the Philippines will not happen again. I told Andrew that we did not need an attorney if the purpose
of the PNA was only to give me money in my separate account and that I don't know a lawyer.
Andrew told me that I really have to have a Lawyer so the PNA would be Valid. I looked in the
telephone book and found a Ms. Macdonald. I called her for an appointment. After the appointment, I
decided not to hire her. Andrew suggested that he would call Shawn Meador at Woodburn & Wedge
the firm who was now doing the drafting of the PNA.
(At this point in 2004 when the Post Nuptial Agreement was being drafted and negotiated I did not
know yet that Shawn Meador , a divorce attorney at Wood burn & Wedge was also the one involved in
the estate planning in 2002, he was the one who had suggested the Post Nuptial Agreement in 2002
and the $15 Million PNA in the pie chart )
Shawn Meador faxed to our residence four names of Attorney which was misplaced by the time I
decided to call somemore attorneys. Shawn Meador faxed to the house four(4) more lawyers names.
I did the "mini my nimo" and decided on Sandra Unsworth. My appointment with Unsworth was on
March 4 and I hired her on the same day. From the day I had hired Ms. Unsworth until the PNA was
signed I only met with her one time until May 5,2004 when the PNA was signed. Our communication
was mostly over the telephone. This is proof that the PNA was what my husband had represented to
me after I agreed not to divorce him. " I will give you in the PNA money in your individual account a
substantial amount so I do not have to be looking over my shoulder
on your expenses. Everything will still be the same we will not get divorced" Andrew did not mention
anything about the assets. Toward the middle of of March I was shown by Andrew a draft of the PNA.
I asked why the assets were listed when I saw the cars , the boat jewelry and the condominiun, etc. I
did not notice the marital home nor read the PNA in detail. I asked Andrew why assets are listed as if
we were going to have a divorce. Andrew explained that any Post Nuptial Agreement is to include the
assets like dividing them in order for a PNA to be valid. "DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO IT. PAY ATTENTION TO
THE WORDS THAT STATES THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PNA IS TO RECONCILE OUR MARRIAGE AND WE WILL BE
LIVING A NORMAL HUSBAND AND WIFE, THANK YOU FOR AGREEING NOT TO HAVE A DIVORCE". THIS IS THE
ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET YOUR OWN MONEY AT YOUR DISPOSAL WITHOUT MY LOOKING OVER MY
SHOULDER. YOU CAN SPEND YOUR MONEY THE WAY YOU WANT TO, YOU CAN NOW DO YOUR CHARITY
WORK IN THE PHILIPPINES.
OF COURSE THE IDEA OF HAVING MY OWN MONEY WAS EXCITING. THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WTH
ANDREW'S EXPLANATION . THERE WAS NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY. REMEMBER HE WAS THE ONE
WHO DID NOT WANT THE DIVORCE. WHY WOULD HE DO SOMETHING WRONG NOW TO GIVE ME ANOTHER
CHANCE TO ASK FOR DIVORCE. HAD CRIED FOR DAYS BEGGING ME NOT TO DIVORCE HIM, PLEADED WITH ME
THAT, "I DO NOT WANT A DIVORCE, I LOVE YOU, I CANNOT TRUST ANYONE WITH OUR MONEY, WHY RUIN OUR
LONG MARRIAGE, WHY PUT OUR SON THRU THE STIGMA OF HAVING TO COME FROM A BROKEN HOME, ETC.. I
BELIEVED THE EXPLANATION AND DID NOT QUESTION THE DRAFT OF THE PNA AGAIN.
ANDREW NEVER STOP ME FROM SPENDING ON ANYTHING HAD WANTED. NEVER QUESTIONED ME WHEN I
WOULD COME HOME WITH EXPENSIVE JEWELRY , TWO MORE FUR COATS TO ADD TO THE FUR COATS I
ALREADY HAVE BEFORE WE GOT MARRIED , INCLUDING A FULL LEOPARD COAT I BOUGHT IN KENYA , A LONG
BLACK AND WHITE UNBORN KID AND A CIVIT CAT FUR COAT THAT WERE MADE TO ORDER FOR ME IN ETHIOPIA.
I NEVER HEAR D ANDREW COMPLAIN OR MADE A COMMENT EXCEPT " WHATEVER YOU PAID FOR THEM I
KNOW IT WAS A GOOD BUY, KNOWING YOU".
ON the morning of the day we were to sign the PNA , Andrew told me to call Ms. Unsworth to tell her she
did not need to come to the PNA signing at 2 or 300 pm, so we can save on lawyer's charges having
reviewed the PNA the night before. I did call Unsworth to tell him what Andrew had told me without
telling her the reason why , as I was embarrassed to tell her in order to save attorneys fees. Ms.
Unsworth had called me back to tell me that Meador had told her that there was not going to be any
signing if I as not represented. This should have raised a signal on me in hindsight as it was my
understanding the purpose was only to transfer the $15 Million to my name to spend the way I wanted
to. Of course I was still devoid of the scheme and the Trust agreement that I had not seen after the
signing in 2002, I had forgotten completely.
Before the signing at Woodburn & Wedge , I was told to read the PNA again. I told everyone it was not
necessary as Andrew and I had read the draft the night before. This was testified to by Meador and
Unsworth in Court during the trial in April,2006, two years later. This is another proof that I believed
whatever it was Andrew was telling me was true. MS. Unsworth had also testified in court that she had
told me that if I do not sign the agreement I would get more when we divorce. This is not a true
statement of Ms. Unsworth . All the time during the negotiation I had always known that the purpose
of the agreement was to preserve our marriage. During the negotiation, Unsworth had called me if I
did not want to ask for some more money to purchase a home in case we have to have a divorce. I
laughed at her I told her it is not going to happen. Ms. Unsworth continued in saying , Mrs. Furer it can
happen. I had told her there was no way my husband will divorce me. It was my asking for a divorce
that led to this PNA as Andrew did not want a divorce. Andrew would have just agreed to divorce
when I had asked him in January 2004 and not bother with this PNA. Ms. Unsworth had persisted for
me to give her an amount that she can put in the agreement to protect me just in case. Give me an
amount that you would want for a house in case of a divorce ASIDE FROM THE $3 MILLION THAT YOUR
HUSBAND IS GOING TO ADVANCE TO YOU NOW BEFORE THE $15, MILLION HE IS GOING TO GIVE YOU IN YOUR
OWN ACCOUNT AS YOUR OWN TO SPEND IS FINALISED. Again, in hindsight, had I not trusted my husband, this
would have been another red flag. I had told Unsworth JOKINGLY THAT MAYBE IF WE WILL DIVORCE I
WOULD LIKE TO LIVE IN AT LEAST A $3 MILLION HOME. THE STATEMENT FOR ANOTHER $3 MILLION FOR A
HOUSE FUND IN CASE OF DIVORCE WAS NOT IN THE PNA. THE STATEMENT WAS USED DURING THE TRIAL THAT I
HAD ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL $3 MILLION
IN CASE OF A DIVORCE, TO SHOW THE COURT THAT I WAS AWARE THERE COULD BE A DIVORCE.
PROOF OF THIS THAT UNSWORTH ASKED ME FOR AN AMOUNT IS IN THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN
PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY SHAWN MEADOR OF APRIL 30,2004, FIVE(5) DAYS BEFORE THE PNA WAS SIGNED
THAT STATES: FOR EXAMPlE SHE MAY NEED MONEY TO PUT DOWN A DEPOSIT ON A NEW HOUSE, OR PAY FOR
IT, BEFORE THE $ 3 MILLION CASH IS ACTUALLY TRANSFERRED TO HER ( SHE NEEDS A TRUST DRAFT TO
HANDLE THE CASH AND HER OTHER ASSETS. )
Unsworth was also in the scheme from the beginning. If she really was protecting me in the PNA , she
should have just told me not to sign the PNA as it will hurt me and she suspects the PNA is not what I
think it is.
Right after the signing of the PNA Andrew and I had dinner at TGIF near Woodburn & Wedge.
Andrew had told me that he was not going to come with me to Las Vegas, TO LOOK FOR OUR
HOUSE . "you should go alone tomorrow so you can choose a house you think we would both like.
If I go we will never find a home as we do not agree on which house to make an offer on. You should
leave tomorrow. After you find a home you want to make an offer on I will follow you to approve of it.
Are you packed? I told Andrew it was ok. Before the signing there was some side indication that he
wanted me to go back to Las Vegas alone,but it was unclear.
He was right an on the fact that when we were in Las Vegas in January, we had an argument because
Andrew wanted to make an offer on a house that had a 4,000 sq ft on the Master bedroom alone,with a
total square foot of 12,000 sq foot that I rejected. Since it was early to go home and we were in Reno
anyway, I told Andrew I wanted to look for curtain materials for Alex bedroom in Paris. We went to the
fabric shop and headed for home. I finished my packing so I could leave early for Las Vegas the
following day. We got up early. Andrew made me coffee and a toast and he put my suitcase in the car.
As I was pulling out of the drive way at about 8:45 am, Andrew asked me if I had my Credit Suisse
check book, an account we issue checks over $500.00 . I always carried two check books with me,
the B of A checking account and the UBS check book. I told Andrew I had it in my purse. He kissed
me goodbye and told me to drive carefully and not to call him before I arrive Las Vegas except on an
emergency as there is no signal, roaming, and expensive. He never tells me not to call him when I am
driving, NEVER. Again I did not think nor thought it was something but only due to his cheapness.
While I was in Las Vegas, I called Andrew several times a day to tell him of houses I was going to see,
and houses I had been shown. There were a lot of times I had called our land line I would not get an
answer. I now found out through Phone bills statement, Credit card statement that AROUND 30 TO 45
MINUTES AFTER I HAD LEFT FOR LAS VEGAS ANDREW WAS IN A THREE HOUR TELEPHONE CALL THAT DAY TO A
WHORE IN LAS VEGAS, BY THE NAME OF TRACY ANN HOSLEY, WHOSE NAME ALSO APPEARED IN THE AMEX
CREDIT CARD STATEMENT FOR A ROUND TRIP AIRLINE TICKET FROM LAS VEGAS TO RENO ON MAY 9, 2004
RETURN TO LAS VEGAS ON MAY 13,2004.
ALSO IN THE CREDIT CARD STATEMENT OF MAY/JUNE 2004 WAS A BILL FROM CAMPBELL HOTEL IN
CALIFORNIA FOR ONE NIGHT STAY AND RESTAURANT BILLS . THIS WAS THE TIME ANDREW HAD PICKED JULIE
BLAIN FROM CAMPBELL AFTER THE FIRST WOMAN, TRACY ANN HOSLEY HAD RETURNED TO LAS VEGAS.
ANDREW HAD TAKEN JULIE BLAIN TO THE MARITAL HOME FROM MAY 20 TO MAY 28,2004 . HE HAD TAKEN HER
TO THE AIRPORT THE SAME TIME OUR SON WAS ARRIVING FROM BOSTON, STAYING AT THE MARITAL HOME
FOR EIGHT (8 ) DAYS.
I HAD CALLED A TELEPHONE NUMBER FROM A PIECE OF PAPER ANDREW WAS LOOKING FOR ON JUNE 4, 2004
AFTER WE HAD COME FROM LAS VEGAS . IT WAS THE TELEPHONE NO. OF TRACY ANN HOSLEY. ANDREW
TOLD ME NOT TO CALL HER AGAIN. " S HE IS A DRUG ADDICT AND IS CONNECTED TO A DRUG RING"IN LAS
VEGAS.
AFTER ABOUT TEN DAYS OF LOOKING FOR A HOUSE IN LAS VEGAS I FINALLY FOUND A HOUSE I WANTED TO
MAKE AN OFFER ON. THE REAL ESTATE AGENT AND I CALLED ANDREW ON WHAT TO PUT ON THE OFFER. HE
HAD DICTATED SOMETHING TO THE REAL ESTATE AGENT ON WHAT TO WRITE ON THE OFFER. I TOLD ANDREW
THAT THE BALUSTRADE OF THE BALCONY OUT OF THE MASTER BEDROOM WERE CRACKED. HE TOLD ME TO
FIND A STRUCTURE ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE THE CRACKS WERE NOT STRUCTURAL. OUR FAMILY MET THE
SELLERS IN THE HOUSE WITH THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. WHO ANDREW HAD CONFERRED WITH. IT WAS
DECIDED THE CRACKS WERE NOT STRUCTURAL. WE WALKED THRU THE WHOLE HOUSE. ANDREW LIKED THE
BIG LIBRARY AND THE UPSTAIRS MASTER BEDROOM. HE ASKED WHERE WE WERE GOING TO PUT THE DOG
RUN AS WE HAVE IN OUR INCLINE VILLAGE HOME. WE DECIDED THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF TH E BACK YARD .
ANDREW HAD AGREED THAT THE CLOSING ON THE HOUSE TO BE JULY 29, TO GIVE THE OWNER TIME TO LOOK
FOR A NEW HOME.
Before we headed home, our son wanted to shop for summer clothing. We went to Marshall's . I also
picked up numerous items for me. When it was time to check out, I asked Andrew to get his credit
card to pay for the items as my purse was in the bottom of the cart and my hands were full. THIS WAS
THE MOST UNUSUAL ATTITUDE AND FACIAL EXPRESSION ANDREW HAD GIVEN ME. I asked
Andrew what was wrong. He told me that I should use my credit card to pay for the items. I had asked
what the difference was. During the length of our marriage this is the first time ever that Andrew was
forcing me to use my credit card to pay for anything. Our AMEX card was connected to each other
including our son and on a monthly automatic payment from our checking account at our Bank of
America. This was set up that way when we moved to Nevada when our son entered Groton School in
1997... During the length of our marriage before and after our son was added to the account our
manner in paying was that whoever was the first one to get to the cashier or nearest the casher would
take out his or her card . The facial expression that Andrew had on this day when asked to use his
credit card to pay nis something I will never forget.
