HELEN MARJORIE SLOAN,
RICHARD S. MILLER, 9th & Court Street, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
LEIGHTON S. HOUCK, 2306 Atherholt Road, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
KILLIS T. HOWARD, 712 Court Street, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
MASSIE G. WARE, 8th & Main Street, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
SOVRAN BANK, N.A., 8th & Main Street, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
CREIGHTON W. SLOAN, 383 Mimosa Circle, S.E., Aiken, SC 29801
W. CASSEL JACOBSON, 1101 Orchard Way, Silver Spring, MD 20904
SHELBY ROBERTS, 420 Amelon Road, Madison Heights, VA 24572,
CHARLES ROBERTS, 420 Amelon Road, Madison Heights, VA 24572,
FRANK G. DAVIDSON III, 8th & Main Street, Lynchburg, VA
24505, LAWRENCE JANOW, 202 Main St., Amherst, VA 24521,
CASKIE & FROST, 2306 Atherholt Road, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
THOMAS S. LEEBRICK, Lynchburg, VA,
WILLIAM G. PETTY, 9th & Main Street, Lynchburg, VA 24505,
GLEN D. POND, 1200 E. Main St., Richmond, VA 23207,
VIRGINIA SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT
SYSTEM, 1200 E. Main St. Richmond, VA 23207,
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
Comes now the plaintiff, Helen Marjorie Sloan, and after being duly sworn, moves for judgment against the defendants on the grounds and in the amounts as hereinafter set forth:
1. Plaintiff is a resident since 1986 of the United Arab Emirates. From about 1955 until about 1975, Plaintiff was a resident of 917 Old Trent's Ferry Road, Lynchburg, Virginia 24503. From about 1975 until 1984, Plaintiff was a resident of 324 E. Beverly Street, Staunton, Virginia. Since 1984, for reasons set forth herein, Plaintiff was forced to leave the State of Virginia and since that time has resided in various other places, including the United Arab Emirates.
2. Plaintiff is a retired medical doctor who was employed in various capacities by the State of Virginia for more than 30 years, including 23 years in the City of Lynchburg. During the course of this employment, she accumulated substantial savings and retirement benefits.
3. Plaintiff is the owner of valuable property and real estate located at 917 Old Trent's Ferry Road, Lynchburg, Virginia. Plaintiff also has a bank account with defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. with approximately $150,000 in the account. Altogether, Plaintiff has assets within the State of Virginia estimated to be in excess of $250,000.
4. The above named defendants have, at various times starting in 1984 and continuing up until the present, engaged in a plan or conspiracy for the purpose and intent of seizing control of all of the assets of the plaintiff for their own financial betterment.
5. As a result of the aforementioned conspiracy, Plaintiff was forced to flee from the State of Virginia in 1986 and since that time she has been denied access to all of her assets within the State of Virginia. At various times, her bank accounts have been frozen, her retirement and social security checks have been stopped and she has in effect been prohibited from occupying her house in Lynchburg, Virginia.
6. The current plan and intention of the defendants herein is to deny the plaintiff access to her assets until she dies, which, they hope and believe, will be some time soon.
7. The birth date of the plaintiff is March 17, 1910, so she is presently 79 years old.
8. In 1984, the plaintiff was a medical doctor employed as a full time staff member of the Western State Hospital in Staunton, Virginia. In April, 1984, her son, Defendant Creighton Sloan, came to Virginia and induced her to accompany him on a trip to his then residence in Durham, North Carolina. After arriving in North Carolina, Creighton Sloan took control of the keys to her car, took her clothing, held her a virtual prisoner and would not allow her to drive back to Virginia and return to work. All this was done with the encouragement and assistance of Defendant W. Cassel Jacobson, one of the brothers of the plaintiff.
9. Thereafter, Defendant Creighton Sloan circulated the false rumor .that the plaintiff was a victim of Alzheimer's Disease and that she had become a "vegetable". The purpose of this was to gain control of her assets. At no time has the plaintiff ever been diagnosed as having Alzheimer's or any other debilitating disease. At the time that this rumor was being circulated, Plaintiff was perfectly healthy and capable of resuming her duties as a doctor at Western State Hospital, except that Creighton Sloan was preventing her from doing so.
10. Creighton Sloan then notified Western State Hospital that his mother was "retiring". From April, 1984 until the present, the plaintiff has never again returned to Western State Hospital.
11. Over the succeeding months, Creighton Sloan gradually sought out and gained substantial control over all of the financial assets of the plaintiff. He also, in 1984, along with Defendant Cassel Jacobson, coerced the plaintiff into giving him a power of attorney.
