The Forest Moon of Endor

"Chisholm Admits That He is Liable and Consents to Judgment Against Him"

2011-04-01T10:11:00.000-07:00

It's over. Johnny Chisholm is now the first circuit promoter in history to have been successfully sued for fraud.

Yes, the long awaited settlements in the two civil cases we've been following have finally been filed. Although looking at the terms, it appears more a capitulation than a settlement.

First, here's how the DeForest case wraps up:

Keep in mind DeForest's initial investment, the amount in dispute, was $150,000. So, this consent judgment for $175,000 gives Ray DeForest what he lost, plus $25,000 for his time and trouble (although realistically, I suspect much of that has already been spent in attorney fees and court costs).

Other key terms: Chisholm gives up any right to appeal, and the right to discharge the judgment in bankruptcy. The judgment also accrues interest at 7% per annum as long as it goes unpaid.

And very prominently, first clause at the top: "Chisholm admits that he is liable and consents to judgment against him in this matter." He also admits for the record that DeForest did indeed successfully extricate himself from the disaster that was OMP Paris on May 24, 2007, well before the event flopped.

As far as Chisholm's co-defendant Bobby Warner goes, she's simply been let go from the lawsuit ("Dismissal with Prejudice"):

And here's how the Bardfield case wraps up:

The consent judgment here is for $300,000, $100,000 more than the $200,000 Bardfield and Carver were fraudulently induced to part with. Other terms are similar (7% per annum, no appeal or bankruptcy, full Chisholm admission of liability).

Plus there's an injunction forcing Chisholm to forfeit all money held in those frozen bank accounts "in connection with his unlawful enterprise," i.e., One Mighty Weekend 2009.

So, the total amount Johnny Chisholm admitted liability and consented to judgment for was $475,000.

All that remains, I think, is for the judge to sign off on those consent judgments, and for both cases to be formally closed. Once that occurs I'll let you all know. Shouldn't be long ...

Addendum 4/2/2011: The judge signs off on the consent judgment in the DeForest case:

Addendum 4/3/2011: And here's the order for the Bardfield case:

And with that, I'd say this blog is now at an end. In other words, barring very unusual circumstances, I don't anticipate any new posts, although the blog will still be open for comments.

I hope you all found it as interesting and informative to read as I found it enjoyable to research and write.

And let me just end here, on one final nostalgic note:

"Johnny Chisholm proves once again what many have already determined...he IS the King of Circuit and a student of the "philosophical school of Circuit reinvention." He has the dreams and ability to bring back the parties we nearly lost only a few short years ago due to greed, mismanagement, and pessimism. The quiet, polite and honorable Johnny Chisholm has once again taken the Circuit, and those of us who follow the Circuit, to a whole new level. And the world is Johnny Chisholm's oyster! ...

... Johnny Chisholm was JustCircuit's very first inductee into the Circuit Hall of Fame(tm), and for very good reason. The Circuit is still alive, changing, and growing in part because of the innovation, optimism and hard work by Chisholm and his entire team. The bar has certainly been set high for others who desire to create a successful Circuit party. The Circuit anxiously awaits Johnny Chisholm's next dream."

-- Shane Alan Rogers, January 25, 2007

Local Tourism Council Rejects Johnny Chisholm's Request for $150,000

2011-03-26T15:45:00.000-07:00

Johnny Chisholm has been in the news recently. It seems the Escambia County Tourist Development Council recently rejected an allocation request of his for $150,000, to cover the costs of bringing Kathy Griffin to Pensacola for Memorial Day Weekend:

Tourist council rejects comic Griffin for Memorial Day Weekend
Comments about Kathy Griffin rile gay-event promoter

Local promoter Johnny Chisholm has asked the head of the county's Tourist Development Council to step down for refusing to allocate funds to bring comedian Kathy Griffin to Pensacola's Memorial Day Weekend celebration....(more)

The rejection occurred at a meeting on March 22, just one day after the latest settlement impasse was revealed.

Allegedly, the reason Chisholm's request for a share of this tourism development money was denied was because TDC Chairman Denis McKinnon was not a Kathy Griffin fan.

However, it's hard not to imagine that he and the other 7 members who voted against the grant also felt that $150,000 on a single entertainer, regardless of who he or she was, was too much of a dubious risk to take. Indeed, as those of here who read through Timeline 1 dealing with the DeForest case will recall, Chisholm's track record in bringing in top dollar entertainers to headline events has not exactly been a stellar one.

Here once again is the Federal judge in the Bardfield and DeForest cases, summing up the fiasco that ensued when Chisholm used other people's money to bring in Mariah Carey as a "huge draw" to "jump-start" his floundering One Mighty Party Paris event back in 2007:

To quote Yogi Berra: "It's like deja vu all over again."

About Face

2011-03-21T20:17:00.000-07:00

Well, today was another deadline day ... and yet again, no settlement. Indeed, it looks like a deal may be getting a bit iffy at this point.

Two motions for more time were filed today in the Bardfield case, one by Chisholm:

And a very interesting one by the plaintiffs:

So, to recap: Chisholm refuses to sign the settlement because he claims the papers currently in front of him are not what he agreed to in mediation.

Plaintiffs, on the other hand, say they are the same, and that Chisholm's last minute raising of "disingenuous issues" make it "unclear whether the Parties will be able to ultimately resolve Chisholm’s “about-face” regarding certain material terms of the already agreed-upon settlement".

It looks like the major sticking point is over whether Chisholm agreed to "admit liability" during their mediation session. Plaintiffs seem pretty confident that he did, as evidenced by the fact that they're giving the judge the option to simply enforce the terms of the already signed mediation agreement (which plaintiffs say does have Chisholm admitting liability), in lieu of granting more time.

Assuming the judge does not seize this option, the additional time being asked for is two weeks (in Chisholm's motion) or until March 29, 2011 (in the plaintiffs' motion).

And there was finally some activity in the DeForest case - another joint request for more time, this one good until March 31, 2011:

Addendum 3/23/11: If you've been following these cases, and been frustrated at all these delays and time extensions, well you're not alone. It looks like the magistrate judge is finally fed up with it too:

She's approved a time extension to file settlement papers until April 1, 2011. However, she's made it absolutely clear "[a]bsent a showing of extraordinary cause, no requests for any further enlargements of time shall be entertained."

Additionally, she's appended an interesting footnote to her Order, musing on the fact that one reason for the delay was Chisholm's consultation with his attorney. She wonders if Chisholm indeed has an attorney at his disposal, why he has not made an official appearance in the case:

"1 The court notes Plaintiffs’ statement in their motion that Defendant reports having consulted an attorney to review the parties’ settlement agreement (see Doc. 113 at 2). If Defendant in fact has hired an attorney for that purpose, to date the court is unaware that such counsel has represented Defendant in any other capacity. As the court has previously observed in this case (see Doc. 86 at 6, n.4), if Defendant submits pleadings that are represented as being pro se in nature but in actuality have been drafted by an attorney, Defendant could receive an unfair advantage in that his pleadings would be construed liberally while those filed by Plaintiffs would be held to a higher level of scrutiny; this advantage could affect other aspects of the litigation as well. Moreover, the submission of “ghost-written” pleadings has been deemed a deliberate evasion of the responsibilities imposed on counsel by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and, as such, has been widely condemned as unethical. See, e.g., Duran v. Carris, 238 F.3d 1268, 1273 (10th Cir. 2001); Ellis v. Maine, 448 F.2d 1325, 1328 (1st Cir. 1971); Bush v. Adams, 2010 WL 1253990 (E.D. Va. 2010); Wesley v. Don Stein Buick, Inc., 987 F. Supp. 884, 886 (D. Kan 1997). Accordingly, should Defendant hire counsel to represent him by preparing pleadings or other papers for submission to the court in this case, counsel must conduct him or herself appropriately, i.e., enter an appearance. Additionally, if Defendant is indeed consulting with counsel in any capacity regarding this case (or any other case pending in this district), Defendant shall, upon receipt of this order, provide a copy this order to counsel."

Final Settlement Documents ... and Judgment

2011-02-26T08:31:00.000-08:00

It looks like the mediation conference yesterday in the Bardfield case managed to mediate away any remaining obstacles to a settlement; at least that's according to the mediator's report:

As a result, the parties are now jointly making an emergency motion for two more weeks time, in order to file "all final settlement documents and judgment" with the court:

Thus, the new new new new anticipated settlement date of the Bardfield case is now March 11, 2011.

No new filings in the DeForest case as yet. As I mentioned previously, the deadline for a mediation report in that case is March 4, 2011.

Addendum 3/11/11: This is beginning to feel a bit like Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football. We have here another extension motion in the Bardfield case, this one for 10 days (until March 21, 2011):

What's interesting, I think, is the fact that this one is not a joint motion:

Hmmmm.

And there's been nothing new filed in the DeForest case to date. So, back to waiting we go ...

Mediation

2011-02-24T15:48:00.000-08:00

It appears the anticipated settlement of the Bardfield case did not quite pan out. Both parties are now moving ahead with the next step of the litigation, the oft-postponed mandatory mediation conference. This is scheduled for tomorrow:

No new filing in the DeForest case (yet). However, the court has set a March 4 deadline for a mediation report to be filed there.

Framework for an Agreement Has Been Reached

2010-11-23T14:31:00.000-08:00

The aforementioned substantive settlement discussions appear to be bearing fruit. Although it seems a bit more time is needed to work out the details, in a filing yesterday the plaintiff's in the Bardfield case are now saying that "framework for an agreement has been reached:"

It looks like they are now hopeful for a final settlement within 30 days.

Addendum 12/4/10: As I suspected, there are "substantive settlement discussions" occuring right now in the DeForest case as well. This similar motion to keep the court-appointed mediator at bay a bit longer was filed last week:

Again, this is a 30 day time extension. So, if these discussions work out, we should hear of a settlement agreement around about Christmas or New Years, I guess.

Addendum 12/23/10: Another 30 day extension in the Bardfield case, to January 21, 2011. A settlement is taking a bit longer than expected to hash out, it seems, due to "bankruptcy and corporate issues":

Addendum 1/15/11: Another agreed motion for more time, this one in the DeForest case.

Interestingly, this one actually spells out a date that they think the settlement documents will be filed with the court: January 21, 2011. And "concurrent with the related case" which refers to the Bardfield case; so it looks like this whole saga could be all wrapped up next Friday:

Addendum 1/21/11: Nope, not over yet, folks!

Instead of settlements, today we see yet another joint request for more time, this one in the Bardfield case. They're seeking a new deadline of February 21, 2011, which has the same end date as an extension (not shown, but recently approved) in the DeForest case:

Substantive Settlement Discussions

2010-10-30T14:33:00.000-07:00

This was just filed in the Bardfield case; it's a request by both parties for the mediation deadlines (see the Joint Scheduling Report for info on those) to be extended, so that "substantive settlement discussions" can continue:

As you can see, both parties are hopeful in producing a settlement within 21 days ... thereby avoiding the spectacle of Johnny Chisholm acting as his own attorney in a Federal courtroom before an actual jury (said trial was tentatively scheduled for January 2011).

Meanwhile, in the DeForest case a mediator was just appointed; but no indication whether substantive settlement discussions are going on there or not (my hunch would be yes).

Perhaps the end is near, for both cases? We'll have to wait and see...

Joint Scheduling Report

2010-07-10T22:40:00.000-07:00

The Joint Scheduling Report due in the Bardfield case (which I mentioned here a couple weeks ago) has been filed:

There's a few new and interesting developments here, perhaps the most relevant being the proposed scheduling deadlines for the case:

Deadline to amend pleadings/add other parties to the lawsuit: September 24, 2010
Deadline for discovery to be completed by: October 15, 2010
Deadline to file dispositive motions: November 15, 2010

Proposed trial date: On or about the month of January 2011.

Typically, once a Joint Scheduling Report like this is approved and the private discovery period begins, the filings in a case become pretty quiet. So, if you see this blog become inactive for a spell, that's completely normal...it means there's nothing going on that we can see. An exception would be if there were discovery disputes; in that case we'd begin to see motions related to discovery issues (as happened in the DeForest case, for example).

So, just a heads up, we may be in for an extended quiet period here on The Forest Moon of Endor. Or not. We shall see...

Addendum 7/26/10: The joint scheduling report above has pretty much been made official by an Order:

Addendum 7/29/10: And the same procedure was just completed in the DeForest case:

So, the new schedule for the rest of the DeForest case looks like:

Deadline to add parties/amend pleadings: September 15, 2010
Discovery completed by: November 15, 2010
Dispositive motions filed by: December 15, 2010
Proposed trial date: May 2011

"No more Mr. Nice Guy!" Noize Magazine Takes JustCircuit To Court

2010-06-24T15:46:00.000-07:00

Well this is interesting. I stumbled across this case summary while doing some unrelated research; it looks like it was filed a few weeks ago, on May 21, 2010:

Victor M. Mauro, Jr. is the registered agent and one of two owners listed for JustCircuit, LLC, so I'd say it's a good guess the case concerns some sort of new malfeasance JustCircuit managed to embroil itself in. Although what that would be, and whether it was in any way related to the Chisholm/GayDays scandal, I don't know at this point. All the info I can access online is this very brief summary of the case, which has nothing more than the parties, the courthouse, and the date and time of the hearing.

I'll try to get more information on this from sources close to parties, and will post updates as they become available...

Addendum 6/25/10: I managed to pull the case file:

As you can see, this is a "BREACH OF CONTRACT" lawsuit, with said breach having allegedly occurred between February 6 and February 13, 2010. Noize Magazine is claiming damages in the amount of $3,000, which puts well within the jurisdictional limit of the California small claims court (which is $7,500, IIRC).

The contract that was allegedly breached was attached, and can be viewed here. It seems to be a settlement agreement from a previous legal dispute concerning a pretty blatant act of cybersquatting and trademark violation committed by JustCircuit back in 2008.

Now, if I'm reading this settlement document correctly...it would appear that sometime prior to October of 2008 JustCircuit registered and activated an Internet domain which it had absolutely no right to use, "www.circuitnoizeonline.com," with the intent, I would assume, to illegally steer traffic intended for Noize to JustCircuit. An exhibit attached to the end of the contract that contains traffic statistics of JustCircuit during certain key months seems to bolster this assumption:

And it looks like JustCircuit got caught red handed doing this...and was forced to cave. This settlement required that JustCircuit fork over the cybersquatted domain, and both parties agreed not to infringe on each others trademarks in the future (in particular, Noize agreed to leave parked a domain "www.justcircuitnoize.com" which it had registered but never activated).

So anyways, that's the contract involved in this breach of contract. What's not clear yet is what the actual "breach" is. All I can tell from the filing above is that this alleged breach occurred between February 6 and 13 of this year. I'll keep digging, and see if I can't find out a bit more...

Update 8/24/10: I was able to verify the meaning of those JustCircuit-provided traffic statistics printed above: The 2nd number on each line is the total number of "hits" JustCircuit got in that particular month; for example, in January of 2008 their entire site got a total of 175 hits.

The 3rd number refers to bandwidth (in mb?), which as you can see, was 251187 in Jan of '08.

The 4th number is total number of unique visitors (as opposed to hits) for that month; thus in Jan '08 a grand total of 72 people visited the JustCircuit website, according to their very own internal traffic statistics.

And the 5th number is interesting, that's actually a subset of the 4th number; it's the total number of unique visitors who came to JustCircuit through the Noize-mimicking domains illegally cybersquatted by JustCircuit. For example, of the 72 people who visited JustCircuit in the month of January 2008, 21 of those really meant to go to Noize, but were tricked by the deceptive chicanery of JustCircuit owners Shane Rogers and Victor Mauro.

I'll try to keep you all updated on this as more information becomes available...

Notice of Intention

2010-06-21T13:29:00.000-07:00

The two civil case vs. Johnny Chisholm relentlessly continue forward. Late last week the magistrate in the DeForest case, noting the current procedural status of the litigation, asked how the plaintiff intended to proceed from this point on:

And DeForest, in turn, replied with this Notice of Intention:

Clearly, despite all the delays, Ray DeForest is not giving up, neither as to the discovery documents he wants, nor to the case as a whole.

And there's one paragraph worthy of special notice here, I think (hyperlinks mine):

"Plaintiff had been expending money on discovery that was being ignored so he sought default as suggested by this Court. Ultimately, Defendant Chisholm claimed poverty but provided no excuse for his non-compliance. This Court ruled judgment was too harsh a penalty because Chisholm was unrepresented. Recently, Defendants’ previous counsel, who filed multiple motions to withdraw and acknowledged discovery failures, has shockingly sent letters to media outlets threatening actions on behalf of his client Mr. Chisholm. This brazen approach may further show a game by Defendant Chisholm of hide and seek. He begged the Court for mercy because he had no counsel while paying counsel to threaten others. All of this shows Defendants’ games which require more discovery and time due to their refusals to comply."

The Bardfield case continues as well. This Order sets out a deadline for the parties to confer, so that discovery can finally begin (probably in July):

The deadline for the parties to meet and confer is June 28, with a joint report due 10 days after.

Mail Returned As Undeliverable

2010-05-11T20:46:00.000-07:00

It seems Johnny Chisholm has rather abruptly moved out of his office in Pensacola.

The latest batch of Orders in the DeForest case were mailed to that office address, but were sent back. The court clerk filed a copy of the envelope yesterday, labelling it "Mail Returned as Undeliverable":

And it would appear that Chisholm left no forwarding address.

Addendum 5/15/10: And court documents sent to Chisholm's office in the Bardfield case were returned by the Post Office as well:

It would appear the bird has flown the coop, so to speak.

Also, if you've missed them there have been some important updates to earlier posts below...just scroll down to the latest addendum:

1) A split decision from the magistrate on whether to default Chisholm in the civil cases here; her recommendations get sent up to the district judge on the 18th.

2) One current Chisholm Chapter 11 bankruptcy was just saved from the brink, while another has begun circling the drain, here.

Johnny Chisholm Re-Employs His Former Attorney

2010-05-06T10:52:00.000-07:00

Well this is certainly an interesting development. Granted, it's not a representation in the civil cases we've been following, but as Chisholm has been holding himself out these days as a defenseless pro se defendant, unable to hire a lawyer to defend himself versus a "well-funded" "aggressive and skilled" team of plaintiffs' attorneys, this behind-the-scenes revelation is eyebrow-raising, to say the least.

And on top of that...while everyone suspected Chisholm had a "ghost writer" for his latest filings, to be honest this is probably the last lawyer on the planet I would have thought would have agreed to fill that role.

But then again, Fehr did make a brief post-withdrawal appearance in the PRG case, so perhaps this should be not-so-surprising.

In any event, it'll be interesting to see if plaintiffs' attorneys in the Bardfield and DeForest cases bring this new representation issue up (as they did in the recent "Leave-To-File" motions), and what will be the district judge's reaction (who approved Fehr's withdrawal back in July of 2009) if and when he should learn of it.

How We Got Here, Part Two

2010-04-19T02:00:00.000-07:00

[This is Part Two of the Timeline project begun here. I made some changes to Part 1 as new information became available, the most noteworthy being revisions to the April 21, 2005 entry and the June 11, 2008 entry, both dealing with the source of the money Chisholm used to purchase the weekend back in 2005. How this fits into the 2009 debacle can be seen in the May 20, 2009 entry below. With the reallocation of funds earmarked for later investors to pay off earlier investors, you can begin to see why the plaintiffs in the Chisholm civil cases have often referred to his business enterprises as "ponzi type schemes" in their legal filings.

I'll merge the two timeline posts into one once this blog comes to an end. Ah yes, the end. My intent all along has been to conclude this blog once all the cases related to the events surrounding OMW 2009 are adjudicated (both existing now and in the future, both civil and criminal). As I've said here before, I have no desire to follow any new Chisholm litigation unrelated to OMW. To adopt a contrary policy would probably doom me to writing this blog forever.

And this end may come sooner or later, depending on whether these recent plaintiff default motions are granted, and/or whether criminal charges are filed in the wake of the civil cases. We shall see...]

January 2009: Being deeply in debt to both Disney and Universal Orlando, it seems Chisholm found himself at the start of the year short of funds to put on OMW 2009. A traditional bank loan probably wasn't an option due to his two pending bankruptcies. So, in order to raise capital Chisholm needed to find private “investors” to finance OMW, as he did when he found the unfortunate Ray DeForest in 2007.

And in January, one of his “representatives” at JustCircuit managed to find two such likely targets: Stephen Bardfield of New York and Charles Carver of North Carolina. See here for all the details on this initial solicitation, but long story short: JustCircuit "approached the victims regarding obtaining some funds for the production" of OMW, and "portrayed Johnny Chisholm...as...a renowned expert in the party-promoting business.".

What JustCircuit didn't tell them, obviously, was that they were all part of a big happy group of "FRIENDS in dispute with FRIENDS" and that one of these friends, Ray DeForest, was suing Johnny Chisholm for fraud. This failure to inform plaintiffs of the 2007 fraud case would later constitute a key element of the 2009 fraud case (see next entry).

January 31, 2009: Bardfield and Carver naturally wanted more information about the state of Chisholm's finances before investing. In response to this request, JustCircuit apparently arranged for a "Personal Financial Statement" (PFS) of Johnny Chisholm to be sent to the victims on January 31, 2009. See here for more details on this PFS and it “multiple false representations,” including the failure to mention the DeForest case under the "Liabilities" for "Legal Claims" line, and answering the "Are you a defendant in any suits or legal action?" question with a "NO."

February 18, 2009: As the opening sentences of this email seem to indicate, this was the first day Johnny Chisholm and the victims were in direct contact with each other (ie, without JustCircuit as an “intermediary”):

Both the past and projected ticket sale claims in this email would later prove to be false.

Additionally, up to this point Chisholm had directly (and indirectly, through JustCircuit) made the following verbal representations to the victims:

- Described the 2009 OMW schedule as:
- Friday: Beach Ball at “Disney’s Typhoon Lagoon;”
- Saturday: One Mighty Party at “Disney Studios Theme Park;”
- Sunday: All Stars Deep Blue Party at “Universal Studios;”

- Continually heralded Chisholm as a man with “close ties with Walt Disney World” and a “unique relationship based on years of trust.”

- And that Chisholm needed $200,000 to finalize payment to Disney for the venues listed above, because typically “he runs short of funds before the events” but he “always has plenty of money…to pay off debts” afterwards.

All of the above representations would later turn out to be false.

February 19, 2009: Bardfield and Carver agree in principle to make the loan:

February 20, 2009: Chisholm signs a promissory note, an addendum, and a personal guarantee, promising to pay back to Bardfield and Carver a total of $240,000 in exchange for a $200,000 loan. Repayment was to be made monthly upon receipt of credit card sales (25% of which was pledged) with the balance due immediately after the parties:

March 18, 2009: After Bardfield and Carver wired the promised $200,000 directly to Disney…Disney without explanation wired it back to them. Chisholm claimed that this was due to the funds not having come from Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, with whom Disney had a previous business relationship.