I had found out later the reason why Andrew had wanted me to use my credit that day. THE ANSWER
TO THE PUZZLE IS FOUND IN THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ANDREW AND HIS
COUNSEL, SHAWN MEADOR DATED APRIL 30,2004 FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE PNA WAS SIGNED.
ON PAGE 1 OF THE COMMUNICATION STATES. " AFTER WE SIGN THE AGREEMENT, SHE WILL
KEEP TRACT OF THE THINGS SHE SPENDS FROM OUR JOINT ACCOUNT, CREDIT CARDS, ETC.
AND WE WILL SETTLE UP WHEN WE ACTUALLY SPLIT AND MOVE THE ASSETS TO THEIR NEW
HOMES , MAYBE SOMETHING TO THIS EFFECT SHOULD BE PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT".
Again I did not make a big deal about the incident of the credit card. I thought it was just one of
Andrew's unreasonable days when he is not thinking as he does not sometimes. We drove home in
convoy. Our son and I in one car, Andrew in his car. When we arrive home, on the early morning of
June 3,2004. I rushed to our bedroom to use the bathroom. I flipped the lights and throw my purse
into our bed, when I saw lipstick marks on my side of the bed below the pillows on the flipped over
sheet over the comforter. I called to ask him what it means. He said it probably was my lipstick before
I left for Las Vegas. Andrew knew he was lying . I ran to the upstairs guest bedroom where I saw on
the floor a pad like sanitary napkin. I did not touch it but Andrew had picked it up and said "this was
not supposed to be here" I flipped the bed cover of the bed ' a large white underwear fell to the floor. I
went down stairs and told Andrew to sleep in the other bedroom. He changed the sheet in our bed.
HE ALSO REFUSED TO MOVE TO ANOTHER BEDROOM TO SLEEP, SO WE HAD SLEPT TOGETHER
IN THE SAME BED EVEN IF I WAS HURTING SEEING PROOFS OF HIS INFeDILITY AFTER I HAD
COME HOME FROM ANDREW'S ERRAND TO LOOK FOR OUR NEW HOME. WE HAD SLEPT
TOGETHER IN THE SAME BED EVEN IF WE WERE FIGHTING UNTIL JUNE 30,2004 WHEN ANDREW
HAD GONE TO JAIL AFTER HE HAD BATTERED ME.
WEELER'S ORDER OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006 WHEN HE INVALIDATED THE PNA DUE TO FRAUD
AND OVERREACHING OF ANDREW AND VALIDATED THE MSA WHICH IS A RE-STATEMENT OF THE
PNA IS ERRONEOUS WHEN HE STATED THAT " THE PARTY WERE SEPARATED IN MAY AND
JUNE 2004"
On or around June 6, 2004, I had told Andrew that we must get divorced. He told me he was going to
commit suicide. He went to his bathroom then came back to the living room to lie don in the sofa. He
told me not to call an ambulance as he wanted to die. I told him I will not. A few minutes later he got up
and told me he was going to the hospital to get his stomach pumped out. I waited at least thirty
minutes before I called the hospital in Incline a three minutes drive from our home , if an Andrew Furer
had been admitted. The reply was negative. Andrew did not come home until after about three hours.
The above schedule again coincides with the April 30,2004 email communication between Andrew and
Shawn Meador five days before thePNA was signed in May 5,2004. It states: " thirty or 45 days from
signing .( talking about his guarantee on the WAMU shares given to me in the agreement with a
guarantee of a certain amount per share in case the stock will go down ,before the divorce, I guess)
We need to make sure DON, ( Don Ross our trust attorney in 2002) will be available to do it towards the
end of May. Ellie will be returning to the area from a house hunting trip around May 23. It will be hard
to do it before she leaves on May 6. We can do it when she gets back." THIS EMAIL ALSO TALKS
ABOUT "
" THE DIVORCE COULD BE GAMED TO MAXIMIZE THE GUARANTEE PAYMENT, SINCE NOBODY
KNOWS WHAT THE STOCK PRICE WILL DO IN 15-25 DAYS AFTER ANY GIVEN DATE ( WHEN A
DIVORCE MIGHT BE FILED) THIS SHOULD PROTECT ME, I THINK" (SEE EMAIL OF
COMMUNICATION OF APRIL 30, 2004, UNDER COURT EXHIBITS.)
Later into the litigation I had found a letter from Don Ross" Confirming our Meeting on June 6,2004.
See exhibit ourt record.. Andrew is certainly following the scheme he had planned with the attorney's.
at Woodburn and Wedge.
When Andrew had come home from supposedly going to the hospital to have his stomach pumped
out, about 3 hours later, ( I now know he had an appointment with Don Ross) I told him again that we
should divorce. I told Andrew that he had violated the terms of the PNA which was to reconcile our
marriage by inviting women to the marital home 16 hours the after the PNA was signed. How do you
reconcile the marriage this way? I had also told Andrew that he had misrepresented the Pna by telling
me that the purpose was also to give me money in my own account so the threat in the Philippines
would not happen again and that so you will not be looking over your shoulders on my expenses.
At this time Andrew had agreed immediately. He said he was going to call his divorce attorney Shawn
Meador to draft the MSA . This was in June 6,2004. Every day while I as waiting to see the MSA,
Andrew launched on a reign of terror on me. He was reminding me every day that the MSA would be
generous. I am giving you more money. If you will not sign it I will make sure to have the PNA stick
and drag the litigation to make sure what ever you get from the PNA, will all go to your lawyers and
YOU WILL LIVE A PAUPER, LIKE MY FATHER, (his father). his father sued Payne Weber in I think
1982. He was offered a settlement that his father did not take which was against the advice of
Andrew. At the end his father lost everything. Andrew hated his father secretly for throwing away
money that could have been "my inheritance" .
I got upset with the daily intimidation for me to sign the MSA and I told Andrew I was not going to sign
the MSA. W e were sitting around the kitchen table around the June 26 OR 27, when he got up
towards the towards the sink near where the knifes were. My eyes were following him. He took one
knife out of the wooden receptacle, looked at me then put it back. He came back to the kitchen table
grabbed the draft of the MSA I was flipping thru and throw it back at me repeating the threat. I started
screaming at him back. When he calmed down he told me " and you can have all the oriental antiques
collection. I don,t know how to take care of them, I will be busy with my new life. I told him I wanted all
the French furniture and all the paintings in the house. Andrew had agreed.
On June 30, 2004, we got up and had breakfast . Andrew had nagged me again about signing the Msa.
Andrew then told me that we were going to call the bank to have something ready after the MSA. When
I spoke to clarify what Andrew was saying to the clerk as she was not understanding , Andrew kicked
me in my legs with two successive forcefull kicks that landed in the same spot in my legs with his
birkenstock sandals on . I fell to the floor in front of him. Andrew left me in the room. I then called
Shawn Meador to tell him that his client had just kicked me. Andrew left the house telling me that he
was going to see his counsel. At around 2:30 pm , having been still in pain in my leg, I called Andrew
if he was out of his attorney's office. He told me he was heading home. I told him that I would not be
able to cook as my legs hurt when I stand for long, if he could pass by Costco to get a roast chicken
and some bananas. He told he would. The second I hung up the phone it rang and it was My counsel,
Ms UNsworth. She told me that Andrew was on his way home with a man from Shawn Meador,s office
to help him with some stuff he will take with him. He was advised to move out of your home. I told
Unsworth tht I had just hung up the phone from him but did not say any thing. Unsworth told me
Andrew was on his way to the house.
I became scared. I was just kicked, now he will have a man in the house with him. I was worried that
Andrew would do something to me with a man with him as his witness. I was thinking three days
before when Andrew had walked over to the kitchen next to the kitchen knives took one knife,
looked at me in a threatening way to scare me off, then put the knife back He then walked back to
the Kitchen table grabbed the MSA draft I was reading and throw it back at me.
Without changing my clothes, I grabbed my sun glasses and headed to the Sheriff's office to get a
sheriff to the house before Andrew and the man arrive the residence. As I was turning to the drive
way to the Sheriff's office I saw Andrew and the man with him standing outside of the Sheriff office.
I went back to my car to wait for a sheriff to show up. I was sure Andrew was going to lie to the Sheriff
the moment he will be given a chance to talk to the sheriff first. I did not know what he was doing in
the sheriff's office with another man from his counsel's office when he had just battered me four hours
ago. Andrew had called the Sheriff office to the house at least four times with different false
accusations against me since June 3, 2004, including wanting to have me committed after we came
home from Las Vegas and after I had found out he had invited women to the marital home ( Please
see exhibit filed July 22, 2008 , Eloisa's Affidavit and Supplement, which are a few of Andrew's lies
and false accusations under" Court exhibits").
When the Sheriffs came, Andrew spoke to one of them immediately. I approached the Sheriff Andrew
was talking to and told him I was kicked two times by Andrew. I had shown the sheriffs the black and
blue bruise in my leg and was swollen. After the Sheriff saw the bruise in my leg, he asked Andrew if
he had kicked me. He told the sheriff he did. The sheriff immediately handcuffed Andrew. It was
painfull for me to see my husband being handcuff. I begged the Sheriff not to put Andrew in jail. I
was not pressing charges. The sheriff told me it was too late as he had admitted a crime. In all
plaintiff's motion, (since it was only Andrew who was not able to testify on the April 2005 hearing due
to lack of time (another hearing date was set ) the battery charges were dropped by the DA's office
before the trial date) plaintiff states that the kicking was an accident and that he had only stepped on
my foot..
Of course this is a lie. How did the blue ,red and black bruise and swelling landed in my leg?
At around 2:00 am on July 1st Andrew had called me from Jail to call his lawyer that no one yet had
bailed him out. I did leave a message in Shawn Meador's phone. On July 2,2004 before noon, Plaintiff
filed a Divorce Complaint and an Exclusive Possession of the Marital home I found out later on.
Sandra Unsworth called me in the house around 2:00pm to ask me to go to her office to sign the MSA.
I told her I was in so much stress emotionally and physically with a terrible headache due to the
incarceration of Andrew, and I did not sleep 24 hours, that I could not possible drive down Mount
Rose Highway. Ms Unsworth had offered to send her paralegal to come to the house. I told her she
could come.
I was expecting the paralegal to be in the house a little after 3:00 pm. I was very tired and sleepy
having taken a 10 milligram of valium a little after 3:00 pm so I can rest the after the paralegal leave
my home. At 3:30 pm I called Unsworth's office to inquire if someone was coming. I was told by the
receptionist that she would call the Paralegal in her cell phone. I had asked if there was something her
office had received from the plaintiff a motion Complaint for Divorce. . She told me that a copy of a
motion had been received. I had asked her for title, clerk told me it was acomplaint for divorce. I told
her to fax it to me she replied that she had to ask permission from Ms.Unsworth. Shortly after that the
paralegal had arrived. I had asked her why I was not told of the Divorce Complaint filed that morning
and before I had spoken to Ms. Unsworth at around 2:00 pm. I told her to call Ms. Unsworth.
T
he valium I had taken before was taking effect when Ms. Unsworth had called. She told me as it was
after 4:pm that she will call the court to let them know that she is objecting to the Divorce Complaint,
whatever that meant. I was Not told by Ms Unsworth about the Exclusive Possession Motion was
also filed on July 2, along with the Complaint for Divorce. I did not know that the Exclusive
Possession Motion was Denied by a Judge on the same da y it was filed based on the conclusion of
the Judge that the allegations of Plaintiff are DIsturbing, that Defendant is entitled to a hearing. I found
about this in 2006 among the pages of some documentsI got from somewhere. Ms Unsworth was on
vacation when I signed the MSA. She told me that she will not be back until the the 12th of July to do
the transfer of Property. I had told her that I wanted these ordeal done and over. I had scheduled a
packing company to pack all the delicate Oriental Antiques on the 12th and 13th ahead of the
furniture and my clothing, etc. On July 5th a holiday, I was awaken by a telephone call from
Unsworth's paralega to tell me that Andrew and his counsel were in the office wanting to sign the Msa
I had signed. I had told this paralegal on July 2nd not to give the signed PNA until the complaint for
divorce was dropped.
On or about July 8,2004, I went to Bonnie Mahan the Attorney on duty who had found a Judge to sign
on the incarceration of Andrew on June 30,2004. I had given her the MSA for her to file if she could. I
wanted it filed so the packing of the Oriental antiques will occur on the scheduled date not Later,
when Unsworth came back from vacation. I was told by the Packing company that if I cancelled the
scheduled date I have to wait until October or November. July August are their busiest months.
Ms Mahan typed a substitution of Attorney and asked me to drop it off at UNsworth's office. Two days
after I had hired Mahan , I had found some statements of accounts that Andrew did not include in the
assets he had dictated to me in March 2004 to be included the assets disclosure to be exhibited that I
was told to fax to UNsworth. Ms Mahan prepared a Waiver of full disclosure for Andrew to sign..
Andrew refused to sign it. We then filed an Exparte Motion to Withdraw Joint Petition for divorce
which Judge Schumacher had granted the divorce to be a contested one. ( see Schumacher's Order
July 2004).
The Post Nuptial Agreement was ORDERED INVALID DUE TO FRAUD AND OVER REACHING OF
PLAINTIFF TOWARDS MRS. FURER, AND VALIDITED THE MARITAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
EVEN IF THE MSA IS A RE-STATEMENT OF THE PNA. ON JUDGE WELLER'S ORDER OF NOVEMBER
14, 2006.
PLAINTIFF'S ARGUMENT IS THAT I HAD " REVOKED "THE JOINT PETITION FOR DIVORCE
THEREFORE DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE BENEFITS OF THE MSA, THE PNA IS THE
VALID AGREEMENT AND THE MARITAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS OF NO FORCE AND EFFECT
I have been accused of revoking the Joint Petition for divorce , so what? According to the Order Of
Schumacher, anyone has the right to revoke or withdraw a joint petition for divorce before a final
decree is rendered by the court . Plaintiff and his counsel wanted me to adhere to their fraudulent
scheme of divorce from the trust agreement in 2002 to the suggestion of the PNA so the incident of the
threat to embarass me in the PHilippines will not happen again, plaintiff was going to give me my own
money , was the purpose of the PNA, so we can reconcile our marriage.