12. In late 1985, the other son of the plaintiff, Samuel Sloan, returned from a lengthy stay in Japan and, unaware of these goings on, picked up his mother from the residence of Creighton Sloan in South Carolina and brought her to Lynchburg. When they entered the Langhorn Road Branch of Sovran Bank, N.A. in Lynchburg, they discovered that Carolyn Butler and other bank officers of Sovran Bank, N.A. had assembled and were just getting ready to drill open the safe deposit box of the plaintiff, on the instructions of Creighton Sloan, based upon the power of attorney which the plaintiff had given Creighton Sloan in 1984. Carolyn Butler explained to the plaintiff that it had become necessary to drill open her safe deposit box because of the neglect and financial mismanagement on the part of Creighton Sloan, who had taken control of the assets of the plaintiff. Among other things, Creighton Sloan had failed to roll over maturing certificates of deposit held by the plaintiff, with the result of a substantial loss of interest income on the part of the plaintiff. Creighton Sloan had now instructed the bank to drill open the safe deposit box and to send the contents to him. The plaintiff immediately countermanded this instruction and told the bank not to drill open the box.
13. Because of this incident, Carolyn Butler induced the plaintiff to open a revocable "trust account" with Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. for the purpose of taking control over the assets of the plaintiff away from Creighton Sloan and placing them with Sovran Bank, N.A. instead. The trust account was to be managed by Defendant Massie G. Ware. The plaintiff signed documents giving Sovran Bank, N.A. authority to seize any of her assets held by Creighton Sloan, wherever they might be found. The plaintiff was told by Carolyn Butler and Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. that she could revoke the trust agreement and get her money back any time she wanted to.
14. As a result of this, Sovran Bank, N.A. was successful in taking control of assets amounting to approximately $90,000 which had previously been controlled by Creighton Sloan and held in various bank and brokerage accounts in Virginia and North Carolina.
15. In retaliation for this, Defendant Creighton Sloan commenced a pattern of using or attempting to use the power of attorney which the plaintiff had unadvisedly given him in 1984 to regain control of the assets which had been taken over by Sovran Bank, N.A. Among other things, Creighton Sloan sent instructions to Defendant Virginia Supplemental Retirement System to send the retirement check of the plaintiff to the bank account of Creighton Sloan in North Carolina, just about two weeks after the plaintiff had instructed that the same check be sent to Sovran Bank, N.A.
16. In August, 1986, the plaintiff got wind of the fact that defendants Creighton Sloan and Cassel Jacobson were consulting with attorneys with the plan and intention of bringing a lawsuit to have the plaintiff declared incompetent so that they could seize control of her assets. For this reason, plaintiff contacted her other son, Samuel Sloan, and requested his assistance in helping her to escape.
17. In September, 1986, Plaintiff succeeded in obtaining a passport and managed to escape on a flight to Argentina. After that she made her way, along with her son and her granddaughter, Shamema Sloan, to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.
18. After that, defendants Creighton Sloan and Cassel Jacobson contacted the other defendants herein and succeeded in convincing them to join in a scheme to force the plaintiff to return to the United States of America so that they could gain jurisdiction over her and thereby gain control over her assets.
19. In furtherance of this plan, the defendants conspired to create a serious of fictional lawsuits against each other and to commence various quasi-legal proceedings, all unknown in the law.
20. In particular, Creighton Sloan and Cassel Jacobson secured the services of an attorney, Defendant Killis Howard, who had a close personal friend of many years, Defendant Richard S. Miller, who had recently gained employment as a circuit court judge. In addition, they secured the cooperation of Defendant Massie Ware, who was an employee of Sovran Bank, N.A., which had control over substantially all of the assets of the plaintiff, and with defendants Leighton S. Houck and Caskie & Frost, attorneys for Sovran Bank, N.A.
21. Together between them they conspired to bring a friendly suit between themselves, utterly without any jurisdiction whatever, to bring about a fictional "freeze" on the assets of the plaintiff for the purpose of forcing her to return to the United States.
22.. In furtherance of this plan n, the defendants decided in advance that Creighton Sloan would sue Sovran Bank, N.A. and that Sovran Bank, N.A. would immediately and simultaneously agree to "settle" the lawsuit by placing a freeze on the assets of the plaintiff. Defendant Richard S. Miller was notified of the plan and he agreed to the freeze even before the suit was filed.
23. At all times, all of the concerned defendants were aware that this was a purely fictional friendly proceeding completely unknown in the law. All of the defendants, and in particular, Defendant Richard S. Miller, were fully aware that the courts had absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain such a suit.
