Drew Peterson has a new reason for wishing he hadn’t listened to his lawyer. His complaint against JPMorgan Chase Bank has been dismissed and they are asking to recover costs from Peterson.
Back in November of 2007, shortly after Stacy Peterson went missing, Drew was seen making preparations for what seemed to be his imminent arrest. His son Stephen arrived at his house to collect the youngest children and to receive funds. Drew’s friend Ric Mims told the Enquirer, “I watched Drew write a check for a little over $200,000 from a home equity line and give it to Steve in case something happened to him.”
By May 2008 Peterson’s lawyer, Joel Brodsky, was telling people on a message board that Drew had replaced the money. His description of the reason for the withdrawal veered a bit from Mim’s. Brodsky wrote, “Drew initally pulled that money out to prevent Stacy from getting it to enjoy with her paramour, but now he put it back because if she pulls it out then she has shown herself and Drew is off the hook so to speak.” It might be safe to assume that the money was returned on Brodsky’s recommendation.
Not surprisingly, Stacy has yet to attempt to withdraw any money from that account, but in the fall of last year, Peterson tried again to access his HELOC; this time to pay for his defense after being charged with murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio. JPMorgan Chase Bank denied him the funds and cited “imprisonment” as the reason for suspending his home equity line, saying that Drew’s arrest for murder constituted a material change in his financial condition.
Peterson filed a suit against JPMorgan Chase, asking not only for access to the credit line but also for $75,000 in damages. Lawyer Walter Maksym was hired to argue the case.
After numerous amendments to the complaint and seemingly contradictory arguments that attempted to prove that Peterson’s detention constituted no change in his financial condition while also asserting that he was in dire need of cash to pay for his defense, Judge Ronald Guzman dismissed the complaint on September 8.
Yesterday, Chase filed a motion for a judgment against Peterson to be entered which included this proposed judgment:
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION
The Court has ordered that Plaintiff Drew W. Peterson recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and that the Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. recover costs from the Plaintiff.
This action was decided by Judge Ronald A. Guzman on Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that final judgment is entered granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint and dismissing this action with prejudice.
Case dismissed!
~By commenting you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. You can contact admins directly by sending an email to petersonstory@gmail.com.~
Line and paragraph breaks are automatic in comments. The following HTML tags are allowed: <a href=""> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <pre> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>
I’m still wondering where Drew’s next letter is. C’mon, isn’t the Selig strategy to counter any negative news with a flurry of bullshit?
Yeah, wonder where it is? Aren’t we supposed to be monitoring his son’s suspension/investigation because Peterson says he’s a victim of vindictiveness and persecution? Is anyone working on that? You know, making sure that Peterson’s problems are theirs? If not, get with it.
I am wondering the same thing, when the next letter shall appear. It is never a dull moment with Skunk, and Rotsky! I am sure they are cooking, and scheming something up behind the scenes.
I wonder if he is wearing his donkey suit now that he lost yet another court battle lol
So Chase wants their court costs from Drew. Guess their lawyers don’t work solely for media exposure like the Seven Samurai (oops, SIX Samurai — forgot about the whole Reem thing). Maybe Drew will opt to sell that “sold” motorcycle that’s still in his garage — but for a fair price this time.
“‘Sold’ motorcycle that’s still in his garage?”
You mean Brodsky lied about successfully selling it on eBay?
Granny, you must have missed the photos of the bike still in his garage three months after the supposed sale.
The auction was pulled from eBay so it definitely did not sell there. Joel claimed it had been sold to a private party for a “good price”.
Three months after Joel Brodsky stated that Drew’s Screamin’ Eagle had been sold, it was photographed still in Drew’s garage.
[scribd id=37518958 key=key-2lydpzf3nzk85d3anlkh mode=list]
What a farce, If this wasnt about 2 mothers, silenced by this poor excuse of a human being, It would be funny. LIES LIES and MORE LIES… Wonder how this tribe of misfits will get paid now? My guess is that they are NOT!That goose is slowly cooking, and soon it will be done, as in bye bye Drew! Of course, this is only my opinion.. Keep sleeping on the job Brodsky. Brodsky,gives even bad lawyers a bad name.
Heh, Meirish, true dat. The SA’s office probably has a shrine set up in their office, in which they chant daily, “please don’t fire Brodsky, Drew, please don’t.”