Reno Nevada Washoe County Family Court Of Judge Chuck Weller and Judge Shumacher were
involved in deception, conspiracy, distortion of facts, ignoring credible exhibits and proof to be
exhibited, abuses of substantive, administrative and/or procedural judicial and prosecutorial
discretion.
DIVORCE; FURER vs FURER CASE NO. DV04-01626 DEPT. 11
PLAINTIFF: ANDREW EARL FURER
DEFENDANT: ELOISA FURER
Separation date; June 30, 2004 after Andrew's incarceration (jailed) for battery of Eloisa.
Length of marriage: 27 years on Final Decree
Children : one adult Son
Assets accumulated during marriage: Over $ 80 Million
Length of litigation: Four years and on going, now with supreme court since June 2008.
Divorce: Was bifurcated into three phases;
1) First Phase: Disqualification of Shawn Meador, Plaintiff's divorce attorney since January
2004, before waiver was signed by Eloisa at Plaintiff's coercion and
misrepresentation, Meador was involved in the 2002 parties trust agreement; testimony of Don Ross, the
parties trust attorney of the parties fraudulent estate planning/ trust agreement. SHAWN MEADOR WAS
DISQUALIFIED "MR MEADOR CANNOT REPRESENT PLAINTIFF DURING THIS LITIGATIO N" ( SEE
2) Second Phase: Validity of the Agreements, post nuptial agreement, marital settlement
agreement;
3) Third Phase; Division of community property
I created this website out of necessity due to the extremely adversed decision handed by Judge Weller for
over three years. Judge's Wellers illegal, vindictive, racially motivated Orders will be discussed here later after
I discuss Schumacher's Bias.
Schumacker had handed one year of adversed decisions against me including :
1) Giving the exclusive possession of our Marital home to Plaintiff before PNA and MSA were validated.
2) Judge Schumacher had thrown me out of the marital home before the PNA and MSA was validated by th
Court. She signed the order of exclusive possession in
August 3, 2004, retroactive for me to moveout of the Marital home in July 30,04
while I was in Las Vegas for the walk through of the home misrepresented to me.
Plaintiff, counsels knew I was in Las Vegas when Schumacher signed the order.
I came back to the marital home in early morning of August 4,to find the order in the
mail. My then counsel did not communicate, nor inform me about the order. I was in
constant communication with my counsel while I was in Las Vegas. I was not inform
ed about the motion of the exclusive possession, nor was informed by my then counsel that he had not oppose
the motion, but replied" that the motion as moot as
Mrs. Furer had bought a new home in Las Vegas" I did not see the above motions
until after a few months Iater.
Schumacker had no right to sanction me "in not moving out of the marital home.
I moved out of the marital home in August 7,2004 three days after I had arrived from Las Vegas for fear of
being incarcerated as the order had stated.
I moved out of the marital home in August 7,2004, with a small overnight rollaway and the clothes in my back. I
had to come back home midnight to have a bed to sleep in as all the hotels were full due to the Hot
August Night. I came back home to sleep, feeling so hurt and full of pity for myself. I have never cried so hard
and long until this day of my life. I had leave our marital home before light on August 8 afraid the police would
come to arrest me. My then counsel Gary Silverman did not protect me of my rights, instead had scared me of
being incarcerated if I did not move out, according to his letter to me in August 6,2004, after I had informed
him of the order for me to vacate the marital home in August 4,2004.
3) Imposed TPO against me based on trumped up allegations and fraudulent exhibits of tape recorded
transcriptions without verification and authentication admitted by Schumacher as exhibits.
4) Schumacher did not disclosed her conflict of interest in my case until she was asked to recuse a year later
but not before she made numerous biased decisions. Schumacker's husband was a partner of our trust
attorneys Shawn Meador and Don Ross during the estate planning /trust agreement in 2002. Meador was
consulted about the PNA by Don Ross, which resulted in the $15Million PNA curved out in drawn pie, falsely
testified to by Plaintiff and Meador "as the amount Mrs. Furer had asked for, for" me to go away." Also falsely
testified to by plaintiff and Ross that I was present during the supposed meeting when the draft was
discussed, including the allegations that I had approved the creation of Plaintiff's individual trust funded by the
over $ 50 Million community property Washington Mutual Shares. ( See draft of trust agreement and transcript
of hearing January 6,2006 here as exhibits)
5) Judge Schumacher had imposed sanctions against me based on a motion of plaintiff that I "did not move
out of the marital home in spite of Plaintiff's request I move out a
as the marital home was given to plaintiff in the PNA". There was no such request as the purpose of the PNA
"was to reconcile the marriage and the parties will live together as husband and wife"
6) Judge Schumacher had imposed sanction on me based on a motion of plaintiff that
I had withdrawn money from account given to me in the PNA. It was Plaintiff
who had withdrawn $172,800 from the $3 Million given to defendant in the PNA
as part of the fraudulent agreement that was supposed to be money as my own
account so the threat to embarrass me in the Philippines that" the money I was
spending was money I was stealing from plaintiff as I do not have money of my
own".
The $3 Million was put in a JTWROS account, signed by the parties and their
respective attorneys in May 5,2004 the same day the PNA was signed. Plaintiff had
withdrawn the above amount including the $4,400.00 interest from May, 2004 until
July 24,2004 when the account was transferred to my individual account. I had
withdrawn $70,000.00 from our joint accounts after only $2,836,609.02 transferred to my individual account,
instead of the$3 Million plus the $4,400 interest. Shawn Meador had testified in Court that the amount I had
withdrawn was not the difference of the $3Million. I wanted to reimburse myself the whole $172,000, but
plaintiff had closed and restricted the joint account from my withdrawals, before I could reimburse myself the
amount taken by plaintiff from my account. ( See statement of account and Plaintiff's withdrawal from the account
June,to July 30,2004)
Judge Schumacher is a candidate for the Nevada Supreme Court this time. IN her Ad, she
claims she has integrity and judgement. You be the judge of what she had done to me. My statement here is
supported by authentic court documents and exhibits, I have a complete file of. I stand by my statements, to be
all true and correct to the best of my knowledge as I have known and experienced them.
Judge Schumacher, as far as my case as concerned, had pre judgements against me no matter what our
argument would have been. I have also noticed that judge Schumacher is a racist, as far as the experience I had
in her court room. She allowed Meador more time to harass me in her courtroom while I was on the stand. (See
hearing tape November 1,2004)
Debrah Schumacher has no integrity and proper judgement. If Schumacher has integrity and judgement, she
would have disclosed her conflict of interest with Meador being a partner of her husband during our trust
agreement and would have rescued before she was asked after I had found out their relationship a year after
she had made adversed decisions against me. It was Mr. Robert Young,Esq. who had pointed out to me of the
relationship in 2005.
Schumacher's throwing me out of my own home at 65 years old, after being married to my husband for over two
decades, leaving all my memories and property with no warning, leaving my own home with just an over night
case, then coming back for the night to have a bed to lie on for the night, after wondering where to go dragging
just an overnight suitcase, (still hoping my husband could tell the judge this is not what he wanted, and to let me come
back to the house so we can have a proper separation for the sake of our son and our long marriage) unable to find an
accommodation for the night as all the hotels were full, due to the Hot August Night, was the most devastating
this judge could have done to a human being. This was the most EVER, devastating day of my life.
JUDGE SCHUMACHER HAD PERMANENTLY RUINED ME MENTALLY, EMOTIONALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY. THIS
WAS THE NIGHT I WAS PUSHED TO THE BRINK OF WANTING TO TAKE MY OWN LIFE OUT OF SHAME FOR BEING
THROWN OUT OF MY OWN HOME, BUT FOR THE THOUGHT OF MY SON.
During the only hearing in Schumacher courtroom in November 2004 on a motion of plaintiff for a protective
restraining based on lies and trumped up allegations that I had left death threat messages on plaintiff's cell
phone after we separated and based on a collage death threat letter SUPPOSEDLY WAS SENT TO PLAINTIFF by
ME, clearly proves that Schunacher is a biased, non ethical and a racist. During this hearing Schumacher had
allowed Shawn Meador, dominate the talking and lying in Court at least giving him almost all the court time with
my then attorney , Dolinger, had very little time to cross. Meador kept asking at least three times "another ten
minutes more". Schumacher had allowed taped recorded messages and its transcriptions without validation and
authentication to come in as exhibits. I had pointed out in court that each transcribed messages were not only
inaccurate,but each messages were repeated several times throughout the 54 pages of exhibits.( See
transcribed taped messages from July 2004 after plaintiff WENT TO JAIL and had moved in with the SECOND
woman plaintiff had invited to the marital home 16 HOURS AFTER THE PNA WAS SIGNED and the hearing tape on
November 1,2004)
Schumacher IS CORRUPT, HEARTLESS, A RACIST AND MAKES JUDGMENT ACCORDING TO WHO HER FRIENDS
ARE, NOT BASED ON FACTS AND THE LAW. Clearly all of Schumacher's adversed decisions against me and her
reprimand on my then attorney for filing an Ex Parte motion to Withdraw JOINT PETITION FOR DIVORCE based on
Plaintiff's REFUSAL to sign WAIVER OF FULL DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS WAS BIASED AND RACIAL. Shawn Meador,
Plaintiff's divorce attorney (and law partner of Judge Schumacher's husband during the Trust agreement) filed
his Ex parte motion in July 2, 2004, to give plaintiff Exclusive Possession of the Marital home TWO WEEK LATER
after we filed our Ex Parte motion to Withdraw the Joint Petition For Divorce.The motion to grant exclusive
possession to plaintiff WAS DENIED by Judge Doherty, on the same day, July 2,2004 BASED ON THE
QUESTIONABLE AND SUSPICIOUS MOTIVE OF PLAINTIFF AND ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT SHOULD BE GIVEN AN
OPPORTUNITY OF A HEARING.
On July 21,2004, Shawn Meador REFILED his motion on Exclusive Possession of Marital home, ONLY THIS TIME,
IT WAS heared by Schumacher which she GLADLY GRANTED WITHOUT A HEARING, IN SPITE OF the ORDER
JUDGE DOHERTY IN JULY 2,2004 DENYING THE SAME MOTION OF EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION.
I was not notified by my then attorney, Sandra Unsworth, of the July 2,2004 plaintiff's filing a motion of exclusive
possession of marital home. I had communication with Unsworth on this day as this was the same day that she
had sent her Paralegal to our home for me to sign the MSA. Ms.Unsworth had called me to come to her office to
sign the MSA. I told her I was too sick physically and mentally to drive to Reno due to my husband's going to jail
two days before for battery on me.
I also found out later on by accident on July 2,2004 when I called Unsworth's office that day why the paralegal
was not yet at my home two hours later after she was supposed to have left the office at 2:00pm. I had asked the
office receptionist if there was something else she had received from plaintiff that day. I was told a copy of the
motion filed, Complaint for Divorce was received that morning. When I asked the receptionist to fax it to me
while I was waiting forMs. Unsworth secretary to arrive I was told that she had tocontact Ms. Unsworth if she
could fax it to me. Before the Complaint for divorce copy was faxed to me the parslegal arrived my home and she
called the receptionist to fax the complaint for divorce. We then called MS. Unsworth about the Complaint for
divorce motion. Ms. Unsworth told me that since it was late to file a motion to oppose the complaint for divorce,
she was going to call the court that she will file the opposition. I had written Ms. Unsworth two days later
regarding the matter and about something else where she denied not having told me about the complaint for
divorce.
There was no talk about a motion filed on exclusive possession of the marital home at all between Ms. Unsworth
and myself nor with her paralegal in July 2,2004. I had found about this motion IN 2005 AS I WAS GOING THRU
DOCUMENTS FORWARDED TO MS. MAHAN IN 2005. I THOUGHT THAT THE ONLY EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION MOTION
FILED WAS THE ONE IN JULY 21, WHICH I FOUND OUT ONLY AFTER THE ORDER SIGNED BY SCHUMACHER IN
AUGUST 3,2004 RETROACTIVE FOR ME TO MOVE JULY 30,2004, WHEN I CAME HOME FROM LAS VEGAS ON
AUGUST 3,2004 AND FOUND THE ORDER IN THE MAIL.
EVERYONE KNEW I WAS IN LAS VEGAS ON A WALK THROUGH OF THE HOME AFTER PLAINTIFF HAD CLOSED ON
THE HOME. PLAINTIFF CALLED ME ON JULY 27,2004 TO GO AHEAD ON THE WALK THROUGH AS HE HAD ALREADY
MAILED THE CLOSING OF THE HOUSE AND I WAS ASKED TO ISSUE A CHECK FROM THE $3 MILLION GIVEN TO ME
IN THE PNA THAT WAS DEPOSITED IN OUR JOINT ACCOUNT, SO THE $100.000.00 DEPOSIT WILL NOT BE
FORFEITED, AS HE WAS ADVISED BY THE EQUITY TITLE THE OWNER WAS GOING TO DO IF HE DID NOT CLOSE ON
THE PURCHASE. i HAD FOUND OUT LATER ON THAT PLAINTIFF HAD SIGNED A QUIT CLAIM ON THE HOME, MAILED
DIRECTLY TO EQUITY TITLE WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE. ( See Fed Ex receipt mailed by plaintiff to equity title in
July,2004 here exhibited in court exhibits) AND WAS FORCED ON ME. RETROACTIVE FOR MKNOR I WAS NOTIFIED
BY MY THEN ATTORNEY GARY SILVERMAN OF THE MOTION FILED IN JULY 21,2004, OF THE SAME MOTION. TO
ADD INSULT TO INJURY, SILVERMAN, I HAD FOUND OUT LATER AFTER THE ORDER OF SCHUMACHER GRANTING
THE MOTION TO EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION, HAD NOT OPPOSED THE MOTION INSTEAD HAD FILED A REPLY THAT
THE MOTION WAS "MOOT" AS I HAD BOUGHT A HOME IN LAS VEGAS, KNOWING THAT THE LAS VEGAS HOME WAS
FRAUDULENTLY GIVEN TO ME BASED ON THE MISREPRESENTATION OF PLAINTIFF AND THE PURCHASE WAS
CLOSED BY PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY BEFORE I HAD FINALLY AGREED AFTER WE HAD DECIDED TO GET
DIVORCED AFTER I HAD NOTICED THAT PLAINTIFF HAD NO INTENTION OF BEING MARRIED AFTER THE PNA WAS
SIGNED. IT IS CLAIMED BY PLAINTIFF THAT I HAD LOOKED AND PURCHASED THE HOME DUE TO "THE AGREEMENT
THAT WE WERE GOING TO LIVE A SEPARATE LIFE AFTER THE PNA" WHICH IS FARTHEST FROM WHAT THE
PURPOSE OF THE PNA AS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT.
