These Corporate Shape Shifters come in all forms and sizes so you never know who is in charge, or rather who to charge, or rather what is the proper jurisdiction to charge, or rather who is willing to find a proper jurisdiction that is not part of the Corporate Shape Shifters.
 |
| Amrock, but which one is which? |
Either way, it does not matter because they were stealin'.
Title Source Amended Michigan Articles of Incorporation Change of Name - Amrock 2018 by Beverly Tran on Scribd
If you follow the timeline of Title Sources' metamorphisis into a Corporate Shape Shifter, one shall witness, as so graciously recorded in the annals of history by the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, that Title Source, Inc., which was cashing checks and submitting fake tax filings to the IRS on behalf of the Detroit Land Bank Authority, may have been one of those magical, made up real estate Corporate Shape Shifters is because, according to the court filings, it did not exist when it took individuals money, billed TARP, levied taxes, and other nasty stuff.
Then, the Corporate Shape Shifters made Title Source go through a ritual ceremony of changing names over and over again, which means, it may have been improperly named in my FCA, leading it to argue out that it never existed, and as such, did not do anything, because it is now, Amrock.
Look at the software and applications. They are all third party and there is nothing in federal procurement policy which addresses the privatization of data, particularly if it sold through Corporate Shape Shifters.
They change appearance through the manipulation of data, the entire network of human intelligence, including the amalgamation of data to shove into those crappy predictive modeling algorithms to "maximize revenue" from "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth).
Rumor has it there are some of these "real time" satellite technologies up in the Mayor of Detroit's office, a gift from Dan Gilbert/Rock Financial/Quicken/Title Source/Amrock. or whatever the Corporate Shape Shifter flavor of the week is.
You cannot hold someone accountable if you do not know who they are.
This is privatization and it is being implemented through that nanotechnology stuff.
I pulled the HouseCanary Docket against Title Source.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that Title Source had contracted with HouseCanary to run some Detroit property scheme and it backfired sometime after I filed my case against Title Source for being a cloaking Corporate Shape Shifters of Michigan, one being Detroit Land Bank Authority.
It seems to me that HouseCanary could not run their stuff because Title Source was providing them with dirty data, so, instead of admitting they were selling dirty data, the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) for Title Source, came up with the brilliant idea to become a Corporate Shape Shifter, too!
Title Source has been officially anointed as a Corporate Shape Shifter.
The dirty data is all the Detroit fraudulent property titles...and deeds...and taxes...and ownership...and foreclosures...and judgments...and certified judgments...and mortgages...and bankruptcies...and the votes... any other forms of stealin'.
See, it goes like this:
When you change your name, and you are a litigant in a federal court of law, you typically notify the court.
Once upon a time I went to court with the Detroit Land Bank Authority https://t.co/QftA6jc8u9 #fraud #falseclaims #detroit #Whistleblower pic.twitter.com/bKOYMjV7DV— Beverly Tran (@beverlytran) August 2, 2017
| "Amrock, formerly known as Title Source." |
Perhaps, the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) representing Title Source thought they would be able to use the same legal arguments in the Artist formerly known as Prince pulled on Warner Bros. to get his intellectual property back.
"We are Amrock, not Title Source. We never gave dirty data to the U.S. Department of Treasury, Title Source did it and now they are no more. Tah Dah!!!"
I just thought I would go out there on a limb and proffer this legal postulation in the Detroit investigations because that is what they said in response to the HouseCanary verdict.
In a statement Thursday night, Quicken Loans CEO Jay Farner said: "Quicken Loans and its parent Rock Holdings Inc. were never parties to the recent litigation between HouseCanary and Amrock, nor is either company subject to any liability in connection with yesterday's verdict announced in the state court in San Antonio, Texas. In addition, Quicken Loans and Rock Holdings Inc. were never a party to the contract at issue and there was never a single claim filed against Quicken Loans or Rock Holdings, Inc. in this lawsuit."
