Thread: Don Allen Holbrook IEDC Rogue Former Member / Jeff Finkle Orchestrates Cover-up

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

Don Allen Holbrook has been jumping up and down about his new book all over the internet since Sunday and he is the only one commenting on it and reviewing it. It landed with a huge thud!!!


No one that is in the economic development community that knows what is going on seems to want to get their good name tangled up with his adventures. What a surprise!!!

Soapboxmom

It would have to be a pretty brave potential client who'd risk becoming involved with Mr Holbrook after his recent behaviour.

Risk the wrath of your constituents, risk losing their money AND risk having your own pants sued off is not an inspiring course of action for potential clients, one would imagine.

Woody says KiiiiiiYaaaaaayyyyy, Soapboxmom. It seems as though the peasants have spoken loud and clear and sent a message to someone. Sir GravyLapper, takest thy consultations elsewhere and don't let the door hitteth thou a$$ on the way out of Texas! And don't forget to take those best-selling books that won't even bring a nickel at a yard-sale. The noxious gas compressed in between the pages is giving off a foul odor that smells a lot like a sewage treatment plant that is sickening people Buzz and Woody snuck out of the toybox again and wanted to post a greeting to you Don, but I felt it was highly inappropriate and very unprofessional and threatenen to give them away to the local day-care facility, which seems to have straightened them out. HEY, WOODY, CUT THAT OUT, THAT HURTS! Buzz, what are you doing with that duct-tape? Someone help me, I can't move move movemovemove..............HEY DON, OUR SIGNED - BUZZ and his dubious consultant WOODY

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

One has to wonder at this point if Holbrook's attorney Sue Seeberger is possibly incompetent, not particularly bright, dishonest and/or being bullied by her client into making foolish allegations and filings. Holbrook's contract dispute is between him and the city and has nothing to do with any outside parties!

Soapboxmom

Errr, Maybe not too bright?I presume that in this portion,

search engine optimization logarithms

she meant "algorithms". (Logarithms is an area of mathematics, algorithms are decision methods). Kinda curious how she figures to get a finding of conspiracy. It would seem that at the behest of Donny boy, she is throwing a bunch of crap at the wall and hoping something will stick. Perhaps she is using the "shotgun" approach because she has no single "count"that she feels has a strong case. (That is the first time I have seen the term "count" used in a civil action)

Originally Posted by laidback

It would seem that at the behest of Donny boy, she is throwing a bunch of crap at the wall and hoping something will stick.

It will be worth waiting for the court case to find out how they made the leap from: "the client was unhappy with the service provided, refused to pay AND asked for money back"

to:

"Anonymous internet bloggers asking questions and reporters reporting facts caused the client to become unhappy with the service provided, refusing to pay AND asking for money back"

Surely to goodness, any consultant worth his salt and whose future endeavours rely so heavily on public perception would want to keep his client disputes as far from the public eye as possible.

Still, as so often happens, the need to be seen to be "right" overrides common sense, even when continuing to pursue being "right" comes at such great cost.

Exactly Soapboxmom's point littleroundman, this is turning into a circus show with Holbrook as the Head Ringmaster. I caught that when SBM rolled that one down the red carpet, and a Judge will as well ,without a trial. If reporters (As well as Soapboxmom) are reporting FACTS ( thats the KEY WORD), should anonomous bloggers NOT ask questions? That right there should get Calverts, Malisows, AND Soapboxmoms cases flushed down the loo. As for me, my pals Buzz, Woody, and Mr. PotatoeHead, if our comments have infuriated him to the point of wanting to sue for defamation and derogatory postings, her's a tiny message for him and his so-called lawyer, This reminds me of the time when my daughter was very young, and her two older brothers would tease the pee out of her and her little bitty beautiful face would turn as red as the linkbacks bar on the bottom of this page. Of coarse, the more I punished the boys and the redder her face got, the more they teased her! Filing frivilous lawsuits will get you nowhere Don, so, borrowing a phrase Cowboy told Pyle in the movie " Full Metal Jacket" after they beat him with the bars of soap, "It's all a bad dream, Fatboy". Take my advice, find another group of idiots like the ones you found in EMC, and milk THEM and their constituants (taxpayers) for all they're worth, and get on with your life. The truth will set you free.