March 19, 2009: In order to avoid a repeat of yesterday’s alleged wiring problem, Chisholm asked Bardfield and Carver in the future to wire the funds to him, and he would then immediately wire them to Disney.

March 23, 2009: Chisholm asked Bardfield and carver to put up an additional $100,000 to "seal the deal" on the Disney venues. This was the first time Chisholm indicated that the original $200,000 loan did not “seal the deal on Disney."

March 24, 2009: Bardfield and Carver opt NOT to put up the extra requested $100,000. In addition, they worriedly ask Chisholm if this increased deposit demand meant the Disney venues were in jeopardy. Chisholm reassured them that Disney would be secure, their investment would be safe, and that he would let them know once he had worked it all out with Disney:

March 25, 2009: Chisholm asked Bardfield and Carver if they could cover the $50,000 shortfall alluded to in the email above. Once again, Bardfield and Carver decline.

March 30, 2009: Chisholm informed Bardfield and Carver by email that he had “worked it out with Disney” and gave them the wiring instructions to his account. Just to be SURE, however, Carver phoned Chisholm, and asked whether he was CERTAIN everything was worked out, and that their funds would be immediately forwarded to Disney...and Chisholm said assured him on both counts. Based on these assurances...Bardfield and Carver wired Johnny Chisholm $200,000.

April 3, 2009: The first reports began circulating that One Mighty Weekend parties would not be happening at Disney Resort venues this year:

Shocked and horrified, Bardfield and Carver began desperately trying to contact Johnny Chisholm to ascertain the status of the events, without success until almost the end of the month (see April 26, 2009 entry).

April 13, 2009: Of course, all this time the DeForest case is being litigated quietly (ie, unbeknownst to Bardfield and Carver) behind the scenes, with both parties engaged in discovery (ie, depositions, interrogatories, subpoenas of documents, etc...). And on this day DeForest makes the first of two motions to compel Chisholm to provide documents. Excuses given by Chisholm for his failure to provide the requested documents include a computer crash, and a claim Chisholm maintained a "paperless work environment:"

April 16, 2009: "Attendees will be pleased with the results..." This was the first utterance in a major JustCircuit campaign of damage control on behalf of Chisholm, which included not only propaganda in the guise of news stories on their main site, but numerous defensive comments by the site owners on Facebook and other sites (many of which were later self-deleted), as well as venomous ad hominem attacks leveled against OMW critics by the site owners masquerading as an anti-Semitic drag queen:

DISNEY UPDATE: Johnny Chisholm responds to One Mighty Weekend rumors

Orlando, April 16 11:00AM -- In a phone call to JustCircuit this morning, One Mighty Weekend promoter Johnny Chsiholm addressed recent rumors which have caused concern from some who follow One Mighty Weekend events. In recent days, certain venues have been removed from the One Mighty Weekend website and rumors immediately begain circulating about One Mighty Weekend's possible "demise". "Not the case at all" states Chisholm. "We have been in contract negotiations with venues in Orlando, and are now in the process of signing contracts. We wanted to wait until all of our contracts were finalized before making our announcements. Those venues on our website are already finalized, including our host hotel which is on Disney property and our afterhours venue." This announcement is schedule shortly. "Attendees will be pleased with the results," Chisholm promises, "and everyone will be informed of any changes when contracts are finalized." JustCircuit has received many inquiries from concerned individuals over the past week, many fueled from rumors which were begun in Orlando by certain antagonists of Chisholm's efforts at Disney who were apparently aware of the ongoing negotiations. JustCircuit will continue to monitor all news from Orlando and make that information immediately available as soon as it is available to us.

April 21, 2009: Chisholm responds to Deforest's discovery complaint by claiming that “seven pounds worth of documents” were just mailed two days earlier from his heretofore paperless work environment, thus making the motion moot.

These “seven pounds worth of documents” would be found wanting, leading to a second motion to compel (see May 29, 2009 entry):

Also on this day, another Chisholm-owned company, Chisholm Properties of Pensacola, files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This is the third of what will eventually become four simultaneous Chisholm bankruptcies of 2009-2010.

April 22, 2009: The domain "http://www.letsgoplay2009.com/" is registered with GoDaddy.com, by a previously unknown group of Florida investors with no known party-producing history or experience. Ironically, they will end up producing Friday's Typhoon Lagoon party, the only 2009 party held at a Disney theme park, and easily the most successful event of the weekend. See here for more on the timeline progression of this mysterious company's birth and maturation.

April 26, 2009: Back to the Bardfield case...Finally (see April 3, 2009 entry), in a "flippant" reply Chisholm informed Bardfield and Carver that he had in fact not secured the Disney venues, as previously represented. And instead of returning the $200,000, he had used his “discretion” in applying it towards the procurement of alternate venues and new talent.

April 27, 2009: "I promise you’ll be impressed again this year..." Chisholm officially revealed to the world in this press release his lack of theme park venues for One Mighty Weekend 2009:

"Sixteen years ago, a vision to bring amazing events to the “Gay Day” weekend took shape with our creation of One Mighty Party. We work all year long to bring a fun, exciting and memory-filled weekend to thousands of attendees of One Mighty Weekend. Despite the obstacles associated with this year’s big financial downturn, which has hit every single one of us, our production team is pleased to bring you One Mighty Weekend once again this year – with some events in new locations but most in familiar locations! Only today, Monday, April 27 at 3:00PM have we signed our last and final venue contract. I certainly regret not having this information to you sooner, as it has been my intent to make all the information available to you at one time and in one announcement. As a token of our appreciation for your understanding, all ticket holders and pass holders alike will receive a $15.00 beverage coupon for each of the three main events – Beach Ball “Luau,” One Mighty Party “City After Dark” and All Stars “Deep Blue World.” Magic Journeys, voted by Just Circuit as “2008’s Best After-Hours Party of the Year,” One Mighty Party, voted by Edge New York as 2008’s “Best National Party” and One Mighty Weekend, voted by Edge New York as “2008’s Best National Party Weekend,” you can once again expect over-the-top performances and a visual extravaganza this year! You’ve been impressed with our parties in the past and I promise you’ll be impressed again this year as we present to you “One Mighty Weekend 2009” … your One Mighty Weekend!"

That "$15.00 beverage coupon" was meant as compensation for having the three main parties downgraded from theme parks to hotels:

"BEACH BALL “ LUAU” (“Get lei’d and get wet!”) • Friday, June 5th, 2009
The lush tropical nighttime setting at the Buena Vista Palace Hotel sets the stage for the first ever “Beach Ball-Luau”! Grab your coconuts and your hula skirt and get ready to shake it to the world’s hottest tracks with DJ Joe Gauthreaux. Dance among the stars and under a canopy of light and sound as the sights and sounds of the tropics fill the night air.

Tickets are limited so get yours today for this first ever event!

ONE MIGHTY PARTY “CITY AFTER DARK” • Saturday, June 6th, 2009
Amidst a 60,000 square foot space of concrete and steel at the Gaylord Palms Resort, join us for a sensory explosion of lights, sights and sounds in the “City After Dark”. Extreme stunt performers catapult themselves up, over and through the buildings of the cityscape while DJ Roland Belmares is perched above on a rooftop spinning today’s hottest dance beats.

ALL STARS “DEEP BLUE WORLD” • Sunday, June 7th, 2009
You’ve been dazzled in the past with shows like FREEZERBURN and RUNWAY, and now the production teams responsible for those shows transport you into a “Deep Blue World”. Immerse yourself into the depths of the sea as DJ Abel and DJ Ralphi Rosario, aka Rosabel, transport you into the depths of a world unknown inside the Empire Ballroom at the Buena Vista Palace Hotel."

And on the same day as this announcement, the "www.envibeorlando.com" domain was registered (see April 28, 2009 entry):

April 28, 2009: Several events of note occured on this day. First, another email exchange between Bardfield/Carver and Chisholm. After Bardfield and Carver expressed their dissatisfaction with his "exercise of discretion" (see April 26, 2009 entry), Chisholm sent this further reply:

Second, a public relations Armageddon ensued in the wake of the Chisholm press release of the day before. Gay Days attendees nationwide (many stuck with nonrefundable airline and hotel tickets for the weekend) exploded in an orgy of online indignation, with posts like these being typical examples:

Third, Tony Hayden at The Circuit Dog reported on the pandemonium occuring at the Buena Vista Palace that day, the host hotel for OMW:

Fourth, DJs Manny Lehman, Alyson Calagna, and Mike Cruz, disgusted at what seemed an obvious bait-and-switch swindle of their loyal fans, decided for that they could not in good conscience work for Johnny Chisholm in these circumstances. So, they contracted to spin for EnVibe Entertainment, rather than for OMW as planned. EnVibe would become the first of many hastily-formed party entities attempting to salvage the weekend for consumers in the wake of the Chisholm venue disaster.

Fifth, here's JustCircuit's version of the day's news ("Three DJs have defected...to the upstart events..."):

04/28/2009 07:53 PM
In an unofficial announcement, EnVibe Entertainment, a company run by Miami-based Steve Milo, has created EnVibe Orlando, set to compete with One Mighty Weekend events during Gay Day Orlando events. Three DJs from the One Mighty Weekend events have defected to the upstart events. DJs Manny Lehman and Alyson Calagna have defected the traditional One Mighty Weekend after many years of friendship with its promoter Johnny Chisholm. Calagna claimed her decision was "best for my career" refusing to play a smaller venue as other DJs had agreed to do during this year's downsizing. Calagna was a regular at Chisholm's OZ nightclub in New Orleans and other Chisholm events for years. Lehman has been unavailable for comment. In a letter from George Dellinger, manager of both Lehman and the third defecting DJ Mike Cruz, the switch was said to be a result of Chisholm's not paying a deposit via a credit-card system, despite having been confirmed and advertised for six months. All DJs are reportedly receiving top dollar to make the change. It is also highly suggested on some discussion boards that Victor Calderone has been secured for the Universal Hard Rock Colosseum venue for Sunday, June 7, but JustCircuit has been unable to confirm the booking.

Other DJs connected to EnVibe Orlando are DJ Brett Henrichsen, who turned down working for Johnny Chisholm because he did not feel he should have to split an evening with David Knapp at Arabian Knights during this year's One Mighty Weekend and had planned his own events as seen on his website prior to taking down the announcement. Henrichsen is also selling tickets to the event via his ticket sales website.

It is unclear whether former Gay Day Weekend promoter Mark Baker is openly involved in the event as is speculated by various Facebook postings from those close to his operation. Some have referred to him as a "silent" partner due to his continuing, unexpired non-compete clause signed with Chisholm upon Chisholm's purchase of Baker's Gay Day Orlando interests. The deal was reportedly a multi-million dollar deal.

Many DJs had been contacted by Baker in the past months, refusing to agree to drop their relationship and contractual obligations with Chisholm's One Mighty Weekend. Parties planned by the EnVibe Oraldno events include "Alyson in Wonderland", "Fasscination" (spelling misspelled; as per referenced website) and "Deliverance Act 1: Rise Up and Act 2: Evolve."

Visit www.envibeorlando.com for more information on these events.

And lastly, this day marked the beginning of JustCircuit's campaign of ruthless censorship of any post on their site even remotely critical of Johnny Chisholm:

April 29, 2009: Almost immediately, OMW is swamped with refund requests from dissatisfied customers; so much so that their email systems apparently begin to overflow:

April 30, 2009: "[Y]ou may be confusing "discretion" [with] obtaining money fraudulently..." Their dissatisfaction unabated, Bardfield and Carver threaten legal action, "both civilly and criminal to recover the $200,000.":

And "...a well organized spin machine has delivered non-stop negative information in an attempt to discredit Johnny Chisholm...as claims of fraud...have arisen...", as JustCircuit writes:

04/30/2009 11:43 PM
Orlando, April 30: Exclusive: It was revealed to JustCircuit today that enVibe Orlando, a weekend of events set to compete directly with One Mighty Weekend during Gay Day Weekend in Orlando, has been refused venues for its events, thus delaying by 24-hours a scheduled major announcement.

Midnight tonight was the original time set for announcing parties and venues. Yesterday, it was learned that Disney's Typhoon Lagoon and Disney's Hollywood Studios would NOT be made available to enVibe events and promoters today scrambled to secure alternative venues around Orlando. Publicly, Miami promoter and former Disney employee Steve Milo and reportedly former Gay Day Weekend promoter Mark Baker have been working with West Coast DJ Brett Henrichsen to create events which would draw traffic from the award-winning One Mighty Weekend, held June 5-7 this year. Sources close to Baker reveal that the Universal Hard Rock Colosseum has been secured for DJ Victor Calderone, although multiple attempts to secure the Disney venues have repeatedly failed. Baker, said to still be under a non-compete clause he agreed to in arrangements made during his multi-million dollar sale to Chisholm five years ago, legally keep him from promoting any events during the Gay Day Weekend. His attempts to make an early return also appear to be in violation of that agreement.

Baker has been criticized in the past for a failed Hard Rock Colosseum Party a few years back in which fire marshals shut down admittance to ticketed individuals, due to capacity violations. Some of the same people criticizing Chisholm today were criticizing Baker following the Colosseum Party failure due to delays in announcing refunds for those denied admission. An announcement was made a few weeks following the incident giving instructions on how to receive a refund. In one of his final productions, Baker moved the much adored Stars party away from Universal Studios and into the Orange County Convention Center in it's third year. Both parties eventually were retired and never regained their top-tier status.

In recent days, a well organized spin machine has delivered non-stop negative information in an attempt to discredit Chisholm, those who work for him as well as cross-promotional partners and sponsors of One Mighty Weekend. Chisholm's downsizing of two events typically held in local theme parks has been the hot topic for a week, as claims of fraud and even "counterfeit" have arisen despite Chishom's open offer for refunds from those who purchased passes in previous months. Chisholm's forced renegotiation for venues to house the Friday Beach Ball and Saturday One Mighty Party were the result of last-minute price elevations from the host parks. The final venue was contracted last Monday at 3PM EDT with a full announcement made immediately.

DJs Alyson Calagna and Manny Lehman were among three DJs who severed ties with Chisholm this week, reportedly being paid much higher prices to abandon their agreements with One Mighty Weekend and defect to enVibe Orlando events. All DJs have been advertised for nearly six months, with some holding only verbal agreements as in past years. Some DJs have traditionally held verbal agreements with Chisholm for seventeen years.

Despite a promised announcement, visitors to the website for enVibe Orlando have seen a countdown clock which was reset 24-hours tonight, now making the announcement time Midnight Friday. Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com, the world's leader in everything Circuit, for news and information on One Mighty Weekend and enVibe Orlando events.

...a story which prompted observations elsewhere around the internet such as this one:

May 1, 2009: Chisholm failed to pay the scheduled 25% of ticket sales installment to Bardfield and Carver, in accordance with their note (see entry for February 20, 2009).

But Chisholm did find the time to email JustCircuit this "Q&A" addressing the venue crisis:

05/01/2009 02:21 PM
Pensacola, FL, May 1: The following message was sent to JustCircuit by One Mighty Weekend founder Johnny Chisholm and includes a Q&A answering some of the most common questions currently being asked by interested attendees to this year's events, scheduled in Orlando June 4-7:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Much has transpired in the past few weeks that caused some concerns and questions from those planning to attend One Mighty Weekend events, which will take place June 4-7 in Orlando. In the coming weeks, we will be discussing this year’s changes with you and will continue to move forward with our goals to guarantee that your One Mighty Weekend will be fun, exciting and memorable as always. Thank you to all who have taken the time to ask the questions! Your interest proves your continued love for the weekend. The weekend is truly favored by so many from around the world. We will make it One Mighty Weekend!

Johnny Chisholm

Q. What happened to the venues used for last year’s One Mighty Weekend?

No one expected the economy to become so bad this year. Near the end of venue negotiations, and prior to signing any contracts, we were made aware of price increases that required us to renegotiate our venues. We were able to continue the parties on Friday and Saturday night in a way that we felt would allow the party to continue without simply cancelling the events. The Beach Ball Luau will be held at the Buena Vista Palace host hotel this year and One Mighty Party will be held at the Gaylord Palms. Both events will feature more production that we believe you will simply love!

Q. What can we expect for the price at the new events? Why has the price not been reduced considerably?

Adding production to the evening events, including indoor fireworks, performances and visuals will make your experience memorable. The ticket price will still be lower than comparable events held in other cities. We know how some regard events held in hotel ballrooms and we have begun to make One Mighty Party unlike any you’ve ever seen in the past.

We are lowering the price of the ticket by offering a $15.00 beverage voucher to those who attend the Beach Ball Luau, One Mighty Party and the All Stars Party. Effectively, this overall cost reduction lowers the price of admission, even for those early bird purchases that were already discounted below the ticket cost, dropping your price considerably while adding production value.

Q. Why the delay on announcing details?

Negotiations continued until Monday, April 27 at 3:00PM when our last venue was contractually signed. It was our desire to give you all the information at once so that you could consider the entire package, which includes venues familiar and new alike. The late changes were unforeseen and we announced our changes the moment the weekend’s venues were 100% confirmed. We have never had to renegotiate the terms at such a late date, but we were able to work out agreements which will offer you what we believe will be a fun, memorable choice for our attendees. We have delighted tens of thousands of attendees to our events over the past sixteen years and we are now working around the clock to deliver again this year, despite a few last-minute venue changes.

JustCircuit is a proud long-time sponsor of One Mighty Weekend and Johnny Chisholm events.

...and there was also this example of JustCircuit journalism in action:

Friday, May 1: Sources close to enVibe productions have revealed to JustCircuit some of the production details from the delayed announcement regarding events, rescheduled for Midnight tonight. Venues secured for enVibe Orlando events set to compete against the award-winning One Mighty Weekend June 5-7 include Dolly Parton's Dixie Stampede venue as well as a parking lot in Disney's Swan Hotel. Reportedly, the outdoor venue in the "Goofy Golf" parking lot of the Swan will include several 18-wheeler rigs positioned in a circle, with graphics, lasers and lights displayed on the sides of the rigs.

The delayed announcement from enVibe is scheduled tonight at Midnight. The delay is said to be as a result of the inability of the producers to secure a venue for their events. For more information on the event, visit www.envibeorlando.com. Tickets are available via DJ Brett Henrichsen's CircuiTicket.com website for enVibe events. Visit www.onemightyweekend.com for information and tickets to events scheduled.

May 2, 2009: Public outrage continues to mount over JustCircuit's censorship policy:

...as well as their selective reporting tendencies:

May 5, 2009: A period of frantic emailing between Chisholm, Chisholm's attorney Bruce Fehr, and Bardfield/Carver begin, with Chisholm blaming the missed 25% of sales payment (see May 1, 2009 entry above) on the credit card companies. (however, see May 20, 2009 entry, below). In addition, Chisholm and Fehr attempt to placate Bardfield and Carver with various offers of security interests (including at one point an illusory offer of a mortgage on real estate in Pensacola that was actually in bankruptcy):

Also this day, Chisholm files a harassment suit in Escambia County (Florida) Court to silence Ron Anthony ("Tony") Hayden of TheCircuitDog.com, which was practically the only web site providing honest coverage of the Chisholm/Disney venue collapse during this period.

"Refunds were promptly offered by One Mighty Weekend..." In a story headlined "Cancel My Cancellation!" JustCircuit writes:

Orlando, May 5: In a recent development, it was revealed that One Mighty Weekend ticket sales have now begun to increase. Also, calls have been received from ticket holders now wishing to “cancel the cancellation” that they requested just days ago. Changes to familiar venues for Friday and Saturday night events were met by two weeks of heavy public discussion and sometimes brutal criticism by potential attendees who had pre-purchased tickets for the weekend. Refunds were promptly offered by One Mighty Weekend. Events had been advertised for months at two area theme parks used by promoter Johnny Chisholm and others as in previous years but last minute renegotiations due mostly to a troubled economy required new venues for the two events. Other venues during the weekend, including House of Blues and the award-winning Magic Journeys after hours at Arabian Nights remain unchanged. Reunion pool parties will return again this year to the Buena Vista Palace "host" hotel.

In a call by JustCircuit to the One Mighty Weekend headquarters in Pensacola, Florida, promoter Johnny Chisholm also promised to continue his tradition of providing a good time despite the last-minute venue changes. “Our guests have seen the events we have provided them in past years,” Chisholm stated. “They have no reason to expect anything less than an amazing time, with added productions and incredible visual experiences planned for this year. We are thrilled to continue to bring some of the best parties to what is perhaps the favorite weekend of the year.” Chisholm and One Mighty Weekend events have won numerous awards from a variety of media sources, including multiple JustCircuit Awards™ which are determined my readers of JustCircit.com, including “2008 Best Overall Circuit Weekend” and “2008 Promoter/Producer of the Year” for Chisholm.

Just this weekend, producers of enVibe Orlando events officially announced two new parties in Orlando area nightclubs set to compete against Chisholm’s One Mighty Weekend on June 6th and June 7th. According to the enVibe Orlando website, Saturday’s party at Orlando’s Club Destiny will feature DJs Manny Lehman and Mike Cruz and Sunday’s party at Universal’s Hard Rock club will feature DJs Brett Henrichsen and Alyson Calagna. Herichsen, also owns CircuiTicket.com which will sell tickets beginning May 6 for enVibe events. Henrichsen was not part of the original One Mighty Weekend lineup of DJs. DJs Manny Lehman, Mike Cruz and Alyson Calagna defected from Chisholm’s lineup following many months advertised as part of the weekend's lineup. A variety of reasons were offered for their defections. Both Calagna and Lehman have for years headlined past Chisholm events. “I wish them well," was Chisholm's only comment.

JustCircuit is a proud sponsor of One Mighty Weekend. Follow JustCircuit.com as we bring you news and updates on One Mighty Weekend and enVibe Orlando events as they become available.

May 6, 2009: This email is sent from Fehr to Bardfield/Carver. In addition to repeating the claim that the credit card company was to blame for the missed May 1 payment (however, see May 20, 2009 entry, below), it mentions that Bardfield/Carver were meeting with DeForest's attorneys that day (one can only imagine how distressing this news must have been to Chisholm when he learned of it). It also describes the harassment lawsuit filed to silence Tony Hayden, due to the fact that he "publishes everything about the [DeForest] suit on his website."

The cat was completely out of the bag at this point, it would seem:

May 7, 2009: "If you filed a lawsuit...we could drag the thing on for months." More carrot-and-stick emails from Chisholm attorney Fehr to Bardfield and Carver, desperately promising their money back after the event, and threatening a scorched earth legal strategy if they decide to sue:

Also, more reports of problems from people trying to get promised ticket refunds from Chisholm begin to circulate online:

And the South Florida Blade published this article on the unfolding scandal.

