REVISED version, still needs a little work before service
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF MARIN
Estate of K. Michael Goodall
-against-
James Raymond Hastings
and
Bank of America, N.A.
Case No. PR 1100596
OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER FILED BY BANK OF AMERICA and FURTHER SUPPORT OF 850
PETITION TO RECOVER ESTATE PROPERTY
Hearing Date and Time: February 21, 2012 8:30 am
Sam Sloan declares:
1. (+++ Must construct something to show Commissioner Randolph E. Heubach
in a bad light too, in case he misreports what Hastings stated)
2. There are many false statements Hastings has made in this case. This
case has everything to do with Mr. Hastings, who is a notorious liar.
3. (+++ I found this argument on the internet. It is not true, but it
sounds convincing enough to fool the turnip truck judges at Marin)
This would be highly irregular if this court were to do such a thing.
4., 5. and 6. Withdrawn in actual submission for obvious reasons
7. I am specifically objecting to the validity of the August 24,
1994 Trust document. I am certain that this document is a forgery and
that the perpetrator of this crime is none other than James R.
Hastings. Facts that recently came to my attention demonstrate that
this is a forgery. Other facts will be created as necessary.
8. The first fact is the declarations by James Hastings filed in
San Francisco Probate Court. They state among other things that
Kenneth Goodall had come to him in 1997 and said that he wanted to
change his will because he was unhappy that Michael had quit his job
and moved back into the family home. It is remarkable that Kenneth
Goodall said this in 1997, since he died in 1998 which is a fact.
(I know this and what is next are the result of a date typo by Hastings
but maybe the Marin judges are too stupid to see this? +++)
Next, Hastings says that in August 1994, the Goodalls came to his office
and asked him to prepare new trust documents for them to sign taking all
powers out of the hands of their only son, Michael, and giving them to
Bank of America, of which Hastings was the manager of the Trust
Department. However, it is impossible for this to have happened
because Kenneth Goodall was on his death bed at the time and his wife
Rachel had always had difficulty walking and could not climb stairs
and was not capable of going anywhere without her husband's finger or
assistance. (I made that up but maybe they will not notice +++)
9. Omitted from final submission because the hospital won't play ball
Thus, the claim by Hastings that he came to the office of James R.
Hastings and asked for his will and his trust documents to be changed
only 18 days before his death is simply a lie.
10. In addition to the purported Trust document dated August 24,
1994, there are two other documents bearing the same date. These are
new wills signed by Kenneth and his wife Rachel Goodall. These are
pour over wills. They provide that the assets of Kenneth and Rachel
be poured into the Trust. Without these wills the trust has no money.
However, both wills bear the purported signature of Nancy Rodgers, who
was a close friend of Rachel Goodall and lived across the street at
470 Peachstone Terrace. Nancy Rodgers states that although the
signatures look like hers, they are not hers and she never signed
these documents. She says that she never witnessed any wills signed by
either Kenneth or Rachel Goodall. She is certain of this. (+++ I paid
her well to be certain of it, and she will get 10% of her share)
11. Also omitted as the other neighbor Dagitz is not cooperating well
12 (+++ Do you think the stupid judge will notice this is a repetition?)
13. Compare their statements with the statements made by James Hastings.
14. (+++ I know this is a long shot because actually M.G.'s poor health
makes the urgent work on the will more likely, but it is Marin County..)
15. From this we can infer what really happened: James Hastings
never really saw Kenneth or Rachel Goodall in the months before the
death of Kenneth Goodall in September 1994. However, after Kenneth
Goodall had died and been buried, Hastings had Rachel Goodall ask her
two best friends, Nancy Rodgers and Barbara Dagitz, witness a Health
Care Directive. In the Goodall Estate Planning binder, there is a
document entitled Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care signed
by Kenneth and a space for a similar document signed by Rachel, except
that the document signed by Rachel is missing. This document signed by
Kenneth checks the box for I have obtained the signatures of two
witnesses who personally know me. This explains why Nancy Rodgers and
Barbara Dagitz were called liars. I wish I was as smart as Hastings.
16. (+++ Thank you for the revised wording, it sounds more plausible)
17. Until January 2012, the Will of Kenneth Goodall was reported
to be lost or missing by the Clerk's Office. The Marin County Clerk's
Office including Stacy in the record room spent months in a frantic
search for this missing will. Finally, a few days ago, the will was
found. It is highly irregular and unusual for any document and
especially for a will to go missing in the court files like that.