Looks like Walter Maksym is not going to get paid either then.
Good thing he still got a 2nd job as an Orgasm Expert; at least he’s got another income (!!)
LOL !!
You mean the guy who came up with the stupid idea to rent out Drew’s house to the media while his trial was to be taking place 20 miles or so away? Yeah, he’s a real pip, he is.
Oh Yes that’s right, that was another novel marketing idea of his.
It appears they are just desperately scrounging around to get some money somewhere, anywhere or from anyone for that matter !!
Facs, you’re right. I missed that one totally, but I did remember that Brodsky had bragged about getting a great price for it.
Do I want to know what kind of second job Maksym might have to qualify him as an “Orgasm Expert”?
Where in the world does Drew FIND these losers? I agree with Rescue about the Prosecution lovin’ this Dream Team, but it seems obvious now that anyone who expects to get paid for their work has absolutely no interest in the sideshow that is Brodsky & Peterson.
Thomas Peterson turns age 18 on January 2, 2011 or thereabouts.
Thomas Peterson possibly stands to gain control of his mother’s life insurance proceeds allegedly held in a Trust account, by his father, Trustee, in the approximate amount of $500,000.
Oh Granny, I just can’t bear to put the links up again…but if you Google “One Hour Orgasm” or “Total Body Ecstacy” plus “Walter Maksym” you’ll see his other area of expertise. From what I’ve read he looks way more qualified in that area than law… LOL
God, keep Drew away from this money.
Thanks for not posting the links. I was just asking how in the world someone could be considered an “orgasm expert.”
You’ve given me enough…..thanks.
Isn’t that part of the Savio family’s suit against Drew — that he has never been able to prove that he’s kept that money separate and distinct from other funds?
Here’s the complaint. I haven’t searched through it for that particular assertion but if you want to look…:
[scribd id=37580144 key=key-2icml0rcv32iqqz8u7br mode=list]
You got that right! Keep him away from it, and Joel! I can see it now, using his poor son to get bail money!
From the complaint above:
Too bad, Neil never got to give that bit of testimony at the Hearsay Hearings. *sigh*
There is no specific mention of the money not being accounted for, but it is implied that the insurance proceeds were mismanaged. I am pretty sure that there had been mention early on that while Drew said that he had squireled the money away for the boys, nobody could verify it.
In this article, http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/savio-estate-opposes-peterson-bond-reduction.html, it seems they wanted “to make sure that no money was used for wife number 5 or to spend on Drew and his whims,” …
JMO
If the money was put in separate accounts, that would have been easy enough for Drew to show. And if that were the case, I would think Joel would have been all over the news showing the financial records to prove it. However …
JMO
If money was withdrawn from those accounts or if the money was not put into separate accounts, that is where things get a little stickier. That might account for the silence.
That same story also says:
Of course, Kelly only says that it’s his ‘understanding’ that Drew has access to the boys’ trust funds. So, that’s still not 100% confirmed but at least it’s a mention.
Drew was the guardian of the boys’ estate IIRC. So it would make sense as such that he had access to the funds.
It’s how they were used that will be interesting.
Also, I don’t mean to confuse anyone with post 26.
The reference to “wife 5″ was meant to be “wife 4″ in reference to Stacy.
Related to a Post 16 above, by Judgin:
Is it a fact that Drew’s son will gain control of the entire $500k trust when he turns 18?
Actually, that would be $500k plus interest, assuming that no money was withdrawn prior to now.
You know, this whole thing w/Chase sort of reminds me of a skit that Gallagher used to do about trying to borrow money from a bank. Mr Gotrocks doesn’t need the money, so the bank of course wants to loan it to him. Mr Average Joe needs it, but the bank says no.
Chase was perfectly willing to loan it until Drew needs it.
Not that I want Drew to get it, but it kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth where it comes to Chase.
Just looking at things from the other side of Alice’s looking glass, I guess.
Geez, awful quiet lately, not a word from the MadHatter and the Scream Team. Wonder if they are finally rethinking their stratagy? Naw, its always quiet before the storm. But I have to admit, it’s been nice not seeing or hearing from them.
Is the murder trial ever going to get underway?