IT MAKES DEFENDANT HAPPY THAT SCHUMACHER LOST HER BID FOR THE SUPREME COURT OR SHE WILL RUIN
MORE LIVES OF DECENT HUMAN BEINGS.
JUDGE SCHUMACHER FINALLY RECUSED HERSELF IN 2005, AND THE EQUALLY CORRUPT, BIASED, RACIST AND AN
IMMORAL JUDGE CHUCK WELLER , THE JUDGE SHOT BY ANOTHER LITIGANT IN HIS COURT ROOM HAD COME
INTO MY DIVORCE CASE.
PART 2 OF DIVORCE LITIGATION UNDER THE CRIMINAL JUDGE WELLER.
JUDGE CHUCK WELLER'S REGIME IN MY DIVORCE CASE FROM JUNE 2005 TO THE PRESENT. WELLER JUST
ISSUED ANOTHER AFTER DECREE ORDER IN OCTOBER 23,2008. ALL WELLER'S AFTER DECREE ORDER WERE
SHAMELESSLY ALL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS. YOU BE THE JUDGE OF WELLER'S PERFORMANCE.
Judge Weller had left me in the verge of bankruptcy leaving me with no money for my daily subsistence.
I have no funds EVEN to pay for my medicare at $ 331.00 per month, my home owners associations
fees, home and car insurance, utility bills, medical bills, and fund to hire an appellate counsel to fight the
criminal, illegal, vindictive, malicious,and racially motivated February 22,2008 Finding of Facts and
Decree of this criminal Judge.
After the Decree of Divorce in February 22,2008, I was given the following.
1) three real estate property with a total value of $2,190.00 which are now liabilities to me.
I was not able to pay for the property tax of my Las Vegas residence that was bought out of gross
misrepresentation to be our family home after the misrepresentation by my husband that we were going
to move to Las Vegas after the $11 Million lake front home in Incline Village was sold. I was also given in
the decree
2) the1988, 1998 and a 2004 Mercedez cars.
My husband retained a 2006 Mercedez and a 2005 Lexus, our joint account at Credit Suisse since the
early 90's,
the $11 Million proceeds of our marital home,
all the my 570,000 shares of Washington Mutual shares,
a house in Reno bought for $2338,000, plus a decorating allowance of $500.000.00, that Judge Weller
had allowed my husband to buy when a mutual restraining order was in existence,
my Washington Mutual dividend and interest from 2004 to September 2008, approximate $6 Million.
Deception in this divorce case started during 1999 to 2002 when Andrew had conspired with our
attorneys at Woodburn and Wedge after they were hired to do our estate planning and trust agreement.
The fraudulent estate planning led to the Post Nuptial Agreement, the Marital Settlement Agreement, and
to the throwing me out from our Marital home by Judge Schumacker in July 30,2004. I was thrown out
of the Marital home without a hearing and before the fraudulent PNA and MSA was validated; Woodburn
& Wedge and Andrew had filed in court and with the Sheriff's department false accusations and
allegations against me to have me incarcerated after being bankrupted by Judge Chuck Weller, so I do
not have the means for legal fees to fight the fraudulent, biased, and vindictive decision of Weller.
involved in deception, conspiracy, distortion of facts, ignoring credible exhibits and proof to be
exhibited, abuses of substantive, administrative and/or procedural judicial and prosecutorial
discretion.
DIVORCE; FURER vs FURER CASE NO. DV04-01626 DEPT. 11
PLAINTIFF: ANDREW EARL FURER
DEFENDANT: ELOISA FURER
Separation date; June 30, 2004 after Andrew's incarceration (jailed) for battery of Eloisa.
Length of marriage: 27 years on Final Decree
Children : one adult Son
Assets accumulated during marriage: Over $ 80 Million
Length of litigation: Four years and on going, now with supreme court since June 2008.
Divorce: Was bifurcated into three phases;
1) First Phase: Disqualification of Shawn Meador, Plaintiff's divorce attorney since January
2004, before waiver was signed by Eloisa at Plaintiff's coercion and
misrepresentation, Meador was involved in the 2002 parties trust agreement; testimony of Don Ross, the
parties trust attorney of the parties fraudulent estate planning/ trust agreement. SHAWN MEADOR WAS
DISQUALIFIED "MR MEADOR CANNOT REPRESENT PLAINTIFF DURING THIS LITIGATIO N" ( SEE
2) Second Phase: Validity of the Agreements, post nuptial agreement, marital settlement
agreement;
3) Third Phase; Division of community property
I created this website out of necessity due to the extremely adversed decision handed by Judge Weller for
over three years. Judge's Wellers illegal, vindictive, racially motivated Orders will be discussed here later after
I discuss Schumacher's Bias.
Schumacker had handed one year of adversed decisions against me including :
1) Giving the exclusive possession of our Marital home to Plaintiff before PNA and MSA were validated.
2) Judge Schumacher had thrown me out of the marital home before the PNA and MSA was validated by th
Court. She signed the order of exclusive possession in
August 3, 2004, retroactive for me to moveout of the Marital home in July 30,04
while I was in Las Vegas for the walk through of the home misrepresented to me.
Plaintiff, counsels knew I was in Las Vegas when Schumacher signed the order.
I came back to the marital home in early morning of August 4,to find the order in the
mail. My then counsel did not communicate, nor inform me about the order. I was in
constant communication with my counsel while I was in Las Vegas. I was not inform
ed about the motion of the exclusive possession, nor was informed by my then counsel that he had not oppose
the motion, but replied" that the motion as moot as
Mrs. Furer had bought a new home in Las Vegas" I did not see the above motions
until after a few months Iater.
Schumacker had no right to sanction me "in not moving out of the marital home.
I moved out of the marital home in August 7,2004 three days after I had arrived from Las Vegas for fear of
being incarcerated as the order had stated.
I moved out of the marital home in August 7,2004, with a small overnight rollaway and the clothes in my back. I
had to come back home midnight to have a bed to sleep in as all the hotels were full due to the Hot
August Night. I came back home to sleep, feeling so hurt and full of pity for myself. I have never cried so hard
and long until this day of my life. I had leave our marital home before light on August 8 afraid the police would
come to arrest me. My then counsel Gary Silverman did not protect me of my rights, instead had scared me of
being incarcerated if I did not move out, according to his letter to me in August 6,2004, after I had informed
him of the order for me to vacate the marital home in August 4,2004.
3) Imposed TPO against me based on trumped up allegations and fraudulent exhibits of tape recorded
transcriptions without verification and authentication admitted by Schumacher as exhibits.
4) Schumacher did not disclosed her conflict of interest in my case until she was asked to recuse a year later
but not before she made numerous biased decisions. Schumacker's husband was a partner of our trust
attorneys Shawn Meador and Don Ross during the estate planning /trust agreement in 2002. Meador was
consulted about the PNA by Don Ross, which resulted in the $15Million PNA curved out in drawn pie, falsely
testified to by Plaintiff and Meador "as the amount Mrs. Furer had asked for, for" me to go away." Also falsely
testified to by plaintiff and Ross that I was present during the supposed meeting when the draft was
discussed, including the allegations that I had approved the creation of Plaintiff's individual trust funded by the
over $ 50 Million community property Washington Mutual Shares. ( See draft of trust agreement and transcript
of hearing January 6,2006 here as exhibits)
5) Judge Schumacher had imposed sanctions against me based on a motion of plaintiff that I "did not move
out of the marital home in spite of Plaintiff's request I move out a
as the marital home was given to plaintiff in the PNA". There was no such request as the purpose of the PNA
"was to reconcile the marriage and the parties will live together as husband and wife"
6) Judge Schumacher had imposed sanction on me based on a motion of plaintiff that
I had withdrawn money from account given to me in the PNA. It was Plaintiff
who had withdrawn $172,800 from the $3 Million given to defendant in the PNA
as part of the fraudulent agreement that was supposed to be money as my own
account so the threat to embarrass me in the Philippines that" the money I was
spending was money I was stealing from plaintiff as I do not have money of my
own".
The $3 Million was put in a JTWROS account, signed by the parties and their
respective attorneys in May 5,2004 the same day the PNA was signed. Plaintiff had
withdrawn the above amount including the $4,400.00 interest from May, 2004 until
July 24,2004 when the account was transferred to my individual account. I had
withdrawn $70,000.00 from our joint accounts after only $2,836,609.02 transferred to my individual account,
instead of the$3 Million plus the $4,400 interest. Shawn Meador had testified in Court that the amount I had
withdrawn was not the difference of the $3Million. I wanted to reimburse myself the whole $172,000, but
plaintiff had closed and restricted the joint account from my withdrawals, before I could reimburse myself the
amount taken by plaintiff from my account. ( See statement of account and Plaintiff's withdrawal from the account
June,to July 30,2004)
Judge Schumacher is a candidate for the Nevada Supreme Court this time. IN her Ad, she
claims she has integrity and judgement. You be the judge of what she had done to me. My statement here is
supported by authentic court documents and exhibits, I have a complete file of. I stand by my statements, to be
all true and correct to the best of my knowledge as I have known and experienced them.
Judge Schumacher, as far as my case as concerned, had pre judgements against me no matter what our
argument would have been. I have also noticed that judge Schumacher is a racist, as far as the experience I had
in her court room. She allowed Meador more time to harass me in her courtroom while I was on the stand. (See
hearing tape November 1,2004)
Debrah Schumacher has no integrity and proper judgement. If Schumacher has integrity and judgement, she
would have disclosed her conflict of interest with Meador being a partner of her husband during our trust
agreement and would have rescued before she was asked after I had found out their relationship a year after
she had made adversed decisions against me. It was Mr. Robert Young,Esq. who had pointed out to me of the
relationship in 2005.
Schumacher's throwing me out of my own home at 65 years old, after being married to my husband for over two
decades, leaving all my memories and property with no warning, leaving my own home with just an over night
case, then coming back for the night to have a bed to lie on for the night, after wondering where to go dragging
just an overnight suitcase, (still hoping my husband could tell the judge this is not what he wanted, and to let me come
back to the house so we can have a proper separation for the sake of our son and our long marriage) unable to find an
accommodation for the night as all the hotels were full, due to the Hot August Night, was the most devastating
this judge could have done to a human being. This was the most EVER, devastating day of my life.
JUDGE SCHUMACHER HAD PERMANENTLY RUINED ME MENTALLY, EMOTIONALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY. THIS
WAS THE NIGHT I WAS PUSHED TO THE BRINK OF WANTING TO TAKE MY OWN LIFE OUT OF SHAME FOR BEING
THROWN OUT OF MY OWN HOME, BUT FOR THE THOUGHT OF MY SON.
During the only hearing in Schumacher courtroom in November 2004 on a motion of plaintiff for a protective
restraining based on lies and trumped up allegations that I had left death threat messages on plaintiff's cell
phone after we separated and based on a collage death threat letter SUPPOSEDLY WAS SENT TO PLAINTIFF by
ME, clearly proves that Schunacher is a biased, non ethical and a racist. During this hearing Schumacher had
allowed Shawn Meador, dominate the talking and lying in Court at least giving him almost all the court time with
my then attorney , Dolinger, had very little time to cross. Meador kept asking at least three times "another ten
minutes more". Schumacher had allowed taped recorded messages and its transcriptions without validation and
authentication to come in as exhibits. I had pointed out in court that each transcribed messages were not only
inaccurate,but each messages were repeated several times throughout the 54 pages of exhibits.( See
transcribed taped messages from July 2004 after plaintiff WENT TO JAIL and had moved in with the SECOND
woman plaintiff had invited to the marital home 16 HOURS AFTER THE PNA WAS SIGNED and the hearing tape on
November 1,2004)
Schumacher IS CORRUPT, HEARTLESS, A RACIST AND MAKES JUDGMENT ACCORDING TO WHO HER FRIENDS
ARE, NOT BASED ON FACTS AND THE LAW. Clearly all of Schumacher's adversed decisions against me and her
reprimand on my then attorney for filing an Ex Parte motion to Withdraw JOINT PETITION FOR DIVORCE based on
Plaintiff's REFUSAL to sign WAIVER OF FULL DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS WAS BIASED AND RACIAL. Shawn Meador,
Plaintiff's divorce attorney (and law partner of Judge Schumacher's husband during the Trust agreement) filed
his Ex parte motion in July 2, 2004, to give plaintiff Exclusive Possession of the Marital home TWO WEEK LATER
after we filed our Ex Parte motion to Withdraw the Joint Petition For Divorce.The motion to grant exclusive
possession to plaintiff WAS DENIED by Judge Doherty, on the same day, July 2,2004 BASED ON THE
QUESTIONABLE AND SUSPICIOUS MOTIVE OF PLAINTIFF AND ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT SHOULD BE GIVEN AN
OPPORTUNITY OF A HEARING.
On July 21,2004, Shawn Meador REFILED his motion on Exclusive Possession of Marital home, ONLY THIS TIME,
IT WAS heared by Schumacher which she GLADLY GRANTED WITHOUT A HEARING, IN SPITE OF the ORDER
JUDGE DOHERTY IN JULY 2,2004 DENYING THE SAME MOTION OF EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION.
I was not notified by my then attorney, Sandra Unsworth, of the July 2,2004 plaintiff's filing a motion of exclusive
possession of marital home. I had communication with Unsworth on this day as this was the same day that she
had sent her Paralegal to our home for me to sign the MSA. Ms.Unsworth had called me to come to her office to
sign the MSA. I told her I was too sick physically and mentally to drive to Reno due to my husband's going to jail
two days before for battery on me.
