Monday, November 16, 2015

Kelley Lynch Proposed Order - Leonard Cohen Retaliatory Motion for Sanctions

Kelley Lynch


Leonard Norman Cohen, an individual,                                  Case No. BC338322
Leonard Cohen Investments, LLC, a Delaware                       Related Case No. BC341120
Limited Liability Company                                                     
                                    Plaintiffs                                              Department 24
                        vs.                                                                    Judge Robert Hess

Kelley Lynch, et al.,                                                                Hearing Date:  October 6, 2015
                                                                                                Complaint Filed:  August 15, 2005

PURSUANT TO CCP 1008(d) & CCP 128.7

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Against Defendant Kelley Lynch Pursuant to CCP 1008(d) and CCP 128.7 came on noticed hearing before the Honorable Judge Robert Hess, Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, on October 6, 2015.  Upon consideration of the pleadings on file, Defendant’s Motion for Terminating and Other Sanctions, Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to CCP 1008(d), and CCP 128.7, Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice, all supporting documents, and argument of counsel, the Court denied the motion without prejudice with respect to Plaintiffs request that the Court terminate Lynch’s fee waiver; prevent her from filing any additional legal pleadings (unless approved by the Supervising Judge); order her to return Leonard Cohen’s alleged attorney/client privileged and confidential documents identified in Exhibits C and D of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal Portions of the Record; order her to certify under penalty of perjury that she no longer has in her possession any of Plaintiffs’ attorney/client privileged or confidential documents subjecting her to potential contempt of court sanctions; and prohibit Lynch from disseminating or distributing any such documents to third parties. 
The Court informed the Plaintiffs’ counsel: “I’m going to deny your 128.7 motion.  I don’t think that the remedies here that you propose are well-tailored for this.”  Furthermore, the Court advised Plaintiffs’ counsel that the denial was “without prejudice to your seeking alternative remedies on other theories, but I don’t think it’s 128.7.”
Dated:  11 November 2015                                         IT IS SO ORDERED:

                                                                                    Honorable Robert Hess
                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court



            It was my understanding, based on the comments of the Court at the October 6, 2015 hearing, that I had the option of submitting an Order in this case.  However, Stephen Gianelli, an individual I do not know, emailed me the hearing transcript and minute order.  At that time, I realized the Court ordered me to submit a Proposed Order. 

            On October 26, 2015, I wrote Michelle Rice, opposing counsel, and attached a Proposed Order.  I heard nothing back.  Proposed Order A.  Proposed Order A is the aforesaid Order. 
            On October 30, 2015, I received a redlined copy of the Proposed Order from Michelle Rice by Fedex Priority Overnight.  The enclosed memorandum advised:  “Ms. Rice asked that I send you the following copy of the Proposed Order with her proposed changes in redline.”  It did not advise me what Michelle Rice had in mind with respect to the sentence she proposed.  The following language was redlined:  “I’m going to deny your 128.7 motion.  I don’t think that the remedies here that you propose are well-tailored for this.”  The Court further said that the denial of Plaintiff’s motion is [without prejudice to your seeking alternative remedies on other theories, but I don’t think it’s 128.7].  I attempted to inquire about this matter given the fact that I don’t understand why the Court’s own words were highlighted.  The words preceding the redlined sentence was crossed out:  “the denial was” followed by the aforementioned highlighted statement of the Court’s.  I heard nothing back.  Proposed Order B is attached hereto.

            On October 30, 2015, I received a messengered envelope from Michelle Rice.  The memorandum advised that a clean version of the Proposed Order sent fedex overnight was being enclosed.  The words “the denial was” were removed.  I asked for clarification but again heard nothing.  This is the unprofessional conduct I have experienced with respect to every single one of Leonard Cohen’s legal representatives.  I find it deplorable.  Proposed Order C is attached hereto.

            I therefore attach my original Proposed Order together with the Proposed Orders B and C.   It is my personal opinion that the Court itself should decide which Order to formally enter. 
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

This Statement is executed on this 11th day of November 2015 in Los Angeles, California.

                                                            Kelley Lynch



 Kelley Lynch Proposed Order

Rule of Court
Rule 3.1312

The opposing party or parties must state any reasons for disapproval.