May 9, 2009: The website "www.letsgoplay2009.com" goes online, announcing the new Friday party at Typhoon Lagoon (but not much else). More info would be forthcoming in a later press release (see May 12, 2009 entry).

May 10, 2009: "Typhoon Lagoon was passed over by ... Johnny Chisholm ... when the ... venue contract ... changed..." JustCircuit writes:

Last minute negotiations have secured Disney’s Typhoon Lagoon water park for unknown promoter; “Let’s Go Play” party on Friday during Gay Day weekend raises eyebrows

05/10/2009 11:00 AM
Wilton Manors, FL: Disney’s Typhoon Lagoon, for years home to One Mighty Weekend’s Beach Ball, has been secured by an unknown producer for Friday, June 5. The Wilton Manors, FL address listed as the headquarters for the event is home to an investment company. Other venues in the Orlando area were being sought by another promoter, only identified as “Jeff” in other locations during the week. Typhoon Lagoon was passed over by One Mighty Weekend promoter Johnny Chisholm this year in a much-publicized renegotiation when the multi year/multi venue contract, which included 2010 payment terms, changed and were not acceptable to Chisholm. Chisholm’s Beach Ball Luau will replace this year’s event at Disney's Typhoon Lagoon instead and will be held at the Buena Vista Palace Resort and Spa host hotel, also in the Downtown Disney area.

JustCircuit.com, also based in Wilton Manors, FL, a suburb of Fort Lauderdale, visited the address listed on the Let’s Go Play website on Friday, finding only a closed investment office at the address. Tickets for the event are scheduled to go on sale Tuesday, May 12 via the Let’s Go Play shopping cart and will be $69.00. The event promises to present “Our Favorite Party DJ” as well as a cash bar and food outlets, with an open wave pool and water slides. It was noted that all ticket sales were “final and non-refundable” to the event.

Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com, your #1 Circuit information website, as we continue to update you with breaking information from events during Gay Day Orlando 2009.

May 11, 2009: Worry and angst over the failure of Chisholm to follow though on promised ticket refunds continues to mount:

While JustCircuit seems to have forgotten about their avowed "...we stay OUT of the legal, because the courts will decide the outcome" editorial policy today:

No more Mr. Nice Guy! Johnny Chisholm answers “TheCircuitDog’s” two-year campaign to discredit One Mighty Weekend with lawsuit claiming “defamation, misuse of image”; asks for injunctive relief and damages “greater than $15K”

05/11/2009 11:09 AM
Orlando, FL: EXCLUSIVE: For nearly two years, award-winning promoter Johnny Chisholm, founder of One Mighty Weekend during Gay Day weekend in Orlando, has been under attack, both personally and professionally, by self-proclaimed “Circuit watch dog” Tony Hayden, aka "The Circuit Dog. " Hayden, an Orlando-area hairdresser, is best known most recently for his “me-ality” series which was focused on Hayden’s own, everyday life in a series of videos with Hayden presented in a one-man show.

On Saturday, May 9, Hayden was served papers at his home in the Orlando area as the result of an Escambia County, FL lawsuit filed by Chisholm which claims defamation and misuse of image. Chisholm is also asking for damages “greater than $15,000” from Hayden. The full complaint can be viewed BY CLICKING HERE. An emergency hearing is scheduled to take place soon to hear the complaint from both sides.

JustCircuit.com and other sponsors and promotional partners have also been under attack by Hayden, who Hayden claims are “aiding and embedding [spelling incorrect] counterfeiting” by sponsoring and promoting the upcoming One Mighty Weekend events June 4-7. His efforts to undermine the weekend have included calling certain sponsors to pressure them to drop their sponsorship. Hayden has also suggested Chisholm was guilty of fraud and posted letters from Walt Disney World written in 2004 to Chisholm before his takeover of events from a recently resurfaced promoter Mark Baker. The multi-million dollar takeover of Baker’s events by Chisholm included a “non-compete” clause preventing Baker from promoting any Gay event for several years. The non-compete clause of the agreement is reportedly still in effect for at least two more years. Baker has returned to the Gay Day weekend this year, however, and is actively promoting the Mona Lisa Hotel, host hotel for competitive enVibe Orlando events.

JustCircuit.com is a proud sponsor of One Mighty Weekend events and will be providing coverage all weekend long beginning June 4. Stay tuned to the #1 website for everything Circuit for continuous updates and information as it becomes available.

May 12, 2009: Lets Go Play! issues it's first press release on the Typhoon Lagoon party:

"Orlando, May 12: Press Release: Don't believe everything you hear…the magical Friday night party at Disney's Typhoon Lagoon Water Park is ON. Now known as Let’s Go Play! this year’s bash produced by East Gate Events will be held on Friday Night, June 5, 2009.

Coinciding with the largest gay and lesbian vacation weekend of the year, this lively event brings together over 5,500 gay men and women from all over the world. Orlando area locals, as well as those visiting from out of town, will meet, mix and mingle in a private event inside Disney’s premier water park. Let’s Go Play! where skimpy bathing suits, wave pools, and water slides bring out the heat of the night.

Running for six straight hours, from 8:00 pm to 2:00 am, this wild night offers everything from dancing under the stars and cash-bar cocktails to surfing in the wave pool and plunging down water slides. Those that have been in the past will tell you… "it's one of the best events of the weekend." Bring some old friends and meet some new friends.

Tickets are available for $69 beginning May 13, 2009.

For more information go to www.letsgoplay2009.com.

Let's Go Play! is honored to donate 10% of net proceeds to charity. The main recipient is the Hope and Help Center of Central Florida, Inc. (www.hopeandhelp.org), who do an amazing job throughout metro Orlando and Central Florida."

May 13, 2009: Popular gay blogger Joe.My.God. publishes a post about the ensuing Chisholm fiasco entitled "Less Gay Days: One Mighty Weekend Booted From Disney World".

"Chisholm revealed to JustCircuit that just over 100 ticket refund requests have been made ... Of those ... 35 have now called ... to “cancel their cancellations”..." JustCircuit writes:

Missed deadlines, unconfirmed venues raise doubt and confusion about competitive events during Gay Day Weekend; Numbers of One Mighty Weekend ticket refund requests revealed

05/13/2009 04:11 PM
Orlando, May 13: Continuous postponements of scheduled ticket sales and questions about venues for events connected to enVibe Orlando have now begun to drive UP ticket sales for One Mighty Weekend, the Johnny Chisholm produced events taking place during the same time during Gay Day weekend June 5-7 in Orlando, Florida. JustCircuit’s calls to Universal’s Hard Rock Live were met by a confused staff, who knew nothing about the scheduled June 7 enVibe Orlando event “Alyson in Wonderland” featuring One Mighty Weekend defection DJ Alyson Calagna and DJ Brett Henrichsen, owner of both Masterbeat.com and CircuiTicket.com. Destiny Nightclub in Orlando, currently features OMW defections DJs Manny Lehman and Mike Cruz on the enVibe website and as a Shawn N Paul produced event. GayDayReborn.com now shows Manny Lehman at Disney’s Pleasure Island on Saturday, June 6 and not at Destiny Nightclub with no sign of DJ Mike Cruz in the line-up.

In another strange development, JustCircuit’s calls to CircuiTicket.com, the ticket outlet selling tickets to enVibe Orlando with ticket sales stated to begin “May 11”, were met with additionally confusing answers. Originally told to refer “to the One Mighty Party website” to get enVibe ticket information, but following being placed on hold, the caller was then told that the tickets “would most likely be on sale later in the week” as the producers hadn’t yet given information regarding ticket sales.

JustCircuit on Tuesday spoke with Michael Christ, promoter for “Let’s Go Play 2009” who assured us he was a not partner with any other organization during the weekend. It was revealed today that GayDayS.com is indeed partnered with the event and that 10% of proceeds will now go to benefit Hope & Health, a local HIV/AIDS charity. Christ revealed that the event had Disney’s support and that Disney was responsible for the “Let’s Go Play 2009” website design. Tickets are now on sale.

One Mighty Weekend promoter Johnny Chisholm has received criticism from his competitors and critics over the past two weeks for his decision to change the location of two of his 10 scheduled One Mighty Weekend events. Friday’s Beach Ball Luau was relocated from Disney’s Typhoon Lagoon and One Mighty Party was relocated from Disney’s Hollywood Studios theme park just last month. Typhoon Lagoon was passed over by Chisholm this year in a much-publicized renegotiation that was required when the multi year/multi venue contract, which included 2010 payment terms, changed and were not acceptable to Chisholm. Typhoon Lagoon and Hollywood Studios was a package deal for the promoter, who has overseen the events for five successful years.

There is an apparent change of opinion for many formerly disgruntled attendees of Chisholm’s One Mighty Weekend following weeks of sometimes-bitter discussions regarding the changes. Chisholm revealed to JustCircuit that just over 100 ticket refund requests have been made out of thousands of tickets sold. Of those refund requests, 35 have now called the One Mighty Weekend offices to “cancel their cancellations” following apparent delays and unanswered questions about events set to compete with One Mighty Weekend. “Ticket sales have been rising steadily as we approach the weekend,” Chisholm stated.

For more information on enVibe Orlando events, CLICK HERE.
For more information on Let’s Go Play 2009 @ Typhoon Lagoon, CLICK HERE.
For more information on One Mighty Weekend events, CLICK HERE.

Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com for continuous updates on all events during the upcoming Gay Day weekend and events throughout the year. JustCircuit is your #1 source for everything Circuit!

Meanwhile, the actions of Johnny Chisholm and the editorial policies of JustCircuit continue to provoke reactions like these:

May 14, 2009: "One Mighty Party to be held at the luxurious Gaylord Palms Resort..." JustCircuit writes:

Superstar Kelly Rowland of Destiny's Child to perform at One Mighty Party on June 6 during One Mighty Weekend; One Mighty Party to be held at the luxurious Gaylord Palms Resort

05/14/2009 04:08 PM
Orlando, FL, May 14, 4:00PM update: One Mighty Weekend has announced that Kelly Rowland will be the main stage performer at One Mighty Party on June 6 at the Gaylord Palms Resort. The best-selling Grammy-winning solo artist is a founding member of Destiny's Child the top-selling female recording group of all-time.

Rowland proved a major contributing force to the group's record-breaking global popularity as they racked up sales of more than 100 million records worldwide while earning three Grammy Awards. She successfully debuted as a solo artist in 2002 with the album "Simply Deep," which sold over 2.5 million copies worldwide and included the hit single "Dilemma." The duet, with rapper Nelly, earned the Grammy for Best Rap/Sung Collaboration in 2002 and spent 10 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard's Hot 100. Her follow-up album, "Ms. Kelly," was released in 2007. Kelly is featured on the lead single of David Guetta's album, "When Love Takes Over". The track is currently headed to #1 on the Billboard Charts. She is currently a judge on Bravo’s “The Fashion Show." Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com, the world's most popular website for EVERYTHING Circuit!

For more info on Kelly Rowland, visit www.KellyRowlandOnline.com.

For more info on One Mighty Weekend or to purchase tickets, visit www.OneMightyWeekend.com.

JustCircuit is a proud sponsor of
One Mighty Weekend 2009 and Johnny Chisholm Circuit Events!

May 15, 2009: JustCircuit writes (in a story they would have to retract the next day; see May 16, 2009 entry):

Orlando, FL, May 15 9:30PM: EXCLUSIVE: In a phone call from Steven Milo, it was confirmed to JustCircuit.com that all WorldVibe Orlando and enVibe Orlando events have now been officially CANCELLED for Memorial Weekend and during Gay Day Weekend in Orlando. One Mighty Weekend producer Johnny Chisholm is in talks with enVibe Orlando coproducers to assume control over venues left vacant by the cancellation. More news will be provided as soon as it becomes available. JustCircuit.com is your truly unbiased source for everything Circuit. Continue to check back with JustCircuit.com and OneMightyWeekend.com for continuous updates all weekend long.

May 16, 2009: JustCircuit writes:

JOHNNY CHISHOLM PRESS RELEASE REGARDING ONE MIGHTY WEEKEND AFFILIATION

05/16/2009 11:37 AM
Pensacola, May 16: 11:30AM Update: The following three sentence press release was given by One Mighty Weekend with regards to current One Mighty Weekend schedules and promoter Johnny Chisholm's current affiliation with other Gay Day Weekend events:

11:30 EDT

A Message from Johnny Chisholm

One Mighty Weekend events have not changed. Johnny Chisholm has no affiliation with any other events planned for Gay Days in Orlando. For ticket information to One Mighty Weekend events, please visit OneMightyWeekend.com.

Also on this day, one time JustCircuit editor and long time continuing JustCircuit contributor Mickey Weems wrote an article for Edge publications entitled "Disney Drama: The Inside Scoop." Edge was later compelled to retract this article after they discovered that Weems had neglected to reveal in the article certain facts that basic journalistic ethics mandated he disclose...to wit, the fact that he was, as noted above, a one time JustCircuit editor and long time continuing JustCircuit contributor. In other words, it was an article purporting to give readers "the low-down on all the players" in the Disney drama without Weems revealing to the audience that he himself was one of those players.

The article is too lengthy to reprint in full in this timeline, but you can read it here (along with a preamble in which JustCircuit mischaracterizes the reason the article was pulled). In fact if you have not done so already I heartily recommend that you do; I would say it's a "must-read" as far as this timeline goes, keeping in mind of course that it's a JustCircuit authored article trying to pretend that it isn't.

Some of the more notable facts alleged in the article include "the last-minute demand for renegotiation from Disney" as the reason for the venue change, that relations between Chisholm and Disney were "amicable" and that Disney wanted him back in 2010, Tony Hayden's "Strong, But Questionable Accusations" of fraud against Johnny Chisholm, and that "too much bad publicity" could imperil the survival of the weekend.

Meanwhile, despite Chisholm/JustCircuit assurances that OMW refunds were being promptly given, actual customers continued to report a different reality:

May 17, 2009: JustCircuit's public relations tactics continue to generate observations such as these:

May 18, 2009: "Release the Rooms!" This was the headline blared across the top of Tony Hayden's The Circuit Dog website, after his hotel sources informed him the decision by Buena Vista Palace management to open up room sales during Gay Days weekend to the general public (previously, the entire hotel had been reserved as a "block" as the host hotel for One Mighty Weekend, but poor sales and cancellations left so many unoccupied rooms at this point that maintaining that status was no longer feasible).

False denials by JustCircuit on this issue were debunked by Facebookers, who actually called the hotel and verified that the rooms had indeed been released:

And JustCircuit's heavy-handed censorship policy on their own site continued to be remarked upon:

May 19, 2009: Stating in a video message on TheCircuitDog that "...freedom of speech isn't free, but comes with a $15,000 retainer..." Tony Hayden opts to settle the harassment suit Chisholm filed against him back on May 5. The verbal settlement agreement (in which Hayden agreed not to mention Chisholm on his site until March of 2010) would later be invalidated after revelations emerged in the Bardfield case that the lawsuit was nothing more that a fraudulent attempt to silence Hayden because he "publishes everything about the [DeForest] suit on his website." (See May 6, 2009 entry above).

Also today, JustCircuit writes:

Alyson in Will-Call Land

05/19/2009 10:35 PM
I bought a ticket the moment the tickets went on sale for this event. (I really did.) I paid $60.00 plus a $5.00 service charge for the ticket.

Just was wonderlanding....uh, wondering.....

1. Why the 5.00 service charge for a Will-Call ticket? (all tickets are will-call) I understand the service charge, as tickets have to be produced (or do they?) and the ticket company (DJ Brett Henrichsen is also spinning the event) has to get a fee for doing it. But wait....the fee is over 8% of the pre-sale price????

2. All tickets are will-call tickets. So....say there's a sell-out at this event. Let's say 2500 people. Everyone gets there around showtime. Will there be lines to the parking garage? Are you with me here? Maybe they'll provide little mushroom seats while you're in line. When Mark Baker had the lock out a few years ago, people couldn't get in the event. This gives it a whole different meaning...

3. This party has been compared to the One Mighty Weekend Colosseum party. Same day during the weekend. Same expectations to many. Will it really be the same production at $60.00? That's a pretty low price for a huge production. I mean, they already have a tough job to make a party like this for that price, but the expectations are so high, I don't pity the producers.

4. The talent. No comment.

5. I notice the ticket sales goes up at the door. I wonder how many "pre-sale" tickets will actually be sold in just a couple weeks of selling them. I bet a clear majority of these sales are at the door at that higher price. They compare the high prices of OMW to that $60.00 so we might want to consider that idea.

I don't see much talk anywhere about this "enVibe" event. I guess folks are confident of it. With only a few weeks of ticket sales, I'm glad I got my ticket right away, as people are probably scrambling to get them. I know I'm excited about having my own will-call confirmation form.

At least one commenter immediately found a key aspect of the above story to be "strange":

While critiques of JustCircuit's public relations skills continue to flow in to various online forums:

Also today, more on those elusive OMW refunds:

May 20, 2009: A Chapter 11 reorganization plan is proposed (and later approved) in the 800 Bourbon bankruptcy case (see June 11, 2008 entry). In order to get one of the major creditors of the plan on board, and convince him not to sue on his note, Baybridge Building Limited is immediately promised 15% (possibly raised to 25%?...see the Hayslette deposition here and excerpts below) of all future incoming OMW credit card revenues, paid weekly on Wednesday.

Note that earlier in the month Chisholm had told Bardfield and Carver that this sort of payment to them was no longer possible, as the credit card company was refusing to release incoming receipts prior to the event (see letters attached to the May 5, 2009 and May 6, 2009 entries above).

Meanwhile, JustCircuit's charm and tact continues to have a significant effect on hearts and minds:

...while still more complaints about refunds come rolling in:

May 21, 2009: More on those refunds:

May 22, 2009: Still more on those refunds:

...and then there's this rather shocking report, which took the refund scandal to a whole new level: Chisholm illegally "re-posted" a credit card charge after the charge had been removed. "Cancel the cancellation of my cancellation," I guess one could say:

May 23, 2009: Yet still more on...you guessed it...those refunds:

May 25, 2009: Refunds, etc etc...:

May 26, 2009: OK, for a change here's a day with something totally unrelated to refunds (except that it probably increased the desire for them). The first reports that DJ Offer Nissim will no longer be spinning for OMW begin to circulate. JustCircuit would spend the next three days on this Facebook forum thread desperately attempting to deny these reports, before finally confessing them to be accurate (see May 29, 2009 entry).

May 27, 2009: Chisholm life partner Cy Whitney and office assistant Angie Denmon are deposed in the DeForest case. Whitney is asked (among other things) whether he had some of the missing requested documents and he replied that yes, some were on his computer...while others he had until they were time-deleted from AOL. When asked why they were never produced, he replied that before this deposition, he never knew the lawsuit between DeForest and his significant other even existed:

As for Denmon, one of the many questions put to her involved whether Johnny Chisholm maintained a "paperless work environment" or not (see April 13, 2009 entry):

Also today, criticism of a certain unnamed circuit website:

And here's censorship taken to a whole new level...just don't let suspected contrary viewpoints onto your website in the first place. Then you don't even have to bother reading and censoring them...a great time saver, no doubt:

May 29, 2009: Based on the disappointing yield of the "seven pounds of documents" (see April 21, 2009 entry) combined with the deposition revelations two days earlier (see May 27, 2009 entry), DeForest makes a second motion to compel production of documents.

Also on this day, Chisholm's law firm motions to withdraw from representation in the case. This motion would be denied on June 6, 2009...but then, repeated and granted a month and a half later:

And JustCircuit finally admits to the the Offer Nissam cancellation (see May 26, 2009 entry):

OFFER NISSIM CANCELS ONE MIGHTY WEEKEND APPEARANCE; Letter to Johnny Chisholm revealing the decision reprinted in its entirety

05/29/2009 11:03 PM

STAR69 Records email to Chisholm to follow

Orlando, May 29: 10:00PM: It was confirmed this evening to JustCircuit.com that Offer Nissim, the popular Israeli performer and DJ, has delivered a message that he will not be spinning his scheduled two-hour opening set for Peter Rauhofer at One Mighty Party’s Magic Journey’s After Hours at Arabian Nights on June 7. Nissim has been scheduled for many months, and claims his busy schedule surrounding the event and a recent illness in his family made it impossible for him to appear. Rauhofer’s Star69 Records also serves as the exclusive booking agent for Nissim in the United States and has worked until the very final moments in attempts to convince Nissim to reconsider his decision. A statement from One Mighty Weekend is expected on Saturday.

One Mighty Weekend issued an email blast two days ago, which raised eyebrows over the omission of Offer Nissim on the Magic Journeys lineup, causing many to speculate whether he were confirmed for the event or perhaps already cancelled. Other ads showed Offer Nissim listed on the ad, furthering the question of his desire to appear. JustCircuit.com’s conversation with Star69 Record’s Angelo Russo revealed tonight that Nissim had officially cancelled and would not be entering the United States. Explanations given by Russo suggested Nissim’s extremely tight international tour schedule surrounding this year’s One Mighty Weekend as well as an undisclosed illness of a very close family member had complicated his travel. Nissim is currently in Sao Paolo and is expected to return to Israel immediately afterwards. This afternoon it was learned that intense discussions between Star69 staff and Nissim attempted to convince Nissim to honor his contractual obligations and reconsider his performance at the event. One Mighty Weekend and Star69 Records have refused to offer any specific details about the cancellation this evening yet it appears that all contracts were signed and deposits were cashed, including other post-contract monetary demands made in recent days and eventually agreed upon by Chisholm in an effort to keep Nissim in the Magic Journey’s lineup. Despite the signed and completed agreement, a cleared deposit check and airline accommodations, which were all provided as per contractual obligation, the cancellation became a confirmed reality this afternoon.

Producer Johnny Chisholm was reached late Friday evening in his Pensacola home where he offered his best wishes to Offer Nissim and his family during their time of crisis and stated that he hoped to work with Offer in the very near future. "We are extremely proud and honored to have Peter Rauhofer agree to spin the entire evening under these circutstances and we are certain you will have an amazing time," stated Chisholm.

Star69’s letter to One Mighty Weekend producer Johnny Chisholm is reproduced in its entirety below. Rauhofer will spin the entire evening, which begins at 1:00AM June 8 and goes into the mid morning. The event has never before featured Offer Nissim and Peter Rauhofer and had been expected to be a sell-out event. All questions regarding the failed appearance by Offer Nissim should be directed to Star69 Records in New York. JustCircuit will continue to bring you the latest developments and information on this development as they become available throughout the weekend.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL FROM STAR69 RECORD'S ANGELO RUSSO TO OMW'S JOHNNY CHISHOLM

Sent: Fri, 29 May 2009 9:32 pm
Subject: OFFER NISSIM

Hi Johnny,

I just finished speaking with Offer Nissim's manager and Offer's final decision, after much consideration, is that, unfortunately, he will not be able to play at Gay Disney (Gay Day Weekend) this year.

