“So you’ll stay out of jail if all these cases are dismissed in time for me to vacate the hearing. Otherwise the next time you show up, you pack your toothbrush, because you are going to jail.” Judge Edward W. Nottingham to Mrs. Sieverding 2/16/06 closed CO case 02-cv-1950 p.14

“Are the defendants suggesting that the plaintiff be jailed?” Judge Edward W. Nottingham 2/16/06 p. 6 D of CO closed case 02-cv-1950

“You attached a consolidated motion to withdraw under duress of jail…and you include the Kansas Case …you have 7 days to do this and furnish to this court that you’ve done that and serve that proof on the defendants….I will check out and make sure that you have dismissed all those cases.” Judge Edward W. Nottingham 2/16/06 p. 10-13 closed CO case to Mrs. Sieverding about open KS case.

“…a bench warrant should issue for her arrest” Christopher P. Beall, representing WorldWest LLP p.5. 02/02/06 closed case CO 02-cv-1950

“The first case is the …D of Minnesota case filed by Mr. and Mrs. Sieverding against the newspaper defendants and my law firm, Feagre & Benson. (p. 6.)….we seek an order requiring the plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Sieverding, to show cause why they should not be held in contempt (p. 11.)…they do not have the right to counsel. They do not have the right to a jury trial. They do not have the right to a full and complete evidentiary hearing. (p. 14.)…nothing short of incarceration will make them stop, and that’s an appropriate” (p. 18.) Christopher P. Beall representing WorldWest LLP 9/2/05 closed case CO 02-cv-1950

“You will file on your behalf a motion to voluntarily dismiss (p. 32)…If you fail to withdraw those lawsuits, the next time you’re in this court you better be prepared with your toothbrush, because you will be going to jail. (p.33.)” Judge Edward W. Nottingham, 9/2/05 closed case CO 02-cv-1950.

.) 2/12/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding new pleadings from plaintiffs”. (e60 David Brougham bill to CIRSA)
42.) 2/28/03 “Telephone call from David Brougham regarding new pleading from Sieverding and review pleading with Brougham as to most significant allegations. Telephone call with….and Clerk’s office” (e73 Lettunich)
43.) 3/21/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding possible re-filed amended complaint” (e10 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental risk Sharing) Note, the amended complaint was not filed until 3/31/03.
44.) 3/24/03 “Confer with city attorney regarding status of amended complaint and service issue, telephone call to federal court clerk regarding same” (e61-62 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
45.) 3/31/03 “telephone calls to and from Lettunich regarding new filing, telephone call to federal court regarding same”(e62 Brougham to CIRSA)
46.)4/23/03 Telephone call to court regarding status of recent orders” (e64)
47.) 5/2/03 “Review actual court file re co-defendant’s answer”. () but the other records show that the co-defendants were emailing their filings so the “actual court file” must have had additional information not sent by the co-defendants. On 5/6, Brougham’s wording was “review Colorado Bar’s motion to dismiss”. (e70 Brougham’s bill to CIRSA)
48.) 5/6/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding status of defendant responses”(e67)
49.) 6/11/03 “Telephone call to court regarding response to motion to compel” (e67 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
50.) 6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding 6/15 filing” (e68 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
51.) 6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of plaintiffs’ response regarding motion to dismiss” (e68 Brougham to CIRSA)
52.) 7/2/03 “Telephone call from clerk regarding certain motions” (e72) ….
55.) 7/30/03 “Telephone call to Court regarding latest filings” (e75)…

8/4/03 “Telephone call to court regarding filings by plaintiffs since (7/31) order”. (e75 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental)
59.) 8/11/03“Telephone call to court clerk regarding post 7/31 filings”e46
60.) 8/14/03“Confer with court clerk regarding status of ruling on motions” e76 (Brougham to CIRSA)
61.) 8/15/03 “Confer with court regarding status of pending motions and timing of ruling”. (e58 Brougham to Underwriters at Lloyd’s London)
62.) 9/8/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of pending motions” (e76 Brougham to CIRSA)
63.) 9/09/03 “Confer with court regarding status of motions” (e77)
64.) 9/24/03 “Confer with Lettunich and court clerk regarding status of pending motions” (e78 Brougham to CIRSA)
65.) 9/24/03 “Confer with court regarding status of pending motions) (e58 Brougham to Underwriters at Lloyd’s London)
65.) 10/07/03 ‘Confer with court clerk regarding rule status’ (e78)
66.) 10/10/03 “Telephone calls to court clerk regarding new filings”(e78)
67.) 10/14/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding filing of recommendation regarding pending motions” (e78, Brougham to CIRSA). That recommendation was issued 10/20.
68.) 10/24/03 “review 13 additional ‘motions’ filed by plaintiffs. Telephone call to court regarding status and acceptance or rejection of same.” (e79-80, Mr. Brougham, Hall & Evans to CIRSA)
69.) 10/27/03 “Confer court clerk regarding filing dates and plaintiffs’ latest filings” (e 80 Brougham to CIRSA
69.) 10/31/03 “Review actual court file regarding most recent pleadings, ‘striking’ majority of same, confer with court clerk regarding same” (e80, Brougham to CIRSA)
70.) 11/21/03 “confer with court clerk regarding status of pleadings” (e81)
71.) 12/2/03 “telephone call to court clerk regarding status of 50 or more filings” (e81)
72.) 12/11/03 “Review actual court file” “confer with clerks regarding case status, pending motions” “Further conference with court staff regarding motion status” (e82, Brougham to CIRSA)
73.) 1/07/04 “Confer with court regarding status of plaintiff pleadings, pending motions, etc. Analyze motion to enjoin grounds, etc.” (.40) (e82, Brougham to CIRSA)
74.) 2/11/04 “”Telephone call to court regarding Plaintiff’s latest filings.” (e83, Brougham to CIRSA)
2/17/04“Confer with court clerk regarding status of recent plaintiff filings.”(e83, Brougham to CIRSA)
76.) 3/23/04 “confer with Court Clerk, city attorney, and Merrill regarding latest plaintiff filings” e85 (Brougham to CIRSA)