24. Meanwhile, defendants Creighton Sloan and Cassel Jacobson contacted defendants Shelby Roberts, Charles Roberts and Frank G. Davidson III and, through them, Defendant Lawrence Janow. Together, they agreed to attack from a different direction, by bringing a lawsuit for the custody of Shamema Sloan, the granddaughter of the plaintiff.
25. In furtherance of this plan, on August 27, 1986, a suit was filed on behalf of Shelby Roberts and Charles Roberts in the Amherst County courts by Defendant Frank Davidson III for the custody of Shamema Sloan. Defendant Lawrence Janow requested that such a suit be filed, having been contacted prior to the filing of the suit.
26. Defendants Shelby Roberts and Charles Roberts are not in any way blood relations of Shamema Sloan. Their only prior connection with Shamema Sloan arose from the fact that Defendant Shelby Roberts had previously been hired by the plaintiff and her son as a baby-sitter to take care of Shamema Sloan.
27. At no time at or since the filing of the custody suit by Shelby Roberts and Charles Roberts has Shamema Sloan ever been within the State of Virginia.
28. Defendants Frank Davidson III, Lawrence Janow and William G. Petty knew or should have known that the courts of Virginia had absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain such a custody suit or proceeding involving, among other things, a child who was not within the state.
29. In connection with the aforementioned purely fictional suits, one for a freeze on the assets of the plaintiff and the other for custody of the granddaughter of the plaintiff, defendants Lawrence Janow, William.G. Petty, Frank G. Davidson III, Killis T. Howard, Leighton Houck, Richard Miller, Charles Roberts, Shelby Roberts and Cassel Jacobson have contacted various agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Interpol, various U.S. Embassies around the world and various state and private agencies in an effort to harass the plaintiff and have her detained, arrested and returned to the United States of America by force if possible.
30. In or about March or April, 1987, defendant Richard S. Miller made a private telephone call to defendant Virginia Supplemental Retirement System and its director, Defendant Glen D. Pond. In this telephone call, Defendant Richard S. Miller requested that Defendant Virginia Supplemental Retirement System stop the payment of monthly retirement checks by the State of Virginia to the plaintiff.
31. As a result of this telephone conversation, the plaintiff was not allowed to receive her monthly retirement checks from about March, 1987 until about September, 1988, which caused great hardship to the plaintiff and could easily have resulted in her death.
32. The reason Defendant Richard S. Miller made this telephone call was to help his friend, Defendant Killis Howard, in forcing the plaintiff to return to the United States so as to gain control over her assets.
33. Defendants Richard S. Miller, Glen D. Pond and Virginia Supplemental Retirement System knew that there was no legal basis whatever for stopping the monthly retirement check of the plaintiff.
34. During the months of January through April, 1987, the plaintiff made repeated and frequent attempts to contact Defendant Richard S. Miller by telephone. At all times, Defendant Richard S. Miller refused to speak to the plaintiff on the telephone. Finally, on one occasion when the plaintiff attempted to make a person to person telephone call to defendant Richard S. Miller, Defendant Richard S. Miller accepted the call (the only time he has ever done so) and immediately handed the telephone receiver over to his friend, Defendant Killis Howard, person with whom the plaintiff had no desire or need to speak.
35. Defendant Thomas S. Leebrick is an attorney who, in about March or April, 1987, was brought into this scheme to steal the assets of the plaintiff by defendants Richard S. Miller, Killis Howard and Leighton Houck. In furtherance of this scheme or plan, Defendant Leebrick has falsely represented himself to be the attorney for the plaintiff. In fact, the plaintiff has never met, seen, spoken to or corresponded with Defendant Leebrick. Defendant Leebrick has never written a letter to the plaintiff or attempted to contact her by telephone. The plaintiff does not even know the address and telephone number of defendant Leebrick or how to contact him. She only knows his name by seeing his name in various court papers and pleadings, listing him as her attorney.
36. Assuming that defendant Leebrick is or has ever been the attorney for the plaintiff in some capacity, he has failed to provide her with adequate or proper legal representation. In particular, he has failed to do anything to help her recover her stolen assets. Indeed, the only reason he was included in this scheme was to create the imprimatur of legality to the illegal theft of her assets, after the fact.
37. Defendants Richard S. Miller and Lawrence Janow are judges of the courts of Virginia. They have entertained suits and entered orders, knowing full well that they had absolutely no jurisdiction to do so. The reason and purpose of these orders was to steal the money of the plaintiff and to kidnap the granddaughter of the plaintiff. They entered these orders, fully aware that they had utterly no jurisdiction to do so, because they were under the mistaken belief that they enjoyed absolute immunity from suit.