Although you did everything you could to accommodate him, the fact is that Offer has a family emergency and is committed to being back in Tel Aviv the same weekend as the Disney event.

The deposit you sent us for Offer will be applied to Peter Rauhofer's fee.

On behalf of Offer Nissim, I apologize to any fans who may be disappointed but I want to reassure everyone that Peter is looking forward to playing the whole night in Offer's absence and in the end it will be a great event and a night to remember.

Sincerely,

ANGELO RUSSO
STAR 69 RECORDS

Although, as it turns out, there would be more to this story (see Postscript).

May 31, 2009: Mickey Weems publishes (on JustCircuit this time) a "Part II" (of 2) to his "Disney Drama" series. As in Part I (see May 16, 2009 entry) Weems intrepidly sought out "cabals and conspiracies" amongst the various players, all the while mananging to overlook the one very real conspiracy that existed this whole time, right under his very nose.

But credit where credit is due...the last sentence of his new article:

"Stay tuned. The drama is far from over."

...would, only 48 hours later, prove to be devastatingly accurate.

June 1, 2009: Bardfield and Carver make one final attempt to recover their stolen money from Chisholm without litigation:

They filed their lawsuit later in the day.

Postscript: And that brings us to June 2, 2009...the point where, intrigued by the post I read below, I began to search for, read and upload the documents from the just filed Bardfield case online onto the Gay Days at Disney Facebook group:

So, we've now come full circle between this timeline and the first post of this blog, so simply go there to follow what happened next. Although, there were a few events of a non-legal nature that occurred just after June 2 which I never wrote about back then, yet nonetheless deserve mention.

First of all, literally within minutes of my posting of the Bardfield documents onto that Facebook group, JustCircuit began frantically deleting almost every comment they made on the discussion pages of that group, in every single topic. "Like cockroaches when you shine a flashlight on them..." is how one observer described their instinctive reaction to seeing the case made public.

And shortly thereafter, the entire JustCircuit website was taken offline. It remained offline for several days.

JustCircuit's reaction was atypical, however. Other reactions to the astounding news that Chisholm had essentially stolen $200,000 to put on a circuit party were mostly of this nature:

Another interesting revelation that occurred on June 2 was the real reason for the Offer Nissim cancellation. Dissatisfied with the "family emergency" cover story (see May 29, 2009 entry), a disgruntled Offer fan wrote Offer's manager directly, and got the following reply:

As for OMW, things continued to go downhill, and on June 3 the Saturday night "One Mighty Party" event was booted from the Gaylord Palms Hotel. Needless to say, reactions to this latest development were less than favorable:

I guess I'll end this timeline on a positive note. One good thing that happened just after June 2 concerned refunds. After the Bardfield TRO was approved, OMW footdragging on those refunds vanished immediately, as people reported being able to obtain refunds at the host hotel lobby quickly and efficiently:

And I guess that's a wrap on this timeline. It's taken me literally months to compile it, but I think the effort was worthwhile. I hope newcomers to this story found it to be helpful in gaining an understanding of what was indeed a long and sometimes complex series of events. And I suspect that you not-so-newcomers may find it useful too. Perhaps seeing all the facts and documents laid out in chronological fashion may lead you to additional insights into this tragedy. That certainly has been the case for me.

Jim Winsor
April 19, 2010

Replies

2010-04-14T22:22:00.000-07:00

There were two new filings today in the Chisholm civil cases, both by plaintiff Ray DeForest.

The first was a Response to Chisholm's "Leave To File" motion, and I went ahead and tacked it on as an addendum to the "Gross Untimeliness" post below.

The second was a Reply in support of DeForest's original motion for default. A Reply which may actually not even be needed; if Chisholm's "Leave To File" motion is rejected, then there'll technically be nothing to "reply" to...without "Leave To File," the Chisholm filing it replies to will have been rejected for being five months late.

So, you could say this is a "just in case" reply. It's 14 pages long with exhibits, and can be found here. But just to give you all a flavor for it's contents, here's a couple sample sentences:

"...It is difficult to sympathize with his “financial problems” when he has in essence stolen and/or fraudulently obtained Plaintiff’s money yet seemingly has no remorse. His lack of money appears to be because his ponzi type schemes have been exposed."

Bardfield and Carver apparently didn't file any corresponding Response and Reply in their civil suit today, but I expect they probably will in the next couple days. I also expect that they too will find it difficult to sympathize with Chisholm's alleged problems, for very similar reasons.

Addendum 4/17/10: As expected, Plaintiffs Bardfield and Carver filed their corresponding Response and Reply yesterday. So now, we wait for the rulings on the plaintiffs' default motions, in both lawsuits. If they're granted, then it's game over: plaintiffs win, Chisholm loses. If they're not granted, then we play on.

And frankly, there's no way to tell how long this decision will take. Normally I would expect to hear something soon, however, history here argues otherwise. The fact is, this court could have ruled on these default motions months ago, but for some unknown reason did not. And if that "unknown reason" is still present, then when we'll finally get these rulings is anyone's guess.

Addendum 5/4/10: We have a split decision from the magistrate today on Chisholm’s leave-to-file motions, and the plaintiffs’ default motions.

Chisholm’s leave-to-file motions were rejected in both cases, the magistrate having found no good excuse for him to have been 5 months late in filing. Hence his tardy motions in opposition to the defaults were not considered (although, as we’ll soon see this will turn out to be a largely moot point).

In the Bardfield case, the plaintiff’s default motion against Johnny Chisholm was denied. You can read the full decision here; it seems the motion was denied on some fairly technical procedural grounds (i.e., “…the docket does not reflect that Plaintiffs ever filed a motion to compel discovery” and “[i]n this case, Plaintiffs did not request, and the clerk has not entered, a default pursuant to Rule 55(a)”).

In the DeForest case, the default against Johnny Chisholm personally was denied for pretty much the same technical procedural reasons as above. However, the default against Chisholm’s old OMP Paris company, Johnny Chisholm Global Events, was granted.

The full decision is here. In approving the default, the magistrate found Chisholm’s company liable for 1) fraud in the inducement; 2) conspiracy to defraud; and 3) unjust enrichment, and awarded Ray DeForest damages in the amount of $150,000.

It should be noted that these decisions by the magistrate are actually recommendations. The final decision is in the hands of the district court judge, and both parties have 14 days to file objections to the recommendations before they are submitted to him for his consideration.

One other thing that happened today in the DeForest case, was that monetary santions were imposed on Johnny Chisholm for discovery violations. That filing can be found here; as you can see, Chisholm was ordered to pay Ray DeForest $2,415.00 in attorney fees incurred in being forced to file two Motions to Compel against him.

Addendum 6/4/10: The default recommnedations were approved by the district judge today, so they are now official:

And here's the default judgment against Chisholm's OMW Paris company for fraud in the inducement, conspiracy to defraud, and unjust enrichment:

The cases continue on against all the other defendants.

Return to Sender

2010-03-26T18:52:00.001-07:00

Well, I guess there's one more court development to report on today, and it's a bit unusual:

Apparently, plaintiff Charles Carver tried yesterday to send by fax a direct personal letter addressed to "CLERK OF HER HONOR ELIZABETH TIMOTHY," and it was rejected by the Court for a whole host of good reasons.

And in accordance with the Order, the letter was never docketed or filed. So, the obvious questions of what's it's contents were, and/or what motivated the author to send it, must at this time remain a mystery...

Chisholm's Summary Judgment Motion DENIED

2010-03-26T13:36:00.000-07:00

Again, probably denied. This too is an "Order, Report and Recommendation" by the magistrate, so it'll have to be approved by the District Court judge just like the bond decision mentioned here earlier today.

But assuming it's officially signed off on...this is a pretty significant development in the case. For those of you who have forgotten the details of this motion (and I can't blame you if you did...it was actually filed waaay back in June of 2009) you can reacquaint yourselves with it here. As you can see, the last significant update on the whole issue I posted to Facebook back on July 6, 2009. And so, we've been patiently waiting for a decision ever since.

Now, fast forward to this past Monday, when Chisholm filed his Response (to the bond motion). In that Response he wrote:

Well, ask and ye shall receive! Yesterday the magistrate finally made her decision:

You can read the entire 15 page decision here, but in a nutshell, the usury argument was rejected because there were areas of fact-finding that needed a jury to sort out (for a summary judgment motion to succeed, there has to be no significant facts in dispute), while the "economic loss rule" argument was rejected because it was, well, just totally wrong according to the law.

This summary judgment decision is, I'd say, what Joe Biden would probably call "a big f-ing deal." This "usury" gambit was pretty much the last great hope for those in Camp Chisholm for Johnny to nullify the Bardfield loan and thus come out of the case unscathed, and now, it looks like that hope is officially going down in flames.

What happens next? Well, besides the District Court judge making the final call on these recommendations, the main outstanding issue now in both the Bardfield and DeForest cases are the various plaintiffs' default motions against Johnny Chisholm. And since we're now waiting on Chisholm to file something on that (he has until March 31), it looks like it'll be at least April before any big decision there.

Addendum 4/26/10: It's official, the district judge has approved the magistrate's recommendation; Chisholm's "usury" summary judgment motion has been DENIED:

Bardfield and Carver To Get 90% of Their Deposit Back

2010-03-26T11:54:00.000-07:00

Well, to be accurate, it looks like they probably will get 90% it back. This is actually an "Order, Report and Recommendation" from the magistrate overseeing the Bardfield (and DeForest) case, in response to Bardfield and Carver's earlier motion to get their bond money back. Which means it'll be sent up to the District Court judge for final approval on April 6, along with any other last minute arguments submitted by the parties before that time. Assuming the District Court judge agrees with the logic of the magistrate here (and I can scarcely see why he wouldn't) Bardfield and Carver will soon have $180,000 of their $200,000 bond money returned to them by the Court:

Addendum 4/26/10: It's official, the district judge has approved the magistrate's recommendation, and reduced Bardfield and Carver's injunction bond amount to $20,000, returning to them $180,000. The preliminary injunction remains in full force:

"Gross Untimeliness"

2010-03-26T09:43:00.000-07:00

The recent Johnny Chisholm filings have stirred the District Court in Pensacola into sudden activity. This is actually the first of three Chisholm court updates to report on today, all having to do with Orders issued in the past couple days by the magistrate in the Bardfield and DeForest cases. Look for the other two updates later today, which I'll post as my free time permits...

First off, there was another Chisholm motion filed on the 22nd (it wasn't docketed right away, which is why I did not see it when I wrote my earlier post), this one an Opposition to the summary judgment motion in the Bardfield case, worded very similarly to the one he filed in the DeForest Case:

And late Wednesday, the magistrate responded to both of these filings:

So, to recap: Chisholm has to now file motions seeking leave to file his Oppositions. Reason being, as I noted earlier in the last post, Chisholm's extreme lateness in filing these papers, or as the Court put it, "...his gross untimeliness."

Chisholm has until March 31 to file these permission-seeking motions, and if he either fails to do so and/or fails to conjure up therein a sufficiently good excuse why his new Oppositions were 150 days late (both were due on October 23, 2009), the court won't even look at them.

I should add too, the Court is being very generous to Johnny Chisholm here, on account of him being a "pro se" litigant. Had an attorney tried to file something 150 days late in Federal Court, there would have been no second chances to explain, as we're seeing here.

Addendum 4/2/10: Chisholm filed this "Leave to File" motion on time late Wednesday (the day it was due) in the DeForest case; there does not seem to be any corresponding filing in the Bardfield case, however:

So, his excuse as to why he was 150 days late in filing his recent Opposition boils down to he could not find a lawyer in the Pensacola area this entire time willing to work for free (or, at least on a no retainer basis).

Since the subject of legal fees and retainers was brought up, I went back and checked to see if there had been any new development in the lawsuit for unpaid legal bills brought against Johnny Chisholm by Liberis & Associates, his former law firm referred to in this filing that left Chisholm "without counsel of record since December 19, 2009, when this court granted his attorney's motion to withdraw." (The date is incorrect; Fehr's withdrawal motions in both cases were approved July 17, 2009). And there was...about a month ago a final judgment was entered, and the dollar amount was mentioned in the online docket records: $24,705.78.

So, this was apparently Chisholm's unpaid legal bill (plus court costs?) as of July 17 of last year. Thus I guess it should come as no great shock to anyone that he's unable to find a lawyer willing to work for him on a no retainer basis.

Addendum 4/3/10: The corresponding "Leave to File" motion in the Bardfield case was filed, with the same basic "no money, no lawyer" excuse. Looks like it got stamped "received" on March 31st, but not "filed" until April 2nd because it had the wrong case number on it:

Addendum 4/14/10: DeForest filed a Response to Chisholm's Leave To File Motion today, it's 9 pages long and can be found here.

One interesting part that caught my eye:

"...Defendant has taken advantage of the leniency this Court provides to pro se litigants to the prejudice of Plaintiff. Meanwhile, it is obvious from Chisholm’s recent motions that he had an undisclosed attorney prepare his motions, while Chisholm signed the motions. Such “ghost writing” is looked at unfavorably by the courts. See Somerset Pharm. Inc. v. Kimball, 168 F.R.D. 69 (M.D. Fla. 1996) (explaining that “the practice of filing pro se pleading which are actually prepared by a legal advocate does taint the legal process and creates disparity between the parties”)."

In fact, Chisholm actually hinted in his motion above that he indeed had such a "ghost writing" attorney, helping him out on a "piecemeal basis":

"Defendant expects to be able to obtain some assistance with this case on a piecemeal basis, even if he cannot retain counsel to appear as his attorney, and expects, therefore, to be able to mount a defense."

Addendum 4/17/10: And here's Bardfield and Carver's Response, filed yesterday.

Chisholm Finally Responds

2010-03-24T04:21:00.000-07:00

After literally months of simply ignoring the civil cases against him, Chisholm has finally filed some legal papers in the Bardfield and DeForest cases. Both responses were filed pro se (on behalf of oneself, and not by an attorney).

This Response was filed in the Bardfield case, in response to the recent motion to lift or reduce the $200,000 bond amount:

And this Opposition was to the pending default motion in the DeForest case:

The first response is timely (a new bond motion was just filed, and Chisholm had until March 22 to reply...he waited until the last day, but he got it in there), while the second one would have to be considered extremely untimely (the DeForest default motion was filed back in October, just before OMW filed for bankruptcy). Hence it's questionable if the court will even consider the second filing.

Nevertheless, there was one assertion in the DeForest Opposition that caught my eye, and is worth commenting on, I think:

"Plaintiffs' motion seeks, essentially, to punish this defendant because he has been unable to retain counsel. As this Court knows, defendant's counsel has withdrawn because he had not been paid. Defendant is no more able now to pay a new attorney than he was able to pay his old attorney. Ironically, it is this Court's freezing of tens of thousands of dollars of defendant's funds in the Bardfield and Carver case, at the request of the same attorneys as those representing plaintiffs here, that has been at the heart of defendant's financial problems. It is abundantly clear that plaintiff's efforts in this action are well funded and his skilled and aggressive attorneys can propound discovery to defendant at will, knowing he cannot respond, and can file numerous motions seeking relief from this Court, knowing that only his voice can be heard. Defendant, standing alone against plaintiff's hired guns, does not have the luxury of being a proactive litigant."

A couple of points: One, Chisholm hasn't entirely been without lawyers at his disposal during this time. He is currently employing a bankruptcy attorney (who has been very active as of late), and there was at least one recent instance when his old lawyer made an appearance on his behalf after he was allowed to withdraw from the Federal civil cases (an aborted attempt to get the default judgment in the PRG case rolled back).

And two, I'd say the use of the word "ironically" here is misplaced, in that the asset freeze was approved largely due to Chisholm's threat back in May of 2009 that he would resort to "burning up even more money" through drawn out litigation if he were ever sued:

The definition of "irony" is "the quality or state of an event being both coincidental and contradictory in a humorous or poignant and extremely improbable way." And in this case, there is nothing really coincidental or contradictory about this situation. The asset freeze was put in place to prevent the threatened dissipation of contested assets, and it's operating exactly as expected and advertised. Although by no means adequately, as the Bardfield plaintiff's noted in their recent bond motion:

"...the injunction only netted nominal amounts against him personally...Chisholm is not depositing monies in any enjoined accounts and has not done so since the temporary injunction was granted. Any initial money enjoined from the corporate Defendant has dwindled due to refunds and is far less than the bond amount."

Given that the bond amount was $200,000, it's probably safe to infer that this "nominal" "far less" amount would have been eaten up in litigation in only a few short months. So, the blame Chisholm assigns on the OMW asset freeze for all his current woes is not only misplaced (since he brought it upon himself) but overstated as well.

But I will say this, the overall point he's making as to his current financial state is probably accurate. Given recent problems in his other bankruptcy cases (two additional unpaid creditors filed relief-from-stay motions last week), as well as his continued reliance on the free services offered by a marketing partner of questionable value and reputation, I would say right now Chisholm in no more condition to carry on protracted litigation as he is to produce quality circuit parties.

Could Johnny Chisholm Be Banned From Circuit Party Promotions For Life?

2010-03-10T10:46:00.000-08:00

At this moment, the answer appears to be yes. Indeed, indications are such a ban could be imposed relatively soon*.

This intriguing possibility arises due to the pending default motion against Chisholm in the Bardfield case. If you recall, one of the causes of action brought by Bardfield and Carver in their OMW lawsuit was for civil RICO violations, and it so happens a victorious litigant can not only win money damages under civil RICO, but under Florida law can also get permanent post-judgment injunctive relief as well.

We've already seen how powerful the pre-judgment injunctive relief under the Florida civil RICO statute can be: The freezing of Chisholm's bank accounts last June when the Bardfield lawsuit got underway. So what kind of permanent injunctive relief is available to RICO plaintiffs post-judgment? Well, according to Fla. Stat. 895.05(1):

OFFENSES CONCERNING RACKETEERING AND ILLEGAL DEBTS

895.05 Civil remedies.--

(1) Any circuit court may, after making due provision for the rights of innocent persons, enjoin violations of the provisions of s. 895.03 by issuing appropriate orders and judgments, including, but not limited to:

(a) Ordering any defendant to divest himself or herself of any interest in any enterprise, including real property.

(b) Imposing reasonable restrictions upon the future activities or investments of any defendant, including, but not limited to, prohibiting any defendant from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise in which the defendant was engaged in violation of the provisions of s. 895.03.

(c) Ordering the dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise.

(d) Ordering the suspension or revocation of a license, permit, or prior approval granted to any enterprise by any agency of the state.

(e) Ordering the forfeiture of the charter of a corporation organized under the laws of the state, or the revocation of a certificate authorizing a foreign corporation to conduct business within the state, upon finding that the board of directors or a managerial agent acting on behalf of the corporation, in conducting the affairs of the corporation, has authorized or engaged in conduct in violation of s. 895.03 and that, for the prevention of future criminal activity, the public interest requires the charter of the corporation forfeited and the corporation dissolved or the certificate revoked.

As you can see, courts have pretty sweeping authority under Florida RICO law to put an end to the corrupt practices of discovered racketeers. In particular, the "prohibiting any defendant from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise in which the defendant was engaged in violation of the provisions of" Florida racketeering laws.

And the enterprise Chisholm was engaged in when he defrauded DeForest, Bardfield and Carver was the production of circuit parties. So, if this default goes through and Chisholm is therefore found to be a racketeer, it is certainly within the power of the court to injunctively force Chisholm sell his interests in and/or dissolve his party corporations, to revoke his state business licences...it could even outright prohibit Chisholm from engaging in circuit party business endeavors, period.

So, you might ask, are Bardfield and Carver actually asking the court to slap Chisholm with such a prohibition on future party production endeavors?

And the answer is...YES they are. This from the pending default motion:

Now, it should be noted that even though the plaintiffs are asking for this ban, and the court can impose this ban, there is no guarantee the court will impose such a ban. It's up to the discretion of the court whether such a ban would be "appropriate" and "reasonable" under the circumstances. However, when you look at the circumstances....Chisholm's violations of the TRO (including at one point stuffing cash in a desk drawer to avoid depositing it into a frozen account), ignoring the lawsuit and "thumbing his nose" at numerous court orders for months, discovery violations, and supinely letting the case slide into default...they don't make a very good case for the court to show much leniency towards Chisholm when it comes to making this decision.

Indeed, if the court wanted to send Chisholm a message after months of these shenanigans on his part...such a permanent injunction would fit the bill nicely.

So, as a practical matter, what does this mean for the party-going public? Obviously, a bit of consumer protection wariness is called for, I'd say...it would be foolhardy, for example, to purchase advance tickets to an event that may in the near future be effectively cancelled by order of a Federal judge. You could end up not only losing your ticket money (as many did during the Chisholm fiasco of 2009) but also stuck with nonrefundable deposits at a "host" hotel that is no longer hosting anything (the notoriously inflexible policy of the Buena Vista Palace Hotel despite cancelled venues last year springs to mind).

So, as long as this ticking time bomb of a default motion is out there...caveat emptor, folks.

* See March 1, 2010 post: "Additionally, at the earliest possible time, this court anticipates entering a separate Report and Recommendation to the district court on Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment against Defendant Chisholm."

OMW Bankruptcy Case CLOSED

2010-03-08T17:47:00.000-08:00

This just filed today, in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC bankruptcy case:

As you can see, this comes on the heels of a "Chapter 7 Trustee's Report of No Distribution" on Friday, which is a signal to the unsecured creditors that there are no unsecured assets to distribute to them, and they will get nothing. And sadly, that includes all of you party goers who followed horrific advice, and failed to get refunds in time.

And there you have it, case closed. And rather suddenly, I must say...for a while I thought it might get a bit more interesting, due to a planned behind-the-scenes "asset" sale by the trustee, but I guess this "asset" sale fell through. Perhaps due to people realizing there was really no legally transferable asset to sell after all. Oh well!

Anyways, what happens now is...Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC ceases to exist. Unlike when an individual goes through Chapter 7, a business (in this case, a limited liability company) does NOT get it's debts discharged. Instead, the business entity gets liquidated and dissolved at the conclusion of the bankruptcy, in accordance with state law.

One Mighty Weekend is now officially dead. As Tony Hayden of The Circuit Dog graphically described it last year:

Bardfield and Carver Ask For Their Deposit Back

2010-03-01T08:46:00.000-08:00

Well, after an extremely long period of no activity at all, we finally have a new development in the Bardfield case: The plaintiffs are requesting that their bond money be returned by the court.

If you recall, the plaintiffs in this case had to post a $200,000 bond back in June of 2009 in order to get the original TRO (and later preliminary injunction) against Chisholm, attaching and freezing his various OMW bank accounts. And that money has been sitting in the Court Registry ever since.