I also found out later on by accident on July 2,2004 when I called Unsworth's office that day why the paralegal
was not yet at my home two hours later after she was supposed to have left the office at 2:00pm. I had asked the
office receptionist if there was something else she had received from plaintiff that day. I was told a copy of the
motion filed, Complaint for Divorce was received that morning. When I asked the receptionist to fax it to me
while I was waiting forMs. Unsworth secretary to arrive I was told that she had tocontact Ms. Unsworth if she
could fax it to me. Before the Complaint for divorce copy was faxed to me the parslegal arrived my home and she
called the receptionist to fax the complaint for divorce. We then called MS. Unsworth about the Complaint for
divorce motion. Ms. Unsworth told me that since it was late to file a motion to oppose the complaint for divorce,
she was going to call the court that she will file the opposition. I had written Ms. Unsworth two days later
regarding the matter and about something else where she denied not having told me about the complaint for
divorce.
There was no talk about a motion filed on exclusive possession of the marital home at all between Ms. Unsworth
and myself nor with her paralegal in July 2,2004. I had found about this motion IN 2005 AS I WAS GOING THRU
DOCUMENTS FORWARDED TO MS. MAHAN IN 2005. I THOUGHT THAT THE ONLY EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION MOTION
FILED WAS THE ONE IN JULY 21, WHICH I FOUND OUT ONLY AFTER THE ORDER SIGNED BY SCHUMACHER IN
AUGUST 3,2004 RETROACTIVE FOR ME TO MOVE JULY 30,2004, WHEN I CAME HOME FROM LAS VEGAS ON
AUGUST 3,2004 AND FOUND THE ORDER IN THE MAIL.
EVERYONE KNEW I WAS IN LAS VEGAS ON A WALK THROUGH OF THE HOME AFTER PLAINTIFF HAD CLOSED ON
THE HOME. PLAINTIFF CALLED ME ON JULY 27,2004 TO GO AHEAD ON THE WALK THROUGH AS HE HAD ALREADY
MAILED THE CLOSING OF THE HOUSE AND I WAS ASKED TO ISSUE A CHECK FROM THE $3 MILLION GIVEN TO ME
IN THE PNA THAT WAS DEPOSITED IN OUR JOINT ACCOUNT, SO THE $100.000.00 DEPOSIT WILL NOT BE
FORFEITED, AS HE WAS ADVISED BY THE EQUITY TITLE THE OWNER WAS GOING TO DO IF HE DID NOT CLOSE ON
THE PURCHASE. i HAD FOUND OUT LATER ON THAT PLAINTIFF HAD SIGNED A QUIT CLAIM ON THE HOME, MAILED
DIRECTLY TO EQUITY TITLE WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE. ( See Fed Ex receipt mailed by plaintiff to equity title in
July,2004 here exhibited in court exhibits) AND WAS FORCED ON ME. RETROACTIVE FOR MKNOR I WAS NOTIFIED
BY MY THEN ATTORNEY GARY SILVERMAN OF THE MOTION FILED IN JULY 21,2004, OF THE SAME MOTION. TO
ADD INSULT TO INJURY, SILVERMAN, I HAD FOUND OUT LATER AFTER THE ORDER OF SCHUMACHER GRANTING
THE MOTION TO EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION, HAD NOT OPPOSED THE MOTION INSTEAD HAD FILED A REPLY THAT
THE MOTION WAS "MOOT" AS I HAD BOUGHT A HOME IN LAS VEGAS, KNOWING THAT THE LAS VEGAS HOME WAS
FRAUDULENTLY GIVEN TO ME BASED ON THE MISREPRESENTATION OF PLAINTIFF AND THE PURCHASE WAS
CLOSED BY PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY BEFORE I HAD FINALLY AGREED AFTER WE HAD DECIDED TO GET
DIVORCED AFTER I HAD NOTICED THAT PLAINTIFF HAD NO INTENTION OF BEING MARRIED AFTER THE PNA WAS
SIGNED. IT IS CLAIMED BY PLAINTIFF THAT I HAD LOOKED AND PURCHASED THE HOME DUE TO "THE AGREEMENT
THAT WE WERE GOING TO LIVE A SEPARATE LIFE AFTER THE PNA" WHICH IS FARTHEST FROM WHAT THE
PURPOSE OF THE PNA AS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT.
IT MAKES DEFENDANT HAPPY THAT SCHUMACHER LOST HER BID FOR THE SUPREME COURT OR SHE WILL RUIN
MORE LIVES OF DECENT HUMAN BEINGS.
JUDGE SCHUMACHER FINALLY RECUSED HERSELF IN 2005, AND THE EQUALLY CORRUPT, BIASED, RACIST AND AN
IMMORAL JUDGE CHUCK WELLER , THE JUDGE SHOT BY ANOTHER LITIGANT IN HIS COURT ROOM HAD COME
INTO MY DIVORCE CASE.
PART 2 OF DIVORCE LITIGATION UNDER THE CRIMINAL JUDGE WELLER.
JUDGE CHUCK WELLER'S REGIME IN MY DIVORCE CASE FROM JUNE 2005 TO THE PRESENT. WELLER JUST
ISSUED ANOTHER AFTER DECREE ORDER IN OCTOBER 23,2008. ALL WELLER'S AFTER DECREE ORDER WERE
SHAMELESSLY ALL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS. YOU BE THE JUDGE OF WELLER'S PERFORMANCE.
Judge Weller had left me in the verge of bankruptcy leaving me with no money for my daily subsistence.
I have no funds EVEN to pay for my medicare at $ 331.00 per month, my home owners associations
fees, home and car insurance, utility bills, medical bills, and fund to hire an appellate counsel to fight the
criminal, illegal, vindictive, malicious,and racially motivated February 22,2008 Finding of Facts and
Decree of this criminal Judge.
After the Decree of Divorce in February 22,2008, I was given the following.
1) three real estate property with a total value of $2,190.00 which are now liabilities to me.
I was not able to pay for the property tax of my Las Vegas residence that was bought out of gross
misrepresentation to be our family home after the misrepresentation by my husband that we were going
to move to Las Vegas after the $11 Million lake front home in Incline Village was sold. I was also given in
the decree
2) the1988, 1998 and a 2004 Mercedez cars.
My husband retained a 2006 Mercedez and a 2005 Lexus, our joint account at Credit Suisse since the
early 90's,
the $11 Million proceeds of our marital home,
all the my 570,000 shares of Washington Mutual shares,
a house in Reno bought for $2338,000, plus a decorating allowance of $500.000.00, that Judge Weller
had allowed my husband to buy when a mutual restraining order was in existence,
my Washington Mutual dividend and interest from 2004 to September 2008, approximate $6 Million.
Deception in this divorce case started during 1999 to 2002 when Andrew had conspired with our
attorneys at Woodburn and Wedge after they were hired to do our estate planning and trust agreement.
The fraudulent estate planning led to the Post Nuptial Agreement, the Marital Settlement Agreement, and
to the throwing me out from our Marital home by Judge Schumacker in July 30,2004. I was thrown out
of the Marital home without a hearing and before the fraudulent PNA and MSA was validated; Woodburn
& Wedge and Andrew had filed in court and with the Sheriff's department false accusations and
allegations against me to have me incarcerated after being bankrupted by Judge Chuck Weller, so I do
not have the means for legal fees to fight the fraudulent, biased, and vindictive decision of Weller.
 | Deception | |
| Conspiracy | |
| Fraud | |
| Intimidation | |
| Coercion | |
| Injustice | |
| THIS WEBSITE WILL REVEAL THE |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| My Judicial Complaint! |
We were married for 24 years before our separation. The litigation from 2004 has taken four years and
is still ongoing. The grossly biased, illegal, vindictive, blatantly erroneous Finding of Facts and Decree (
contrary to court record and documentation ) was handed down by Judge Chuck Weller in February 22,
2008. THIS ILLEGAL DECISION OF WELLER WAS OBVIOUSLY MADE TO BANKRUPT ME SO I DO NOT
HAVE THE MEANS TO FIGHT HIS DECISION WITH THE SUPREME COURT.
Judge Weller had also denied a motion to retain an out of state associate counsel, filed in may 8, 2008, to
represent me in my complaints against Judge Weller, Washoe County, and against certain attorney's.
Judge Weller's denial striking the motion to retain this associate counsel was issued in july 11, 2008,
citing that the motion to retain this associate counsel is in violation of wdcr 23, two months after the
filing. Judge Weller had also approved the withdrawal of my appellate Divorce attorneys on the same
day, leaving me with no attorney to represent me in the Supreme Court, the after trial issues, and the
after the decree filings for the transfer of my properties.
I had no intention of substituting my then attorney, Mr. Lueck. Mr. was to remain my Divorce appellate
attorney. He knew that another attorney was coming in to handle my issues with the washoe judicial
system. It was Mr. Lueck who told me to look for another attorney to handle my issues with Judge
Weller and the Washoe Judicial system, Andrew's attorneys and other issues, apart from the divorce
appeal with the Supreme Court, as he did not want to get involved in my personal case to remove Judge
Weller.
Mr. Fitting filed a motion to withdraw from my case after Judge Weller struck the motion to retain
associate counsel, but Judge Weller did not allow Mr. Fitting to withdraw. This was a calculated move of
Judge Weller to force on me an attorney I do not know. Judge Weller had again violated my
constitutional rights to be represented in court by an attorney of my choice. The attorney from out of
state I had hired was the one who had hired Mr. Fitting to associate him with. Mr. Fitting is a sole
practitioner conducting his practice from an office in his home, and is a tax attorney not a litigation
attorney. I did not know Mr. Fitting before the out of state attorney i had hired, asked me to pick up the
motion to associate from Mr. Fitting’s home in May. I now know that Mr. Fitting is not prepared to
represent me in the Supreme Court appeal, and i must have sufficient time to retain an attorney.
Mr. Fitting told me he had been trying to transfer my property to my name according to the decree from
may, 2008 up to the present. As of September 18, 2008, Mr. Fitting has not accomplished anything. I
have been inquiring about his progress on this issue thru telephone calls and emails, but Mr. Fitting
has not returned my calls and emails regarding this issue. Mr. Fitting told me he has been
communicating with Andrew's counsel, Shawn Meador, since may regarding the transfer of property,
but has not forwarded to me any of his communications with Meador, nor any communications with
Credit Suisse. I have forwarded to Mr. Fitting documents regarding my property and information to be
dealt with on the wrong finding of facts by Weller, including exhibits to prove the wrong finding of facts
by Weller.
In the final decree of Judge Weller, gave 95% of our assets to Andrew.
.
1) A joint account containing over $19 Million cash,
2) $11 Million proceeds of the sale of our Marital home sold in September 2007, authorized by Weller
without my input (click order to sell home and related documents)
3) Judge Weller had allowed Mr. Furer to keep my Washington Mutual dividend, and interest from 2004
to the present in the amount of over $ 6 Million, based on his November 14, 2006 invalidating the PNA,
but validated the MSA, which is a restatement of the fraudulent PNA.
Weller had rewritten the PNA and MSA agreement in this order. ( See plaintiff's tender of dividend to me
in August 2004,with check enclosed, three other letters of tenders from plaintiff in 2005, and two in 2006
with out checks enclosed letter to Unsworth re opening account to hold WAMU dividends in 2004, and
letter from Mr. Marks questioning plaintiff's counsel about dividend tenders without checks enclosed ).
Was the letter of tenders without actual checks enclosed for tax purposes to show IRS that I receive
payments or for plaintiff's tax return to avoid tax payment on dividend he had received? I will write IRS
to inquire. Plaintiff refused to provide me with his tax return of 2006 in violation of court order.
4) Judge Weller had allowed plaintiff to buy a home in Reno for
$2,338,000.00 plus $500,000.00 for redecoration expenses, in September 2006, when there was a
financial restraining order in existence. Judge Weller lifted the financial restraining order only in his
Decree February 22, 2008. ( See Feb.22, 2008 decree)
5) $2.8 Million in sanctions and reimbursement taken from my asset.
In the February Decree, Judge Weller had ordered plaintiff to transfer my WAMU stock to me within thirty
days (30) of the Decree. Instead of transferring my stocks to my name and account as per the Decree,
Andrew filed a motion in March 2008 to hold 250,000 of my shares in dispute because of an appeal that
was filed by plaintiff to reverse the invalidity of the Post Nuptial Agreement in the Supreme Court.
According to Credit Suisse, my available shares of stock that could manage and sell were only 250,000
shares. As of this writing, September 25, 2008, WAMU shares are worth nothing compared to what they
would have been worth when Andrew sold his shares. The only cash asset given to me are all gone.
Judge Weller also stated in his Final Decree that I had won the litigation of the agreement, but did not
award me attorney fees (of over $2 Million) "due to Mrs. Furer's out burst in Court" during the third phase
of litigation
OUTBURST IN COURT
This outburst started after Judge Weller started harassing me and my attorneys
since I had fired Mr. Marks for filing a Joint Brief without changes that I asked him
to do due to the position that he had taken with the opposing party which were not
my position at all. Mr. Marks had hidden the Joint Brief from me before filing.
During the April 3, April 9, April 12 and April 30, 2007 status conference hearings,
Judge Weller was harassing me and my attorneys to stipulate to divorce before a
division of assets. Judge Weller promised the plaintiff that he was going to give
him his divorce before the division of assets if he could find a law in support, and asked
plaintiff and his attorneys to help him find such law. Judge Weller's threatening attitude in court towards
me and pushing me to a corner STARTED ALL MY OUTBURST IN COURT. CAN ANYONE BLAME ME IN
TRYING TO PROTECT MYSELF FROM THE HARASSMENT OF THE COURT?