Michelle Rice red-lined copy with no explanation as to what she would like done.


Michelle Rice additional Proposed Order.  No explanation.  


From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 3:23 PM
Subject: Fwd: FYI
To: Michelle Rice <>, rkory <>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*>, Washington Field <>, ASKDOJ <>, "Division, Criminal" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, nsapao <>, fsb <>, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, Stan Garnett <>, Mike Feuer <>, "mayor.garcetti" <>, Opla-pd-los-occ <>, "Kelly.Sopko" <>, Whistleblower <>, Attacheottawa <>,,

Michelle Rice and Robert Kory,

At the end of the October 6, 2015 hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions, Judge Hess advised me as follows:  "If you want to submit a written order on the denial of their 128.7 motion, you're welcome to do that."  I took that to mean that I had the option of filing a proposed order with the Court.  As you have probably determined, based on my fee waivers (in this and other cases before LA Superior Court and the Appellate Division), I have extremely limited financial resources.  I, therefore, decided that the Court's denial of the motion was sufficient.  However, on October 19, 2015, Stephen Gianelli (who has been criminally harassing me, my sons, and others for over six straight years) decided to transmit the hearing transcript and Minute Order to me with certain rather disturbing comments.  I understand that Gianelli is now attempting to argue that the three of you have not engaged in any type of potentially unlawful conduct with respect to me but I believe the evidence proves otherwise.  That will be up to a Court to ultimately decide.  I have repeatedly and continuously asked that this conduct cease and desist.  My sons were relentlessly targeted, and many individuals continue to be, by Stephen Gianelli, Susanne Walsh (Cohen's fans), and others.  At times, Michelle Rice was copied on those harassing and disturbing emails.  I have no idea who these parties are or what their interest in all matters related to Leonard Cohen might be.

Based upon the Minute Order, it would appear that Judge Hess actually ordered me to submit a Proposed Order to the Court.  Therefore, I attach hereto a copy of my Proposed Order.  I would like to ask you to provide me with your comments, or any proposed changes, at your earliest convenience.

On a separate note, I will be filing two case statements with respect to two matters under appeal.  My federal RICO suit will be filed within the month.  I have informed you that Gianelli has now begun harassing me over this matter and I have provided you with a copy of my Declaration to Tax Court that extensively addresses this unconscionable situation.

Gianelli has decided to quote Michelle Rice's July 25, 2015 email.  For the record, I have never stated that Michelle Rice is a child molester.  That particular issue arose when Freda Guttman questioned Ann Diamond about certain statements her son/daughter heeard Lorca Cohen make publicly while attending Concordia University.  I personally do not understand why this matter would be something to joke about.  Ann Diamond addressed this matter in her Declaration which was submitted to the Court in connection with the fraudulent domestic violence order (Case No. BQ033717).  Her declaration is attached hereto for your convenience.  While I did work as Cohen's personal manager (and never business manager) when these statements were made public, I had nothing whatsoever to do with the statements.  In fact, I asked my brother-in-law, Van Penick, to inform Ms. Diamond that the statements were disturbing to Lorca Cohen.  That resulted in her removing the comments from her public blog.  However, now that I have been repeatedly falsely accused of making these statements, I have no choice but to confront them.  

