Getting Gritty 3: Meigs' Cases: Malicious Mediation
Updated: Oct 11, 2019
UNCOVERING POTENTIAL DANGERS TO THE PUBLIC
WITH POSSIBLE LAWYER SELF-INTEREST
BASIC INFORMATION REGARDING MEIGS' FIGHT:
Click Link for Importance of Questions to Meigs' Case: Deceptions
Preface to Individuals Involved.
==All Statements, Opinions, Conclusions and Assumptions are personal opinions and conclusions of Wendy Meigs and do not intend to be assumed as judgment or declarations. Wendy Meigs holds copyright to all statements, conclusions, assumptions and story. © ==
Meigs' Lawsuits against Bergman and Zucker were Dismissed. Case Information.
Both are currently in APPEALS. Stop Mediation Abuse: Help Force Accountability
Questions for Analysis for this Blog:
1. Why would a divorce court-ordered mediation over community property in the divorce continue after the person being divorced left mediation before it began? (Enjoining of all Parties?)
2. What actions could be taken to hide potentially serious legal mistakes by lawyers from a non-lawyer? How could mediation be used to ensure this outcome? Would a particular mediator be required to ensure those actions in mediation?
3. Why was Meigs threatened, manipulated and drugged at the 2015 mediation?
4. Why do three versions of the mediation agreement exist, two handwritten and one printed?
(At the conclusion of mediation, Michael J. Johnston stated that he did not want any confidentiality as he wanted to tell Jody Meigs and others about the events. Wendy Meigs agreed.)
1. Mediation occurred at Heights Mediation Center run by Edward Trey Bergman, Mediator and Current Sitting Chair of the Texas State Bar on ADR 2019.
Mediator: Edward Trey Bergman
2. Jody Meigs, the person Wendy Meigs was divorcing, left before mediation began due to no access to money to pay for mediation. Emails to lawyers indicated Jody and Wendy Meigs were going to work together to bring justice against Michael J. Johnston's appearing misappropriation of assets, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and all orchestrated through a stock sale agreement denied by the Meigs and what appears to be written and counseled by Todd Frankfort, board member of the Houston Bar on ADR (See Getting Gritty Blog 1). A document shows approval of money for Jody to attend mediation, but was not signed by Sherri Evans, Meigs' divorce lawyer, until too late for Jody to obtain money for mediation.
Important Party to Mediation leaves for Lack of Money;
Yet, Bergman Continues Mediation
3. Wendy Meigs (Meigs) was isolated from Jody Meigs, her only support and person of knowledge of many of Michael Johnston's activities in the company due to his inability to pay for the mediation. Had Evans signed the court document sooner than just before mediation, Jody could have afforded to attend mediation and work together with Wendy to bring Johnston to justice as discussed in previous emails sent to Evans, Bohreer and Zucker. However, the delay in signing the document to release money for Jody to attend mediation, isolated Wendy from her only support thus placing her in a very vulnerable position. Wendy lost her mother, lost a 33 year marriage, experienced significant issues and all within six months of the mediation; thus Wendy was already vulnerable and all knew this. This further isolation at mediation without Wendy's only support significantly increased her vulnerability and placed Wendy in desperate need for someone to trust; yet unknown to Wendy, not only did mediation lack someone for her to trust, Wendy could not even trust the mediation process itself.
Meigs Isolated from Known Support Against Johnston and Only Support
4. Upon Jody Meigs leaving mediation before it started, Wendy Meigs' attorney, Todd Zucker, told Wendy that if she left mediation, then she would lose the company and Meigs must do everything asked of her or the judge would rule against her for not participating regardless of any negotiation; hence, Wendy Meigs could not leave mediation or refuse anything asked of her per her attorney's instruction. This direction seems premeditated to ensure a predetermined outcome. Not only would Meigs be forced to comply to all requests, but Bergman could control those requests to guarantee compliance with any of his requests and further ensure the success of a predetermined outcome per the Zucker email having Bergman "handle" Meigs' claims..
Meigs Forced to Stay and Participate in Anything Asked Per Zucker or Lose Company
5. First mediation meeting consisted only of Bergman asking Meigs if she knew that her opponent was now taking psychotic medications. This question was repeated three times with Bergman staring intensely for response and this was the sole question for the first meeting. Note that a seasoned mediator like Bergman should have known that statement would frighten Meigs as her opponent had drugged, wrapped in saran-wrap and left a slit to breathe in his partner just a couple of years before and now appeared to have digressed mentally from that to requiring psychotic medications. Taking the position that mediation was a setup to manipulate Meigs to sign an agreement to be later altered now clarifies why a seasoned mediator like Bergman would need to spend the full first meeting on placing Meigs in a state of fear to be able to better manipulate her for the predetermined outcome which appears to protect Frankfort for aiding and abetting Johnston. Thus meeting one with Bergman was to instill fear into Meigs.