6) 69,000 shares of my WAMU stock authorized by Weller to be sold to cover illegal sanctions against me
7) Over $300,000.00 subtracted from my assets on a biased ruling on an attorney's lien, including
payments to the following attorneys. I had refused to pay these attorneys for the following reasons:
after his February 22,2008 Decree for plaintiff to "transfer my 570,000 shares within 30 days of the
Decree" ( click on April 25, 2008 order and Feb.22, 2008 decree)
to cover Andrew's withdrawal of over $172,000.00 from my account where the $3,000,000.00 was put
temporarily in a joint account.
sent to the BNP account as an advance to me, to pay for the expenses of a Paris apartment. Andrew did
not send money to the BNP bank. ANDREW TRANSFERRED $10,000.00 FROM OUR DOLLAR SAVINGS
ACCOUNT TO OUR EURO CHECKING ACCOUNT IN MARCH, 2006. BOTH THESE ACCOUNTS WERE
AWARDED TO ME IN THE FRAUDULENT AGREEMENTS. ANDREW MUST BE HELD IN CONTEMPT
FOR THIS BLATANT LIE TO THE COURT. (See BNP Bank Statement of March 2006). All bank statements
were directly sent to Andrew from 2004 to 2008.
SPOUSAL SUPPORT FROM SEPTEMBER 2005(ONE YEAR AFTER THE SEPARATION), @ $60,000.00
PER MONTH UNTIL APRIL 2006 ; INTERIM SPOUSAL SUPPORT FROM MAY 1, 2006 TO DECEMBER
2007.
me should be put in a JTWROS account. A document was signed to this effect by us and our attorney.
According to the bank statement, the $3 Million was put in an account with Credit Suisse on May 17, 2004
until July 24, 2004 after a divorce was eminent (instead of the fraudulent PNA that was misrepresented to
me by Mr. Furer). However, the amount that was transferred to my own individual account was
$2,836,609.00.
transferring it to my individual account after our agreement to divorce.
offers no correspondence near the time of withdrawal ----)". According to Judge Weller's Decision. This
was because Mr. Furer had hidden the bank statement from Mrs. Furer. Mrs. Furer had obtained a copy
of the bank statement in March 14, 2008 from Credit Suisse before Mr. Furer had written a memo not to
furnish Mrs. Furer with any more financial statements.
After checking the account, I realized the amount transferred was not correct. It was supposed to show
the $3 Million plus interest from May 17 to July 24, 2004. To reimburse myself I had withdrawn $60,000
from our joint account in Credit Suisse and $10,000.00 from our Money market account with Bank of
America. I had limited my withdrawal to the above amount afraid if I withdraw more it might not clear. I
could not however withdraw further as Mr. Furer had blocked the joint account at Credit Suisse and
closed the Bank of America account. This is why "The sum she spent from account awarded to Mr.
Furer, were not the same amount she claimed he had shorted her from the $3 million".
Weller is criminal for putting me through financial hardship after a 25 years of marriage with an assets of
over $80 Million that Andrew and I have enjoyed and have been used to.
I had suggested to my husband in 1999 that we create a estate planning before our planned extensive
traveling while our son was in school, and after we had finally settled in our Incline Village, Nevada
home from the 1997 after residing in Switzerland. The sole purpose to create a trust was to protect our
son in case something happens to us during our travels. NOTHING ELSE!
had decided to hire since 2002.. During one of their secret meetings before May 21, 2002, a drafting of
the joint trust had occurred. (I discovered the draft in 2005, after we had separated )
This twelve pages draft is hand written by our trust attorney. I have no idea when this was discussed.
I demanded $15 Million in a Post Nuptial Agreement, the allegation that I was aware and had agreed that
my husband should have an individual Trust funded by the 1,149,000.00 Washington Mutual Shares of
stock worth approximately $50 Million IS A LIE. (see May 14, and May 19,2002, documents that proves
plaintiff had met with Don Ross alone).
THE "CERTIFICATE OF THE TRUST AGREEMENT" (as I see now,) WAS WRITTEN AND PRESENTED
IN SUCH A DECEPTIVE WAY THAT I DID NOT UNDERSTAND. I MUST HAVE SIGNED THIS
DOCUMENT AFTER IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME AS A DOCUMENT TO CONFIRM THAT WE HAD
CREATED A JOINT TRUST NOT KNOWING THAT THIS IS THE DOCUMENT THAT GAVE PLAINTIFF
THE FRAUDULENT OWNERSHIP OF THE WAMU STOCK AND THE MARITAL HOME.
I NOW ALSO NOTICED THAT THE DESCRIPTION OF THE OWNERSHIP DISTRIBUTION IN THE PNA,
WAS NOT CLEARLY SPECIFIED ABOUT THE MARITAL HOME. I MUST HAVE MIS-INTERPRETED THE
PHRASE MENTIONING THE MARITAL HOME ADDRESS IN THE "ANDREW FURER SEPARATE
PROPERTY" AS A REFERENCE WHERE ALL THE PERSONAL PROPERTY WAS LOCATED.
PLAINTIFF AND SANDRA UNSWORTH DID NOT EMPHASIZE THAT IF I SIGNED THE PNA THE MARITAL
HOME BELONGED TO PLAINTIFF. (See hearing tape on January 6, 2006, notice the nervous reaction of
Meador and Andrew with their hand movement during the whole testimony of Don Ross) There was no
discussion whatsoever about a divorce when the trust was being prepared. The trust was solely to
protect our son as being testified to repeatedly by Don Ross.
issues about a divorce or separation and a Post Nuptial, which may affect your rights ". This statement
is untrue. There was no letter nor a waiver signed in 1999. The waiver was PREPARED BY DON
ROSS SECRETARY THE SAME DAY BEFORE THE TRUST WAS SIGNED. ( See email from Don Ross
to his secretary on May 24,2002 TO PREPARE THE WAIVER AS THE FURER'S WERE COMING TO SIGN
THE TRUST ).
$15 Million Post Nuptial ". The trust agreement draft included wordings such as " most assets are sep
property ", " separate name--largest asset ", " not married is there ideas, hv different prospective ",
conflict letter f--spouses ", " comm vs separate--no pre-nup ", " beef up re: sep prop, Andy's sep prop,
Andy's sep trust ", " change Credit Suisse letter to other trust ", "exh A of trust remove Credit Suisse",
"cert of trust no exh A or B", " sep & community prop", " home -- qprt-payment after expiration of term".
fraudulent trust, another two years to implement it in a Post Nuptial Agreement.
divorce and mean it. That is when the threat that he will tell my friends and members of the fraternity
that " the money you are spending (during centennial celebration) is money you are stealing from me as
you do not have money of your own ".
that we should have a trust to protect our son, And 2002 when my husband finally implemented the
trust. A divorce attorney, Shawn Meador, from the same law firm who did our trust agreement was
involved in the creation of the trust. He was consulted about a Post Nuptial Agreement by our trust
attorney, Don Ross ( I am sure at the suggestion of my husband for his plan to divorce since 2002). This
same attorney became the divorce attorney of my husband before January 16, 2004 a few days after I
had asked for a divorce. ( See Draft of MSA, January 16,2004).
30, 2004 five days before signing of the PNA says it all. Please read it carefully and you will see that the
Plaintiff did not have an intention to be married to Mrs. Furer after the PNA was signed on May 5, 2004.
Click here to see the email communication.
bankruptcy with no resources for my daily subsistence, and no funds for attorney's fee to fight plaintiff
in my Supreme Court appeal.
(Click here for Final Decree, Feb 22, 2008), then please refer to (Nov 14, 2006 Order after Trial) on the
Validity of the PNA and MSA.
Mercedes was bought for me by plaintiff as a "gift for agreeing not to divorce me"
4) Incomplete oriental antique collection ( porcelain, ceramics)from the Sung and Ming
Dynasty. Missing from the collection are :
above total amount I had received in four years out of the $80 Million assets. To add
insult to injury , Judge Weller has made me reimburse plaintiff the interim spousal support
he had ordered in April,2006 as one half of our passive income from May to November,
14,2007,2006 when he validated the MSA.
to stop interim spousal payment filed December 28 2007) over my opposition Judge
Weller granted plaintiff's motion on the Decree retroactive January 1, 2008.)
of decree, allowing plaintiff not to pay me my January and February, 2008 interim
support owed before the decree. This is in violation of his April 12, 2008 order on
interim support as my one half share of our passive monthly income. Judge Weller had
imposed over $2 Million of illegal sanctions on me, including an order for me to reimburse
plaintiff of the interim spousal support paid to me after November 14, 2006 until
December 30, 2007.
WAMU stock given them to Andrew from 2004 until November 14, 2006 when he validated
the MSA in his Order. The computation of my Dividend and interest from 2004 until July
11, 2007 was almost $6 Million. Judge Weller had re written both the already fraudulent
PNA and MSA in order to give Andrew all our assets. Andrew had tendered to me (but
were not accepted as PNA is an invalid agreement after the tender of my dividend in
2004, Plaintiff was not accepted, Plaintiff wrote a letter stating that the WAMU dividend
will be put in a separate account during the litigation. This account was opened in Andrews
own account instead of a joint account) my share of dividends in 2004, 2005, and 2006,
through my attorneys. The tender in 2204 was with an actual check of over $ 120,000.00
for the third quarter of 2004 after 16% was kept by Andrew for alleged tax payments.
The three Tenders were only letters of Tenders with no checks. Why would Andrew keep
16% from my dividend for tax payments a year before taxes are due? Simple! To avail
himself of all the interest as he had done on the $3 million from the PNA, where he had
withdrawn the $4,400.00 interest from May 17, 2004 to July 25, 2004 before the
remaining balance was transferred to my individual account. Andrew had withdrawn from
this account a total of $172,244.00.
($107,000.00) when Andrew still owed me the money he had with drawn from the 3million
given to me during the fraudulent PNA.
April 12. He wanted to be reimbursed for the $10,000.00 he had sent to the Paris bank as
advance to me to pay for the Paris apartment maintenance. A Paris bank statement of
Bank Pariba of March, 2006, shows that Andrew had transferred $10,000.00 from our
dollar savings account to our Euro checking account. This account was awarded to me in
the PNA and MSA. Andrew had blatantly lied to the court. This is a criminal act and he
should be put in jail, along with all the fraud, Andrew has committed against me. I will
innumerate all the fraud Andrew had committed against me in this website.
Nuptial" cases in the USA. Litigation has taken four years, and is on going. The first
judge in this case was asked to recuse herself after a year of litigation due to severe
conflict of interest. No one had informed me, not even my own two attorneys at the time,
that this judge is married to a stockholder and partner of the same law firm of our trust
attorney and the divorce attorney of my husband. This particular Judge had made
adverse orders against me including throwing me out of our Marital home without notice or
hearing, imposing illegal sanctions and restraining orders based on fraudulent allegations
and tampered evidence, before the fraudulent Post Nuptial Agreement and the Marital
Settlement Agreement was validated.
14th, 2006 Order due to Fraud and over reaching of Plaintiff, then validated the Marital
Settlement which was a re statement of the PNA.
Judge Weller had me investigated by the Reno Detective Bureau, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation on allegations made up by parties involved. No report been filed by either
agency. The investigation of the FBI was a week before Judge Weller issued his final
decree.
a motion to associate an out of state attorney thru Pro Hac Vice filed in May 8, 2008. He
sat on the motion for over two months then denying it in July 11, 2008. This was obviously
done to deprive me of an attorney to represent me in the appeals court after his final
decision to leave me on the verge of bankruptcy with no funds to pay for my legal fees.
fight my case with the Supreme Court without representation. Maybe a miracle will
happen here for a good Samaritan to offer me help.
is still ongoing. The grossly biased, illegal, vindictive, blatantly erroneous Finding of Facts and Decree (
contrary to court record and documentation ) was handed down by Judge Chuck Weller in February 22,
2008. THIS ILLEGAL DECISION OF WELLER WAS OBVIOUSLY MADE TO BANKRUPT ME SO I DO NOT
HAVE THE MEANS TO FIGHT HIS DECISION WITH THE SUPREME COURT.
Judge Weller had also denied a motion to retain an out of state associate counsel, filed in may 8, 2008, to
represent me in my complaints against Judge Weller, Washoe County, and against certain attorney's.
Judge Weller's denial striking the motion to retain this associate counsel was issued in july 11, 2008,
citing that the motion to retain this associate counsel is in violation of wdcr 23, two months after the
filing. Judge Weller had also approved the withdrawal of my appellate Divorce attorneys on the same
day, leaving me with no attorney to represent me in the Supreme Court, the after trial issues, and the
after the decree filings for the transfer of my properties.
I had no intention of substituting my then attorney, Mr. Lueck. Mr. was to remain my Divorce appellate
attorney. He knew that another attorney was coming in to handle my issues with the washoe judicial
system. It was Mr. Lueck who told me to look for another attorney to handle my issues with Judge
Weller and the Washoe Judicial system, Andrew's attorneys and other issues, apart from the divorce
appeal with the Supreme Court, as he did not want to get involved in my personal case to remove Judge
Weller.
Mr. Fitting filed a motion to withdraw from my case after Judge Weller struck the motion to retain
associate counsel, but Judge Weller did not allow Mr. Fitting to withdraw. This was a calculated move of
Judge Weller to force on me an attorney I do not know. Judge Weller had again violated my
constitutional rights to be represented in court by an attorney of my choice. The attorney from out of
state I had hired was the one who had hired Mr. Fitting to associate him with. Mr. Fitting is a sole
practitioner conducting his practice from an office in his home, and is a tax attorney not a litigation
attorney. I did not know Mr. Fitting before the out of state attorney i had hired, asked me to pick up the
motion to associate from Mr. Fitting’s home in May. I now know that Mr. Fitting is not prepared to
represent me in the Supreme Court appeal, and i must have sufficient time to retain an attorney.
Mr. Fitting told me he had been trying to transfer my property to my name according to the decree from
may, 2008 up to the present. As of September 18, 2008, Mr. Fitting has not accomplished anything. I
have been inquiring about his progress on this issue thru telephone calls and emails, but Mr. Fitting
has not returned my calls and emails regarding this issue. Mr. Fitting told me he has been
communicating with Andrew's counsel, Shawn Meador, since may regarding the transfer of property,
but has not forwarded to me any of his communications with Meador, nor any communications with
Credit Suisse. I have forwarded to Mr. Fitting documents regarding my property and information to be
dealt with on the wrong finding of facts by Weller, including exhibits to prove the wrong finding of facts
by Weller.
