Porsche 356 Registry Litigation: Update?

[surfer71]

is this still going on?

I was a member It's just run out and right at this moment I am a bit skint to be honest. So I am in no rush to get more on my credit card for this month.. Bought some new kites for kite surfing so self inflicted I know..

But really from an outsiders point of view. Esp one from overseas we have so little to gain in terms of membership to the 356 Reg that All I really get is 6 mags a year for $60. In all honesty there are some great articles but that's about as far as it goes.. I doubt I will rejoin to be honest. Even though I should has the mag when it arrives makes me think it's about time I did some work on the car.. and in real terms I need their input to help me along..

Well I think a lot of the larger clubs end up being more Political than they need to be. Trust me I know I have learnt from my issues with clubs. You can't ask them to change with the times they will do what they have always done and nothing will change. It's all about who knows who and what a waste of time and effort to do anything to help.

On the whole the people i have met both in Europe and Esp the USA have been brilliant like minded people. I have met some crackers over the years of Porsche/classic car like minded people..

I hope the Porsche Club 356 lot sort their act out I think this is going to end in a right old mess and what's laughable is that PORSCHE AG have signed in to this mess!!!!!!!!!

Do I think the 356 Reg have lost their way " YES "

Do I think this will cause collateral ( sp ) damage and reputation " YES "

Do I think people will leave ( or just not renew their membership because of it ) " YES " esp if the membership goes up to cover costs of their mess!!!!!

Best of luck guys I am so glad I am out of all this ..........

[surfer71]

I just went to log into the 356reg forum and it says my membership expired.. got to be honest I'm not going to renew.

I did at least some time ago mention to the board that closing the forum down to members only would only make the 356reg more an elite members only and the wealth of international input would be lost.

As a number of people on their like me pay $65 a year for 6 mags that's about it.. we can't go on their holidays, we can't go on local meets, we really get the most out of being on the forum and $65 to join a forum is abit silly really.

I mentioned they needed like a $25 online membership that was forum access and PDF of the mag..

As it's the mag that is the single biggest cost to produce in print and distribution to the club.

may be in the future but it's $65 firmly staying in my pocket this year.

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[Bill Sampson]

George Dunn reported within the last day on his version of what is transpiring in the litigation. Rather than rely on him (or me) feel free to review the public record.

The most glaring falsehood in George's report is this: "Without a hearing the Court summarily ordered the documents to be produced." Numerous motions on the precise issue of which he complains were filed, opposed, briefed, etc. George's lawyers, in fact, were able to persuade the trial judge to hold off on enforcing his ruling until the appeal was heard. The parties submitted briefs, motions and opposition to the appellate court. Oral argument on the appeal was heard. So far, Steve Heinrichs has prevailed on all of these matters, although they are truly preliminary skirmishes. The "without a hearing" and "summarily" statements suggest that the Registry's views were given short shrift. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and call the statements disingenuous although if you called them a lie I wouldn't argue. I find Dunn's suggestion that judges have ignored their sworn duty when their written opinion clearly indicate otherwise to be outrageous. I'm sorry, mostly I admire judges for their efforts, even if I disagree with their conclusions. There is almost never reason to suggest they laughed off the arguments of a party and they did not do so here.

The appellate court, as correctly pointed out by George, furnished the dicta that if the only issue before it were under the specific statute mentioned at length by both parties and both courts, Heinrichs might not be entitled to the records sought. However, omitted by Mr. Dunn and as specifically stated by the appellate court, the claims by the Registry in the countersuit filed by it and as filed by Heinrichs in the suit all permit discovery of the items in question under the statute. Mr. Dunn should have mentioned that since it is, in fact the ruling of the court.

Nowhere in any of the briefs filed by the Registry's lawyer does the bogus claim of no hearing appear. I assure you, any lawyer would bring such a failing to the attention of the appeallate court.

Mr. Dunn's factual discussion as to the offering of records differs markedly from the claims of Mr. Heinrichs in his complaint. Resolution of such factual disputes is the unique province of the courts. Neither Mr. Dunn's nor Mr. Heinrichs's word at this point has been found to be true, although the judicial "score" at this point is 4 to 0 in favor of Heinrichs on legal issues. There are many innings left, however, and anything can happen in floods, ballgames and lawsuits.

Permit me these editorial remarks: After 4 judges have ignored my arguments I generally suggest to clients that it is possible they will lose their case and that they at least should consider making a strong settlement offer. What has happened here I do not and would not expect to know as settlement discussions are most productive in private. This is NOT Brown v Board of Education, nor Miranda v Arizona, nor Kelso v New Hampshire - it is a member, allegedly, seeking information about his car club and the leadership declining, allegedly, to furnish it. The other claims grew out of hard feelings engendered by hard-ball tactics and alleged defamatory remarks regarding the attempts to learn about the club and/or attempts to prevent learning about the club.

Mr. Dunn refers to inaccuracies on other web sites, presumably including this one. As always, I invite anyone to correct statements I have made in this thread that are inaccurate. While on that topic, Mr. Dunn asserts that Mr. Heinrichs has sought in his suit and in discovery information about members' cars. That statement is false. That information has not been sought.

Your corrections, as always, are invited. I'll be happy to make them. My bias is or should be obvious, but, I want the facts to be correct. Mr. Dunn? Mr. Maltby? Any trustee? Speak up

Stay tuned.

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[MMW]

I can't speak for Adam but my thoughts are he already knows the answer & is asking questions to get other members thinking & asking also. If someone came out & directly posted what is going on I'm sure it would get "lost" quickly.