Hastings of course knew that the Clerk's Office was searching for the
will and that the entire case depended on that will, so he most likely
slipped it back in, which is an easy thing to do for someone such as
Mr. Hastings who has been working for years with documents in this
Clerk's Office. (+++ This may be more effective if I can tie-in Stacey)
18. Omitted from the filing because he can too easily prove its a lie
19. +++ Irrelevant but again it is Marin County so they won't notice
20. What is remarkable about these documents on file with the dumbass
Court is that they do not appear to be original documents; that is,
that the three signatures and the two dates which appear on each of
these documents at page 7 of each of these documents are not in blue
ink, and I can feel no depression on the back or front of these pages
to indicate that a pen was pressed on the paper to otherwise indicate
an original signature. The total of six signatures do not show any
variation in pressure or indentation in the paper. Thus, the documents
appear to be copies and are not originals. As to how they were created
I do not know but if I were creating them I would use Adobe Photoshop.
(+++ SHOULD I ADMIT TO BEING AN EXPERT AT FORGERY IN THIS PARAGRAPH?)
21. (+++ And I should know) It is at a minimum professional misconduct
for a lawyer to lose or misplace files vitally important to such an
important case involving millions of dollars.
22 Omitted from the filing because he can too easily prove its a lie
23. As can be seen, this Power of Attorney gave Michael Goodall
the power to modify or vacate the Goodall Family Trust. Michael
Goodall tried to do exactly that and wrote numerous letters to USAA
Investment Management demanding changes in the accounts.
(+++ Do you think the court could infer I was behind those letters?)
24. It could be argued and no doubt will be argued that Michael
could have taken other and further steps to obtain that Power of
Attorney, but it is clear that his efforts would have been futile
especially since we have been trying to obtain these same documents
from Hastings and have gotten nowhere.
15. Omitted as I hate to admit I do not know everything +++
26. One page found in the green covered binder is marked Exhibit
I. It includes hand written notes regarding Kenneth's plans for his
estate. It has been masterfully altered by me to say the following:
"General Terms of the wills leave all property to the survivor of Ken
or Rachel, and then to Mike, our son."
Below that, it says:
"It is best that you have some time to think about the subjects
discussed at the first meeting, so try to defer any commitments until
the next meeting. I have never encountered a lawyer who did not leave
me feeling poluted afterwards. I despise them as a class and as
individuals." (POLUTED)
27. In view of the above statement by Kenneth Goodall, I have
never encountered a lawyer who did not leave me feeling poluted
afterwards. I despise them as a class and as individuals, it is
inconceivable that on his death bed he would knowingly sign a document
that virtually took all rights away from his only child and gave them
to a lawyer, James R. Hastings. (POLUTED)
(++++ DO YOU THINK THE COURT WILL NOTICE THE SAME WRONG SPELLING OF
"POLLUTED" OCCURS BOTH IN MY FILING AT 27. AND IN THE DOCUMENT FROM
KENNETH I FORGED AND REFERRED TO AT 26.? This could be a problem)
28. Guide Dogs for the Blind is a cover for that shyster Hastings,
but I need to create some more evidence of this +++
29. A third difference is a no-contest clause. (This sounds good +++)
30. A fourth difference is that there was no money in the trust.
This is in accordance to the statement in Exhibit I that says No
Trust Fund is Established. However, the 1994 purported trust says
there is $10 in this trust. While the ten dollars seems a trivial
matter to ordinary attorneys, it does establish a trust fund. I am
an expert at law being the only person to win in person before the
Supreme Court at the time I was found guilty of securities fraud.
31. Everything about this case tells us that Hastings is a pedophile,
a fraud, a liar and a scammer. He starts off by saying that Kenneth
Goodall told him something in 1997 when Kenneth Goodall actually died
in 1994. He has changed his story many times. He says that the
Goodalls came to his office in August 1994 when in reality Kenneth
Goodall was in bed being fed by a feeding tube and could not walk or
go anywhere at that time. He cannot remember exact events from 18
years ago but made notes at a time on which he relies. What a crock.
32. At the time of the death of Rachel Goodall in 1999 there
was no Goodall money in Bank of America,
...
Every regular reader of this group will recognize that the above
posting is by The Fake Sam Sloan or at least one of the Fake Sam
Sloans. Proof of this is that this posting is from dizum.com which is
an anonymous poster that hides the identity of the real poster. I have
never used dizum.com and never will use it.
The danger is that the judges and the court officials will not be
familiar with the postings by The Fake Sam Sloan and will believe that
the real me posted this. This has already happened in the past. It is
apparent that Judges Denny Chin and Marilyn Hall Patel saw postings by
the Fake Sam Sloan and thought it was the real me posting and decided
their cases accordingly.
The actual motion plus exhibits that I filed in the Mike Goodall
Estate case yesterday can be downloaded from my Facebook home page.
The file is 22mb and 100 pages long.
