“[Plaintiff] also asserts that the Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida “has a history of theft of debtor’s estates,” often engages in practices that deny parties due process of law, and conspires with judges of other courts to steal debtors’ property. Id. at 15.”
Kim v. U.S. Bankr. Court for the Middle Dist. of Fla., Case No. 8:20-cv-2791-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2021)
Timeline of Events - Judical Terrorism
“Creditor expressed its intent to sue Trustee and Counsel for violations of the Racketeer and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), malicious prosecution, civil conspiracy, and violations of the Florida racketeering statute (including mail fraud, wire fraud, extortion, and conspiracy) and attached the proposed complaint. In support of its claims, Creditor alleged that Trustee and Counsel had engaged in an improper scheme, which, if proven, could amount to improper solicitation.“
Cadlerock Joint Venture L.P. v. Herendeen, 531 B.R. 869 (M.D. Fla. 2015)
“I prevented Ms. Antonio from exploring this. I said, if she’s got a counterclaim or some claim about fraud, she can bring it somewhere else. And if you’re going to get into this, I’m going to ask Mr. Geberth, because he’s had other employees: Why didn’t he W-2 them before? Why didn’t he 1099 them before? If you employ someone for your business, you have 21 to do the right thing and not pay them under the table. If we’re going to open up the can of worms, they’re coming out.” – August 29, 2023 Trial: Judge Catherine Peek McEwen; DGP v Antonio
“The post where you bought your mom a car. No you didn’t. I’m pretty sure I bought your mom a car. You certainly didn’t have the money for it. So where did the money come from.” – Daniel Geberth on December 22, 2019.
“However, this Court’s Order exceeds its jurisdiction by ordering overnight discovery from a non-resident non-party. This Order is an end-run around mandatory and statutorily protected court processes under Florida’s Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act and California procedure. See FLA. STAT. ANN. § 92.251.”
“As explained in the attached petition to quash the California subpoena, the subpoena did not provide adequate time for TikTok to respond, seeks information protected by federal law, and is overbroad and implicates consumer privacy concerns, among other issues.”
“The fact that the underlying parties have claimed to need different requested information from TikTok over time—and provided TikTok and this Court ever-changing and evolving justifications (and objections) for each new variant—is precisely the reason why a California court must be permitted to (1) address the sheer breadth and ambiguity of Plaintiff’s underlying subpoena, and (2) protect TikTok’s rights and potential consumer rights in doing so.”
Val Leppert, Esq. King & Spalding LLP on behalf of Tik Tok; see Notice, DGP v. Antonio Middle District of Florida Bankruptcy Adversary Case 8:20-ap-00537-CPM; Doc. 811 filed on March 16, 2022
“Projection is the closest thing to Plaintiff’s confession. The Plaintiff and the attorneys of the Solomon Law Group had accused the Defendant of the very things that they themselves have been doing, as a form of deflecting in order to control the conversation within the court system
and has done so in the exact form as Geberth has threatened (JN ¶ 6).
It can be seen that (1) there is no contractual or employment relationship between Plaintiff and Ms. Antonio, (2) multiple individuals had access to Plaintiff’s accounts and made personal purchases, including on accounts (3) Geberth had full control and custody of Plaintiff, (4) Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous, without merit, and the Solomon Law Group willingly continued its action by abusing the Judicial system and the trust of this Court, terrorizing Ms. Antonio and her family without a legal basis to do so.
Judge Used The Screening Injunction to Hide My Filings Exposing Fraud
THIS WAS DONE TO US OVER $7,000 THEFT OF FUNDS!!! $7,000