And now, they'd like it returned (or, at least dramatically reduced). Noting the very long time it's taken the court to rule on the latest batch of default motions:

"...Plaintiffs respectfully point out that this Court has not disposed of the pending Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant, even though such motion was reinstated over three months ago."

...they further point out that since a) OMW is now over, and "the event was a financial disaster"; and b) "Defendant Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC is now defunct and liquidating through the bankruptcy court;" and c) there is relatively little in the frozen accounts, because Chisholm violated the TRO by "not using banks to avoid the injunction"; and d) Chisholm is now essentially ignoring the lawsuit, "thumbing his nose" and letting it slide into default...there is no longer any need for a bond in this case. The purpose of an injunction bond, after all, is to protect the interests of the defendant in case the injunction is wrongly granted; and in this case, Chisholm doesn't have any interests left to protect, for reasons that have nothing to do with this injunction.

Here's the full copy of this new motion:

Sorry for the paucity of posts in recent months folks, but the simple reason for that is that prior to this latest filing...not much has been happening in the various Chisholm cases. For example, in the DeForest case Bobby Warner was finally served. She filed an answer generally denying most every allegation (thereby making it generally uninteresting); the most revealing aspect of which was probably the fact that she filed it pro se (ie, without an attorney).

In the latest crisis involving the Emerald City bankruptcy, the court gave Emerald City one more chance to come up with an approvable Chapter 11 plan. And a new plan was indeed submitted, sweetening the deal for the recalcitrant creditors in that case; it remains to be seen if it'll be approved.

And in the OMW bankruptcy case, there has been no activity in the case file there at all, since Universal Orlando filed it's claim. Which is not to say the case has been inactive; there HAS been some stuff going on, but behind the scenes. Once that (rather comedic, I must say) activity is reflected in the filings, I'll post about it here.

So, what's been going on as of late has either been too minor or too incomplete to warrant a new post (or even an update). Perhaps this new motion in the Bardfield case will rustle the tree branches a bit, and get things going again.

Addendum 3/5/10: And we have a decision! Motion is temporarily denied for a technical deficiency...BUT once that is corrected, the court indicates that it's inclined to reduce the bond from $200,000 to $1,000. "Additionally, at the earliest possible time, this court anticipates entering a separate Report and Recommendation to the district court on Plaintiffs’ motion for
default judgment against Defendant Chisholm."

The End of Emerald City?

2009-12-26T17:06:00.000-08:00

This past Christmas Eve Johnny Chisholm got a large lump of coal in his stocking, in the form of motion by a Trustee in one of his ongoing bankruptcy cases...a motion that could very well spell doom for his Pensacola-based nightclub, Emerald City.

We haven't talked about this particular Chisholm business bankruptcy case here yet (there are a total of four out there, including CPCE...my eventual plan is to weave them into the upcoming timeline Part II project), so guess I should back up a bit and explain what it's all about. Filed on May 21, 2008, Emerald City of Pensacola, Inc. (the parent company of Emerald City) sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection against three large creditors: McBride Construction (has a lawsuit judgment lien for $351,964.99), Garrison Trust (made a loan collateralized by the club's very valuable liquor license, $95,466.31 is owed), and the Small Business Administration (made an SBA loan, $461,416.59 is owed). So, this was an attempt by Chisholm to restructure $908,847.89 worth of debt on his Pensacola nightclub.

And it doesn't seem to have worked out. Chisholm proposed a restructuring plan that involved Garrison Trust and the SBA getting paid more or less as originally agreed, and McBride Construction getting it's $350,000+ judgment debt paid at a rate of $5000 a month.

Not surprisingly, McBride Construction thought a plan that had them waiting almost 3 years after the end of the Mayan calendar to get paid in full was a sucky plan, and they rejected it outright on March 19, 2009:

This alone was enough to kill the deal, but to add insult to injury Garrison Trust objected that same day as well; they pointed out the plan did not compensate them for missed payments, as well as attorney fees, late fees, and interest called for by their loan agreement.

Anyways, fast forward to today, and it looks now like Emerald City may never be able to save itself. Citing the continuing plan rejection (among other reasons), on December 24th the Trustee in the case slid down the metaphorical chimney, and motioned for the court to either terminate the Chapter 11, or convert it to a Chapter 7 liquidation:

If this dismissal/conversion to a Chapter 7 is approved, Emerald City will likely be foreclosed upon/liquidated, respectively. Of course, a last minute sale and/or capital infusion is possible too, I suppose; but as the business is currently operating as a loss, this seems unlikely:

What effect Emerald City's demise will have on the closely related annual Memorial Weekend in Pensacola circuit event in May is unclear; I believe that's technically run by a completely different Chisholm entity: Chisholm Properties of Pensacola, LLC.

However, Chisholm Properties of Pensacola is also now in Chapter 11 bankruptcy (as of April 21, 2009).

Addendum 12/28/09: There will be a telephonic hearing on this motion January 22, 2010 (but now rescheduled to January 25, 2010).

Addendum 12/30/09: There is actually a similar motion pending to convert another Chisholm bankruptcy case, that of 800 Bourbon Street, LLC, from a Chapter 11 to a Chapter 7 liquidation.

800 Bourbon Street is the company that owns the building which houses the New Orleans nightclub Oz. So, it's basically "Oz the building," and it's been in Chapter 11 bankruptcy since June 11, 2008. It's not to be confused with another company (Louisiana Interests, Inc.) which actually owns "Oz the business," although both companies are controlled by Chisholm. Chisholm essentially pays himself rent in this arrangement. And "Oz the business" is not currently in bankruptcy (it actually emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in December of 2007).

The 800 Bourbon Street bankruptcy is an interesting one which seems to have played a role the 2009 OMW disaster in a few key respects. So, it too will be incorporated into the upcoming timeline. I'll probably have more to say about it in a separate post as well.

Anyways, back to the news of today...as with Emerald City, 800 Bourbon's Chapter 11 seems to be unravelling now as well. A former Chisholm lawyer in the case and a court appointed accountant are not being paid according to the approved restructuring plan, so they've motioned the court for either their money, OR for the case to be converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation.

If 800 Bourbon is liquidated as a result of this latest crisis, this will not necessarily mean the closure of Oz. It will mean that the building will probably be sold to pay off it's creditors, and Chisholm will no longer be his own landlord.

A hearing on this motion is set for January 12, in New Orleans.

Addendum 12/31/09: Chisholm filed a response to the trustee's motion in the Emerald City bankruptcy case today:

The major problem here, it seems to me, is the continuing failure (for nearly nine months) to resolve all the issues with McBride Construction and Garrison Trust. It'll be tough to oppose this motion if those creditors arn't both somehow brought on board by the time of the telephonic hearing on the 25th. We'll see what happens then...

Addendum 1/5/10: The Emerald City telephonic hearing has been rescheduled to Monday, January 25.

Addendum 5/15/10: Chisholm has successfully appeased both of those two objecting Emerald City creditors, as on Thursday they each officially voted to approve the Chapter 11 plan. And yesterday the plan was approved by the judge at a telephonic hearing.

At the same time, however, rather serious problems have cropped up in yet another Chisholm Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, that of Chisholm Properties of Pensacola. That one was filed back on April 21, 2009 (right during the chaos of the OMW collapse...see timeline post here) and concerns a Chisholm company that owns a cluster of adjacent commercial properties on East Garden Street in Pensacola, Florida. One of the secured creditors in that case, Coastal Bank and Trust, won approval to lift the automatic stay in that case, so it could begin foreclosure on it's secured property:

Meanwhile, the Internal Revenue Service has not been happy about this case for a variety of reasons (failure to file delinquent returns, etc...), and as such, is motioning to have it either dismissed, or converted to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy:

A telephonic hearing on the IRS motion is scheduled for May 27.

Addendum 7/26/10: Chisholm filed the missing tax returns, and this seems to have been good enough for the IRS...they withdrew their motion:

So, barring any new surprises, it would appear that this Chapter 11 case will be approved by the creditors and the court.

Johnny Chisholm Sued For Music Copyright Infringement

2009-12-17T12:54:00.000-08:00

Last week in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Louisiana Interests, LLC (the parent company of Oz Nightclub in New Orleans), and it's co-owners Johnny Chisholm and Doyle Yeager, were sued for music copyright infringement by Sony/ATV Tunes, Red Giant, Universal Music Corporation, and Chappell & Co.:

OK, in a nutshell, what we have here is this: Chisholm (and his partner Yeager) have been behind in their annual music licence fees for Oz to "The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers" (aka ASCAP) as of December of 2006. ASCAP fees are paid in advance, so this would have been the first month they stopped paying.

(BTW, for those not familiar with ASCAP licence fees, what they're for, and who has to pay them, see here; it's more or less a standard cost of doing business that a music-playing establishment has to incur to operate legitimately)

And after a couple years of unsuccessful collection attempts, it looks like ASCAP decided "no more Mr. Nice Guy" in a manner of speaking, and sent in an investigator to gather evidence of music copyright infringement. And he/she caught Oz red handed playing three songs out of the ASCAP repertory: Girls Just Want To Have Fun, Do It Again, and I Want Your Sex:

As a result, Oz, Chisholm and Yeager now face statutory damages in the range of $750.00 to $30,000.00 per song, or a total of $2,250 to $90,000 in damages.

And this will probably be the one and only post you'll see here on this particular Chisholm lawsuit. Reason being, IMO, it doesn't really have anything to do with the OMW calamity of 2009, EXCEPT in one respect: It does tend to show the financial rot which began to beset the Chisholm party empire around the time of the Paris disaster of 2007, and beyond. These ASCAP fees are not terribly burdensome for large nightclubs like Oz. They are based on a rather arcane fee schedule, but as near as I've been able to determine, fees for a dance club like Oz would have run only about $1000 to $2000 a year. So, there is really no logical excuse for a club the size of Oz to run the risk of not paying it except perhaps for financial problems.

And that point has been adequately made by the mere existence of this new lawsuit, I think. Interesting though this case is, unless there is a hue and cry from my readership, we'll leave this one be from here on out.

Objection Sustained, and a Service Quashed

2009-12-15T20:27:00.000-08:00

The magistrate judge in the DeForest case sustained Ray DeForest's objection to the stay on the entire case, and lifted the stay as to Johnny Chisholm individually, and Bobby Warner individually:

So, the case is now reactivated as to those two individual defendants. A stay remains in place on the bankrupt Chisholm Properties Circuit Events LLC, and for some reason (an oversight?) the not-bankrupt Johnny Chisholm Global Events LLC. Although, since Global Events is empty shell with no assets, (probably) lots of debt, and negative goodwill from the OMP Paris fiasco, I wonder if it even matters to anyone if that stay is lifted or not?

Anyways, the other interesting ruling in this order is that Bobby Warner's Motion to Quash her defective service of process was granted as well. I kinda predicted this would happen. So, she is now officially un-served...but the magistrate judge has indicated she's not going to put up with this tomfoolery forever. DeForest's motion for additional time to correctly serve Warner was granted; in addition, Bobby Warner is required to provide her actual residential address to the court by December 29, or she'll reconsider the motion to consider her effectively served regardless.

Also in this order is a brief road map as to what'll happen next...I would call it the first glimmering of the light at the end of the tunnel:

"The pending amended motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant Johnny Chisholm (Doc. 100) shall be reinstated. The undersigned shall address this motion separately at a later date in a Report and Recommendation to the district court."

As I indicated in the previous post, this motion for default (as well as the similar motion in the Bardfield case) has been sitting around since October 5. So, after over two months of delay, what'll happen next is, "at a later date" the magistrate judge will write a "Report and Recommendation," then presumably at a still later date from that, the district court judge will read the Report and Recommendation, and finally make a ruling.

Addendum 12/29/09: Bobby Warner successfully filed a notice today with the court, listing an address purporting to be her current residential address.

The Personal Financial Statement Revisited

2009-12-14T01:52:00.000-08:00

During their initial solicitation by a JustCircuit "representative" of Chisholm in January of 2009, the plaintiffs in the Bardfield case rather prudently requested more information about the state of Chisholm's finances before investing. In response to this request, JustCircuit arranged for a "Personal Financial Statement" (PFS) of Johnny Chisholm to be sent to the victims on January 31, 2009. Naturally, Bardfield and Carver relied heavily on this Chisholm PFS, "certifying himself to be a person of means with a net worth of 11.6 million dollars," when they made their fatal decision to loan him $200,000 to fund One Mighty Weekend 2009.

We've seen this PFS before; it was an Exhibit to the initial court filings back on June 1, 2009, and it was one of the first documents I posted to Facebook way back when I started following all this on June 2. Here it is again:

One obvious falsity in the PFS, which we all immediately noticed back in June, was that the line under "Liabilities" for "Legal Claims" was left blank; in addition, in the box with the question "Are you a defendant in any suits or legal action?" was written "NO."

Now right there we had evidence of fraud...both criminal and civil. Because as we all know (thanks to Tony Hayden at The Circuit Dog), Chisholm was indeed embroiled in at least one lawsuit back then: DeForest vs. Chisholm. But was there any other fraudulent information in this PFS as well?

Well, it turns out, there was. On October 5, 2009 the plaintiffs in the Bardfield case filed a voluminous amount of documents, in support of new motions for default against both Chisholm and CPCE. And contained therein were some new revelations about the accuracy of this PFS, gleaned from a deposition of Chisholm accountant Robert Hayslette in late June:

Now, it was my intention to bring this new info to everyone's attention back on October 5; indeed on October 6 I had written a brief preview post on Facebook announcing the discovery, and that a more full report was on the way. But then, later that day on October 6, something else happened, which, kind of stole the spotlight, I guess you could say...bankruptcy.

Anyways, fast forward to today, and as I'm working on finishing up the timeline, in order to make it complete I realize that I really need to get some of this neglected October 5 information out. Hence, this revisitation.

So, with apologies for being a couple months tardy, here's the totality of what was known wrong with the "Personal Financial Statement" as of October 5, 2009:

1) "Defendant Chisholm claimed not to have been a defendant in any lawsuits or legal actions. When in fact, at the time, Defendant Chisholm was a defendant in the related case of Ray DeForest v. Johnny Chisholm Global Events, LLC and Johnny Chisholm, individually, Case No. 3:08cv498-MRC/EMT, and he had post-judgment recovery proceedings pending against him in McBride Construction Inc. v. Johnny Chisholm, Doyle G. Yeager, Emerald City of Pensacola, Inc., Chisholm Properties of Pensacola, LLC, Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC, Case No. 2005-CA-002063. (DE 1-Verified Complaint at para. 24; Exh. C)."

2) "Certain related entities, which were listed as assets on the Personal Financial Statement, were involved in at least two pending bankruptcy filings and a third was filed soon thereafter...(Hayslette Depo. 125-26);"

3) "Additionally, other false statements on the Financial Statement would have been known by Defendant Chisholm at the time include but are not limited to: listing false assets, including assets that transferred to his minor daughter (Hayslette Depo. at p. 156-57);"

4) "failing to list a series of notes for loans in the amount of 1.2 million dollars (Hayslette Depo. at 78, 80, 81, 85)...as set forth, Defendant Chisholm failed to identify the bankruptcy of 800 Bourbon LLC. Not only did he forget to identify the filing, in the Statement he listed more than one million dollars in equity on the property when in fact, it was in bankruptcy because he was in default of his mortgage...debts Defendant Chisholm obtained when he purchased the parties."

5) "not identifying second mortgages; unsubstantiated out of date valuations (Hayslette Depo. at p. 141);

6) "for the properties owned by Chisholm Properties of Pensacola, Mr. Chisholm listed himself as 100% owner when in fact, he had sold half of his interest to Bobby Warner;"

7) "He also knew of sizable credit card debts which he failed to list (Hayslette Depo. at p. 156-57)"

Once again, all of the October 5 documents, including the referenced portions of the Hayslette deposition, can be found here.

One Night On New York Street

2009-12-11T01:18:00.000-08:00

Universal City Development Partners, Ltd., aka "Universal Orlando," filed it's claim yesterday in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events (CPCE) bankruptcy case:

Their total claim comes to $277,209.36, which is a bit higher than the $249,007.00 CPCE listed on it's initial bankruptcy filing.

Attached to the claim form are some interesting supporting documents, such as the contract between Universal Orlando and CPCE for the 2008 "Universe" party for which this debt was incurred. If you've ever wondered what a contract to rent a major American theme park for a night looks like, well, here's your chance! As someone who has been going to these parties for years as a consumer, getting a glimpse of how the sausage is made is actually kind of fascinating, I think. Of course, YMMV.

Also attached is a copy of the state court lawsuit filed by Universal Orlando against CPCE, for nonpayment of the contract mentioned above. Even though we've talked about the suit here before, this is the first time I've seen the actual complaint. Five pages long, what Universal Orlando is saying is pretty cut and dry: Chisholm was invoiced $221,779.47, he only paid $4,000, therefore, he now owes us $217,779.47 (plus interest).

Then there's the invoice itself:

Here's a summary of how the charges broke down:

Cost to rent the "New York Street Set" at UO (plus tax): $159,217.50
Food and Beverage at same (plus tax): $16,553.77
Aerial acts at same: $38,600.00
Bar service at same: $1,200.00
Audio/Lighting/Lasers at same: $135,000.00
"8 Dancers for Finnegans": $4,720.00
Miscellaneous taxes: $10,488.00
------------------------------------------------
TOTAL comes to: $365,778.77

But from that we subtract the pre-event deposits paid by Chisholm in three installments: CR $144,000.00

...which leaves us with a bill to CPCE for $221,778.77, which was due and payable in full five days after the event on June 13, 2008, as per the contract. But was not; even though Universal "provided several notices to Chisholm of it's breach of the Agreement" he "only made payments of $4,000.00 towards the $221,778.77 balance owed."

Then rounding out this bankruptcy claim we have accumulated interest, which as per the contract accrued at a rate of 1.5% a month:

...which as you can see, brought the total to $276,635.36 by the date of the bankruptcy filing. In addition, Universal Orlando is seeking recovery of the $417.00 it paid in Florida state court filing fees:

...as well as $157.00 in process server fees:

...which if you notice, interestingly, also includes a $100 "LOCATE" charge.

So, $276,635.36 plus $417.00 plus $157.00 comes to $277,209.36, which his how Universal Orlando calculated it's claim yesterday.

The Graveyard of Domains and Dreams

2009-12-08T21:58:00.000-08:00

I've been getting a steady bombardment of emails the past couple of weeks are so, all either asking the same general question: "When are you going to do Part 2 of the timeline???" ...or making the same general request: "Please hurry up and post the rest of the timeline, the suspense is killing me...GAAAAH!"

Patience please, I'm working on it. As I suspected, it's turning out to be a much more involved task than Part 1, requiring me to connect the dots between events in not one but two major lawsuits, a minor lawsuit (the short-lived but emblematic Chisholm vs. Hayden), another 2009 bankruptcy case (800 Bourbon Street, a New Orleans business also known as "Oz"), plus alot of other online and offline shenanigans to boot...and then arrange them all (and their associated documents, quotes and images) in chronological order. So I beg everyone's indulgence, it's coming. It may take a while yet, but it's coming, I promise!

And since there hasn't been anything new filed in any of the cases in a while, I thought I'd fill in this lull in the action with an interesting and thought-provoking little "background information" post, I guess you could call it.

If you Google this exact phrase in quotes - "ONE MIGHTY WEEKEND - JOHNNY CHISHOLM, PROPERTIES, INC." - you'll make a fascinating (IMO) discovery: Domains, lots of domains, all owned by Chisholm:

www.onemightyweekendparis.com
www.onemightyweekend.com
www.gaydayseurodisney.com
www.markbakerpresents.com
www.gaydaysdisneyland.com
www.onemightyweekend.net
www.1mightyparty.com
www.johnnychisholmglobalevents.com
www.onemightypartyparis.com
www.onemightyparty.net
www.onemightyreunion.com
www.onemightyweekendofsports.com
www.onemightyweekendexpo.com
www.onemightyexpo.com
gaydisney.com
www.gaymagickingdom.com
www.gaydayeurodisney.com
www.reunioneventshongkong.com
www.gaydisneylandparis.com
www.gaydaydisneylandparis.com
www.gayeurodisney.com
www.gayeurodisneyland.com
www.internationalgayevents.com
onemightyweekendhongkong.com
www.gayeventusa.com
www.gaydaysdisneylandparis.com
www.gaydisneyparis.com
www.gayworldevents.com
www.gaydaysparis.com
www.gaypoolpartyusa.com
www.gaydisneycruise.com
www.gaydayparis.com
www.gaydaysweddings.com
www.gaydisneyhongkong.com
www.gaydisneyanaheim.com
www.gaydayshongkong.com
www.1mightyreunion.com
www.onemightycruise.com
www.gaydayhongkong.com

I've done Whois searches on a handful of these, and it appears most were registered in 2005 - 2007, the heyday of One Mighty Weekend, a time when we can perhaps rightly speculate he possessed an overabundance of confidence (or, as some would put it, hubris). You can see not only ones registered with "Paris" in mind (which as we know, turned out to be his undoing), but apparently, even more ambitious schemes were later envisioned, for the west coast (www.gaydaysdisneyland.com, www.gaydisneyanaheim.com) and China (www.reunioneventshongkong.com, onemightyweekendhongkong.com, www.gaydisneyhongkong.com, www.gaydayshongkong.com, www.gaydayhongkong.com). It looks as though he may even had in mind giving Rich Campbell at Atlantis a run for his money (www.gaydisneycruise.com, www.onemightycruise.com) and had some other odd ideas in the pipeline as well (www.gaydaysweddings.com).

And as we know, there were others in the Chisholm entourage who in 2007 possessed these delusions of grandeur as well:

"...one can not help but focus on the hints that Chisholm's One Mighty Weekend, formerly Gay Day Orlando, is headed globally in nearly every direction..."

"Johnny Chisholm proves once again what many have already determined...he IS the King of Circuit and a student of the "philosophical school of Circuit reinvention." He has the dreams and ability to bring back the parties we nearly lost only a few short years ago due to greed, mismanagement, and pessimism. The quiet, polite and honorable Johnny Chisholm has once again taken the Circuit, and those of us who follow the Circuit, to a whole new level. And the world is Johnny Chisholm's oyster!"

"The Circuit is still alive, changing, and growing in part because of the innovation, optimism and hard work by Chisholm and his entire team...The Circuit anxiously awaits Johnny Chisholm's next dream."

"No one is surprised these days at the magic coming from the man many describe as the undisputed King of Circuit...a One Mighty Party which will eventually arrive at the doors of countries around the world."

Interesting question to ponder: Can the fervent possession and/or constant reinforcement of delusions of this nature empower people to think they can constantly lie with impunity, and/or flagrantly break the law (theft, fraud, slander, etc...) without being caught...all in furtherance of these delusions?

It's certainly a theory worthy of thought, I think, in that it may help to explain some of the almost otherwise inexplicable behavior we'll see in How We Got Here, Part 2.