In the final decree of Judge Weller, gave 95% of our assets to Andrew.
.
1) A joint account containing over $19 Million cash,
2) $11 Million proceeds of the sale of our Marital home sold in September 2007, authorized by Weller
without my input (click order to sell home and related documents)
3) Judge Weller had allowed Mr. Furer to keep my Washington Mutual dividend, and interest from 2004
to the present in the amount of over $ 6 Million, based on his November 14, 2006 invalidating the PNA,
but validated the MSA, which is a restatement of the fraudulent PNA.
Weller had rewritten the PNA and MSA agreement in this order. ( See plaintiff's tender of dividend to me
in August 2004,with check enclosed, three other letters of tenders from plaintiff in 2005, and two in 2006
with out checks enclosed letter to Unsworth re opening account to hold WAMU dividends in 2004, and
letter from Mr. Marks questioning plaintiff's counsel about dividend tenders without checks enclosed ).
Was the letter of tenders without actual checks enclosed for tax purposes to show IRS that I receive
payments or for plaintiff's tax return to avoid tax payment on dividend he had received? I will write IRS
to inquire. Plaintiff refused to provide me with his tax return of 2006 in violation of court order.
4) Judge Weller had allowed plaintiff to buy a home in Reno for
$2,338,000.00 plus $500,000.00 for redecoration expenses, in September 2006, when there was a
financial restraining order in existence. Judge Weller lifted the financial restraining order only in his
Decree February 22, 2008. ( See Feb.22, 2008 decree)
5) $2.8 Million in sanctions and reimbursement taken from my asset.
In the February Decree, Judge Weller had ordered plaintiff to transfer my WAMU stock to me within thirty
days (30) of the Decree. Instead of transferring my stocks to my name and account as per the Decree,
Andrew filed a motion in March 2008 to hold 250,000 of my shares in dispute because of an appeal that
was filed by plaintiff to reverse the invalidity of the Post Nuptial Agreement in the Supreme Court.
According to Credit Suisse, my available shares of stock that could manage and sell were only 250,000
shares. As of this writing, September 25, 2008, WAMU shares are worth nothing compared to what they
would have been worth when Andrew sold his shares. The only cash asset given to me are all gone.
Judge Weller also stated in his Final Decree that I had won the litigation of the agreement, but did not
award me attorney fees (of over $2 Million) "due to Mrs. Furer's out burst in Court" during the third phase
of litigation
OUTBURST IN COURT
This outburst started after Judge Weller started harassing me and my attorneys
since I had fired Mr. Marks for filing a Joint Brief without changes that I asked him
to do due to the position that he had taken with the opposing party which were not
my position at all. Mr. Marks had hidden the Joint Brief from me before filing.
During the April 3, April 9, April 12 and April 30, 2007 status conference hearings,
Judge Weller was harassing me and my attorneys to stipulate to divorce before a
division of assets. Judge Weller promised the plaintiff that he was going to give
him his divorce before the division of assets if he could find a law in support, and asked
plaintiff and his attorneys to help him find such law. Judge Weller's threatening attitude in court towards
me and pushing me to a corner STARTED ALL MY OUTBURST IN COURT. CAN ANYONE BLAME ME IN
TRYING TO PROTECT MYSELF FROM THE HARASSMENT OF THE COURT?
6) 69,000 shares of my WAMU stock authorized by Weller to be sold to cover illegal sanctions against me
7) Over $300,000.00 subtracted from my assets on a biased ruling on an attorney's lien, including
payments to the following attorneys. I had refused to pay these attorneys for the following reasons:
- A) I had fired Gloria Petroni in 2006 due to a side agreement she had made with opposing counsel
behind my back without my knowledge or consent.(see side agreement) This side agreement was a
manipulation of a previous stipulation agreement signed during the retrieval of my cars in
September 2005, stating that personal property had to be forwarded to Mrs. Furer on or before
September 19, 2005
B) Judge Weller had authorized Plaintiff to pay attorney a lien that I had refused to pay due to
exorbitant billing from this attorney in representing me for a total of 60 working days. This is the
same attorney who Judge Weller had sanctioned verbally during July 5 & 6, 2007 status conference
hearing for not having the trial brief ready three days before the July 9,2007 hearing. (See hearing
tape #18). I was told by this attorney that I was not to be present during the conference hearing.
During this hearing, this attorney said she could not produce a brief that I agreed to. This is a lie.
(Exhibited documents during a Lien hearing in August were available, two unfinished and
incomplete drafts of one and two pages in triple spaces were faxed to me before the conference
hearing). The trial brief was filed on the day of the hearing, July 9, 2007. I went to court without any
knowledge what issues were to be discussed in court. I had paid this attorney a $50,000 retainer
fee and paid another $18,000 bill three weeks later.
C) Judge Weller had also authorized the payment of an attorney’s last bill which I refused to pay
because a Joint brief was filed without my approval. I requested changes to the position he had
taken in the joint brief that were not my stand and my position for the third phase hearing. This
attorney had promised me that "you will have your fun during the third phase hearing as we will
exhibit all your husband deception in the PNA ". None of this promise was done or mentioned in
the Joint brief. This joint brief was filed before I was allowed to read it. I had fired this attorney after
he had filed the joint brief in February 2, 2007. I immediately filed a motion to supplement and
amend the joint petition that was filed, which did not have my position, stand, belief and approval.
Judge Weller has stricken this motion in the pretense that it will harm my case.
I found out later that Judge Weller had put pressure on my attorney not to include valuable exhibits
and not to state my real position for fear of being reversed by the Supreme Court in his November
14, 2006 action invalidating the PNA and validating the Marital Settlement Agreement which is the
re-statement of the Post Nuptial Agreement.
8) $43,000.00 taken from my money given to Andrew as my part on a Tax free gift to our son from
2004 to 2008.
after his February 22,2008 Decree for plaintiff to "transfer my 570,000 shares within 30 days of the
Decree" ( click on April 25, 2008 order and Feb.22, 2008 decree)
10) Judge Weller had allowed Andrew to sell his 579,000 shares of Washington Mutual in November
2007, before Decree, but then instructed Credit Suisse (According to the November 2007 order) that
we could manage our individual shares of WAMU stock. My share was segregated into one of
Andrew's individual accounts at Credit Suisse, Trustee, Andrew Furer, depriving me of the ability to
sell my shares in November 2007. My shares were in Plaintiff's name as of September 22, 2008,
and in spite of the February 22, 2008 Decree that required Plaintiff to transfer my sock to me with in
30 days of the decree.
to cover Andrew's withdrawal of over $172,000.00 from my account where the $3,000,000.00 was put
temporarily in a joint account.
sent to the BNP account as an advance to me, to pay for the expenses of a Paris apartment. Andrew did
not send money to the BNP bank. ANDREW TRANSFERRED $10,000.00 FROM OUR DOLLAR SAVINGS
ACCOUNT TO OUR EURO CHECKING ACCOUNT IN MARCH, 2006. BOTH THESE ACCOUNTS WERE
AWARDED TO ME IN THE FRAUDULENT AGREEMENTS. ANDREW MUST BE HELD IN CONTEMPT
FOR THIS BLATANT LIE TO THE COURT. (See BNP Bank Statement of March 2006). All bank statements
were directly sent to Andrew from 2004 to 2008.
13) Weller had ordered me to reimburse Andrew on my car insurance which Andrew had paid until
February, 2007, almost $2,000.00 over the actual payment of Andrew to AIG. (See letter of AIG to
Andrew on the amount paid for my part)
14)Judge Weller ordered me to reimburse plaintiff the spousal support paid to me from November
2006, to December 2007, at 112,500 a month based on his November 14, 2006 Order.
15) Weller ignored Andrew's withdrawals of over 40,000.00 Swiss
Francs to be reimbursed to me. Andrew had several orders to the UBS bank to transfer various
amounts to another account from the UBS savings and checking account that was given to me in
the fraudulent PNA & MSA. (See UBS monthly statement from 2005 to 2008) All statement s were
directly sent to Andrew from 2004 to 2008.
16) Weller did not enforce the sanction imposed on Andrew by the Discovery commissioner of
over $900.00 in 2005.
17) Weller hadgiven plaintiff the big martaban jars, the lady lying budha that was part of the 'All
oriental PORCELAIN AND CERAMICS antiques IN THE PNA AND MSA. HOW CAN THIS CRIMINAL
AND ARROGANT JUDGE DO AS HE PLEASES, PICK AND CHOOSE ACCORDING TO HIS WHIM
WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE LAW?
CASH ASSETS
SPOUSAL SUPPORT FROM SEPTEMBER 2005(ONE YEAR AFTER THE SEPARATION), @ $60,000.00
PER MONTH UNTIL APRIL 2006 ; INTERIM SPOUSAL SUPPORT FROM MAY 1, 2006 TO DECEMBER
2007.
- own " at your own disposal for expenses and Charity in the
Philippines so I wont be looking over your shoulder, as we are not getting divorce, I want you to
have your own money "
me should be put in a JTWROS account. A document was signed to this effect by us and our attorney.
According to the bank statement, the $3 Million was put in an account with Credit Suisse on May 17, 2004
until July 24, 2004 after a divorce was eminent (instead of the fraudulent PNA that was misrepresented to
me by Mr. Furer). However, the amount that was transferred to my own individual account was
$2,836,609.00.
transferring it to my individual account after our agreement to divorce.
offers no correspondence near the time of withdrawal ----)". According to Judge Weller's Decision. This
was because Mr. Furer had hidden the bank statement from Mrs. Furer. Mrs. Furer had obtained a copy
of the bank statement in March 14, 2008 from Credit Suisse before Mr. Furer had written a memo not to
furnish Mrs. Furer with any more financial statements.
After checking the account, I realized the amount transferred was not correct. It was supposed to show
the $3 Million plus interest from May 17 to July 24, 2004. To reimburse myself I had withdrawn $60,000
from our joint account in Credit Suisse and $10,000.00 from our Money market account with Bank of
America. I had limited my withdrawal to the above amount afraid if I withdraw more it might not clear. I
could not however withdraw further as Mr. Furer had blocked the joint account at Credit Suisse and
closed the Bank of America account. This is why "The sum she spent from account awarded to Mr.
Furer, were not the same amount she claimed he had shorted her from the $3 million".
Weller is criminal for putting me through financial hardship after a 25 years of marriage with an assets of
over $80 Million that Andrew and I have enjoyed and have been used to.
THE CONSPIRACY
- The conspiracy started when Andrew had finally wanted to implement his own Individual Trust
created in 2002 that was funded by the majority ob our marital assets without my knowledge.
I had suggested to my husband in 1999 that we create a estate planning before our planned extensive
traveling while our son was in school, and after we had finally settled in our Incline Village, Nevada
home from the 1997 after residing in Switzerland. The sole purpose to create a trust was to protect our
son in case something happens to us during our travels. NOTHING ELSE!
had decided to hire since 2002.. During one of their secret meetings before May 21, 2002, a drafting of
the joint trust had occurred. (I discovered the draft in 2005, after we had separated )
This twelve pages draft is hand written by our trust attorney. I have no idea when this was discussed.
I demanded $15 Million in a Post Nuptial Agreement, the allegation that I was aware and had agreed that
my husband should have an individual Trust funded by the 1,149,000.00 Washington Mutual Shares of
stock worth approximately $50 Million IS A LIE. (see May 14, and May 19,2002, documents that proves
plaintiff had met with Don Ross alone).
THE "CERTIFICATE OF THE TRUST AGREEMENT" (as I see now,) WAS WRITTEN AND PRESENTED
IN SUCH A DECEPTIVE WAY THAT I DID NOT UNDERSTAND. I MUST HAVE SIGNED THIS
DOCUMENT AFTER IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME AS A DOCUMENT TO CONFIRM THAT WE HAD
CREATED A JOINT TRUST NOT KNOWING THAT THIS IS THE DOCUMENT THAT GAVE PLAINTIFF
THE FRAUDULENT OWNERSHIP OF THE WAMU STOCK AND THE MARITAL HOME.
I NOW ALSO NOTICED THAT THE DESCRIPTION OF THE OWNERSHIP DISTRIBUTION IN THE PNA,
WAS NOT CLEARLY SPECIFIED ABOUT THE MARITAL HOME. I MUST HAVE MIS-INTERPRETED THE
PHRASE MENTIONING THE MARITAL HOME ADDRESS IN THE "ANDREW FURER SEPARATE
PROPERTY" AS A REFERENCE WHERE ALL THE PERSONAL PROPERTY WAS LOCATED.
PLAINTIFF AND SANDRA UNSWORTH DID NOT EMPHASIZE THAT IF I SIGNED THE PNA THE MARITAL
HOME BELONGED TO PLAINTIFF. (See hearing tape on January 6, 2006, notice the nervous reaction of
Meador and Andrew with their hand movement during the whole testimony of Don Ross) There was no
discussion whatsoever about a divorce when the trust was being prepared. The trust was solely to
protect our son as being testified to repeatedly by Don Ross.
issues about a divorce or separation and a Post Nuptial, which may affect your rights ". This statement
is untrue. There was no letter nor a waiver signed in 1999. The waiver was PREPARED BY DON
ROSS SECRETARY THE SAME DAY BEFORE THE TRUST WAS SIGNED. ( See email from Don Ross
to his secretary on May 24,2002 TO PREPARE THE WAIVER AS THE FURER'S WERE COMING TO SIGN
THE TRUST ).