Hi Dill. The prosecution appealed the Judge’s ruling on the hearsay statements that can be allowed as evidence (he only wants to allow a few of them) so that needs to be heard and decided by the Illinois appellate court before the trial can proceed. It’s going to take a while!
I agree with what you are say with average joe needing/not getting and Gotrocks not needing/getting…but the statment about beging willing to loan to drew until he needs it, is confusing. Why would chase be willing to lend someone money when they may never get it back?? He’s a high risk! Sure he needs it now, but he wouldn’t have to be trying to rip off the banks if he didn’t kill his wives–IMHO!!!!
Plus, didn’t drew want his homeowners insurance (or something like that)to pick up the tab on his legal bills? Or am I confusing this with the same Chase issue…
The banking industry puts the screws to the least well off always. Whole nations are abused and robbed in this way. The better off a person or a country is, the lower interet rate they pay as well. I keep tellin’ ya that the money marketeers are not only ripping us off in grand style, they’re laughing at the rest of us as they relax with prostitutes and intoxicants, waving their six-figure bonus cheques in the air.
Rant over.
Hey everyone. Attorney Karen Conti has always been gracious when asked questions that many of us have had. She’s so successful in everything she does, it seems.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/media/2010/09/karen_conti_hired_as_wfld-chan.html
Bucket said: “…waving their six-figure bonus cheques in the air…”
LOL, Bucket! And their fingers.
***
Sureyouwill: I guess what I’m thinking is that since his income has not changed, there’s the same chance for payback.
On the other hand, I agree with you 100%. Drewpy is a bad risk for anything good!
While Drew’s income may not have changed, his expenses certainly increased dramatically because of his detention. Chase cited a “material change in his financial condition” as the reason for freezing the HELOC which I think would mean his whole financial situation — not just his earnings. I’m sure that was part of what was considered in the decision to dismiss his suit against Chase.
cheryljones – It is true that Drew’s income may not change – but his expenses absolutely have changed. It is very expensive to pay for an attorney when you are charged with murder. Banking is all about risk versus reward. I would think that his knee-jerk reaction to pull the whole amount out right away didn’t help his case any either.
Jinx, TAI!
And congratulations to Karen Conti! I saw her as I was flipping through channels last night and was reminded of how helpful she’s always been to us.
Facs – we are on the same page there – I started my post and went to do something else for a minute! LOL.
As an aside (
), Karen Conti’s office received a congratulatory response from Joel Brodsky to a PR they sent out. In the response, he congratulated her on behalf of the entire Drew Peterson defense team. Noticeably absent from the list of attorneys was Reem Odeh. Five attorneys were named. Mess with the driver, guess you’re off the bus.
Ouch! Defending Drew or not, Reem is certainly on the outs with that one.
Heh. You’ve got that right, Facs.
Just keep a good thought and hope that Peterson and/or his supporters don’t smarten up and kick Brodsky to the curb, replacing him with a real attorney. We wouldn’t want that to happen.
This is off topic. Police have identified remains found Monday as belonging to Theresa Parker, the 911 dispatcher who went missing in 2007. Her husband, Sam Parker, was convicted of her murder WITHOUT A BODY!!!
Denise @ #47. Wow!!! Thanks for the information.
Here’s a link for general info:
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/sep/22/walker-county-sheriff-announcing-new-information-t/?breakingnews
Random and amusing Tweet posted today by a lawyer:
Of course, he doesn’t say which of the team he’s looking at…but I think I know.
Haha! I wonder.
Hi everyone.
Well, isn’t that just hilarious, Bratsky sucking up to Karen Conti. (please have me as a guest, please invite me on your show, please let me be on your show, please..)
Congratulations to Karen from me, too.
Thank you for the news, Denise. It’s so sad, but an end to a successful physical search opens new doors to recovery for the bereaved. God bless ‘em.
Isn’t the gist of the lady attorney’s comments pretty much what we’ve been saying all along about her law partner? See, we DO know what we’re talking about here.
Still, folks, remember to do the chant: Please don’t fire Joel, Drew, please don’t fire Joel. Repeat.
From Facebook:
“Haggage” was Reem Odeh’s slip for a term she unlovingly calls Elizabeth Brodsky. Wonder why Brodsky has such a hard time playing nice with the other kids?????
Hahahahahaha. You just can’t make this stuff up.