Originally Posted by laidback

Errr, Maybe not too bright?I presume that in this portion, she meant "algorithms". (Logarithms is an area of mathematics, algorithms are decision methods). Kinda curious how she figures to get a finding of conspiracy. It would seem that at the behest of Donny boy, she is throwing a bunch of crap at the wall and hoping something will stick. Perhaps she is using the "shotgun" approach because she has no single "count"that she feels has a strong case. (That is the first time I have seen the term "count" used in a civil action)

Absolutely! I call that the dartboard theory of law practice. Throw as many darts (allegations whether they have any basis in law or fact or not) and hope something or anything at all sticks. As the case law I have analyzed shows, her case has numerous problems and was most certainly not well thought out or executed.

And, dare we mention that Holbrook stiffed Peabody Nixon to the tune of 1.29 million and is listing a 20 grand debt to a Texas attorney on his current bankruptcy. So, she is risking her reputation for a client that may well not be able or willing to pay her. With all the parties she dragged in, this litigation is going to cost a fortune. Also, it may well get turned around on them.

Not too bright to be sure! I am apparently being sued because of my SEO skills.

Soapboxmom

The question about Holbrook and the response are priceless. Gotta love Notorial Dissent for hitting the nail on the head!!!

Quatloos! • View topic - Don Allen Holbrook LLC Sues Soapboxmom & Half of the Planet

I can just imagine the Supreme Master of the Internet's response to the last post by Notorial Dissent. It more than likely consisted of these three elements - , , and "none shall post, NONE SHALL POST!!!"

If Holbrook's online shenanigans haven't scared off potential clients that are looking for paid speakers, his looney contract certainly will:

Standard legal Dispute Resolution and disclaimer
Both Parties agree that any legal dispute including collection of unpaid fees shall be the financial responsibility of the party that prevails. This shall include any attorney fees, collection agency fees, and additional time required by the speaker in pursuit of relief and remedy to the breach of this contractual agreement by the hiring organization, at his normal rate of $395.00 per hour. The speaker’s hours shall match those billed by his legal counsel as an assumption of his time consumed in such matters. Any, legal disputes and/or mandatory arbitration prior to litigation, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Nevada and all claims handled in Las Vegas, NV Circuit Court system.

Client Recommendation(s)
Each Client must provide the speaker with a written evaluation of his speech presentation within 10 days after the event and as such these comments
may be used in the speakers promotional marketing. The hiring organization will send this review via email on scanned organizational letterhead to the speaker. The speaker may list the client as a speaking reference and also provide the hiring organization’s contact persons email and phone number for future client referral inquiries on this web and other marketing materials. If the speaker has done a satisfactory performance he expects a favorable testimonial from the client.....

Wiring Instructions are as follows:
Account Name Holder- Don Allen Holbrook, LLC.
Account Holders Bank- Chase Bank
Account Number-#757831292
Account ABA/Routing # – 122100024
Swift Code- CHASUS33

Who in their right mind would agree to any of this??? $395.00 an hour? Clients forced to write a recommendation (in the contract) so he can use it to wrangle some more business? That suggests any recommendations or comments about Holbrook could be considered bogus as they were made under duress. What a joke he is!

And, what kind of idiot would put their banking info online??? If this lawsuit gets to discovery the defendants may want information relating to that account if Holbrook thinks he is getting damages of course.

Soapboxmom

Well, that explains where he thinks he is getting the money to pay his current attorney.

The Art of the New Deal

Do public relations he said??? How did Lorman find this clown? Don't they Google their speakers before scheduling them? Shouldn't he be speaking about the art of silencing the taxpayers??? I wonder if the attendees can request a refund? Yikes!!!

Soapboxmom

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

Shouldn't he be speaking about the art of silencing the taxpayers???

Judging by his recent history, that's the LAST thing about which he should be speaking.

B. On Count Two for Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations with the City,
with Pahrump Nevada, and tortious interference with prospective business relations against all Third-Party Defendants, Third-Party Plaintiff Don Allen Holbrook, LLC asks this Court to grant judgment in its favor and against these Third-Party Defendants, compensatory damages in an amount in excess of $25,000.00 to be shown at trial, punitive damages in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 to be shown at trial, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, its attorney’s fees and all costs of this action and the Complaint filed against it;
C. On Count Three of the Third-Party Complaint for Defamation per se and/or per
quod, Third-Party Plaintiff Don Allen Holbrook, LLC asks this Court to grant judgment in its
favor and against all Third-Party Defendants, compensatory damages in an amount in excess of $25,000.00 to be shown at trial or if such statements are determined to be defamatory per quod, special damages in an amount in excess of $66,000.00 for any losses relating to the City, special damages in an amount in excess of $80,000.00 for any losses relating to a pending contract with Pahrump, Nevada, special damages in an amount in excess of $25,000.00 relating to any other losses that may be shown at trial relating to existing, pending and/or future losses of business with existing and/or prospective clients, compensatory damages to repair its reputation on the internet in the approximate amount of $25,000.00 for the first year and approximately $8,000.00
per year thereafter, to be shown at trial, punitive damages in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 to be shown at trial, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, its attorney’s fees and all costs of this action and the Complaint filed against it; and
D. For such other legal and/or equitable relief this Court deems just and proper.