Just my opinion & it may be wrong.

[Bill Sampson]

Mic:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/1702 is the statute.

As to the specific subsections involved, 1702.13 and 1702.15, I know of no reported appellate case interpreting either. Neither the judges nor the lawyers brought up previous references to those statutes that would affect the outcome of Steve's case.


Bill

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[Bill Sampson]

There are two complaints, which I suppose could count as multiple.

1. There is a complaint in Ohio state court, pending for over a year which was the subject of the Registry's recent unsuccessful appeal. Steve Heinrichs's complaint seeks books and records from the Registry [While editing this the court web site went down - books and records were all that was in the intial complaint and I could not verify, one way or the other, whether the complaint was amended.] The Registry trustees filed a counterclaim in that case alleging against Steve Heinrichs: a. Intentional Interference with Business Relations; 2. Commercial defamation/trade libel; 3. Defamation, libel and slander, per se; 4. Defamation, libel and slander, per quod; all seeking punitive damages in excess of $25,000 (that amount was picked, doubtless, as the minimum jurisdictional limit for that court - the total is unlimited). You may decide if any of those allegations against Steve Heinrichs are personal.

2. There is the recently filed action in federal court in Ohio by Steve Heinrichs against most if not all of the current and recent past Registry trustees and officers. It makes 81 paragraphs of factual allegations and seeks recovery under these theories: 1. Mail and Wire Fraud; 2. Civil RICO (Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations) conspiracy; 3. A declaratory judgment that Steve remains a member of the Registry; 4. Breach of Fiduciary duties; 5. Intentional Interference with Business Relationship. Again I'll suggest that you may decide if the allegations against the officers and directors are personal.

There are no other lawsuits involving these parties of which I am aware.

As always, I invite corrections. I'll make them if warranted and if nothing else note your "objections."



Bill

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[Steve Heinrichs]

All,

I want to respond this morning to a few items from yesterday. Please also note that a few individuals have contacted me and want to talk. I will try to get in toch with them in the next day or so.

First---some facts regarding Mr. Dunn's update to the membership regarding the lawsuit. These facts are in addition to other items already discussed here.

...as to the lawsuit of last year being filed because the financial information was published late: this is simply not true. Mr. Dunn either has not read the filings or he is completely misinformed. There are links here to all the filings (of both sides) and I hope you will read them.

...as to the "issue" of car data/information being an important part of the Registry resistance: it is simply not an issue---

1) I did not ask for car data.
2) Only the Registry brought it up
3) The Registry's lawyer has been told long ago that I do not want it.
4) I have posted before explaining this here.
5) None of 1-4 has had any effect on the Registry's continued refusal to comply with discovery requests and, as you know, the Registry has recently lost as to its motion in the Appeals Court.

So, now the abuse and defamation of me continues as last year (which has been well documented).

All this said, I remain hopeful and optimistic that the Registry will be stronger and better and more attentive to its mission once we are through all of this. The hobby is a great one and enjoyed by us all. The Registry, too, will have a greater respect for its members and their legitimate requests. No member should be subject to this kind of abuse.

I'm grateful to Justin for the opportunity here to express views in a civil manner. I'd rather be looking at 550 and 718 and SCCA photos today and thinking about which race it was and which car. I've learned a lot. So--thanks, Justin.

Steve Heinrichs

PS---it might be helpful if someone with skills better than mine (that is, most anyone), would "bring up" to the current page, the links to the various filings.

[Bill Sampson]

OK. I'll try on the links. This is for the STATE court action only. The federal case access is NOT free and requires a subscription to PACER. More on it when I have time.

To get the state course documents first use this link or copy and paste it into your browser:
http://fcdcfcjs.co.franklin.oh.us/CaseInformationOnline/nameSearch

Next, about every 24 hours Franklin County clears its cache and the link above will take you to a screen where you must accept the user agreement. Click accept and you'll be taken to the screen where you can search for cases (below). IF you have recently looked, the link above will take you direct to the case search screen





On that screen type HEINRICHS into the name box on the very far left. Then click SEARCH at the right side of the screen. A new screen with a list of cases should appear. The TRIAL court Heinrichs v 356 Registry will be the third case down (as of 10/5/2013). The APPELLATE court Heinrichs v 356 Registry will be the fourth (as of 10/5/2013). Click on the case you want to review.

You will then be taken to a screen that looks like this:




You can scroll through this screen and will be shown a list of documents/proceedings. This also works for the appellate court case. On request I'll come back when I have time and include relevant documents from the cases as attachments although I expect most of you can find them on their own. I suggest in the trial court reading the complaint, the counterclaim and the answers of the parties. Also you can review the motions, oppositions, replies and court rulings to make your own determination as to whether the Registry's arguments were summarily dismissed without hearing. They were not. Period. They system functioned as it should. Someone wins, someone loses, the judges perform to the best of their ability and in this instance have provided the parties and the public (that's part of a judge's job) their reasons and reasoning. Reasonable minds CAN differ on the outcome but not on the process being fair with full opportunity for presentation of issues. Both sides get full hearings in America and both have here.

[356JAGER]

DELETED

[Steve Heinrichs]

All,

Well, the personal attacks continue on the Registry site. I will not respond to them all here. suffice at the moment to say that Roy Lock has made another set of allegations that are just plain wrong. And, that was followed by another set of comments from someone who has clearly not read the filings, nor is he accurate as to how the court system works.

There is a link to the federal filing a few pages back here. I will find it and advise.

Steve Heinrichs