Brodsky is a real professional. We just haven’t decided which kind of real professional he is. Maybe the clown variety, like Bozo was? At least Bozo had buckets and gave prizes for getting the little ball in them. What does Brodsky have to offer Drew, but a day-in and day-out existence in a county detention center, with merely a contention that he’s being vindictively persecuted. Maybe Brodsky can get him some buckets and a ping pong ball for excitement.
Doing the chant…….
DP got himself into that day-in and day-out existence in a little county detention center cell.
JB sure is doing a bang-up job of slowly digging DP’s grave for him! Maybe that is JB’s claim to fame… the ‘Con’ conning the ‘Con’!
Also from today.
You know, it’s really too bad Reem didn’t listen to her gut a long time back when she was telling the media she didn’t care for Joel’s style of representation.
I’m just disappointed that she stayed in that dysfunctional partnership as long as she did. I hope now she realizes that there are more honorable ways to achieve fame and that any boob can write a book.
Hey Judgin
I loved this. So True, IMO.
“Maybe that is JB’s claim to fame… the ‘Con’ conning the ‘Con’”!
Heh. The list of fallouts on the Brodsky Wall of Defame is growing. Can they all be defective, or is the master of deceit the one to watch?
Patience is a virtue. We here at Justice Cafe have repeatedly been putting up accurate research and facts which show that Peterson is the evil creep that is getting the defense he so deserves. Not only is Peterson himself the main event, but his goofball of an attorney takes the show to the Nth degree.
We’ve covered these issues about Brodsky many times on this blog. We were appalled that Brodsky endorsed a date-scheme on a radio show, and a fight match with both the boyfriend of Peterson’s “love interest,” and Geraldo Rivera. We were equally disgusted that Brodsky used his client as a bargaining tool for interviews to promote his personal business. We were stunned that he tried to sell Steph Watts personal video footage of Peterson and his latest love interest for $200,000. Mind you, the woman child actually admitted the “engagement” was all a stunt until Brodsky buttoned her lips by saying she was confused.
Brodsky has come across as a man of intimidation. He seems to thrive on making trouble for anyone that he thinks is getting in his face. He thrills upon being known for his unorthodox antics rather than, obviously, being known as reserved, professional, having integrity, honest and effective. Brodsky’s latest focus of intimidation appears to be Reem Odeh.
I believe he thinks he is the one that is responsible for the end of the FindStacyPeterson forum, even though he’s patting himself on the back erroneously for the ending of it. Peterson, through Brodsky said: “The site, he says, had intruded on his personal life and Peterson filed two complaints against the blog–one with the FBI and one with local authorities. (http://www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/templates/?z=4&a=548)
He’s intimidated, through his ugly cease and desist nonsense, Matt Phelps, Geoff Pinkus, Michelle LeFort, and Lisa Ward (Vicki Connelly’s daughter). He’s tried to make trouble for Joe Hosey by attempting to get him fired. (BTW, Brodsky’s pie hole seems to be stuck on stupid by telling any idiot that will listen to him that I am really Joe Hosey, posting under a pseudonym. What I will say is that Joe Hosey is an honorable and ethical individual, someone that Brodsky couldn’t come close to being!!)
Two attorneys have left the defense team, one who has been publicly vocal about the reasons. Now, a years-long law partnership has ended, with one half of the team inferring that her former partner is anything but ethical and professional.
We told you so.
*Applause*
I would just add to your Rescue’s comments, that even some members of the new defense team have been observed trying to put some distance between themselves and Brodsky (in the courtroom yet!) and who can forget the recent angry hiss of “STFU!” from his own co-counsel.
Man, if you took away Brodsky’s phone line to the FBI, the ISP, the Tribune and the Daily Herald, he’d be reduced to what he is. Nothing. He’s had plenty of chances to prevail in court (that is when he stays awake), and we know how far that’s gotten him.
P.S. Lest we not forget his new found buddy, Sneed. She luvs those letters!
LMAO!!!!
Heh ~ I think Lopez refusing to sit at the defense table with Brodsky isn’t exactly Brodsky’s shining moment either!
What kind of stuff is this to say by a member of the legal profession, while posting on a forum?
This is how Joel Brodsky likes to flex his beer muscles by intimidation. Can you believe a member of the law profession would write things like this?