Another Request To Lift Stay

2009-12-02T16:20:00.000-08:00

This one was filed today, in the DeForest case:

It's pretty similar to the recent request to partially lift the stay in the Bardfield case, which was approved. Hence odds are it'll probably be approved as well, which will reactivate the DeForest case as to the non-bankrupt parties (which in this lawsuit would be Johnny Chisholm individually, Bobby Warner individually, and Johnny Chisholm Global Events, LLC).

The Tax Man Cometh

2009-12-01T16:42:00.000-08:00

The Internal Revenue Service filed it's claim today in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events bankruptcy case:

The total claim comes to $2,103.88, of which it looks like $1,975.00 is characterized as penalties, and $128.88 as interest. "Tax Due" is listed as $0.00, for each of the last four years it was assessed.

Yes, all penalties and interest, but no tax. This had me puzzled too...until I saw this very fine print footnote on the bottom of page 2: "UNASSESSED TAX LIABILITY(IES) HAVE BEEN LISTED ON THIS CLAIM BECAUSE OUR RECORDS SHOW NO RETURN(S) FILED. WHEN THE DEBTOR(S) FILES THE RETURN OR PROVIDES OTHER INFORMATION AS REQUIRED BY LAW THE CLAIM WILL BE AMENDED".

So yes, in other words, this $2,103.88 is just non-filing penalties on CPCE for tax years 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the interest accrued thereon. The actual tax owed is yet unknown, since Chisholm apparently never filed partnership taxes for his company, in each and every year of it's corporate existence.

Thus it's indeed possible this IRS claim could be "amended" higher...MUCH higher.

Objection Sustained

2009-11-24T03:47:00.000-08:00

On Friday the magistrate judge in the Bardfield case partially lifted the stay on the whole case, just as the plaintiff's had requested:

So, now the Bardfield case is once again active, but only as to "Johnny Chisholm, individually." The bankrupt Chisholm Properties Circuit Events will remain protected by a stay for the duration of the bankruptcy case.

Confetti Cannons

2009-11-24T02:36:00.000-08:00

Pyrotechnic and special effects company Art F/X of Groveland, Florida filed it's claim in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events bankruptcy case last Friday, for $1,032.00: $1,025.00 for 10 "Confetti cannons with multi color metallic streamers and confetti" at $102.50 each; plus $7.00 for the bank fee they were hit with after the check was returned "Stop Payment:"

The memo line of the check indicates the cannons were destined for the "Deep Blue" party at the Buena Vista Hotel on Sunday, June 7. Note that this check was dated June 5, and drawn on a CPCE Wachovia checking account that was frozen by the TRO in the Bardfield case on June 3; indeed, the same frozen account that Masterson Electrical Contracting's check was drawn on. Thus, this marks the second instance in a row we've seen in which Chisholm procured OMW goods and services for free, by using a check he apparently knew the vendors would be unable to cash.

How We Got Here, Part One

2009-11-23T05:51:00.000-08:00

[Because this timeline project I've been working on is by it's nature so time-consuming, I've decided to release it in two separate posts; this is the first one. It briefly covers the "pre-history" (2002 to 2006) of all this, as well as the events leading up to the calamitous One Mighty Party in Paris in 2007, and it's aftermath in 2007-2008.

Part Two will deal with the even more wild and woolly events of 2009, in which the criminal behavior, incompetence, lies and deceptions of Johnny Chisholm and JustCircuit brought about the near complete destruction of this once awesome party weekend. And when it's finished, I'll simply merge the two timelines into one.

In a way, doing it this way is a good thing, because Part One is really all about Ray DeForest and his nightmare experience with OMP Paris. The DeForest case has never really gotten the attention it deserves, either here or on Facebook (certainly, not to the extent the Bardfield case has), and so, this post should serve to rectify that. As you'll see below, 2007 was the spark, and 2008 was the lit fuse, which led to the implosion we all know and hate in 2009.]

June 2002: Johnny Chisholm and Jeffrey Sanker did the very first One Mighty Party together in Orlando at Disney's MGM Studios. Legend has it Sanker did not really want to work with Chisholm, but Chisholm went behind Sanker's back and got the Disney contract, so Sanker had no choice but to work with Chisholm. (As a footnote, Chisholm did not come up with the "One Mighty Party" concept. It was done many years earlier by Sanker in association with PROBE in Los Angeles, and the name was brought to Orlando)

June 2003: Sanker and Chisholm did One Mighty Party again, at Disney's MGM Studios.

January 9, 2004: Disney's legal department sends this rather unfriendly letter to Chisholm:

June 2004: There was no One Mighty Party with Chisholm, and Sanker and Baker worked together. Chisholm later (in April of 2005) said in a press release that "the year off was necessary for him to be able to return as a single promoter and to re-think his approach to organizing and producing this event."

Early 2005: Chisholm acquired the rights to the Reunion pool parties.

April 21, 2005: At the 11th hour, Chisholm bought Baker's interests in the weekend for $1.2 million dollars. As part of the transaction, Baker gave Chisholm a 6 year non-compete agreement (which would expire after April 2011, OR, according to Florida law, whenever the buyer ceased to have "legitimate business interests justifying the restrictive covenant." See FL Stat. 542.335(b)). Baker wisely (as we shall soon see) demanded all cash up front prior to executing the transaction.

And where did Chisholm get this $1.2 million dollars? As will soon be seen as a constantly recurring pattern here in this timeline when it comes to his circuit party operations, Chisholm used other people's money to fund it. In this case, he borrowed it from "Bay Bridge Building Limited Company," one of many firms owned by north Florida real estate developer Julian MacQueen. In return for the loan, Chisholm gave Bay Bridge a promissory note secured by a second mortgage on 800 Bourbon Street, the property which houses the New Orleans nightclub Oz.

More on this Bay Bridge "OMW" loan later in the timeline (ie, see June 11, 2008 entry).

June 2005 (and 2006): Chisholm produced two relatively uncontroversial One Mighty Weekends. It was during this period that a symbiotic relationship developed between Chisholm and JustCircuit, a South Florida based online discussion board (although in reality, very little discussion seems to take place there). They've become, in effect, the propaganda arm of Johnny Chisholm, and to illustrate this point I've inserted into this timeline excerpts of the site owners' Chisholm-related posts, each on the exact date they were posted [Note: This symbiotic relationship referred to would in 2009 extend beyond a mere propaganda-services-for-press-passes exchange, as we shall see in Part Two of this timeline...].

January - February 2007: In early January 2007 Chisholm approached soon-to-be-plaintiff Ray DeForest regarding an investment opportunity: $150,000 to buy a 20% share in OMW Paris (or "Johnny Chisholm Global Events, LLC" as the company was formally known) scheduled for June 2007 at the Disneyland Resort Paris. A series of solicitations ensued, one of which occurred at a "very lavish condominium on the beach" where Chisholm had invited DeForest to stay. During the visit, Chisholm "repeatedly boasted of his wealth and the expense of the condominium." Chisholm told DeForest "that his condominium was used just for investors in his other entities as well as their friends and clients."

DeForest "would later learn that Chisholm did in fact not own the condominium or his home and this charade was part of the scheme."

January 24, 2007: JustCircuit writes:

A TRIUMPHANT JOHNNY CHISHOLM MARCHES INTO PARIS

France has experienced many exciting moments in its long history. It was announced today that even more excitement is on the way to this popular European destination, courtesy of Circuit King *Johnny Chisholm*. One Mighty Party Paris will be presented by Chisholm in association with New York promoter *Ray Deforest* at Disneyland Paris on June 29-30, 2007. The venue will host the very first European One Mighty Party and will list the Elton John AIDS Foundation as its beneficiary, with a minimum $50,000. donation generated for the charity.

"One Mighty Weekend events in the United States attract 135,000 guests, including International visitors from thirty different countries around the globe" stated Chisholm, who has captured JustCircuit's Promoter of the Year Award for the past two consecutive years. "Now, we are ready to go GLOBAL and take the party to THEM--and Paris is the first stop." JustCircuit will be live from Paris, bringing the excitement to the world throughout the weekend.

January 25, 2007: JustCircuit writes:

CHISHOLM SETS THE BAR ONCE AGAIN WITH PARIS PARTY

The day following the mega-announcement that Circuit promoter *Johnny Chisholm* will expand his One Mighty Party beyond the Orlando horizon to Paris, France, one can not help but focus on the hints that Chisholm's One Mighty Weekend, formerly Gay Day Orlando, is headed globally in nearly every direction.

[...]

Johnny Chisholm proves once again what many have already determined...he IS the King of Circuit and a student of the "philosophical school of Circuit reinvention." He has the dreams and ability to bring back the parties we nearly lost only a few short years ago due to greed, mismanagement, and pessimism. The quiet, polite and honorable Johnny Chisholm has once again taken the Circuit, and those of us who follow the Circuit, to a whole new level. And the world is Johnny Chisholm's oyster!

[...]

Johnny Chisholm was JustCircuit's very first inductee into the Circuit Hall of Fame(tm), and for very good reason. The Circuit is still alive, changing, and growing in part because of the innovation, optimism and hard work by Chisholm and his entire team. The bar has certainly been set high for others who desire to create a successful Circuit party. The Circuit anxiously awaits Johnny Chisholm's next dream.

February 27, 2007: Chisholm faxed DeForest a signed and notarized memorandum, confirming his purchase of a 20% stake in OMW Paris for $150,000. Other investors were listed on the memorandum, "who in the end never invested."

March - May 2007: During this period, several events of a continuing nature occurred in a business relationship both sides agree was a "struggle:"

- Chisholm "failed to issue [DeForest] any operating agreement and failed to obtain the [life] insurance policy on Defendant Chisholm as promised as a condition" of their agreement;

- Chisholm repeatedly refused "to make the books of the company available for inspection" and failed "to provide any accounting;"

- Unbeknowst to DeForest during this time (thanks to the aforementioned refusals to allow inspection of the books), "a series of questionable payments or loans were made to or on behalf of Defendants to other related entities owned by Defendant Chisholm," "at a whim." Examples of where DeForest's wrongly diverted funds went include 1) paying debts and expenses related to OMW Orlando; 2) Chisholm's company payroll in his other corporations; and 3) "paying Johnny Chisholm's personal American Express Card."

- What DeForest did know, however, was that ticket pre-sales were alarmingly lower than projected, and that advertising was woefully inadequate. In fact, news reached DeForest that "promoters and advertisers in Europe were not being paid" by Chisholm, and as a result "promoters in Europe were actually advising against the event."

- A concerned DeForest "continually" called Chisholm, pleading with him to adopt a better marketing strategy. And he adamantly refused to increase costs in other areas. Which as we will soon see was a problem for Chisholm, as he wanted to increase costs dramatically by hiring another entertainer...

- Weekly salary checks due DeForest as co-promoter began bouncing.

April 3, 2007: Chisholm secretly sells half his shares (40%) to Bobby Warner for $350,000. According to court documents, they begin making plans to hire Mariah Carey as a big name (and big dollar) performer for OMW...again in secret, as they realize that DeForest would strenuously oppose the plan should he learn of it.

May 23, 2007: In an evening phone conversation, Chisholm offers to buy back DeForest's 20% for the original purchase price of $150,000. DeForest readily agrees.

May 24, 2007: Chisholm writes up the repurchase offer in an email. Naturally, under this sort of agreement, DeForest would likely consider himself still a partner unless and until he got his $150,000 back, which Chisholm promised within 45 days "or sooner, as soon as I am able to secure a new mortgage." (The 45 days was actually written into the contract; the vague mortgage reference was NOT; this will become important later...)

May 25, 2007: Chisholm now tells DeForest there is a problem: His new investor, Bobby Warner, required DeForest's "interest to be closed in order for her to invest any funds into the company." (Note that this is a deception - Warner had in fact already invested her funds, see April 3 entry). So, Chisholm convinced DeForest to consider his shares transferred immediately, and to accept a deferred but slightly increased payment later ($160,000 within 45 days, an additional $15,000 within 30 days after that). At this point, DeForest happily considers himself out of the deal, and Chisholm (and Warner) no longer consult with him as a partner.

June 1 - 3, 2007: Chisholm produces OMW Orlando, with all the main events at Disney venues.

June 7, 2007: With the fiscally responsible DeForest now safely out of the way, Chisholm and Warner proceeded with their cost-intensive strategy, and signed Mariah Carey to perform at OMP Paris for $2,000,000. This and other decisions resulted in production costs for the event to soar to over 200% higher than was projected during the initial DeForest solicitation.

June 11, 2007: JustCircuit writes:

CIRCUIT KING JOHNNY CHISHOLM MAKES MORE MAGIC

No one is surprised these days at the magic coming from the man many describe as the undisputed King of Circuit...Johnny Chisholm. In the latest "who's your daddy" reinvention of the modern-day Circuit party, Pensacola, FL-based Chisholm announced to the Circuit that superstar entertainer *Mariah Carey* will headline his latest product One Mighty Party/Paris, to be held June 29 at Disneyland Paris. Already announced to perform will be disco diva *Gloria Gaynor*, who wowed the audience at One Mighty Party/Orlando in 2006, and eventuallyu went on to win "CIRCUIT PARTY OF THE YEAR" (JustCircuit Awards 2006.) This magical restructuring by Chisholm of what was once considered a "declining Circuit" has methodically taken familiar events and added features such as main-stream entertainment, unique show variety and even a $250,000 fireworks display digitally synced to special dance tracks unlike any seen before. And of course the beneficiary of these events is the Elton John AIDS Foundation, headed by Sir Elton John. The giving keeps on giving. The reach of Chisholm has now crossed the Atlantic into uncharted European territories using the Disney mantra along the way to keep a consistent expectation from the Circuit. Disney's exquisite attention to every fine detail is then added to the event. The international expansion gets its first test later this month as Paris kicks off a One Mighty Party which will eventually arrive at the doors of countries around the world. Never before has the Circuit experienced the combinations of talent utilized by Chisholm Circuit Events to create the Chisholm magic. The team works year round to gauge the interests of the Circuit and uses individual talents to make the progress. And there is no team like the Chisholm team, for sure. Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com throughout the month of June for updates on events as we approach One Mighty Party in Paris June 29.

And there was also this Chisholm press release:

MARIAH AT "ONE MIGHTY PARTY" IN DISNEYLAND PARIS

Johnny Chisholm, founder and producer of the One Mighty Weekend events, today announced that the biggest female artist of all time, Mariah Carey, will perform a special set at One Mighty Party Paris on 29th June. Carey’s exclusive performance will celebrate the European debut of the party Chisholm made famous as an annual event at The Walt Disney World® Resort Orlando, which benefits the Elton John AIDS Foundation each year.

[...]

“Mariah Carey is a worldwide musical superstar and we are thrilled to host her at our party,” said Chisholm. “We anticipate this event will sell out quickly, so we encourage everyone to buy tickets as soon as possible to secure your place at Europe’s first One Mighty Party.”

Over the past 14 years, Chisholm’s annual One Mighty Weekend at The Walt Disney World Resort Orlando has grown to become America’s largest gay and lesbian celebration. The event also has generated sizeable contributions to its beneficiary organization, the non-profit Elton John AIDS Foundation (www.ejaf.org).

[...]

June 18, 2007: JustCircuit writes:

A REVIEW: ONE MIGHTY, MIGHTY WEEKEND!

The world of Disney is certainly a wonderful world! Promoter *Johnny Chisholm's* purchase of major events during Gay Days Orlando just a few short years ago insured that the excitement and joy the Circuit just experienced within the walls of Disney and Universal Studios would continue.

[...]

Before Chisholm’s arrival, fierce competition struck a disharmonious chord among Circuit attendees split on which party to attend, threatening the event’s success and future. Chisholm’s desire to produce “an amazing event like no other, even if we only sell three tickets” leaves an impression and precedence that no other promoter or party producer has ever given us. The Circuit is alive and thriving because of those like Johnny Chisholm and the people around him who make his magic happen.

*Donna Summer* at One Mighty Party made Circuit history as a music legend returned to a primarily Gay and Lesbian community having once criticized that same group. Her Circuit debut last week facilitated by music insider *Arlene Weiss* of Los Angeles, drove the ticket sales sky high to record levels for One Mighty Party—all benefiting the Elton John AIDS Foundation. Industry leaders regard Ms. Weiss and Chisholm’s efforts to obtain Donna Summer "monumental" and certainly historic. Many wonder aloud how Chisholm could have been so lucky as to have had Weiss in his corner. The answer...when all that is good about the Circuit comes together, success is a certainty. Reinvention is working.

[...]

With all eyes now on Chisholm's expansion of One Mighty Party beginning June 29 in Paris, Chisholm will again be relying upon the strengths he currently enjoys with a supportive Circuit and efforts of exceptionally talented individuals. The risk of large international investment is overshadowed by the risk of failing to acknowledge those who have worked so diligently to insure success for Chisholm and the Circuit as a whole. All bets are on the man with the big heart who can see the big picture like no other!

June 29, 2007: Early in the day, JustCircuit writes:

ONE MIGHTY PARIS REPORT-FRIDAY NOON (EDT)

Tonight's One Mighty Party at Disneyland Paris will once again be an historic event as Circuit promoter Johnny Chisholm and team bring the successful party concept across the pond for all of Europe to enjoy.

The performance of superstar entertainer Mariah Carey will be the highlight of the evening and will be much to the delight of the thousands of attendees expected through the Disney gates, beginning at 8 PM (2PM EDT) tonight. Also performing is disco diva Gloria Gaynor. Among the DJ's for tonight's party are DJ Manny Lehman and DJ Wayne G. (London). Wayne G. and Tom Stephan (aka SuperChumbo) arrived only moments ago and were greated by JustCircuit in the One Mighty Party welcome center, located at the New York Resort on Disneyland property, steps away from the main gate.

[...]

Perhaps the most exciting moment of the past 48-hours was when the call came from the airline that the MIS-PLACED LUGGAGE (several from Chisholm, one from JustCircuit) had been located and were available at the airport office. Important bags? JustCircuit's bag contained cameras and computer equipment needed for tonight's coverage. Chisholm's team reports that credit-card and ticketing equipment is included in one of their bags.

No need to fret now as all is good and in place for an amazing evening ahead! Stay tuned to JustCircuit for continuing pictures and details of tonight's party.

June 29, 2007: OMP Paris was a spectacular flop.

Those few who were lured to this event by JustCircuit prognostications of "a triumphant Johnny Chisholm march[ing] into Paris," "set[ting] the bar once again with this Paris party" were instead attendees of quite possibly the biggest boondoggle in the history of the circuit (see eyewitness account to the left). As the judge in the DeForest case summed up: "Chisholm spent $1.5 million to rent Disney’s Paris site, paid $2 million to hire singer Mariah Carey, and was warned by Disney to expect no more than 300 people instead of the projected 12,000 to 15,000. The Paris event resulted in a loss of $3 million." As DeForest put it: "The event, due to Defendants' negligence and fraudulent actions, was a failure. Defendants did not follow their past practices, isolated critical groups, such as promoters and marketers, and ignored me."

Johnny Chisholm (in his Answer to the DeForest lawsuit) had an even more interesting theory on why the party failed:

...while JustCircuit amazingly managed to say nothing at all. Beyond a few desultory photos seemingly taken at angles so as to obscure the crowd size, OMP Paris was never again mentioned on their site. It would appear that their lost luggage was indeed the most exciting moment of the trip.

July 9, 2007: The 45 day deadline for Chisholm to pay DeForest the first $160,000 for his shares comes due. And on this date and beyond, according to DeForest, "payments to me were never made despite numerous subsequent promises and excuses by Defendants, and despite their acknowledgment that the transaction had been completed."

May 21, 2008: The first of the four current Chisholm bankruptcy cases is filed today...Emerald City of Pensacola files for Chapter 11. More on this case here.

June 5 - 8, 2008: Chisholm produces OMW Orlando, this year partly at Disney, but partly at Universal Orlando as well. As later bankruptcy papers would show, Chisholm had by the end of this weekend racked up massive debt with both theme parks; over $200,000 to Universal, and over $450,000 to Disney Resorts (parent of both Euro Disney and Disney Orlando).

June 11, 2008: The second of the four current Chisholm bankruptices occurs today...800 Bourbon Street, LLC, files for Chapter 11. As I noted earlier (see April 21, 2005 entry) this is the Chisholm company that owns the real estate in which the Chisholm-owned New Orleans nightclub business Oz is located. Since this was the property on which Bay Bridge had it's security interest for the original $1.2 million dollar "One Mighty Weekend" purchase loan, Bay Bridge was listed in this bankruptcy as a creditor.

And how had this loan been doing since it was made back in April of 2005? Not so good, according to Bay Bridge's bankruptcy claim:

It appears that no payment had been made on the loan in 2006, 2007, and the first half of 2008, and as a result $52,615.05 in penalties and late fees had been racked up. In fact, it seems Chisholm had been compelled to ask Bay Bridge for an additional $200,000 in loans in 2006. And so, with accumulated interest added in, Bay Bridge's claim in this bankruptcy came to $1,360,571.01.

More on this delinquent "OMW" loan and it's treatment in this 800 Bourbon bankruptcy later in the timeline (see May 20, 2009 entry).

October 28, 2008: "After months of tall stories" about paying DeForest soon, Chisholm would finally inform him "that he would no longer be able to honor our contract." He claimed that the contract was "contingent on him getting a mortgage" (despite this condition not, in fact, being in the contract) and as such...surprise! DeForest, he now claimed, was still a shareholder, and had been all along. And being a shareholder in a doomed enterprise, had lost his money fair and square.

Not surprisingly, DeForest and his attornies did not agree with this interpretation. So, on this date they send a demand letter, threatening to sue Chisholm for Civil Theft (which calls for treble damages).

October 29, 2008: JustCircuit writes:

One Mighty Weekend Update: DJ lineup announcement delayed; Announcement scheduled for later this week on JustCircuit.com

Johnny Chisholm Circuit Events has delayed the announcement of One Mighty Weekend 2009's DJ lineup until later this week, JustCircuit.com has learned. The delay was announced Tuesday in order to accommodate last minute venue and DJ additions. One Mighty Weekend will be June 4-7, 2009 in Orlando, FL during the Gay Days weekend. Chisholm promises both new and familiar talent as well as new and familiar venues. One Mighty Weekend has won numerous JustCircuit Awards, including Circuit Party of the Year, Best Afterhour and Best Pool Event. JustCircuit Hall of Famer Johnny Chisholm took over operations of One Mighty Weekend in 2005.

JustCircuit.com and JustCircuit.MAG is a proud sponsor of One Mighty Weekend. Stay tuned to JustCircuit.com for updates and the official, exclusive announcement now coming this week!

October 31, 2008: DeForest sues Chisholm for fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, statutory Breach of Duty of Loyalty and Care, and violation of the Florida Inpection of Records statute (a charge of Civil Theft would be added later). DeForest vs. Chisholm is officially on (although it would not be generally known about until Tony Hayden of TheCircuitDog.com began his reporting of the case in 2009).

