A Pattern of Abusive Misconduct is Emerging

Collusion is Deadly
  1. Several of the players in Jeff's case, including Judge Royal Furgeson and Charla Aldous are connected to similar cases of alleged impropriety.  In the case highlighted in the story below, Judge Furgeson's wife is partner in the law offices of Stephen Malouf, who is partner of Charla Aldous (Judge Furgeson permitted Aldous to make a $7 million intervention in Jeff's case for performing a few weeks of work).Public record's reveal that since at least 2003 up to and includng 2010 Judge Furgeson's wife has received compensation consisting of "Salary, Partnership distribution, andTust-Salary" from Charla Aldous' partner.  There is no indication the remuneration has ceased.    Click Here to view the Amicus Curiae Brief Regarding Judge Royal Furgeson, Jr.
  2. The players are all intertwined in numerous cases, collecting salaries from the same people involved in the cases.  They have a history of collusion and cronyism among Judge Furgeson, his wife  Malouf-Furgeson, Stephen Malouf and others.  Page 18 of the above brief uncovers a financial disclosure from Judge Furgeson showing Furgeson's compensation from these persons.

  3. Onother case involves Henry Goltz. Click Here to view a misconduct Complaint from Mr. Goltz. Judge Furgson. Goltz's complaint illustrates similar misconduct by Furgeson as in Baron's case.  In this complaint, Mr Goltz was explains how he was denied due process, was threatened in court of incarceration, and complained of judicial bias, stating "At the court appearance on 1 February 2006, before having heard any testimony, Judge Furgeson repeatedly threatened me with 'up to eighteen months incarceration' for contempt of court...".

  4. For more complaints of judicial misconduct against Judge Royal FurgesonClick Here to view a complaint by attorney Andrea Arnold.
  5. The  lawyers/judges in Jeff's case have been the subject of investigation by journalists involving another similar case. Lawyers Charla Aldous, and Stephen Malouf were allegedly involved in a billing scam against another one of their clients, Albert Hill.   Aldous and her partners sued Mr. Hill for approximately $50 million for approximately $5 months work.  Days before the trial, when it came time for Mr. Hill to tell his side, the lawyers allegedly had their friend at the D.A's office indict Mr. Hill in an unrelated incident  to prevent him from testifying against his lawyers.   This is a dangerous group of lawyers who are very well connected to Judges and other public figures.  Click Here to View one of the many articles published about the convoluted Hill case, which led to the investigation of the Dallas D.A. for allegedly impropriety with the lawyers.

Judge Threatens Defendant

By Dave Tomers, World Net Daily

American jurisprudence: Fair, reasonable, following the rule of law and delivering the best chance for justice anywhere, right?

Well, how about a Texas district court case in which there are allegations a judge threatened a participant, ordered that his assets be seized, told him he was not allowed to hire defense counsel and then pronounced he had the full power of the Navy, Army and Marines to enforce his will?

Those are the allegations contained in a case pending before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that – by the description of a volunteer attorney working on arguments – should “shock the conscience” of the nation.

The bottom line appears to be whether the judiciary is prepared to rein in one of its own after accusations the judge apparently conspired to strip a long list of constitutional rights from a case participant.

Gary Schepps, who describes himself as a “one-man law office,” is working on the bankruptcy case involving Jeff Baron’s company, Ondova. Schepps is volunteering, as Baron was ordered by Senior U.S. District Judge Royal Furgeson not to “hire” an attorney for his defense.

Schepps says it is an “overreaching order” against Baron from Furgeson, based in Dallas, that created the trouble.

He told WND Furgeson held a secret meeting with several others about Baron that resulted in the naming of a “receiver” to take over Baron’s assets, property and life.

“What is frightening legally is the U.S. federal judge’s reasoning. The judge reasons that he has power to – without any notice or hearing – appoint a receiver over an American citizen, and his receiver, who takes orders from the judge, can then waive the person’s constitutional rights,” Schepps told WND.

Baron became a successful businessman with the rise of the Internet age in the 1990s. His many companies registered domain names by the thousands.

His success attracted attention, and he was soon wooed by another business operator who apparently promised the development of a search engine to rival Google.

But that business relationship went sour fast, leaving Baron and his multiple corporations beat up and bloody but not dead.

Baron said he successfully fought off numerous lawsuits brought over the breakup and, although his company was forced into bankruptcy, was faring well until he wound up in the courtroom of Furgeson, who was appointed by President Clinton.

According to a motion filed by Schepps to the appeals court, Furgeson had personality problems with Baron.

“Every person has their own personality, and the district judge has clearly been personally offended by Jeff, and apparently by counsel,” the motion said. “This may be because, as a result of his own personality style, Jeff’s testimony is naturally narrow, and technical.

“The court’s language is broad. Review of the transcripts shows two men entirely speaking past each other.”

But the judge apparently reacted personally.

During one of the hearings as the dispute progressed – before the receiver was appointed – Furgeson was quoted saying, “You are a fool, a fool, a fool, a fool to screw with a federal judge, and if you don’t understand that, I can make you understand it. I have the force of the Navy, Army [and] Marines behind me.”

The judge is also on record reminding Baron that “death” is an option as well.

Despite the obvious vitriol present in the courtroom, the bankrupty case of Ondova, one of Baron’s companies, reached a “Global Settlement Agreement” in July of 2010 that was supposed to resolve the conflicts.

According to both Baron and court records, under the direction of the court-appointed bankruptcy trustee, Daniel Sherman, Baron’s company Ondova appeared to have about $2 million in cash available and only about $900,000 in settled claims.

“Sherman should have immediately closed the Ondova bankruptcy in
September 2010 when there was the million dollars cash surplus. Instead,
Sherman kept the bankruptcy open and ran up over $300,000 in additional attorney fees,” Schepps said.

When Baron objected, the full wrath of the judiciary arose anew.

“Within three business days Sherman had Baron placed into receivership,” with another local attorney, Peter Vogel of Gardere, Wynne and Sewell, named as receiver.



Subscribe to

Federal Judges take an oath of office to protect the Constitution of the United States.  They abide by an oath that charges them with unbiased and blind justice.  We the...