Let’s not forget Joel Brodsky going after potential witnesses (like Len and Paula, Sharon Bychowski, Cassandra and Yelton Cales, etc.) on blogs and forums and using the blog of P.I. Paul Huebl to aid him in his smear campaigns. The sleaze factor is mind boggling! What kind of lawyer thinks that this is professional conduct?
I, for one, want to thank Brodsky for giving us so much material in which to bop him on his noggin.
Yeah, sure you are expanding. Windbags do expand.
I’m not going to bother repasting the comments from other defense attorneys who have commented on Joel’s poor performance in the courtroom and poor choices outside of it. I’m sure you all remember those comments well.
OK, just this one from last Thursday (this is two years after Joel posted the above. You would think his skills would have improved over time…):
When I went over the posts of Brodsky relevant to Matt Phelps, I can’t help but wonder what is so important about those so-called recordings that sent Brodsky into a tizzy. Brodsky went apeshit over it, threatened him legally, denying it happened, trying to post on the author’s website, posted on SYM, everything he could do to disspell the myths Brodsky claims were put forth by Phelps.
What I’d like to know is if there really are recordings, and, if so (AFAIK, Phelps was not arrested and/or charged with anything illegal in association with this mess), are the recordings in the hands of the State? WHAT is on those recordings? I wonder if they can actually be used as part of the case against Peterson if there is anything useful to the SA on them.
Brodsky sounds like Blago! PLAY ALL THE TAPES.
Now, if we have learned anything in almost three years of seeing and hearing Brodsky, believe the opposite of what he says, heh? That, you can count on!
Neil Schori guest wrote a piece for the Time’s Up blog yesterday. Go Neil!:
http://timesupblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/chris-rainey-domestic-violence-church.html
I feel assured this attorney’s day will come, as well as those that place their confidence in him, and it won’t be for his or their brilliance.
Nice post from Pastor Schori. Abusers take on many forms, unfortunately. Bullying. Name calling. Attempts at humiliating someone, especially for an opposing point of view.
We’ve even seen some very low, degrading, lewd and disgusting remarks, posts, and pictures posted about those of us that blog here, merely because we put our faith in the belief that Kathleen and Stacy were the victims, not the murder defendant. He has a voice. He has many voices. They’re called lawyers. Kathleen and Stacy didn’t have a chance to survive, and we see that clearly.
Thanks, Judgin!
http://www.willcosheriff.com/pages/cimis/details.asp?lname=Peterson&Submit=Submit&CIMIS_NUMBER=20090003825#Visit
Reem Odeh:
…Its been stressful. I was able to experience first hand how evil people could be towards one another and my patience and temper was really put through a big test.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Whatever Reem is going to do in future will always be a big improvement on what she did with Joel Brodsky !
For you who are local. There is not a Team Stacy this year, but it’s still a worthwhile cause. It’s not too late to sign up!
http://www.events.org/angelsagainstabuse/cpage.aspx?e=29669
5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Lid will blow.
BLASTOFF!!!
Yep.
Someone must be mad at Reem today. Otherwise, I can’t imagine why they would submit her photo to this nasty site so that she could be torn down.
http://thedirty.com/2010/09/hottest-lawyer-in-chicago/
Heh. When it comes to the subject of Drew Peterson and his defense team, nothing is left to the imagination. It’s all right there. You just have to sort it out.
I wouldn’t put it past a certain “haggage” either.
What is wrong with “those” people? Never mind. I think I’ve figured it out.
What’s wrong with those people is that they are scared. Looks like a pre-emptive strike to me. I hope Reem isn’t intimidated by that kind of crap.
IMO
Facs@ #85. Are you kidding? Reem has seen first hand what her ex-law partner is all about. She knows what he’s capable of doing. He thrives on making trouble where there is none. The question is, is she up for the repercussions? It’s not just a matter of walking away from a broken partnership, it’s a matter of dodging the slime that is going to be coming her way. Whew.
True. True. But she’s been working closely with that dog for at least three years. Imagine the dirt she has on HIM.
[scribd id=38272818 key=key-29yba5lxbglj17fyrox9 mode=list]
It is almost going to be predictable what slime is going to come Reems way.
We’ve seen it all before with others that left the fold or were no longer in favor !
New post is up now:
http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/reem-odeh-withdraws-from-drew-peterson-defense/