November 6, 2008: JustCircuit writes this curiously worded entry...italics are mine:

Johnny Chisholm announces One Mighty Weekend DJ lineup; New talent for One Mighty Weekend; Announcement has been much anticipated

Circuit King Johnny Chisholm has announced the 2009 One Mighty Weekend DJ lineup. Familiar faces along with new talent make up the award-winning weekend. New to the lineup will be DJ Peter Rauhofer, DJ Offer Nissim, DJ Mike Cruz and DJ Raphi Rosario, who will be teaming with DJ ABEL.

DJs annnounced by Chisholm include: Phil B., Eddie Baez, Roland Belmares, Don Bishop, Alyson Calagna, Mike Cruz, Joe Gauthreaux, Wendy Hunt, David Knapp, Manny Lehman, Tony Moran, Offer Nissim, Peter Rauhofer and Rosabel (DJ's Ralphi Rosario and ABEL.) One Mighty Weekend will take place in Orlando June 4-June 7, 2009. The host hotel remains the Buena Vista Palace Resort and Spa, located on Disney property. Reunion Events will take place at the host hotel.

JustCircuit remains a proud sponsor of One Mighty Weekend and Johnny Chisholm Circuit Events. Watch for venue announcements coming soon to JustCircuit.com.

December 2008: Despite owing Disney Resort Destinations close to $500,000, Chisholm begins an aggressive pre-sale campaign with uncontracted Disney venues prominently advertised as main party locations:

[And thats a wrap on Part One of the timeline. I'll no doubt revise it from time to time, as more evidence comes in. Part Two will pick up the story in January of 2009. It'll take a while to do, I imagine, as 2009 was eventful indeed...]

Request To Lift Stay

2009-11-17T17:45:00.000-08:00

As it was invited to do by the court, the plaintiffs in the Bardfield case today filed an Objection to the decision to stay the entire civil case because of the bankruptcy of just one defendant, Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC:

As you can see, it's an extremely well-reasoned Objection, followed by a polite request to partially lift the stay. There has been no corresponding Objection filed in the DeForest case, but I wouldn't be surprised to see one filed there soon.

If this Objection is approved, the Bardfield case will be "de-iced" and re-activated as to the non-bankrupt defendant, Johnny Chisholm personally. Then it'll be up to the court to finally rule on a whole range of pending motions, including whether to hit Johnny Chisholm personally with a default judgment for $692,640.

Chisholm Sued By His Former Lawyers

2009-11-17T14:37:00.000-08:00

I guess this could be considered a follow-up to this post here. As you can see below, former Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr's law firm, Liberis and Associates, is suing Johnny Chisholm in Escambia County Circuit Court for "Contract and Indebtedness:"

I don't have easy access to the state court pleadings, so I'm not sure what the exact dollar amount of "indebtedness" we're talking; but since it's a Florida Circuit Court case the amount would have to be over the jurisdictional minimum of $15,000.

Note that this case is not impeded by the automatic stay in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events bankruptcy, as Liberis is suing Chisholm personally only, and not CPCE.

Addendum 11/18/09: Chisholm failed to file an answer, and defaulted on the suit. Whatever Liberis was asking for, it got. Or at least a judgment to, anyways...

Electrical Services

2009-11-09T17:17:00.000-08:00

Masterson Electrical Contracting, LLC, filed it's $2,800.00 Proof of Claim with the bankruptcy court last week:

As you can see, the bill was for electrical materials ($1500) and labor ($1300) provided to the "Arabian Knights" after parties on the early mornings of June 6, 7 and 8. It looks like Masterson was issued a check for $2800 from the OMW Wachovia account on June 4...which is a bit shocking when you think about it, as the TRO freezing that account was approved on June 3 (thus the "stop payment"). Hence, it would appear Johnny Chisholm intentionally wrote a check he knew Masterson would never be able to cash:

Nothing else to report court-wise today. Once again, I want to thank everyone for all the emails of support and encouragement. And questions as well...it seems I'm picking up readers who weren't there for all the drama as it unfolded in May and June of this year, who find some of this a bit confusing (understandably). To help you newcomers to this fascinating story out, I'm working on an "Ultimate Timeline" which should hopefully explain to the uninitiated exactly how we got here, with key events laid out in chronological order...all referenced to documented sources, just as every post in this blog has been. Look for it here in coming days.

White Leather Furniture

2009-11-02T16:20:00.000-08:00

Another claim was filed in the Chisholm Properties Circuit Events bankruptcy case last week, this one by the previously listed "Unique Options, LLC" of Orlando, Florida. According to this filing, Chisholm wrote a $6,800.00 bounced "NSF" check for furniture rental, for the "Beach Ball" party on June 5, 2009:

On the bright side for Unique Options, by all accounts the vast majority of party-goers were at Typhoon Lagoon that night, so it's unlikely that this rental furniture saw too much wear and tear. Still, a debt is a debt, and a bounced check is a bounced check, and thus Unique Options has come forth here, seeking redress.

Not much else to report on today on the legal front, but there was some good news on the Gay Days 2010 party front: the Mark Baker Events website is up, and although his "Gay Days Orlando" schedule is yet incomplete, it appears that he now has the House of Blues, Arabian Nights, and the Hard Rock Live ("...a 140,000-square-foot building designed as a retro interpretation of the Roman Coliseum...") lined up as venues.

This news of today, incidentally, came after I did my recent video interview on The Circuit Dog. So, on a personal note, I must say it's gratifying that my optimistic prediction there on the future of this weekend seems to be coming true: Despite the damage caused to this once great party weekend by the actions of the defendants in these cases (and others), it appears the stage is now set for a return to it's former glory.

The Civil Cases Get Put On Ice

2009-10-28T16:31:00.000-07:00

Well, there was a very interesting development today in the Chisholm cases. The magistrate judge overseeing both the Bardfield and DeForest cases, taking notice of the bankruptcy filing of Chisholm Properties Circuit Events (OMW), ordered both cases stayed (ie, put on hold) for the duration of the bankruptcy case:

(Note that the magistrate here made the same error I did when I first read the Suggestion of Bankruptcy...it's actually a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, not a Chapter 11 as these Orders mistakenly indicate.)

The decision here as it pertains to CPCE comes as no surprise; as I explained earlier, the "automatic stay" in bankruptcy is supposed to do just that. What is a bit of a surprise here is the generous (to the defense) decision, "for reasons of fairness as well as judicial economy and efficiency," to the stay the entire case, even as to the defendants in both these cases who have NOT filed for bankruptcy: Johnny Chisholm personally, Bobby Warner personally, and Johnny Chisholm Global Events (aka OMW Paris).

The order does not seem to be entirely final, however, as the magistrate has provided the option that "[a]ny party who objects to a stay of the entire case should immediately so inform the court." So, if someone is unhappy about this (hint: it probably won't be any of the defendants), you can bet we'll hear about it very soon...

Claims Come Rolling In

2009-10-26T16:29:00.000-07:00

There have been three claims filed thus far by creditors of Chisholm Properties Circuit Events (OMW), two of which (disappointed ticket holders for $410.03 and $95.00) were not listed in the original bankruptcy filing Schedules:

Given the microscopic ratio of assets over debts in this case, it is unlikely that these two new claimants will ever see much as a result of their efforts here; but you do have to admire their pluck. If nothing else, they are making a statement by doing this, one that will now become part of the permanent court records of this country, for all posterity to see and view. And all it cost them, really, was a postage stamp.

You can find the forms used for making claims in this case here (see the "Proof of Claim" form).

In other Chisholm court news, it was pointed out to me by several readers that the 14 day deadline I listed for Chisholm's reply to the Motion for Default should have been October 23, not October 21 as I have been saying. And this is true...October 9 plus 14 days does indeed equal October 23. However, despite my inability to solve complex mathematical problems like 9+14=x, the net result was the same: The 23rd came and went, just as the 21st did, and Chisholm failed to file the reply demanded by the court by that date.

So what happens next should be interesting...according to the court dockets for both the Bardfield and DeForest cases:

ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH M TIMOTHY notified that action is needed Re: Order, - - No response to MOTION for Entry of Default Judgment as to DEFENDANT JOHNNY CHISHOLM. (cbj) (Entered: 10/26/2009)

Like I posted earlier, this should result in a default being entered against Chisholm personally...but whatever happens, hopefully we won't have to wait too long to find out.

The Remaining Schedules

2009-10-21T16:53:00.001-07:00

The remaining CPCE bankruptcy Schedules were filed today, with the most interesting one probably being Schedule B, the list of "Personal Property." Since CPCE had no real property, this Schedule pretty much reflects all the actual claimed assets of the corporation.

Here's a quick summary:

Bank acct, Wachovia: $334.68
Bank acct, Beach Community Bank: $3,953.66

Accounts receivable, CircuiTicket ("Funds related to 2008 events"): $12,482.70

4 accts, American Express ("Accounts frozen purusant to Order in suit by Bardfield and Carver"): Unknown

3 accts, First Data ("funds on on hold pursuant to garnishment from suit by Bardfield and Carver"): Unknown

Apparently, those last seven frozen accounts are so well protected by the injunction Chisholm can't even do a balance inquiry on them.

So, total assets listed for OMW are $16,771.04, plus 7 frozen accounts listed as "unknown." And while those "unknown" accounts could very well be substantial, I'd say it's a sure bet they are very well under the 1.7 million or so in debt listed on Schedules E and F.

Indeed, I think we can safely infer they are well less than the $240,000 Bardfield and Carver were demanding in their lawsuit; otherwise, this rather damaging suit would have undoubtedly been settled by Chisholm a loooong time ago.

A New New Trustee, and a Re-Rescheduled Hearing

2009-10-21T16:39:00.000-07:00

And once again, the Trustee change actually serves to accelerate this bankruptcy case, with the initial Meeting of Creditors now bumped up from December 1, 2009 to November 23, 2009, at 1:30pm in Pensacola:

Addendum: Filed late Friday:

Another Trustee Declines

2009-10-20T17:39:00.000-07:00

Pretty self-explanatory. I imagine this will cause the Meeting of Creditors to be rescheduled (again) as well:

And a programming reminder, there are a couple of key deadlines tomorrow (October 21) to watch out for:

1) Deadline set by the bankrupcy clerk for Chisholm to file the missing Schedules to his Voluntary Petition; and

2) Deadline set by the magistrate judge for Chisholm to respond to the summary judgment motions filed against him personally in both the Bardfield and DeForest cases.

A New Trustee, and a Rescheduled Hearing

2009-10-14T16:33:00.000-07:00

As you can see below, the bankruptcy court wasted no time today in appointing a new successor Trustee for the OMW bankruptcy case. In addition, the new appointment has caused the initial Meeting of Creditors to be rescheduled...actually bumped up two days, to December 1, 2009 at 10:45am in Pensacola:

Addendum: And this was filed late Friday:

A Trustee Bows Out

2009-10-13T16:24:00.000-07:00

I don't know exactly what the backstory is on this new bankruptcy filing today; apparantly, there is some sort of conflict between the initially proposed Trustee and Chisholm. Perhaps not all that surprising, in a small city like Pensacola. In any case, since this Trustee is opting out, it looks like there will soon be a new Trustee appointed to oversee the Chisholm bankruptcy estate for the court:

Proof of Claim

2009-10-12T17:07:00.000-07:00

A copy of the various initial notices sent out to creditors in the CPCE bankruptcy case, including the "Proof of Claim" form, was filed by the court today. These notices and forms contains some good basic information on what to do if you are a creditor in this bankruptcy case:

Fourteen (14) Days to Respond

2009-10-09T16:44:00.000-07:00

The Magistrate in the Federal cases acted on the Motions of Default filed against Johnny Chisholm personally on Monday. She issued the same Order in each of the two cases: "Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of docketing of this order, Defendant Johnny Chisholm shall file a response to Plaintiff’s motion." This gives him until October 21 to respond.

If Chisholm fails to respond (either pro se or via the supposed new attorney) within these fourteen days, the court should approve the default motions against him (I'm hedging here a bit, because as we've seen, this court has been strangely reluctant to enter defaults in these cases, even when the ground for such have been pretty clear):

The Automatic Stay

2009-10-09T14:09:00.000-07:00

Now that we have a bankruptcy underway in addition to all the civil suits, I should probably take a moment and try to explain in laymans' terms one very important aspect of how the bankruptcy will affect things from here on out: The automatic stay.

As this Wikipedia entry explains, the "...automatic stay is an automatic injunction which halts actions by creditors, with certain exceptions, to collect debts from a debtor who has declared bankruptcy." As the entry indicates, it zaps into existence at the very moment the bankruptcy is first filed (which in this case was Tuesday, October 6).

Notice that the debt collection actions prohibited include "...beginning or continuing judicial proceedings against the debtor..." So, what this means is, the various civil lawsuits must come to a grinding halt. The plaintiffs (who are "creditors") cannot continue pursuing their lawsuits. This means they can't file any new motions against the now bankrupt Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC (CPCE); the lawsuit versus them is basically on hold for the duration of the bankruptcy.

Notice however that there are other defendants in the civil suits who have NOT filed for bankruptcy...Johnny Chisholm personally, for example. The lawsuits should be able to proceed against the non-bankrupt parties as normal; to do this, the lawsuits will likely be split, with the now bankrupt CPCE being segregated in a seperate lawsuit (that will be put on hold as per the automatic stay). This procedure is known as "disaggregation," and I'm guessing we'll see that happen in these civil suits soon...

Notice of Deficiency

2009-10-07T16:38:00.000-07:00

As I mentioned in the previous post, there were some Schedules missing from yesterday's bankruptcy filing. Today the bankruptcy clerk noticed that problem too:

From what I've been told, this is a not-too-uncommon phenominon in bankruptcy; filers are often in a hurry to file these Voluntary Petitions, in order to meet some crisis and stave off creditors at the 11th hour. And when there is not enough time to gather all the info for all the schedules, an incomplete filing is made. The court simply gives the filer more time (in this case, until October 21) to make up the deficiencies.

I imagine this Voluntary Petition was rushed out the door on Tuesday, to throw a monkey wrench in the 4 Motions for Default that were filed against Chisholm in the Federal cases on Monday.

One Mighty Bankruptcy

2009-10-07T03:03:00.000-07:00

Johnny Chisholm's OMW company, Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC, filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection yesterday.

Yes, that's correct, Chapter 7. In my haste to post the news on Facebook yesterday I misread the filing, and misreported it as a Chapter 11:

"Title 11" actually refers to the entire bankruptcy code. "Chapter 11" is one of it's subdivisions, as is "Chapter 7."

The difference is a big one. Chapter 11 bankruptcy of a corporation is an attempt at a reorganization, trying to keep the business alive. Chapter 7 is, on the other hand, essentially a liquidation.

In other words, One Mighty Weekend is now dead. Not exactly a surprise to anyone here I'm sure, but at least now we can say it's official.

Because of the immense historical significance of this document, I'll post the entire initial bankruptcy filing below. But first I'll summarize the really interesting parts, ie, the now fully revealed assets and liabilities of One Mighty Weekend:

Assets
-------
Estimated at: "$0 to $50,000"

Debts (all unsecured):
-------
Florida Department of Revenue: Unknown
Internal Revenue Service: $1,926.17
A & R Radio Rentals, Inc.: $1,529.34
Access Pass & Design: $3,117.98
Amscot Corp., Dept C: $488.00
Arabian Nights: $48,000.00
Arlene Weiss: $52,300.00
Art F/X: $1,025.00
Big Events: $6,000.00
Casswood Insurance Agency: $23,903.07
Christie Lites Orlando Rentals: $25,265.37
Disney Resort Destinations: $495,874.67
DW Uniform Creations: $4,209.90
Event Marketing & Management: $3,000.00
Evigna Brand Insight: $13,626.86
Freeman Companies: $6,296.71
Harddrive Productions, Inc.: $ 13,710.00
Hotflyers.com: $5,541.21
Hyatt Regency Grand Cypress: $14,691.87
In Magazine: $6,152.04
Karl's Event Rental: $29,659.00
Lasersonics: $9,006.61
Masterson Elec. Contracting: $2,800.00
Maximum Event Staffing: $10,375.00
Mears Transportation: $11,033.00
Metropolis Productions: $18,000.00
Presentation Services: $43,212.47
Production Resource Group: $310,514.00
RMC Corporation: $101,957.01
S. Bardfield & C. Carver: $200,000.00
T-Mobile: $405.35
Unique Option: $6,800.00
Universal Orlando: $249,007.00
Universal City Dev. Partners: Unknown
UPS: $ 1,700.69
-------
GRAND TOTAL DEBT: $1,719,202.15

Looking at this list, we can see some Chisholm creditors we're already familiar with, such as "S. Bardfield & C. Carver," "Production Resource Group," and "Universal Orlando." But as you can see, there are also some new revelations here. The biggie being of course (drum roll):

Disney Resort Destinations: $495,874.67

Now, remember back to last May, folks? When Chisholm and JustCircuit were denying Disney was owed ANY money at all? That the real reason for the loss of the Disney venues was unexpected "last minute price increases" by Disney, hence it was all Disney's fault? Remember those oft-regurgitated JustCircuit talking points?

Well, I guess we can now say...that was a bit of a fib. Or, another way to put it: They were only off by $495,874.67.

Below is the actual initial filing, known as a "Voluntary Petition," along with the Schedules. Notice there are missing schedules (A, B and C), those will probably be filed later.

There was another filing too (not posted), the "Notice of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case, Meeting of Creditors, & Deadlines," which I can easily summarize: It sets the date for the initial hearing, the "Meeting of Creditors" for December 3, 2009, at 9:15am, in Pensacola. If you are on the list above, and there is something special you'd like to say as the bankruptcy get underway...this'll be where you'll want to be.

The full Voluntary Petition can be viewed here.

Universal Orlando Joins the Fray

2009-09-21T00:35:00.000-07:00

[Filed in state court in Orange County, Florida; the case number is 2009-CA-029624-O.]

You wrote on September 17, 2009 at 5:24pm:

*** BREAKING NEWS ***

Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC was sued today by Univeral City Development Partners, Ltd...aka Universal Orlando. Which owns Universal Islands of Adventure, Universal Studios Florida, and Wet 'n Wild.

[The] state court filing images here:

...plus the corporate ID of Univeral City Development Partners, Ltd to what is more commonly known as Universal Orlando...

...plus Universal Orando's website, thrown in for good measure.

What is this suit about? How much is it for? What exactly did Chisholm do to piss off Universal Orlando?

And the answers to these questions...I know not. Again, it's a state court filing, and unlike the Federal case, the actual docs are not easily obtainable by me. All I can tell you is this lawsuit popped up in the Orange County, FL court system today, and Universal is the plaintiff, Johnny the defendant.

But we can safely infer, I think, that this is probably not good news for Johnny Chisholm.

---

You wrote on September 21, 2009 at 9:35am: It looks like Tony Hayden at TCD has tracked down this new Universal lawsuit.

The suit appears to be almost the entire unpaid balance owed to Universal Orlando from a Chisholm event held there in 2008: $217,779.47, plus accrued interest.

I guess this would explain why Universal venues were not considered as an alternate when Disney rejected him during this most recent crisis of 2009.

How many theme parks are left in Orlando?

---

[Dennis Brown on GDAD then proceeded to partially answer that somewhat rhetorical question I posed at the end there, finding this one Orlando theme park Johnny Chisholm is (probably) not deeply in debt to (yet).]

Going It "Pro Se"

2009-08-07T16:05:00.000-07:00

[As of today (October 20, 2009), there has been no word on whether Chisholm has or will secure a new attorney (unless the Suggestion of Bankruptcy filing counts as a new appearance?) and no decision as yet regarding the default of the Chisholm LLCs.]

You wrote on August 7, 2009 at 5:08pm: Today's Chisholm court news: ... And I should mention too, we are coming down to the wire for the deadline for Johnny Chisholm to find a new lawyer. The judge gave him 30 days from July 17, which is August 16; however, I notice that is a Sunday. Meaning for practical purposes the last day for a new attorney to make an appearance on his behalf would be Friday August 14...one week from today.

If nothing happens by this deadline, the judge has stated flat out that the case will continue against Johnny Chisholm personally, under the assumption Johnny has opted to represent himself pro se (ie, w/o an attorney).

A corporation, however, being that it is a legal entitiy and not a real person, by definition cannot represent itself pro se. Thus if no new attorney shows up by next Friday, come the following Monday August 17 the plaintiffs will be able to Motion for Default against Johnny's OMW corporations...and will automatically win vs. them, just as PRG recently did in it's state court action.

Stay tuned...

---

You wrote on August 17, 2009 at 5:18pm: Well, no new filings by the defense last week, and thru today...meaning unless I missed something (which is possible), as of this moment Johnny Chisholm is officially acting pro se in these lawsuits (ie, as his own attorney).

The plaintiff's filed their monthly attorney time records with the court today (28.4 hrs on the Bardfield case, 12 in the DeForest case), with copies being sent this month not to former Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr, but to Johnny Chisholm and Bobby Warner, "pro se."

In case anyone is curious, they sent Bobby Warner's copy to the abandoned building she listed as an address in her Motion to Quash.

It appears to me that the defense has simply given up. At this point, the LLC's holding the rights to OMW are now vulnerable to default judgments...which will, for all intents and purposes, destroy those entities. We'll just have to wait and see what happens next...

---

You wrote on August 18, 2009 at 5:42pm:

***BREAKING NEWS***

The plaintiffs' in the Bardfield and Deforest filed Motions for Default against Chisholm's OMW companies. Reason being, as I noted over a week ago, the lack of legal representation for his corporate defendants by the 30 day deadline imposed by the judge for him to procure.

I've posted screen shots of the Motion for Default in the Bardfield case below. As you can see, if approved Chisholm's OMW holding company will be hit with a total of $692,640 in damages. That's $600,000 in actual damages (the $200,000 "loan" amount, tripled by statute due to the Civil Theft charge in the lawsuit), plus $92,640 in attorney fees.

The Motion for Default filed in the DeForest case (not posted) is similar, except the damages there add up to $612,165.

692,640 + 612,165 = $1,304,795.00

Add to this the 100 grand or so PRG reportedly got in it's state court default judgment, means that One Mighty Weekend will soon be saddled with over 1.4 million dollars in lawsuit debt. That's one mighty debt.

Even taking into account the money collected in the frozen accounts (just under $100K, IIRC), that still leaves what was once arguably the finest circuit party in the world hopelessly* in debt.

This all assumes of course, that the judge will grant these default motions...however, I see no reason why he wouldn't. Chisholm had 30 days to find a new lawyer, and he no doubt intentionally and knowingly just let this happen.

As soon as these motions (and others) are ruled on, I'll let you all know.