Quicken affiliate hit with $706M verdict
A Quicken Loans affiliate based in Detroit has been ordered to pay $706.2 million after a Texas jury this week found it had taken trade secrets from a real estate data firm, officials announced Thursday.
The case stems from a 2015 contract between Title Source, now known as HouseCanary. The contract was to develop software to provide appraisal as well as real estate valuations, attorneys said in a statement Thursday.
In a statement Thursday, Amrock CEO Jeff Eisenshtadt called the verdict “a travesty of justice” and the company planned to appeal.
Representatives for HouseCanary, which has offices in California, Colorado and Texas, could not be reached for comment Thursday night.
Its lawyers said Title Source declined to pay the company after 18 months of work and sued in Bexar County, Texas, to avoid contract fees for its real estate data, analytics and valuation technology.
Amrock is the nation’s largest independent company offering title insurance, valuations and closing services, its website says.
Through a countersuit HouseCanary alleged the company misappropriated trade secrets, which violated signed agreements governing non-disclosure and limiting use of the information.
“Title Source and its family of companies (including Quicken Loans) wanted access to HouseCanary’s technology and data to develop its own competing analytics and software,” HouseCanary attorneys said Thursday.
In a statement Thursday night, Quicken Loans CEO Jay Farner said: "Quicken Loans and its parent Rock Holdings Inc. were never parties to the recent litigation between HouseCanary and Amrock, nor is either company subject to any liability in connection with yesterday's verdict announced in the state court in San Antonio, Texas. In addition, Quicken Loans and Rock Holdings Inc. were never a party to the contract at issue and there was never a single claim filed against Quicken Loans or Rock Holdings, Inc. in this lawsuit."
After a seven-week trial, a jury on Wednesday awarded HouseCanary $235.4 million for misappropriation of the trade secrets and fraud claims and $471.4 million in punitive damages.
In response to the verdict, Eisenshtadt said: “HouseCanary made several unkept promises leading Amrock to file a contract claim. However, when we asked the court to intervene, a local attorney and professional plaintiff law firm spun a distorted and twisted counterclaim narrative leading a San Antonio jury to an unconscionable result.”
Eisenshtadt added Amrock never received working software from HouseCanary but “wireframes and half-developed apps that were completely unusable by the company. After HouseCanary breached its contract, we ended our relationship with the company and were forced to develop our own tool in-house.”
His company started out as Stewart Title of Michigan in the 1990s before becoming Title Source, according to its website. Last month, the company
It has offices in California, Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, with headquarters relocating to Detroit in 2012.
Quicken’s website describes Amrock as among its family of companies and “on the forefront of industry innovation, with a large team dedicated to developing new technology and software.”
Skousen Law,Robert James Skousen, San Bernardino, James Allen, Los Angeles, and Cindy Tran, for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Defendants, Cross-complainants and Respondents.
Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 5, California.
No. B207861.
Decided: August 19, 2009
Plaintiff was a Nevada corporation duly qualified to transact intrastate business in California when it filed this action in California. Defendants cross-complained against plaintiff. While the action was pending, plaintiff converted to a Delaware corporation, changed its name, and obtained a new certificate of qualification to transact intrastate business in California. The trial court granted defendants' motion to strike the complaint and all responsive pleadings filed after the date of conversion on the ground that plaintiff failed to comply with the conversion requirements set forth in Corporations Code section 1157 1 or notify the court and California's Secretary of State of the corporate changes. The court entered judgment in favor of defendants on the cross-complaint.
On appeal, plaintiff contends the trial court abused its discretion in striking plaintiff's pleadings because it was a corporation in good standing in its home state, as well as in full compliance with California laws regulating the transaction of business by foreign corporations. We conclude that plaintiff had the capacity to maintain pending actions under Nevada and Delaware laws, plaintiff was duly qualified to transact intrastate business in California, and section 1157 does not apply to the conversion of a foreign corporation to another foreign business entity. Therefore, we reverse.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
No comments:
Post a Comment