There are copies of the bills quoted here for ex parte conferences posted on D of Colorado 02-1950 Pacer on 4/12/07-4/31/07. Anyone can download the bills for ex parte conferences with federal judicial personnel for 8 cents a page. If you email me at kaysieverding@aol.com, I will email them to you.

“Telephone call from Dave Brougham (defense attorney for government defendants) advising me that the Clerk for Magistrate Schlatter advised that no Reply would be necessary”. 6/24/03 (e88)

On 4/14/03, “Confer with Slezak regarding case assignment, Review fax regarding same”. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, c/o Lord, Bissell & Brook, Attm Walter Slezak, 115 S. LaSalle St. Chicago, IL 60603-3901 claim 6603013-1896 (e57)

After the conference with Walter Slezak in his role with Underwriters at Lloyds of London our lawsuit d of Colorado 02-1950 was transferred in Oct 2003 from Judge Matsch to Judge Edward Nottingham. No health reason was given and the transfer order was not signed by the court administrator as is standard

On 2/12/03,:“Review new letter from Sieverding to Tremaine regarding Jane Bennett and may city defendants. Telephone call to Dave Brougham—discussed pleadings from Wisconsin court and Sieverding letter. Conference call to Magistrate Schlatter. Further discussion with Brougham on notice letter to Sieverding.”(e86, Lettunich to City)

That’s a verified bill for a long distance three way ex parte conference between city of steamboat springs colorado city attorney Anthony lettunich and David Brougham, attorney representing Lloyds of London, and former federal magistrate O.E. Schlatter.

“When Federal Magistrate Schlatter was asked “Do you think that if any attorney knowingly lies in court to hurt you and succeeds, that they should be liable for that? His answer was “No” …Judge Schlatter said “Even if the lawyer gives a false statement of law or a false statement of the facts, I would have to sit here and look at you and say no claim” and “if any attorney makes up something that you think is a lie, there’s some likelihood that no they’re not liable for that if they’re representing a party that is opposed to your interest” Asked again “If an attorney makes a knowing false statement of law, you think they should have no liability?”, Magistrate Judge Schlatter responded “You have no claim against them for that” 05-01283 complaint p. 33. (transcript on record)

However, it is forbidden for ex clerks to have meetings about how a judge may react. The judge is Minnesota federal judge Tunheim. They wrote and asked him for an ex parte phone call.

“David Brougham has advised me that in the event that plaintiffs obtain service upon any of the municipal defendants he will be the attorney for such defendants. In light of that fact, I will direct that Mr. Brougham also attend the status conference” p. 7 “order setting status conference 1/10/03 Magistrate Schlatter” Colorado 02- 1950 document 9

Don’t be taken in by Kay’s story. Google her name and you will that she has esculated a zoning dispute with a neighbor into an assault against the local government, local officials, the local, state and federal courts and many others including the bar.

She was jailed for contempt of court regarding abuse of process. She and her husband are complete kooks. They lost their zoning dispute and decided to take it out on everyone in sight. A restraining was issued to the neighbor involved in the zoning dispute because of repeated harrassment.

They sued the bar because they couldn’t get a lawyer to take up their obviously frivolous cause.

She and her husband filed dozens of lawsuits pro se that are filled what one judge called “verbose, prolix, and impossible to understand” language. Talk about sore losers!!!

If someone of this low a caliber can become AG of the USA … there is no hope.

Gonzo: “I’m an eye witness. I didn’t see a thing.”

Please, after 9/11 when the same people that will illegally spy on us and keep our records of communication tell us that they can’t find their own, they either think you a fool or you are a fool.

We don’t have any time to waste. We’ve already have gone too far. Not only do we have to convict these criminals ASAP, we need to work overtime to repair

…the Bushites are flooding the DOJ…

…the Bush family are CIA connected…

…the rich NOW have Blackwater AND the Patriot Act…

…America is in dangerous territory…

…DELUDE yourselves at your own risk…

WTF! Impeach them already! WHAT do they have to do to make you act on what you KNOW is happening here?

chebush has morphed into our “shadow” government. who really knows what they plan to do next?

We cannot wait, impeach or start the Mother of all 3rd parties!

“I serv(ice) at the pleasure of…

…whomever in the WH will have me… SERIOUSLY!”…