Bergman Creates Atmosphere of Fear
6. The second meeting of the 2015 mediation day was a communication play between Bergman and Zucker telling Meigs that she had no claims against the opposing attorneys and that Zucker's partner Michelle Bohreer was not very smart but energetic and that she mistakenly stated that Meigs had claims at deposition. This meeting served to confuse Meigs as she was told that she had claims and was now being told that she did not. All this time both Bergman and Zucker knew that Meigs had claims and intentionally hid those claims from Meigs as seen in the mediation memorandum that Zucker created and gave to Bergman for this mediation and kept from Meigs as mentioned in the email of Bergman handling Meigs' claims.: Mediation Memorandum. Thus the second meeting of that day with Bergman was to instill confusion and lie about claims against the opposing attorney and other claims. Now knowing that Zucker never intended on representing Meigs based on the email that gave handling Meigs claims to Bergman, Zucker's lying to Meigs about Meigs claims serves to seal his self-serving agenda rather than represent Meigs, a self-serving agenda that appears to be protecting Frankfort from claims for aiding and abetting as seen in Getting Gritty blog one and two.
Bergman and Zucker Create Atmosphere of Confusion and of Sexism against Women
7. Bergman isolated Meigs from attorney Zucker with opponent whom she feared and whom Bergman instilled more fear from meeting one.
Bergman Instills More Fear with Isolation and Confrontation
8. At one point Bergman led the conversation into such intensity that the opponent slid up his chair in anger, a man whose mental status progressed to requiring psychotic medications and thus placing Meigs into further fear.
Bergman Increases More Fear by Allowing Opponents Anger to Rise
9. Bergman allowed the opposing counsel, Todd Frankfort, to leave in the middle of mediation to go to a liquor store to buy alcohol at the intense request of the opponent whom Meigs now had incredible fear. With Meigs attorney still NOT present, Bergman found glasses for Frankfort to pour the alcohol and serve to Meigs twice before Meigs attorney, Zucker, ever entered the room. At no time did Bergman request no drinking as he assisted in the process. Meigs could not refuse the alcohol as Zucker told her at the beginning of mediation that she could not leave or refuse anything requested or she would lose her company. See Confession Email. and Confession Email with Notations by Meigs and Confession Email with Bohreer notations and Bohreer was NOT at mediation thus fueling the appearance of several lawyers working to manipulate mediation. Note that Todd Frankfort, the opposing attorney who left mediation for the liquor store by Bergman, is the same attorney whom seemingly aided and abetted the opponent in theft of stock and assets and did so through dual representation, known to all via Zucker's memorandum but unbeknownst to Meigs. PUT ANOTHER WAY: Bergman allowed the attorney whom Meigs had serious claims against and Bergman knew of those claims, to leave mediation to acquire alcohol to intoxicate Meigs in order to seemingly control Meigs and the mediation outcome to protect this same attorney from serious claims by Meigs by ensuring Meigs' incapacitation and any signature on a handwritten agreement to be altered later in a final printed version, a version that released all liability for all claims at all times for all lawyers; thus freeing the opposing attorney from his actions of possibly aiding and abetting and contributing to Meigs' losses now in potentially millions of dollars.
Bergman Creates and Condones Biased Environment against Isolated Meigs
10. Bergman and Frankfort allowed the opponent whom Bergman told Meigs was now on powerful psychotic medications to slide the first glass of alcohol to Meigs and the opponent did so with his hand over the glass instead of around it.
Bergman Allows Opponent on Psychotic Medications Per Bergman
to Slide Alcohol to Meigs with Hand Over the Glass Supplied by Bergman
Leading to Possible Drugging
a. What is ODD is that Frankfort, the opposing attorney, poured the alcohol into the glass and instead of sliding it to Meigs himself as he did the second time, intentionally gave the glass to the Opponent to slide to Meigs as if anticipating the Opponent to do something to the drink with his hand over the glass instead of around the glass. AS A PERSON WHO PROFESSED TO HAVING DRUGGED PEOPLE BEFORE AND FELT HE COULD GET AWAY WITH IT FOR BEING MENTALLY UNSTABLE, drugging Meigs' drink would not be a surprising action for the opponent if prepared. Frankfort and Bergman allowing drugging of Meigs would be surprising unless the actions by Frankfort in aiding and abetting the opponent were so severe that any measure to ensure that Meigs would sign anything to eventually create a printed version of the agreement that would release liability for all lawyers for all actions had to occur. Why else would Frankfort have given the glass to the opponent to give to Meigs as Frankfort poured and gave the second glass of alcohol himself directly to Meigs. After a few sips from that first glass, Meigs does not know how she got from one room to the next, suddenly appeared in a chair, and her fingers turned a dark purple from lack of oxygen. Meigs was intensely afraid, but could not leave or lose her company per Zucker.