Newspaper article questions theme park player’s resumé | Pahrump Valley Times

Kulkin noted that the town paid for the services of Contour Entertainment only and Holbrook’s name is only on the contract for liability purposes.

He said any and all information relating to Holbrook’s character and background is Contour Entertainment’s responsibility.


“We didn’t hire Don. He works for Contour. We did not give him any money, all of the money we gave went to Contour. We can’t say who they do or do not subcontract to. We hired Contour to deliver what we asked for and who they sub it out to is their business. Don doesn’t work for us, we didn’t hire him. We haven’t paid him one cent. That’s Chris’ problem. We have nothing to do with it.” he said.

Mr. Holbrook is a contractor of Contour and we were more concerned with what Contour could bring to the table,” Kohbarger said....

Lot's more dirt on Holbrook is in that article. The contract talk caught my attention. Holbrook is suing for a contract that his name is on only for "liability" and Pahrump says the contract is actually with Contour and that they did not hire Don. So, how in the hell can he sue for that in Ohio (as a third party suit claim that has nothing to do with the original suit with Ohio that is the heart of this,) and how can he sue for a contract that is actually inked with Contour? I want to see that contract!!!

Soapboxmom

http://les.brochure.s3.amazonaws.com/389530.pdf

Who Will Be There?
This seminar is designed for attorneys, business owners, presidents, vice presidents, directors, economic development agency officials, finance directors, CPAs, accountants, bankers, developers and other government officials....

Faculty
For more information about our speakers, go to Economic Development Financing Seminar.
Moderator:
Don A. Holbrook, CEcD, FM, Economic Developer, LLC
Barry Broome, Greater Phoenix Economic Council
Judith M. Dworkin, Sacks Tierney P.A.
Roxann S. Gallagher, Sacks Tierney P.A.
William A. Hicks III, Ballard Spahr LLP....

Don A. Holbrook, CEcD, FM - Moderator

• Private consultant/practitioner involved in the major elements of economic development public policy, site location analysis and incentive development
• Worked on a wide variety of projects representing billions of dollars in capital investment generating more than 50,000 jobs
• Recognized for his prowess in the economic development industry as an early pioneer of site location and community-profiling technology based infrastructure
• Can be contacted at 928-706-4440 or don.holbrook@economicdeveloper.com

• It all depends on how one defines working on a project. A miniscule or very minor role in a very limited short term capacity is not enough for me to credit Holbrook with a project. The bus manufacturing generated an estimated 400 jobs for one example.

It occurs to me that Holbrook's Attorney is trying to join anybody and everybody to the suit, hoping there are some deep pockets in the crowd...! Maybe she is hedging her bets on Holbrook's fee? OMG do you suppose she took this on contingency...?

Daily Law Journal | View Case

Case Information

Date:
7/6/2012
Case Number:
2012CV02947
Court:
Common Pleas

---

Plaintiff:
City Of Huber Heights Ohio
Defendant:
Don Allen Holbrook Llc
Details:
ORDER SETTING SUBMISSION DATE MOTION TO STRIKE FILED 7/3/12 SUBMISSION FOR DECISION ON 7/25/12; RESPONSES DUE 7/17/12; REPLY TO RESPONSE DUE 7/24/12

---

Judge:

Attorney:
L. Michael Bly

Docket History

Date:
7/5/2012
Details:
ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE ON 8-30-12 AT 8:50 A.M.

Date:
6/6/2012
Details:
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE 7-3-12 @9:00 A.M.

Date:
4/24/2012
Details:
CIVIL ALL OTHER

Viral and mountains of publicity!!!

