Free Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 446

Filed 01/25/2005

Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

INDYMAC BANK, F.S.B. Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:00CV835 (CFD)

V.

MOSTAFA REYAD AND WAFA REYAD Defendants DATE: JANUARY 24, 2005

DEFENDANT S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISQUALIFY PLAINTIFF S ATTORNEY

This is Defendant Mostafa Reyad s memorandum of law in support of the filed concurrently Defendant s motion to disqualify Plaintiff s attorney and the law firms of Brenner, Salzman and Wallman LLP and Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP. Plaintiff s lead attorney, David R. Schaeffer committed fraud upon the Court, at the commencement of the action. Mr. Schaeffer on his own, on May 17, 2000 prepared eight (8) writs of garnishment against Defendant in the total amount of $ 12.8 million. He prepared the writs which started by: BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATED, And its memorandum Mr. Schaeffer defrauded this Court and inspired or conspired with Honorable Garfinkel, U.S.M.J., who executed the orders, and

1

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 446

Filed 01/25/2005

Page 2 of 4

none of those were reflected on the dockets. Simple reading to the eight (8) writs, reveal that seven (7) out of the eight (8) writs do not have the endorsement of the District Clerk; see the eight (8) writs attached hereto, and see the lower left corner of each page, indicating that it were prepared by Plaintiff s attorney s computer. Attorney Schaeffer is an officer of the Court, he is fully aware that any court order is not valid, unless it is entered on the docket, and injunctive relief is only valid when issued or indorsed by the Presiding Judge. Mr. Schaeffer vested in himself the United States power and authority and executed invalid garnishment orders, the Presiding Judge over this action was not aware about it. Mr. Schaeffer committed the crime of fraud against United States. Mr. Schaeffer and attorney Rowena A. Moffett never respond to the facts how this happened, and their response shows bad faith and persistence to damage Defendant, and insistance to abuse the process of law.

The recent discovery of these documents opted Defendant to file the motion to hold United States as an Indispensable party Defendant to Defendant s claims of damages. Defendant properly serves the United States Attorney. The circumstances of the case has escalated, because, ordinarily fraud upon the Court which resulted in heavy magnitude of damages against Defendant by using the power and authority of the United States, and by receiving the aid of the Magistrate Judge who is absolutely immuned; ordinarily should be referred to the United States Attorney General s office for investigation. It is the same office which will respond to Defendant s allegation towards the Magistrate. To that

2

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 446

Filed 01/25/2005

Page 3 of 4

extend, Defendant do not see any alternative except that, this Court must nominate independent prosecutor to investigate the crime committed by attorney Schaeffer.

It would be injustice to postpone the Ruling upon this motion, until the end of the case. This action commenced by perjury and fraud upon the Court, makes it impossible to reach a fair judgment before ruling upon the perjury and the fraud.

3

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 446

Filed 01/25/2005

Page 4 of 4

The Defendant Mostafa Reyad

By: Mostafa Reyad 2077 Center Ave # 22D Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Day Phone 203-325-4100

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on the captioned date has mailed the following; each of them a true and correct copy. 1. Connecticut United States Attorney Kevin J. O Conner, Esq. 157 Church Street, New Haven, CT 06510 2. Plaintiff s Attorney David R. Schaefer 271 Whitney Ave, New Haven, CT 06511 3. Wafa Reyad

Mostafa Reyad

4