38. In August or September, 1986, defendants Charles Roberts, Shelby Roberts, Frank Davidson III, Lawrence Janow and William Petty entered into a plan or conspiracy to kidnap Shamema Sloan, the granddaughter of the plaintiff. Shamema Sloan is an exceptionally brilliant, talented and gifted child and, for that reason, they wanted to kidnap her.
39. A further reason was that Charles Roberts and Shelby Roberts were desirous of converting Shamema Sloan from the religion of her parents, which is the Muslim religion, to their own religion, which is the Jerry Falwell version of the Christian religion.
40. A final reason by these defendants for wanting to kidnap Shamema Sloan was to bring pressure on the plaintiff to give them all her money.
41. In furtherance of this conspiracy, these defendants placed advertisements all over the United States of America seeking help in locating the plaintiff and her granddaughter. These advertisements, which contained photographs of the plaintiff and her granddaughter, caused great embarrassment to the plaintiff.
42. At the same time, these defendants contacted various agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, seeking assistance in their efforts to detain the plaintiff and to kidnap Shamema Sloan.
43. At no time did these defendants have any legal right whatever to know the whereabouts of the plaintiff or her granddaughter.
44. In September, 1986, Defendant Creighton Sloan contacted defendants Massie Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A. and asked them to dishonor all checks written by the plaintiff and to cancel her credit cards.
45. As a result, the Visa Card issued by Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. to the plaintiff was canceled without the knowledge of the plaintiff.
46. As a result, the plaintiff was detained for some days in Rio Gallegos, Argentina because she did not have any money to pay her hotel bill. In addition, an interdiction order was placed to prevent her departure from the local airport in Argentina.
47. This incident caused great hardship, suffering and financial embarrassment to the plaintiff.
48. Sovran Bank, N.A. had absolutely no legal authority to cancel the Visa Card of the plaintiff.
49. Starting in September, 1986, Sovran Bank, N.A. commenced a pattern of refusing to honor any checks written by the plaintiff on her bank accounts, although the plaintiff had ample funds in her accounts. Sovran Bank, N.A. gave as the reason for this that it had received instructions from Creighton Sloan to place a freeze on her bank accounts and not to honor any checks written or requests for telegraphic transfers, of money by his mother. However, Creighton Sloan had no legal authority to issue such instructions. Sovran Bank, N.A. had no legal right to refuse to honor checks written by the plaintiff.
50. All this was done . in an effort to force the plaintiff to come to the State of Virginia so as to be able to serve her with a summons and to commence litigation against the plaintiff.
51. After the plaintiff had established her "trust account" with Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A., she had instructed the bank to transfer about $3,000 per month to her regular checking account to meet her normal living expenses. In September, 1986, Creighton Sloan contacted Defendant Massie Ware and requested him not to transfer any more funds to the checking account of the plaintiff.
52. As a result, defendants Massie Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A. placed a "freeze" on the trust account of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was not allowed to have access to any of the funds in her account. Massie Ware told the plaintiff that she did not have the right to override the wishes of her son, Creighton Sloan. Massie Ware further stated that the "freeze" on her bank account was based upon the power of attorney which the plaintiff had given to Creighton Sloan in 1984.
53. In fact, Defendant Creighton Sloan did not have any legal right to place a freeze on the bank account of the plaintiff, nor did Massie Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A. have any legal right to disobey the instructions of the plaintiff. The power of attorney which the plaintiff had given to Creighton Sloan in 1984 did not in any way give Creighton Sloan the right to freeze her bank account or to order that her instructions be disobeyed.
54. Commencing in September, 1986 and continuing until the present, defendants Massie Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A. have simply ignored any communications received from the plaintiff.
55. Commencing in September, 1986, Defendant Massie Ware refused to send to the plaintiff her monthly bank account statements. He said that he was sending them to Creighton Sloan instead. As a result, the plaintiff did not receive any bank account statements until mid-1987, and there she received them only by surreptitious means, unknown to Defendant Massie Ware. This caused great suffering and hardship to the plaintiff, because she had no way of determining that her bank account was still intact.
56. Defendants Massie Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A. had no legal authority to refuse to send to the plaintiff her bank statements and to send them to Defendant Creighton Sloan instead. Defendant Massie Ware also lied several times to the plaintiff, by saying that he was just in the process of mailing her bank statements to her, when he had no intention of doing so.
57. In October, 1986, the plaintiff notified her son, Defendant Creighton Sloan, that she was revoking the power of attorney which she had unadvisedly given him in 1984. Nevertheless, Defendant Creighton Sloan continued to use that power of attorney and used it in ways harmful and detrimental to the best interests of the plaintiff. Defendant Creighton Sloan continues to use that power of attorney to this day, without any legal authority to do so, even though since then the plaintiff has caused to be recorded in the Lynchburg Circuit Court a notice that the power of attorney has been revoked.