Holbrook's attorney is up against the top litigators in business, defamation and First Amendment:

Video: Charlie Faruki talks about the firm's practice, including its primary focus and services that Faruki Ireland & Cox provides. We have a passion for excellence. Excellence in work product, excellence in representation. Excellence in results. Welcome to Faruki Ireland & Cox P.L.L. Faruki Ireland & Cox P.L.L. is an experienced, national complex business litigation trial practice. The pace of business and personal interactions in the 21st Century is extraordinary. Technology and information combine to create, expand and enhance opportunities and relationships for our current and future clients every moment. In this complicated business environment, FI&C provides clients with innovative thinking, good judgment and hard work, to assist in resolving disputes large and small, near and far. Attention to detail and understanding that clients demand responsiveness, reliability, candor and cost effectiveness are leading contributors to the successful results we achieve for clients. We look forward to working with, and for, you. National Practice Coverage FI&C attorneys routinely appear in federal and state courts throughout the United States, and have appeared in the U.S. Supreme Court and most of the United States Courts of Appeals including the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In recent years, we have handled matters in over 30 states and Puerto Rico.

Partners | Attorneys Areas of Practice: First Amendment, Defamation, Privacy, Access to News, Freedom of Information Act, Commercial Business Litigation Law Schools: Academic Scholarship, University of Virginia Law School, 1961; Ohio State University, J.D., 1964 Undergraduate: Denison University, Granville, Ohio, B.A., Political Science and Economics, 1960 Born Marietta, Ohio, February 27, 1938, Bob's early years were spent in West Hartford, Connecticut. Later graduating from Denison University (B.A., 1960); University of Virginia Law School; The Ohio State University Law School (J.D., 1964), where he was a member of Phi Delta Phi Honorary. After graduating from law school, Bob started his legal career with the Dayton law firm of Estabrook, Finn & McKee, rising to the position of Senior Partner in that firm. The Estabrook firm was acquired by the Columbus firm of Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur in 1984 and Bob was a Senior Partner, Member of the Executive Committee, and the Management Committee of that firm, as well as being the Partner in charge of that firm's Dayton office. In August, 1987, Bob moved his practice to the firm of Coolidge Wall Womsley & Lombard, where he was a Senior Partner and in some years was a member of the firm's Executive Committee and Compensation Committee. In August, 2004, Bob moved his practice to the firm of Faruki Ireland & Cox, P.L.L. He is a Federal Bar Examiner for the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 1978-; a Life-Member Delegate, Sixth Circuit Judicial Conference; Member, International Association of Defense Counsel; Member, American Bar Association (Member, Business Litigation, Product Liability and Reinsurance Committees); The Ohio State Bar Association; the Dayton Bar Association; Defense Research Institute; Ohio Trial Lawyers Association; Chair of the Ohio State Bar Association Media Law Committee; National Freedom of Information Coalition; Carl D. Kessler Inn of Court. In 1983, Bob was elected as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, a professional association of lawyers skilled and experienced in the trial of cases and dedicated to maintaining and improving the standards of trial practice, the administration of justice, and the ethics of the profession. Fellowship in the College is conferred on less than 1% of the lawyers who are licensed to practice in any state. Bob has been recognized as an "Ohio SuperLawyer," being the top 5% of Ohio's lawyers announced annually in the January edition of Law & Politics in Cincinnati Magazine. Bob is chief First Amendment counsel for the Dayton Daily News and the former Dayton Journal Herald; he has represented the Springfield News-Sun, WHIO TV-7, WPXI TV in Pittsburg, PA; has been chief First Amendment counsel for Cox Ohio Publishing and Dayton Newspapers, Inc., in every libel, access to news, court closure, gag order, FOIA and related matters for over 30 years; was chief counsel for the Dayton Daily News, Cox Newspapers and their reporters, Russell Carollo and Jeff Nesmith, in the successful FOIA lawsuit against the United States Government, which resulted in their series of stories on the U.S. Military's health care system, being awarded the 1998 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting. He presently represents the Dayton Daily News, Cox Enterprises and corporate officers, editors and reporters in a libel case captioned Scaccia v. Dayton Newspapers, Inc. Bob also currently represents WHIO TV, Cox Broadcasting, Cox Enterprises and corporate officers and reporters in a defamation case captioned Total Exposure.com v. WHIO TV-7. Bob is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States District Court for the Southern and Northern Districts of Ohio. Bob has been a frequent lecturer and panelist for seminars conducted by the Ohio State Bar Association Media Law Committee, the Ohio State Bar Association Local Government Affairs Committee, and other organizations. He is presently serving a two year term as the Chair of the Ohio State Bar Association Media Law Committee. Bob is a member of the Board of Directors of Kids Voting and is a member of the Dayton Lawyers Club, the Dayton Bicycle Club and the Moraine Country Club.

Holbrook's frivolous folly will be over very soon!!!

Soapboxmom

Don Allen Hobrook | LinkedIn

I thought the nice folks at Lorman might want to consider expanding their speakers topics to include sue the pants off of half the planet!