If you intend to file any documents in the related Case No. BC341120, I would like to remind you that that corporations are not part of the writ of possession; TH and BMT are suspended corporations; I was not served the summons and complaint; and Judge Ken Freeman's court reporter brought the case to my attention.  I stored, as a courtesy to Leonard Cohen, boxes of very old business documents.  In 1996, Leonard Cohen asked me to store them as a courtesy.  He was renovating his garage which was transformed into a recording studio and guest suite.  A great deal of the seized property relates to corporate matters.  Other boxes were my own files from New York or the property of Machat & Machat, Phil Spector, and others.  In October 2004, Leonard Cohen and his daughter removed all his personal and business files from my office.  That includes, but is not limited to, his archival materials.  On October 27, 2004, my lawyers notified Westin that his client, Leonard Cohen, should make arrangements to pick up all of Cohen's property.  Cohen understood I worked from my home office on a daily basis and stored these old documents for him.  The alleged manuscript would have been a photocopy of "Beautiful Losers" from Machat & Machat's files.  It is worth the pen and paper it was written on/with.  Machat & Machat were engaged in negotiations with respect to a potential Broadway play and your client's work.  Therefore, your client abandoned this property and I had no legal obligation to return it.  Your client had an obligation to make arrangements to pick it up.  I also phoned Scott Edelman, who in keeping with Cohen's legal representatives disgraceful conduct, refused to speak with me or call me back.  Most of the items listed in the writ of possession were not in my possession.  Edelman refused to communicate with me about the failure to serve me the summons and complaint in Case No. BC338322 as well.  I have asked you to provide me with a copy of the proof of service in the related case and Steve Lindsey's declaration.  At no time did I advise Lindsey that I planned to sell anything belonging to Cohen.  I advised the IRS Commissioner's Staff that I intended to ship the evidence to IRS in Washington, DC.  As you know, and I have Kory's emails confirming this, I reported that allegations that Cohen committed criminal tax fraud to IRS on April 15, 2005 and at other times.  I had valuable paintings Cohen gave me (and dedicated/signed for me) and never sold them so your argument is really quite absurd.  Steve Lindsey, on the other hand, was willing to coordinate a custody matter, submitting Kory/Cohen's declaration to the Court, and his actions with respect to my younger son speak volumes.  I have informed IRS, FBI, and DOJ that Greenberg's lawyer wrote me that they have evidence in Colorado that the custody matter was coordinated (by Cohen, Kory, Lindsey, and others); the false arrest on May 25, 2011 was coordinated; and there is evidence related to criminal witness and evidence tampering as well.  I have personally discussed this matter with FBI in Denver and forwarded Daniel Scheid's email confirmation to IRS, FBI, DOJ, Treasury, and others.  Please feel free to serve me any document you want in the related case.  I will respond appropriately.  

Please let me have your thoughts or comments on the attached Proposed Order.

Kelley Lynch
NOTE:  Kelley Lynch has never referred to Rice as a “child molester.” 

From: Michelle Rice []
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2015 11:35 AM
To: Stephen Gianelli
Subject: Re: So where is your oft threatened, but never quite filed "motion to vacate the fraud domestic violence matter"? (See 4/14/2015 email)

And who cannot control their emotions?  Booo hooo Kelley Lynch called me a child molester in emails that no one ever reads....

Boooo fucking hoooooo...... man up and put on your big boy pants and shut the f*&k up.

Do me a favor and keep inciting her to file more motions, you are making me richer than f*&k.  In fact, I think I can pay off my mortgage on my $2 million Hollywood Hills home with jetliner views by the end of this year.

Michelle L. Rice, Esq.
Kory & Rice LLP
9300 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
(310) 285-1633
(310) 278-7641

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen R. Gianelli <>
Date: Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:32 PM
Subject: FYI

In the immortal words of Michelle Rice, words we can all now savor: “you know, I mean, basically … And so it's our, you know, I mean‎ ... basically ... you know ... So, basically ... It's our sort of feeling that this motion here … I think the main point that we're ... trying to make … I mean…”. (Michelle Rice, actual remarks to Judge Hess at the 10/6/2015 law and motion hearing in BC338322; bold italics added.)

Not even Clarence Darrow himself was so eloquent on his feet…

No wonder Leonard Cohen is paying Michelle Rice a “rate that [she] can command … [that] would make [Bergman and Gianelli] sick with more envy than [they] already seem to have”. (Rice email dated July 24, 2015 11:17 PM.) No wonder “[Lynch’s] motions … are making [Rice] richer than fuck [and she] can pay off [Rice’s] mortgage on [her] $2 million Hollywood Hills home with jetliner views by the end of this year.” (Rice email dated July 25, 2015 11:35 AM.) And little wonder that “[Gianelli is] pathologically jealous of [Rice]”. (Rice email dated July 24, 2015 11:17 PM.) Michelle Rice is just amazing in court!

No doubt Gianelli will soon be “receiv[ing] letters rogatory issued through the Greek embassy”. (Rice email dated July 24, 2015 11:59 PM.)

We tremble with fear and anticipation!

ATTACHED:  Minute Order and Transcript re. October 6, 2015 hearing.