58. In December, 1986, the plaintiff sent to Defendant Massie Ware by Federal Express written notification that she was revoking the trust and terminating her "trust account" with Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. She also sent instructions to liquidate or transfer all of her assets to another bank. These communications were all ignored by defendants Massie G. Ware and Sovran Bank, N.A..
59. Because the plaintiff had previously instructed that her monthly Social Security check be sent to Defendant Massie Ware and because he now refused to forward any money whatever to her, the plaintiff was deprived all sources of income.
60. In January, 1987, Defendant Massie Ware ordered that all funds held by the plaintiff in various checking accounts with Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. be sent instead to Defendant Creighton Sloan, who, by then, resided in South Carolina. Defendant Massie Ware further .ordered that all of the checking accounts of the plaintiff be thereafter closed. As a result, the only funds of the plaintiff which remained with Defendant Sovran Bank, N.A. were those held in the "trust account", which was under the control of Defendant Massie Ware.
61. By January, 1987, because of the combined efforts of defendants Massie G. Ware, Sovran Bank, N.A., Richard S. Miller, Leighton Houck, Caskie & Frost, Creighton Sloan, Killis Howard and Cassel Jacobson, the plaintiff was utterly destitute and without funds. These defendants had, by then, obtained control of all of the assets plus the monthly retirement check and social security checks of the plaintiff. They said that they would release these funds to her only if she returned to the State of Virginia.
62. The purpose of all this was to starve the plaintiff into submission and to force her to return to the State of Virginia so that they could commence further litigation against her. An additional purpose was to insure that the plaintiff would have no funds whatever, so that she would have no money with which to hire an attorney to defend herself.
63. The aforementioned defendants had no legal authority to do any of the aforementioned acts.
64. The plaintiff contacted the United States Social Security Administration and, in about April, 1987, was able to start receiving her social security checks again, in spite of the efforts of defendant Creighton Sloan to prevent this from happening.
65. In September, 1988, defendants Virginia Supplemental Retirement System, Glen D. Pond, Richard S. Miller, Killis Howard and Creighton Sloan agreed to reinstate the monthly retirement checks of the plaintiff, because of being threatened with litigation by Rudy West, Assistant Attorney General for the State 'of Virginia.
66. Although the defendants are no longer able to prevent the plaintiff from receiving her monthly social security and retirement checks, they still, to this day, are refusing to allow her to have access to any of her assets within the State of Virginia, including especially her bank account at Sovran Bank, N.A., which contains assets with an estimated value of $150,000.
67. Because of the aforementioned acts of the defendants, the plaintiff has been unable to enter the State of Virginia or even the United States of America since 1986, because it would be too dangerous for her to do so in view of her age and physical condition and the efforts which the defendants are making to deprive her of her assets, to kidnap her granddaughter and to place her under physical restraint. For this reason, the plaintiff resides in the United Arab Emirates, with respect to which there is no extradition treaty.
68. All of the aforementioned acts of the above named defendants have caused great suffering and hardship to the plaintiff, have caused her great public embarrassment and have placed her life in danger, due among other things to not being able to have access to her assets should she need them to pay for necessary medical expenses. For these and other reasons, the defendants are liable for damages to the plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, the undersigned plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants in the following amounts:
1. A judgment in the amount of $150,000 representing the estimated value of the assets held by Sovran Bank, N.A. which Sovran Bank, N.A. refuses to return to the plaintiff; and
2. A judgment in the amount of $10,000 representing the estimated amount of the funds belonging to the plaintiff which Sovran Bank, N.A. transferred to Creighton Sloan.
3. A judgment in the amount of $2,000,000 (two million dollars) jointly and severally against the defendants representing actual damages to the plaintiff; and
4. A judgment in the amount of $5,000,000 (five million dollars) jointly and severally against the defendants for punitive and exemplary damages; and
5. For such other and further relief as may be just and equitable, together with costs.
HELEN MARJORIE SLOAN
P. 0. Box 11829
Fujairah United Arab Emirates
I, Helen Marjorie Sloan, the plaintiff herein, being duly sworn say that I have read the foregoing notion for judgment and know the contents thereof, and that the same is true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
HELEN MARJORIE SLOAN
Given under my hand this 20th day of November, 1989.
Subscribed and sworn
To before me this day
Harry A. Nunnemacher
Vice Consul of the United States of America
Dubai United Arab Emirates
20 NOV 1989