*Barring a bankruptcy filing. I'll say more about this possibility if and when it happens. And yes, I have been monitoring the US Bankruptcy Court filings for the name "Chisholm" on a daily basis, so if and when this happens, you'll know about it here as well.

---

You wrote on September 10, 2009 at 7:09pm: After a lull of a few weeks, we finally have some new visible activity in the Bardfield case. The new filings are a bit confusing (in part because one of the parties doing the filing seems a bit confused), but I'll try to explain what happened today as clearly and succinctly as I can.

It turns out today (9/10/09) is deadline in the case for the filing of a Joint Scheduling Report. Both parties are supposed to confer, try to agree on when to set key deadlines in the case, and whether they agree or disagree, send their recommendations into the judge.

Well, as we all know, Johnny Chisholm is currently representing himself pro se (ie, w/o a lawyer). So, on 9/3 the plaintiffs' lawyers Fed-Ex'ed directly Chisholm their own proposed pre-trial schedule, asking him to "comment" on it, so as to perhaps come to agreement and make it a "joint" report.

Nothing happens for 6 days. Then yesterday afternoon (9/9) Chisholm sent this email to the plantiffs' lawyers:

As you can see, it refers to a "meeting" tomorrow (Friday). And that he is in the process of hiring a new lawyer (within the week), and requests the "meeting" postponed for two weeks so he can confer with his supposed new lawyer. Nothing about the request for input on the joint report.

Now, there was no "meeting" with Chisholm scheduled for Friday. There was, however, two subpoenas for documents due tomorrow, served not on Chisholm but on two non-parties...the OMW venues Arabian Nights and Buena Vista Hotel. NOT Chisholm personally.

Well, apparantly this morning, the plaintiffs' lawyers emailed back, trying to explain to Chisholm that he's got it all wrong. That there is no meeting or deposition or subpoena for "him" tomorrow, but rather, they would like his input on the proposed trial scheduling. And they need it today.

And Chisholm's response? He filed a pro se motion this afternoon, seeking a "Protective Order" against the "deposition" of him scheduled for tomorrow, citing that it was too far away for him to attend (Fort Lauderdale), he had no time to prepare, he was in the process of hiring a new attorney any day now, and that he had unsuccessfully tried to work it out with the plaintiffs out of court.

The plaintiffs filed a Notice in reponse this afternoon, noting that Chisholm's Motion for Protective Order is basically kind of silly...the plaintiff's want documents from Arabian Nights and Buena Vista tomorrow...NOT Johnny Chisholm. He can stay in Pensacola tomorrow for all they care. They go on to speculate as to two possible motives for Chisholm's nonsensical Motion today:

1) Chisholm is genuinely confused, and mistakenly thinks he is supposed to be in Fort Lauderdale tomorrow, rather than representatives from Arabian Nights and Buena Vista; or

2) This whole thing is an intentional delaying tactic, similar to the discovery shenanigans Chisholm has been pulling in the DeForest case for over a year.

Lastly, because today was indeed the deadline for the Joint Scheduling report, the plaintiffs went ahead and filed a "Unilateral Scheduling Report" since they, despite their best efforts, could not create and file a "joint" one. Here's the schedule they propose:

Oct 7, 2009: Deadline to amend pleading or join other parties (ie, Just Circuit)
Nov 12, 2009: Deadline to file dispositive motions
Nov 23, 2009: Deadline for discovery to be completed

PROPOSED TRIAL DATE: On or about January, 2010

So, if this unilateral schedule gets approved, that's the schedule we will have.

And through all the confusion, we do learn some interesting new facts about this case:

1) Chisholm is on the verge of hiring a new lawyer (or so he claims);
2) Apparantly, some sort of settlement desires have been made known (see reference in the email linked above)? In the plaintiffs' Unilateral Scheduling Order, they mention settlement talks as well, noting that they have been "unsuccessful." And
3) The plaintiffs have been busily trying depose various Chisholm venues (ie, Arabian Nights and Buena Vista set for tomorrow). They key venue to ask questions of, of course, will be Disney. This whole case, IMO, will turn on what Disney says in those depositions.

If it turns out Disney never told him the Disney venues were "worked out" BEFORE he got the $200,000 loan...then Chisholm is doomed.

---

You wrote on September 15, 2009 at 5:43pm: The magistrate judge in the Bardfield case responded to Chisholm's Motion for Protective Order today (see post 102 above). Chisholm has to now "Show Cause" within 7 days as to why his motion is not untimely and/or moot.

In addition, the magistrate is very curious as to this new attorney for Chisholm that has been bandied about, and wants info on the status of his/her hiring made to the court within 7 days as well.

Here's the full text of the magistrate's reply:

---

You wrote on September 22, 2009 at 5:38pm: A couple of new orders today in both of the now slowly moving Federal cases. The magistrate judge (who recently took over reviewing pre-trial motions in these cases) decided to delay a decision on the motions for default vs the Chisholm corporations, on some very arcane, technical grounds: Even though Chisholm failed to get a new lawyer for the LLCs within the 30 day deadline, she wants arguments on whether the complaint was "well-pleaded" before she'll sign off on a default. She also wants affidavits in support of the damages they are asking for. They have until Oct 5 to do so, or she'll recommend that the defaults not be granted (the final decision is still in the hands of the district judge).

So now, the plaintiffs have to scramble and file this new info the magistrate wants. So, this is basically amounts to a delay (and extra work for the plaintiffs' attornies).

This was also the deadline for Chisholm to show cause on the Motion for Protective Order he made last week (see post #102 above), as well as inform the court on his efforts to find a new attorney...which he appears to have missed, since there seems to be no filing from him today.

---

You wrote on October 1, 2009 at 4:47pm: A new Order was issued by the magistrate in the Bardfield case today, doing two things: 1) rejecting Chisholm's earlier pro se motion for a protective order, and 2) asking Johnny Chisholm, once again, to advise the court on his progress in supposedly hiring a new attorney. Since Chisholm failed to respond to the court last time to this question, the magistrate appears to be a little p/o'ed at him, this time threatening him with sanctions if he blows this demand off.

As you all may recall, other possible court sanctions are still pending against Chisholm for a variety of reasons in both Federal cases, ranging from discovery violations in the DeForest case, to money-laundering violations of the TRO in the Bardfield case.

The full text of today's Order is here:

---

You wrote on October 6, 2009 at 4:40pm: ... there was a waft of new filings late yesterday, in both the Bardfield and DeForest cases.

There were two new Motions for Default on the corporations, in both cases...to meet the demand of the new magistrate judge that the Motions be "well-pled." And well pled they were, as you can see by the [link] above.

But perhaps more importantly, each case also added brand new Motions for Default, against Chisholm personally. Ie, not merely the LLCs. The grounds being, Chisholm's failing to meet deadlines and his ignoring of the judges request indicates that he is, in effect, giving up. Hence, a default judgment Chisholm is appropriate.

If these defaults go through (as they likely will, *if* he fails to respond) then he will be personally on the hook for the combined 1.3 million dollars in judgments in both lawsuits.

All four of these Motions are backed up by numerous Exhibits, which as some of you may realize by now, tend to contain the most interesting stuff to read! Emails, financial statement, depostion transcripts, etc.. And I can tell you folks, there are some very interesting revelations here...

It'll take me a awhile to sort thru it all, but to just give you a sampler of the quality of the info contained within, here is an excerpt (from an attached declaration by Ray DeForest):

"...In phone calls Defendant Chisholm constantly advised me of his status and experience with such events. Whenever I raised an issue of concern during my decision making process, he would dismiss such issues by touting his successes with the Orlando parties and bar ownerships. He constantly told me he had never lost money on any investments and boasted of his financial wealth as well as the wealth of his entities.

During his solicitation, Chisholm asked me to come meet him in Florida and stay at his very lavish condominium on the beach. During my visit, he repeatedly boasted of his wealth and the expense of the condominium. He told me that his condominium was used just for investors in his other entities as well as their friends and clients. I would later learn that Chisholm did not in fact own the condominium or his home and and this charade was part of the scheme..."

The Hunt For Bobby Warner

2009-07-22T08:27:00.000-07:00

[Depicted below is another curious sub plot in all this Chisholm litigation, this one emerging from the DeForest case. Court filings related to the Facebook postings below can be viewed here.]

You wrote on July 22, 2009 at 5:06pm: Today's Chisholm update: Today was supposedly the deadline for Bobby Warner, Johnny Chisholm's business partner who Ray DeForest added as a defendant in his lawsuit (see post #73 above) to file an answer in the DeForest case. However, instead she filed a "Motion to Quash," arguing defective service of process.

I'll have to read the process server's side of this story to be sure, but it looks to me that she may be right. Long story short, the process server tried to leave the papers for her with a friend and co-worker, at an Alabama coffee shop owned by her daughter. And a mere friend/co-worker is not legally empowered to accept service of process on her behalf at a place of business

We can infer from this Mrs. Warner is actively dodging the plaintiff's process server. Otherwise, they would have easily served her personally by now, rather than the alledgedly defective substituted service attempt described above.

Anyways, if Mrs. Warner's motion is successful, DeForest's process server will simply have to redouble his or her efforts, striving to get it done right next time. And from that point, she'll have 20 days to file an answer.

---

You wrote on August 4, 2009 at 5:31pm: A small yet mildly amusing update today: Ray DeForest filed a response to Bobby Warner's Motion to Quash today (see post #85, above). And I was right: Johnny Chisholm's business partner, Bobby Warner, has been actively dodging the process servers in this case.

Attached to the motion in opposition was a statement by the process server, who detailed his prior unsuccessful attempts to locate her in person: The address in Pensacola which she listed in her Motion to Quash is, in fact, an abandoned building with a real estate lockbox on the doorknob. Calls to her known phone numbers go unreturned. When asked where she could be found, Johnny Chisholm told the process server she was living in Lillian, Alabama, where she owned a cafe with her daughter.

The ownership of this cafe is where the facts begin to come into dispute. Based on Chisholm's representation that she was an owner, the process server left the documents with an employee there (Bert Adams), who accepted service on her behalf.

But then, as we know, on the last day to file her Answer she filed a Motion to Quash instead, denying any ownership in the cafe. And that fact becomes important: The service on an employee of a business is probably good against an owner, but probably bad against a non-owner.

And the website for the "Lillian's Cafe & Coffee House" seems to back this non-ownership claim up. According to this site, Bobby Warner's sole duties at the cafe seem to consist of "bartending and cooking" for her daughter and son-in-law.

So, due to the deceptive statement by Chisholm as to her ownership of the cafe, DeForest may be temporarily out of luck on this whole service of process question. If the Motion to Quash is granted, she'll have to be re-served.

In fact...if anyone here has any knowledge as to the current whereabouts of Bobby Warner (probably somewhere around either Pensacola, FL and/or Lillian, AL, I would guess), and you wanted to further the cause of justice...you could email those tips into DeForest's attorneys' office, where I imagine they would be MUCH appreciated. Their email addys are:

Arianne B. Suarez: asuarez@ldklaw.com
Scott D. Lieberman: slieberman@ldklaw.com

---

You wrote on September 24, 2009 at 4:53pm: A new filing by the plaintiff's today in the DeForest case: A Motion to Extend Time For Service of Process on Defendant Warner.

In a nutshell, Bobby Warner (Johnny Chisholm's business partner) has managed to successfully play the dodge-the-process-server game for several months now. A substituted service was attempted earlier on a co-worker, but as you all may recall, that was the subject of a "Motion to Quash" a few weeks back (see posts #82 and #86 above), and thus the service's validity is in question.

So today, "in an abundance of caution" Ray DeForest filed today for a 120 day extension to serve the papers personally upon Bobby Warner...just in case her Motion to Quash is granted. For those interested in the nitty gritty, a full text of the motion is [included in the documents link here].

A Fehr Farewell

2009-07-15T16:22:00.000-07:00

[Was this all merely a delaying tactic? You decide...]:

You wrote on July 15, 2009 at 6:45pm: We have two nearly identical filings today by Johnny Chisholm's attorney, in both the DeForest and Bardfield cases. They are almost cookie-cutter exact in wording. They are both Motions for Leave to Withdraw as Attorney of Record.

In both of these Motions, Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr cites the fact that he has been unpaid for some time, in addition to alledging Chisholm's has failed to communicate and cooperate with him in his defense. As such, Fehr is asking the judge to let him go, and to extend all case deadlines 60 days in order to allow Johnny Chisholm to seek new council.

OK, a couple of points. One, Bruce Fehr tried to withdraw from the DeForest case back in late May as well (ie, before the Barfield case was even initially filed on June 1). The judge rejected that motion. He didn't say why, but reading between the lines, it's pretty clear the judge must have felt that May withdrawal motion was just a ploy to get out from under a series of deadlines to produce documents demanded by DeForest.

And point two...you have to ask yourself: if Fehr was so unhappy working for Chisholm in May, why did he voluntarily take up the Bardfield case for him when it was filed on June 1? As far as I can tell, he was under no obligation to do so.

So yeah, take those points into consideration, fast forward to today...coincidentally 24 hours from the 1pm hearing scheduled for tomorrow, in which Johnny Chisholm must "show cause" why he should not be found in contempt for violating the TRO during OMW, else his "...failure to appear shall result in a warrant for his arrest"...and you begin to see the real purpose behind these 11th hour withdrawal motions.

And that being the case, it's pretty obvious the judge will see right through this as well, shooting both these motions down in flames as he did with the May motion. Which is funny because, I'll bet much of what Fehr says in his motions are true (ie, he probably hasn't been paid for a while). But oh well...the 13th Amendment notwithstanding, I think he's going to be bound in indentured servitude to Johnny Chisholm for a bit longer.

So, my guess is we are still on for tomorrow, show (cause) time 1pm CDT, in Pensacola. Should be interesting!

BTW, still no Orders issued by the judge re: the Summary Judgment motion in the Bardfield case, and the discovery sanctions to be levied on Chisholm in the DeForest case. The judge is obviously taking his time on both issues, which is probably a good thing (there are indeed some very intricate legal questions in play in regards the usury question in the Bardfield case).

---

You wrote on July 17, 2009 at 4:41pm: Well, an interesting development today in the Chisholm cases: Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr's two withdrawal motions were both partially approved.

The judge allowed Fehr to resign as Chisholm's attorney in both the Bardfield and DeForest cases, effective immediately. However, Chisholm was given only 30 days to find new counsel, not the 60 that was requested.

Deadlines in the Bardfield case were pushed back 30 days as a result. However, the judge noted Chisholm had missed deadline after deadline in the DeForest case already, so there would be NO further extensions in that case.

The judge also rejected requests by Fehr to have attorney liens placed on Chisholm.

So, attorney Bruce Fehr is out. Mildly surprising, as I had predicted the motions would be totally rejected. But I guess once yesterday's Show Cause hearing got out of the way, there were no major deadlines within 30 days that would have been impacted. So, the judge set Fehr free.

---

You wrote on August 20, 2009 at 4:45pm: Well, just when you thought things couldn't get any stranger...

No activity in the Federal cases today. I was about to call it a day, when on a lark, I decided to check the now closed state court case, filed by the lighting company PRG vs. Chisholm and OMW. The case that was defaulted on, for apparantly $100K+.

Well, imagine my surprise as I saw that six days ago, motions by Chisholm and his OMW compainies to set aside the default judgments:

This is something that is legally possible to do, however, it is very difficult. Basically you have to have a really REALLY good excuse as to why you let a case slip into default in the first place.

So, I'm wondering WHO the attorney is who filed motions six days ago, on behalf of Chisholm AND his corporations, and lo and behold...

Yep, it's the formerly reluctant Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr. The same atty who motioned to withdraw for the federal cases over a month ago, due to not being paid. And now, all of a sudden, he finds it in his heart to LEAP into action for Chisholm to reopen the closed state court case.

I don't know what to make of this, obviously...to say that defending lawsuits in this manner (ie, letting cases default, then try reopening them with a lawyer who supposedly quit earlier over being unpaid) is "strange" would be an understatement.

Well anyways, we are back up to three cases I'm tracking...stay tuned on this Facebook event page, where "the party starts here!"

---

You wrote on September 11, 2009 at 4:26pm: New activity in the closed-but-Chisholm-trying-to-reopen state court case: Chisholm files 3 Motions to Withdraw:

Unfortunately, I can't access the actual filings here, but my guess would be these are motions by attorney Fehr to withdraw from representing Chisholm, this time from the state court case.

Perhaps this is happening because a new Chisholm attorney mentioned in the last post will be taking over. Or perhaps not. We'll see...

The Unindicted Co-Conspirators?

2009-07-01T22:05:00.000-07:00

[Another eyebrow-raising incident in the Bardfield case is the documented involvement of a small south Florida print and web magazine in recruiting the fraud victims for Johnny Chisholm. As you can see by the court excerpts below, the controlling owner of this magazine acted simultaneouly as a "representative" of Chisholm's OMW company, "approached the victims regarding obtaining some funds for the production" of OMW, and "portrayed Johnny Chisholm...as...a renowned expert in the party-promoting business.".

What he didn't tell them, obviously, was that he and his fellow magazine owners were part of a big happy group of "FRIENDS in dispute with FRIENDS" and that one of these friends, Ray DeForest, was suing Johnny Chisholm for fraud.

Ah, with friends like these....]

You wrote on July 1, 2009 at 4:53pm: ...I will leave you all with what be today's most interesting new revelation in the matter...and that being, JustCircuit's newly revealed role in bringing about the current scandal.

[Actual documents replacing Facebook photo links]:

And Mr. Thomas Sicker's facebook profile can be found here.

I'll have more to say, and more court case news to report, when I return. In the meantime, I'm sure this will tide you all over until then...

---

You wrote on July 2, 2009 at 3:50am: Thanks to some anonymous tips, I have some more information on this mysterious Thomas Anthony Sickler, and his equally mysterious portfolio of "Corporate Development" for JustCircuit.mag.

It seems that "corporate development" in JustCircuitSpeak translates to "owner." According to Florida LLC records:

...Thomas A. Sickler is listed as the "MGRM" (Managing Member) of Just Circuit Magazine, with Shane and Victor being listed in a subordinate position as mere "MGRs" (Managers).

To understand the difference in Florida LLC law between MGRMs and MGRs, see this link here.

As you can see, the "Managing Member" is an owner and controller. "Managers" are defined as being non-owner employees.

---

[Addendum: FWIW, JustCircuit Magazine modified their credits page since that July 1 posting; their latest issue now dubs Shane Rogers, Victor Mauro and Thomas Sickler each as "Owner."]:

PRG vs. JC

2009-06-27T11:45:00.000-07:00

[Half of life is just showing up, as the saying goes. Except within the first 20 days after a complaint is served on you in Florida, however...in that situation, it makes up the other half of life as well.]

You wrote on June 27, 2009 at 10:30am: Another lawsuit was filed against Johnny Chisholm (and his OMW companies: CPCE and Reunion Events) last week, this one by the OMW lighting company, Production Resource Group, in Florida state civil court in Orange County (Orlando). Images are posted [below]:

As you may recall, the lighting company (PRG) was mentioned in Chisholm's unsuccessful emergency motion to lift the TRO during Gay Days:

...with the amount claimed owed to them being $163,543.68, according to the schedule that was filed with the motion.

If you look at the filing activity in this new lawsuit, you'll see that PRG was able to get an emergency garnishment order against Chisholm's bank accounts, on the same day the suit was filed (I haven't checked whether they are the same as the frozen accounts, but my guess is they are).

I have to say this is legally highly unusual. Pre-judgment garnishments like this (like the Preliminary Injunction in the Bardfield case) are very rare; to get them, you have to convince the judge your case is both a slam-dunk, AND there is high probability that the defendant will abscond with funds otherwise. And this state court judge in Orange County took less than a day to answer both these questions in the affirmative.

The web site for PRG is here: http://www.prg.com/

---

You wrote on July 21, 2009 at 7:22pm: A watershed event today in the Chisholm cases: PRG, the lighting company for OMW who was reportedly owed $163,543.68 from Johnny Chisholm, has WON it's state court case against Johnny Chisholm personally, and his OMW companies Chisholm Properties Circuit Events, LLC, and Reunion Events, Inc., by default.

I repeat, PRG has officially WON it's case. Johnny Chisholm had 20 days to file an answer to the summons, and apparantly...he did not. Hence, a default judgment was entered against Chisholm and the two companies at the Orange County courthouse today. See [image below]:

The case file number is 2009-CA-018933-O.

---

You wrote on August 7, 2009 at 5:08pm: Today's Chisholm court news: Orlando-based OMW lighting company PRG filed a couple Motions for Final Judgment in the state court case it won against Chisholm by default a couple weeks ago; if approved, these motions will set the damages PRG is entitled to....

---

You replied to your post on August 10, 2009 at 4:11pm: No new Federal filings today, although the PRG state court case file is officially now marked "CLOSED." The motion for final judgment was approved, so whatever PRG was asking for, it got.

---

You wrote on August 20, 2009 at 4:45pm: Well, just when you thought things couldn't get any stranger...

No activity in the Federal cases today. I was about to call it a day, when on a lark, I decided to check the now closed state court case, filed by the lighting company PRG vs. Chisholm and OMW. The case that was defaulted on, for apparantly $100K+.

Well, imagine my surprise as I saw that six days ago, motions by Chisholm and his OMW compainies to set aside the default judgments:

This is something that is legally possible to do, however, it is very difficult. Basically you have to have a really REALLY good excuse as to why you let a case slip into default in the first place.

So, I'm wondering WHO the attorney is who filed motions six days ago, on behalf of Chisholm AND his corporations, and lo and behold...

Yep, it's the formerly reluctant Chisholm attorney Bruce Fehr. The same atty who motioned to withdraw for the federal cases over a month ago, due to not being paid. And now, all of a sudden, he finds it in his heart to LEAP into action for Chisholm to reopen the closed state court case.

I don't know what to make of this, obviously...to say that defending lawsuits in this manner (ie, letting cases default, then try reopening them with a lawyer who supposedly quit earlier over being unpaid) is "strange" would be an understatement.

Well anyways, we are back up to three cases I'm tracking...stay tuned on this Facebook event page, where "the party starts here!"

---

You wrote on September 11, 2009 at 4:26pm: New activity in the closed-but-Chisholm-trying-to-reopen state court case: Chisholm files 3 Motions to Withdraw:

Unfortunately, I can't access the actual filings here, but my guess would be these are motions by attorney Fehr to withdraw from representing Chisholm, this time from the state court case.

Perhaps this is happening because a new Chisholm attorney mentioned in the last post will be taking over. Or perhaps not. We'll see...

---

You wrote on October 1, 2009 at 5:47pm: ...and in other Chisholm court related news, various sources have tracked down a judgment lien filed by PRG against Chisholm, in the state case it won by default. The actual amount of the judgment (which I was never really sure about) turns out to be $316,230.86 (and compounding, at 8% interest):