Frankfort Aided in Incapacitating Meigs without Meigs Attorney Present.
11. Next thing Meigs knows is Zucker physically pushing on Meigs arm to sign a document that she said that she did not want to sign and could NOT see. Zucker told her that it was only a draft and the judge needed to see that we all participated so that she did not rule against Meigs.
Zucker Physically Pushes Meigs' Arm to Sign the Agreement
12. Unable to see and incapacitated by the alcohol from Frankfort and possibly drugs from the opponent, Meigs signed the draft and realized that she signed in the wrong place based on the darkness of the ink so Meigs signed again. After this, the document shown was the handwritten document #2 which has Eagles Klaw forged under Meigs' first signature. Eagles Klaw is Meigs' relief pharmacy company and had nothing to do with discussions or mediation ever. Meigs believes that the forging of Eagles Klaw was to mask her incapacity and to solidify a signature so that the printed agreement would forever release liability against all lawyers including Frankfort's aiding and abetting and the conspiracy of the remaining lawyers to protect Frankfort.
Forging on Document to Hide Meigs' Incapacity
13. Meigs suddenly appearing in a room with two others and Bergman standing just outside of the doorway to the room, Bergman asked Meigs to stay afterwards to discuss the 4%. Since Meigs did not remember the 4%, she innocently agreed to stay afterwards with just Bergman as the 4% seemed important. Someone behind the wall next to Bergman said something as Bergman turned to them and then turned back and said not tonight. It was already after 10:30pm as the mediation lasted over 12 hours.
14. Meigs remembers standing in the middle of a staircase and Zucker asking if she was okay. Then Meigs was in the car, then entering the feeder, and then sitting in a chair at home. Meigs lost a lot of time and many events slowly came back over time. Meigs has never taken drugs other than xanax for severe stressful situations and has NEVER LOST TIME.
No One Offered to Drive Meigs Home after Incapacitation at Mediation
15. As memory came back, Meigs requested the agreement voided the following week for abuse, drugging and manipulation. She also sent an email the following month confirming that request.
Meigs Requests Agreement Voided
16. Both Bohreer & Zucker and divorce lawyer, Sherri Evans decided to abandon Meigs by withdrawing if she refused to sign the printed mediation agreement rather than represent Meigs for her desired wishes. Meigs reinforced that she would not sign any agreement. Although the lawyers stated that they would withdraw, for some reason, possible to control the situation, neither lawyer withdrew via court documents until after the failed summary judgment, but neither would represent Meigs at the summary judgment to force the agreement validity which forced Meigs to get on Facebook and find currently unemployed Rodney Castille to represent plaintiff.
Meigs Threatened for Refusing to Sign The Printed Agreement
17. Summary judgment failed per Castille's pleading for lacking form as it was missing the Texas Family court required code 6.602 that the document is irrevocable, the code left out by Bergman the mediator. At that time, Castille said that since the document lacked the code, I could revoke it without further litigation.
Handwritten Agreement Fails Summary Judgment for Enforcement
18. Castille changed his statement that the agreement did not require further litigation after speaking with Zucker and Frankfort/Brady, and suddenly litigation was required. Meigs did not find out until she was forced to represent herself a couple of years later that litigation was not necessary per other lawyers.
Unemployed Lawyer Changes Position on Litigation of Agreement with Missing Remedy.
Joins Law Firm with Partner Revealed to be Friends of Bergman
19. Castille then hired on with Bruce Jamison after his conversation with Zucker/Frankfort/Brady, and Jamison who turned out to be friends with Bergman, continued litigation against the agreement after one year of no action on the contract. Meigs found out later that first semester law school teaches that after one year of no action on a contract that the contract is void and inactive. Why did seasoned lawyers not tell Meigs that the agreement was void and then continue litigation against a voided agreement and force Meigs into another mediation on an inactive agreement? Was all of this to protect Frankfort and now the numerous lawyers involved in conspiring to protect Frankfort and their actions surrounding the fraud? Or was this to protect Bergman and his manipulation and participation in a possible fraudulent mediation built upon protecting Frankfort? These are assumptions.