$15 Million Post Nuptial ". The trust agreement draft included wordings such as " most assets are sep
property ", " separate name--largest asset ", " not married is there ideas, hv different prospective ",
conflict letter f--spouses ", " comm vs separate--no pre-nup ", " beef up re: sep prop, Andy's sep prop,
Andy's sep trust ", " change Credit Suisse letter to other trust ", "exh A of trust remove Credit Suisse",
"cert of trust no exh A or B", " sep & community prop", " home -- qprt-payment after expiration of term".
fraudulent trust, another two years to implement it in a Post Nuptial Agreement.
divorce and mean it. That is when the threat that he will tell my friends and members of the fraternity
that " the money you are spending (during centennial celebration) is money you are stealing from me as
you do not have money of your own ".
that we should have a trust to protect our son, And 2002 when my husband finally implemented the
trust. A divorce attorney, Shawn Meador, from the same law firm who did our trust agreement was
involved in the creation of the trust. He was consulted about a Post Nuptial Agreement by our trust
attorney, Don Ross ( I am sure at the suggestion of my husband for his plan to divorce since 2002). This
same attorney became the divorce attorney of my husband before January 16, 2004 a few days after I
had asked for a divorce. ( See Draft of MSA, January 16,2004).
30, 2004 five days before signing of the PNA says it all. Please read it carefully and you will see that the
Plaintiff did not have an intention to be married to Mrs. Furer after the PNA was signed on May 5, 2004.
Click here to see the email communication.
bankruptcy with no resources for my daily subsistence, and no funds for attorney's fee to fight plaintiff
in my Supreme Court appeal.
(Click here for Final Decree, Feb 22, 2008), then please refer to (Nov 14, 2006 Order after Trial) on the
Validity of the PNA and MSA.
SUMMARY OF ASSETS MRS. FURER RECEIVED OUT OF OVER $80 MILLION
COMMUNITY PROPERTY ASSETS
1.) TOTAL TRANSFERRED to my individual account
July 24, 2004 -------------------------------------------------$2,836,609.00
Minus amount paid for the Las Vegas home
that was forced on me --------------------------------------$1,295,000.00
Amount left in my checking -------------------------------- $1,536,609.00
Plus Amount I managed to reimburse myself
taken by plaintiff ------------------------------------------- $70,000.00
Total amount of money I had in August 2004--------- $1,606,609.00
(only amount to my name from August, 2004 until September 2005 for my existence,
attorney’s fees and for all my daily necessity. I had left the Marital home with a carry
on bag after Judge Schumacker had thrown me out in August 3, 2004. All my
clothing, shoes, personal property were held hostage by the court and plaintiff until
May 2007. My first spousal support started September 2005 @ $60,000.00 month
for nine (9) months.
2) Interim Spousal Support September 2005 to
April 2006 @ $60,000/month --------------------------- $480,000.00
3) Interim Spousal Support from
May 2006 to December 2007 ------------------------- $2,025,000.00
Minus February 22, 2008 Order to reimburse plaintiff interim support
paid to Mrs. Furer from November 14, 2008 to
December 30, 2007 (Minus)---------------------------- $1,406,250.00
Total Interim support from
May 2006 to November 14, 2006 -------------------- $618,750.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(TOTAL CASH RECEIVED FROM
JULY 2004 TO DECEMBER 2007) $2,635,359.00
- taxes, maintenance and utilities) GIVEN TO MRS. FURER
- This apartment has no kitchen yet. The renovation was stopped in January 2004, of
the whole kitchen. The only furniture in this apartment are two beds and a sofa.
- To completely renovate, decorate and furnished will cost another
- *** A motion was filed to ask the court for renovation money for the
Paris apartment but was ignored by Judge Weller.
Mercedes was bought for me by plaintiff as a "gift for agreeing not to divorce me"
4) Incomplete oriental antique collection ( porcelain, ceramics)from the Sung and Ming
Dynasty. Missing from the collection are :
- A) the 24 oriental antique jars,( porcelain and ceramics) from the
sung and Ming dynasty some earlier, in various sizes from a foot and a half to the
two feet for the smallest and the two largest jars of the same height
approximate four feet, one blue, one white, both with similar pattern and designs
around the body.
( See PNA at IVC.8(g) Plaintiff claims that I am not entitled to them according to the
PNA wordings. It is amazing how plaintiff had turned into a complete monster. He is
completely without shame and integrity left in him. You can just imagine the burden I
had carried in my shoulder during the quarter century marriage to the plaintiff. I had
endured the mental, emotional and physical abuse for the sake of our son.
It is described in the PNA that All oriental antiques, ceramics and porcelain,
including the cabinets they are displayed in, were my property. None of the Oriental
antique jars which are ceramics ,were ever displayed in any of the three curio
cabinets. The glass shelving are not tall and wide enough for even the smallest jar.
All the oriental antiques that were displayed in the Curio cabinets were curio size
objects that is why called Curio cabinets and contained ALL the Oriental antique
porcelain collection. The jars were the Oriental antique Ceramics scattered around
the house lying on the floor. The tallest object that fits the glass shelving of our
Curio cabinets is 10" only. They are not adjustable shelving. Even if adjustable in
height, the glass would not hold the weight and bulky body of the jars. During the
length of the marriage none of the jars were Ever displayed inside any cabinet curio
or otherwise but were always scattered around the house on the floor. (See pictures
of Incline Village Marital home living area were all the ceramic jars were displayed,
exhibited on the phase III hearing)
B) Lady lying Buddha which was a personal item I bought specially for the size and
shape and beauty of the facial expression.
C) The five (5) Parisian Scene Paintings that I had bought on my last trip to Paris in
October 2003, coming back home on December 22, 2003, two weeks before I asked
for a divorce in January 2004. These are the items (Parisian paintings )on page 9
No. 40 that Plaintiff is alleging that our verbal agreement is not valid as there is no
documentation. A hand shake and a verbal agreement as far as honest people are
concerned is a valid agreement and maybe also legally valid.
above total amount I had received in four years out of the $80 Million assets. To add
insult to injury , Judge Weller has made me reimburse plaintiff the interim spousal support
he had ordered in April,2006 as one half of our passive income from May to November,
14,2007,2006 when he validated the MSA.
to stop interim spousal payment filed December 28 2007) over my opposition Judge
Weller granted plaintiff's motion on the Decree retroactive January 1, 2008.)
of decree, allowing plaintiff not to pay me my January and February, 2008 interim
support owed before the decree. This is in violation of his April 12, 2008 order on
interim support as my one half share of our passive monthly income. Judge Weller had
imposed over $2 Million of illegal sanctions on me, including an order for me to reimburse
plaintiff of the interim spousal support paid to me after November 14, 2006 until
December 30, 2007.
WAMU stock given them to Andrew from 2004 until November 14, 2006 when he validated
the MSA in his Order. The computation of my Dividend and interest from 2004 until July
11, 2007 was almost $6 Million. Judge Weller had re written both the already fraudulent
PNA and MSA in order to give Andrew all our assets. Andrew had tendered to me (but
were not accepted as PNA is an invalid agreement after the tender of my dividend in
2004, Plaintiff was not accepted, Plaintiff wrote a letter stating that the WAMU dividend
will be put in a separate account during the litigation. This account was opened in Andrews
own account instead of a joint account) my share of dividends in 2004, 2005, and 2006,
through my attorneys. The tender in 2204 was with an actual check of over $ 120,000.00
for the third quarter of 2004 after 16% was kept by Andrew for alleged tax payments.
The three Tenders were only letters of Tenders with no checks. Why would Andrew keep
16% from my dividend for tax payments a year before taxes are due? Simple! To avail
himself of all the interest as he had done on the $3 million from the PNA, where he had
withdrawn the $4,400.00 interest from May 17, 2004 to July 25, 2004 before the
remaining balance was transferred to my individual account. Andrew had withdrawn from
this account a total of $172,244.00.
($107,000.00) when Andrew still owed me the money he had with drawn from the 3million
given to me during the fraudulent PNA.
April 12. He wanted to be reimbursed for the $10,000.00 he had sent to the Paris bank as
advance to me to pay for the Paris apartment maintenance. A Paris bank statement of
Bank Pariba of March, 2006, shows that Andrew had transferred $10,000.00 from our
dollar savings account to our Euro checking account. This account was awarded to me in
the PNA and MSA. Andrew had blatantly lied to the court. This is a criminal act and he
should be put in jail, along with all the fraud, Andrew has committed against me. I will
innumerate all the fraud Andrew had committed against me in this website.
Nuptial" cases in the USA. Litigation has taken four years, and is on going. The first
judge in this case was asked to recuse herself after a year of litigation due to severe
conflict of interest. No one had informed me, not even my own two attorneys at the time,
that this judge is married to a stockholder and partner of the same law firm of our trust
attorney and the divorce attorney of my husband. This particular Judge had made
adverse orders against me including throwing me out of our Marital home without notice or
hearing, imposing illegal sanctions and restraining orders based on fraudulent allegations
and tampered evidence, before the fraudulent Post Nuptial Agreement and the Marital
Settlement Agreement was validated.
14th, 2006 Order due to Fraud and over reaching of Plaintiff, then validated the Marital
Settlement which was a re statement of the PNA.
1.) The first one is his disqualifying my husband's divorce
attorney in his order of February, 2006 then allowing him back for the third phase
litigation.
- 2.) He had allowed my husband to sell the Marital home with
out my participation in spite of a previous order in
December, 2006, now giving me less than 24 hours to reply to the ex parte motion
filed.
- 3.) Judge Weller had sanctioned my former attorney over
$7,000 for filing Unresolved Issues for the third phase,
ordered me to pay sanction, part of over $2.8 Million in
sanctions against me in his final Decree. Judge Weller had
given my husband 95% of all of our accumulated assets
including the $11 Million proceeds of the sale of the marital
home, and all the $30 Million cash joint account. Judge
Weller had stopped my interim spousal support contrary to
his Order of April 12, 2006.
Judge Weller had me investigated by the Reno Detective Bureau, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation on allegations made up by parties involved. No report been filed by either
agency. The investigation of the FBI was a week before Judge Weller issued his final
decree.
a motion to associate an out of state attorney thru Pro Hac Vice filed in May 8, 2008. He
sat on the motion for over two months then denying it in July 11, 2008. This was obviously
done to deprive me of an attorney to represent me in the appeals court after his final
decision to leave me on the verge of bankruptcy with no funds to pay for my legal fees.
All the above statements and more are documented. Please click
on Court exhibits, hearing tapes and appendixes to read the entire court proceedings.
fight my case with the Supreme Court without representation. Maybe a miracle will
happen here for a good Samaritan to offer me help.
Judge Schumacker also sealed our divorce case for no good reason. I was not aware that our case
was sealed until later in the proceeding. The sealing of our divorce case had no legal
basis and is a violation of the U.S. Constitution's first
amendment. Usually the main reason to seal a case is to protect the interest of minor children. Our son
was no longer a minor in 2004 so why would Plaintiff's right to privacy outweigh the
public rights and my rights? I believe the sealing of my divorce record had one
purpose and one purpose only, the conspiracy to fix the case for the plaintiff. Is
someone who has the authority to" fix" being paid thru counsels? I am working on
this.
I know sealing a court document is often extended to people of influence, in this case extended to
Shawn Meador by Schumacker being partners with the Judges' husband,so EVERY ONE CAN HIDE
BEHIND THE SEALED PAGES OF THE COURT FULL OF LIES, AND CONSPIRACYOF PLAINTIFF,
ANDREW FURER, HIS COUNSEL, SHAWN MEADOR, OUR ESTATE PLANNING ATTORNEY, DON
ROSS, DEBRAH SCHUMACHER, THE RECUSED JUDGE,WHO HAD TO BE ASKED TO RECUSE
BEFORE SHE DID BUT NOT BEFORE SHE HAD MADE BIASED, ILLEGAL , BLATANTLY AND
MALICIOUSLY WRONG DECISIONS AGAINST MRS. FURER WHOSE EMOTIONAL STATE OF MIND HAS
NEVER BEEN THE SAME AFTER SHE HAD THROWN HER OUT OF THE MARITAL HOME BEFORE
THE AGREEMENTS WERE VALIDATED. CHUCK WELLER, WHOSE DESDAIN AGAINST A 67 YEARS
OLD FILIPINO WOMAN WHO HAD DETECTED HIS CONSPIRACY WITH SOME OF MRS FURER'S
ATTORNEY AND SHAWN MEADOR, THIS JUDGE GRANTED ALL THE EX PARTE MOTION S,
SANCTIONS PLEADED BY MEADOR, EXTENDED A RESTRAINING ORDER AFTER A YEAR FOR
ANOTHER WITHOUT A HEARING, AND THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY , HIS DEPUTY FOR ILLEGALLY
DROPPING THE BATTERY CASE AFTER HE HAD STATED TO SANDRA UNSWORTH, THAT HIS
OFFICE DOES NOT DROP BATTERY CASES WHETHER THERE IS A 100 MILLION ASSETS OR A
DOLLAR, CAROLE COOKE, WHO TRIED TO SENTENCE DEFENDANT WITH A 40 DAYS IN JAIL
ON A TO SHOW CAUSE CIVIL HEARING WHY DEFENDANT SHOULD NO BE HELD IN
CONTEMPT, WHEN NO EVIDENCE WERE PRESENTED EXCEPT DEPOSITIONS AND THE
TRUMPED UP ALLEGATIONS AGAINST MRS. THAT HAD BEEN ON GOING SINCE NOVEMBER,
2004. OPPOSING PARTY CANNOT FIND A VIOLATION OF DEFENDANT WITH SUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY ALL THE DECISIONS FOR OVER FIVE YEARS SINCE THE FALSE AND
MALICIOUS ALLEGATIONS WERE LAUNCHED AND ORDERED BY SCHUMACHER,
STEINHEIMER, MANOUKIAN, AS WELL AS MY OWN ATTORNEYS WHO CONSPIRED WITH
OPPOSING PARTY AND WELLER AND MANOUKIANl WHO SIGNED THE ORDER "TO HAVE
PARTIES MANAGE THEIR RESPECTIVE ASSET " KNOWING THAT DEFENDANT HAD NO
FINANCIAL ASSETS IN HER NAME.
HOW CAN A JUDGE WHO HAS NOT BEEN IN THIS CASE FOR EVEN A MINUTE SIGN SUCH AN
ORDER?.
| AND THE TRUTH IS MY POWERFUL ALLY |