Soapboxmom

Although Ohio Civ R 11 is addressed to the signing of documents, the signing lawyer's responsibility for such documents is a continuing one. If an assertion, properly made at the time of signing, becomes improper because the lawyer later learns the assertion is, in fact, groundless, the lawyer will be found in violation of Rule 11 if the lawyer continues to pursue the groundless point. Taylor v. Franklin Blvd. Nursing Home, Inc., 112 Ohio App.3d 27, 677 N.E.2d 1212 (Cuyahoga 1996)

When Holbrook's attorney, Sue Seeberger, realizes all his ranting about false and defamatory statements is actually his taking issue with posts consisting of facts and opinion will she respond accordingly? Will she continue to pursue this ridiculous notion of other parties interfering in Holbrook's dealings with the city of Huber Heights when the evidence gathered shows that is not the case? This case is certainly one to watch!

Soapboxmom

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

When Holbrook's attorney, Sue Seeberger, realizes all his ranting about false and defamatory statements is actually his taking issue with posts consisting of facts and opinion will she respond accordingly? Will she continue to pursue this ridiculous notion of other parties interfering in Holbrook's dealings with the city of Huber Heights when the evidence gathered shows that is not the case? This case is certainly one to watch!

Soapboxmom

She's had to have read them to even consider taking the case no? There's no way she could just go into this whole debacle completely blind.

It's highly probable Sir Gasbag and Mr. Bartlett's lunch, Ms. See 'Sue'berger, will continue this frivolity once Buzz and Woody return from the dark side of the moon and land Holbrook and Co.'s highjacked spaceship "DreamQuest" on the courthouse steps, get out, and plead mercy on the court! How DARE anyone break the Supreme Lord and Master of the Internet's First Commandment.....Thou shalt not post ANYTHING against ME!!!

Originally Posted by Soapboxmom

When Holbrook's attorney, Sue Seeberger, realizes all his ranting about false and defamatory statements is actually his taking issue with posts consisting of facts and opinion will she respond accordingly? Will she continue to pursue this ridiculous notion of other parties interfering in Holbrook's dealings with the city of Huber Heights when the evidence gathered shows that is not the case? This case is certainly one to watch!

Soapboxmom

Personally, I think Mr Holbrook should be encouraged to continue to pursue his current course of action, even expand it.

That way, he'll have no one to blame for the inevitable outcome but himself.

It would take an act of extreme bravery for any new client/s to become involved with Mr Holbrook as it is.

Add a few more months of huffing and puffing and legal posturing to the equation and it's hard to see any future business coming his way.

Keep him talking, I say.

Gotta go now guys, I desperately have to clone a Holbrook and wipe my Sueberger

Perhaps I was a little to harsh with Ms. Sueberger, but she should have sniffed the air surrounding Sir Gasbag before taking him on as a client. In MY OPINION, SHE should plead temporary insanity and ask mercy from the court for being such a dumb - As far as that idiot Holbrook is concerned, the only expert development, (in fact, over-developed) I've seen from him is his EGO. 'See' here, Ms. 'SUE'berger, the only thing your client has done is further piss-off a bunch of already pissed-off taxpayers down here in Texas. Perhaps you should take note of the slogan we've adopted here, the one your client so obviously disregarded, "Don't Mess With Texas" It's not to late to take out the trash, the EMCID did!

Originally Posted by Whip

She's had to have read them to even consider taking the case no? There's no way she could just go into this whole debacle completely blind.

I watched Tim Darnell's attorney file against me and claim in the original petition that "9. Defendant's obsession with Plaintiff led Defendant to make many threats to Plaintiff and his family..... Defendant appears to be obsessed with discussing Plaintiff with third parties or posting defamatory and untrue statements regarding Plaintiff on various websites."The attorney, Jason Charles Ciarochi, goes on in that vain throughout the filing. There is a whole thread devoted to that debauchery.

http://www.realscam.com/f11/jack-wei...-judgment-767/

After lengthy depositions and Darnell's refusal to produce any discovery, what had been obvious from the beginning was shown in court. There was never a false or defamatory statement. Darnell had outright lied about being threatened to garner sympathy from his marks. The Motion for Summary Judgment that won the case for me, and the Motion for Sanctions covers it all beautifully. The attorney who signed these egregious lie-filled pleadings lost his litigation practice and plush office. He is now signing real estate docs from home. So, I am not surprised at all by these far fetched filings by Sue Seeberger. She took the word of her client, Don Holbrook, and went to town. I also have a very good idea how this will end. History does repeat itself!


Soapboxmom