Lawyers Continue Litigation at Meigs Expense on Void/Inactive Agreement
20. More to follow in the next Getting Gritty blogs.
Confession Email: A biased memorandum from Todd Zucker over events that took place at mediation with victim-blaming and threats as Zucker told me when Jody Meigs left mediation before it began that I had to stay and participate in everything asked of me or I would lose my company regardless of any decision made as the judge could rule over any agreements. Mentions alcohol served during mediation without legal counsel presence and poured by opposing counsel.
Those Present at Mediation: Shows those present at mediation.
Sign-in Form for Mediation: Document used to state Wendy Meigs had representation. This form only shows that Todd Zucker was present and not that Meigs was represented. In fraud, which this appears to be, not even an affidavit is permissible so why would a sign in sheet hold more importance than an affidavit?
In “McKnight v. Riddle & Brown, P.C., 877 S.W.2d 59(Tex. App. — Tyler 1994, writ denied), the court of appeals held that the affidavits were inadequate as summary judgment evidence because ‘[t]he very essence of a conspiracy is a secret intent of the co-conspirators…. The affidavits are, in essence, self-serving statements of interested parties of what they knew and intended…. in the context of a conspiracy….’ 877 S.W.2d at 61.” If such affidavits fail as being self-serving in a conspiracy, they are self-serving in all aspects. Why would a sign-in log be more valid than an affidavit in a fraud case? As such the signature on the sign-in log fails to show representation but only shows that Zucker appeared at mediation; thus, any claim to protect Bergman via mediation contracting fails.
(1 original handwritten, 1 altered handwritten, 1 significantly different printed version)
This document shows:
1. Seen in the original handwritten, Eagles Klaw was never part of the agreement. Eagles Klaw was forged in the altered handwritten form after Meigs signed the document.
2. The altered handwritten form shows that Meigs signed twice and Eagles Klaw was added to mask incapacity; yet no legal counsel is shown to represent Eagles Klaw as Eagles Klaw was never part of any emails, memorandums, or letters and Meigs never authorized the binding of Eagles Klaw. Eagles Klaw is a company that Meigs uses for relief pharmacy work and had no relevance to this case.
a. Also, this version, sworn and attested to, failed summary judgment in Feb/March 2016 for lacking the Texas family remedy code 6.602 statement that Bergman left off that states that this document is irrevocable. Lacking the statement that the document is irrevocable allowed Meigs to revoke without any further litigation per multiple lawyers after Meigs filed on her own in 2017. Meigs was never told by any of her lawyers that the agreement was void but instead all lawyers portrayed the need to continued litigation requiring significant money to continue to fight for her company. This continued litigation depleted almost all of Meigs money and forced her to file against Todd Zucker and Bohreer & Zucker, and Edward Trey Bergman and Bergman ADR Group on her own without an attorney.
b. Hence, Meigs revoked the document in 2015 but all lawyers continued perpetrating that it required litigation when it did not through 2017 until Meigs discovered in 2018 that revoking the agreement, revoked it... and no activity on the contract after a year also invalidated it.... No lawyer, all seasoned attorneys, told Meigs that she no longer needed to fight against the agreement. Why? Why did each and every lawyer pretend the agreement required litigation? What did they achieve in doing so?
3. The printed version, contrary to the handwritten, shows full release of all liability for all lawyers involved thus preventing Meigs from pursing the fraud perpetrated by all... but Meigs did not sign the printed version.... and the handwritten failed summary judgment for missing the Texas family court remedy code. Why would all of these lawyers fight so hard and threaten Meigs to sign an agreement that was void on revoking and then continue unnecessary litigation to make Meigs feel was necessary to attempt to keep her company? Why? Was this a conspiracy to protect Frankfort for his mistake in aiding and abetting Johnston and then a conspiracy to protect themselves for protecting Frankfort? Judge for yourself and please help in any way to force accountability....
Meigs was told that the lawyers representing Bergman and Zucker as well as Bergman and Zucker are powerful enough to make sure that Meigs would find no one to represent her, that they were influential enough with various individuals in the courts and justice to block her cases from continuing to trial and prevent any law agency from pursing what appears to be clear claims. Meigs experienced additional tactics to force signature to a printed version of the mediation agreement that released liability of all lawyers. Meigs refused.
No one should be above the law. No one should be allowed to obstruct justice through influencing anyone. The public needs to be aware that justice system/courts may consider some individuals too high to fall while they dismiss valid claims by the public and force the public to be accountable whilst they walk away. Our ancestors suffered for fair courts and our military fights for our freedom every day. We must reclaim the courts for the people.
Help Meigs Force Accountability! Stop Mediation Abuse! Protect the Public!