Edward Detwiler et al

See http://www.leaderdialog.com/blogs/zacks

See http://www.leaderdialog.com/blogs/dunn

See http://www.leaderdialog.com/blogs/wittenberg

See http://www.leaderdialog.com/blogs/steiger

1. DETWILER--VS--LTI-TECHNOLOGIES-INC---09CV-05-6857

2. Leader Answer to Complaint -- Case No. 09CV-05-6857 ---Filed 24-Aug-2009

3. Detwiler files yet another lawsuit EDWARD B DETWILER--VS-MICHAEL MCKIBBEN---09-JG-046415---Filed 05-Nov-2009 while settlement discussions are occurring in the bevy of related lawsuits. This case relates to an earlier lawsuit filed by Detwiler: JERRY RAMPELT AND ASSOCIATES INC (INCL DETWILER) -VS- LEADER TECHNOLOGIES INC---05-CV-004843. No further details are yet available.

4. Leader files appeal of the ADAM J STEIGER -VS- LEADER TECHNOLOGIES INC---09-AP-000946 partial summary judgment in the case ADAM J STEIGER -VS- LEADER TECHNOLOGIES INC---09-AP-000946---05-CV-011582 filed in 2005 where Steiger claims $17,025 in interest owed on an investment he was repaid.

5. (Nov. 24, 2009) Plaintiffs Zacks et al file motion to consolidate this defamation case with Steiger and Detwiler cases.

6. (Dec. 1, 2009) Plaintiffs Zacks et al miss filing deadline for their first response to Leader discovery requests in the defamation case.

7. (Dec. 1, 2009) Without waiting for a decision on their motion to consolidate and without responding timely to Leader discovery requests, Plaintiffs Zacks et al instead file a request to the court to submit a motion for summary judgment that exceeds the normal 15 page limit. Click this link to download.

8. (Dec. 2, 2009) Without waiting for the judge's decision on their request to exceed the 15 page limit, and without timely filing a response to Leader discovery requests, Zacks et al instead file a 1,236 page Motion for Summary Judgment in the defamation case. Click this link to download. ( 43MB )

9. (Dec. 2, 2009) Leader will respond to the motion for summary judgment in due course. A first review of the motion shows it to include a dump of the Zacks Law Group LLC attorney-client files for Leader and McKibben that it has not returned and which Leader and McKibben issued a demand for return on Nov. 27, 2009 (prior to this filing) pursuant to the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct. Zacks Law Group provided legal representation to both Leader and McKibben and Zacks was a legal officer and fiduciary of Leader. Neither Leader nor McKibben were given the opportunity, normally conducted under court supervision, to review these documents with respect to confidentiality before they were made public today.[1] For example, this motion contains a number of confidential shareholder documents, including documents rescinded by the Board of Directors after the extent of Zacks, Detwiler et al's duplicity was uncovered, as Leader and McKibben allege in various court filings. It should be noted that it is customary to conduct discovery before filing a motion for summary judgment since summary judgment can only be granted when there are no disputes of fact. In this case, the fact discovery has not even gotten to first base since plaintiffs have missed their first discovery deadline.

More to the point, a defamation case swings on whether or not the allegedly defamatory statements are based upon fact or lawful opinion. Leader et al must be given an opportunity to collect facts from Zacks et al to prove its assertions that no defamation occurred. This Motion is out of order in our opinion. Zacks et al had asked for several time extensions to prepare their discovery responses, only to file this Motion instead.

Footnote:

[1] This improper introduction of confidential information into the public record via court filings was also used by Brandi L. Dorgan of Isaac, Brandt, Ledman & Teetor LLP in the Barmack case, one of the dubious lawsuits Leader alleges in various court filings was orchestrated by Zacks, Detwiler et al. In Dorgan's action, she disclosed the social security numbers of Michael McKibben's minor children as well as proprietary Leader documents. Dorgan claims to have inadvertently "run afoul" of the protective order and voluntarily sealed the documents within a few days. However, those documents appeared subsequently in the Detwiler lawsuit. Marcus D. Dunn was Dorgan's "boss" at Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn LLP by her own admission to Leader attorneys. Detwiler and Dunn also attempted to sit in on a sealed hearing with McKibben scheduled by Dorgan and supposedly only known by McKibben, Leader's attorney, and Dorgan. The magistrate ordered Dunn and Detwiler to leave.

In similar manner, the individuals that Zacks et al wished to have the confidential information have no doubt already downloaded the electronic files that appeared on the Franklin County Clerk of Courts website. See "The Use and Abuse of the Attorney Client Privilege" cited below.

Useful citations:

Cleary, Edward J., "The Use and Abuse of the Attorney Client Privilege", Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility. Paragraph 14. Last accessed Nov. 27, 2009. http://www.mncourts.gov/lprb/98bbarts/bb0998.html

"The attorney-client privilege is both an honor and a duty. While recently recognized by the highest court in the land as the cornerstone of the attorney-client relationship, the misuse of that same privilege can undermine the entire foundation of our profession. We all do pay the price and we will continue to do so as long as there are lawyers out there who rationalize the collapse of their ethical and moral values while taking the path of least resistance."

Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/Rules/ProfConduct/profConductRules.pdf

RULE 1.9: DUTIES TO FORMER CLIENTS - (c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter do either of the following:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these rules would permit or require with respect to a client or when the information has become generally known;

(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

The Supreme Court of Ohio
Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct (Ethics)
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/Rules/ProfConduct/profConductRules.pdf

RULE 1.9: DUTIES TO FORMER CLIENTS - (c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter do either of the following:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these rules would permit or require with respect to a client or when the information has become generally known;

(2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

RESPONSIBILITIES [5] - A lawyer should use the law's procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others.

RESPONSIBILITIES [6] - A lawyer should seek improvement of the law, ensure access to the legal system, advance the administration of justice, and exemplify the quality of service rendered by the legal profession.

RESPONSIBILITIES [6] - A lawyer should further the public's understanding of and confidence in the rule of law and the justice system because legal institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and support to maintain their authority.

 

Former Attorney's Continuing Duties - Lawyers.com
Go to http://www.lawyers.com/~/link.aspx?_id=603FBA3F-0A7B-4387-A70E-5923C77E6CA4&_z=z

1. Hand Over Your Legal Files
2. Avoid Conflicts of Interest
3. Maintain Attorney-Client Privilege

(May 1, 2009) -- Apologies for the inconvenience.

See Comment 2. Leader shareholders are welcome to telephone the office to obtain additional detail on matters of interest to shareholders. Public filings and other public information will be posted and linked, and your opinions encouraged, should this matter drag on, so keep this web URL handy.