Post by sandi66 on Sept 5, 2008 21:00:15 GMT -5
Cause No. 08-2214-08
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT NO. 7th Judicial Court
VS
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT,
DEFENDANTS
SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES CMKM DIAMONDS, INC., (CMKM) hereinafter called Plaintiff, complaining of and about CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID, MARGARET REID, CAROLYN CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT, RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT and MAX CASAVANT, hereinafter called Defendants or Defendant if referred to individually, and for
cause of action would show unto the Court the followins:
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN LEVEL TWO
1. Pursuant to Rule 190.3, et seq., of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff seeks to conduct discovery in accordance with this declaration.
PARTIES AND SERVICE
2. Plaintiff is a corporation, existing under the laws of the State of Texas, and having its principal place of business and registered office in Tyler, Smith County, Texas.
3. Individual Defendants are residents of Canada, and may be served with process by deliveringa copy of this petition and the citation to him or her at his or her residence pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure of the State of Texas, Rule 1 08a. Plaintiff also requests that these Defendants be served by certified mail, return receipt requested. Additionally, these Defendants should be served by serving the Texas Secretary of State pursuant to CPRC Section 17.045 with duplicate copies of process.
4. Defendant Corinne Ward may be served at her residence at RR 5 Site 2l Box 62, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S6V5R.
5. Defendant Eric Reid may be served at his residence at 1140 3'd St. East, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6 V0J6.
6. Defendant Margaret Reid may be served at her residence at 1140 3'd St. East, PrinceAlbert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V0J6.
7. Defendant Carolyn Casavant may be served at her residence at 501 Cartwright St.#41 , Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S 7 T I E L
8. Defendant Dale Casavant may be served at his residence at RR 5 Site 16, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6VR3.
9. Defendant Ron Casavant may be served at his residence at Box 22, RR 5 Site 16, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V5R3.
10. Defendant Victor Casavant may be served at his residence at Box 2044, Vegreville, Alberta T 9C1T 3.
11. Defendant Max Casavant may be served at his residence at 326 6th St. East, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V0N1.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
12. This court has jurisdiction over the parties because Plaintiff is a Texas corporation.
13. Venue is proper in Smith County, Texas under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Section 15.002 AND 15.006, because all or a part of Plaintiff's causes of action accrued in Smith County, Texas and Plaintiff is domiciled in Smith County, Texas.
FACTS
14. In 2002, CMKM, via its predecessor entities, accumulated over 1,000,000 acres of mineral claims in and around Saskatchewan, Canada. CMKM was formed to develop those
claims.
15. CMKM began promoting the sale of its common stock through various means. Shareholders were told that promising kimberlite pipes had been discovered on the CMKM mineral lands. Company management issued press releases stating that CMKM had acquired other mineral properties including zinc claims, uranium prospects and a gold mine in South America. Management circulated rumors that a major buyout of CMKM was forthcoming
because of its huge diamond discoveries and the skillful acquisitions being made by company management.
16. Beginning tn 2002, various individuals including the Defendants were issued large blocks of CMKM common stock as a result of fraudulent and illegal activities by insiders of the company. Urban Casavant was the sole officer and director of the company at all relevant times. The Casavant Defendants are immediate family members or relatives of Urban Casavant. The individuals named as persons receiving the shares either sold such stock or now maintain ownership of stock by virtue of having their names on CMKM stock certificates. It is believed and therefore alleged that some individuals were never told that stock was issued in their name and certain insiders forged their names to documents which resulted in stock transfers back to the insiders or their designates. Billions of such shares were then sold to the unsuspecting public. Over $200 million in CMKM cornmons tockw as sold to the public.
17. The dilution carried out by these insiders was massive. The company currently has over 700 billion shares of issued and outstanding stock and minimal funds to operate the company. Rather than use the funds raised through sales of the company common stock for the benefit of the corporation, the insiders and promoters funneled the money into their personal bank accounts and trusts for their personal use, all to the detriment of CMKM. This action seeks to recoup a portion of the funds from certain individuals who have participated in the acquisition and sale of CMKM stock without paying proper consideration. These illegal distributions and damages to CMKM were not discovered until April of 2007 when new management assumed control of the company. The Defendants continue to maintain their control over the "ill gotten gains"by asserting ownership of CMKM stock as set out in Exhibit "A".
18. New management filed suit in April of 2007 immediately upon taking office. The company began issuing subpoenas for bank records which were not to be found in records turned over to new management. The bank records obtained through these subpoenas and a thorough examination of records in the possession of the transfer agent revealed the massive fraud that had occurred. The Defendants in this case were all recipients of various amounts of cash, checks, and CMKM stock. There are no company records of these Defendants providing any meaningful services to CMKM nor having paid for the issuance of CMKM stock.
19. Two examples of the types of stock fraud which resulted in benefits to the Defendants are as follows: Ex. I On March 2, 2004, Urban Casavant passed a board resolution directing the issuance of 50 billion shares to various individuals and entities who purportedly held "service contracts" with CMKM. No "service contracts" have been located after an exhaustive search of company records. There is no evidence that the individuals
identified in this resolution performed any services for CMKM. Anita Cohen was named as an individual who was to receive 2 billion shares from this distribution. Anita Cohen's name was
forged on an irrevocable stock power and such shares were immediately transferred to Eric Reid (brother-in-law of CMKM CEO Urban Casavant) who then deposited such shares into his
personal trading account. Ex.2 Urban Casavant passed a board resolution on March 12, 2004 directing that 20 billion shares be issued to Dave Gutka. Dave Gutka died August 16,2003. Dave Gutka's name was forged on various documents resulting in the transfer of 20 billion shares to Eric Reid (Urban Casavant's brother-in-law), Victor Casavant (Via Com Holdings owner and brother of Urban Casavant) and others. Eric Reid and Victor Casavant then sold such stocks and retained the proceeds to the detriment of the Plaintiff.
20. CMKM has cooperated with law enforcement and securities regulators in an ongoing investigation into the stock manipulation and dilution of CMKM. CMKM's investigation has uncovered forged stock powers among company records which were used to facilitate the transfer of securities into brokerage accounts controlled by third parties. Defendants benefitted from the illegal efforts of the insiders and continue to maintain ownership of CMKM stock which was illegally obtained.
21. Billions of shares of CMKM stock were obtained from the company and sold through shell companies set up for the sole purpose of laundering money received from illegal stock sales. There are issued and outstanding certificates for billions of shares that were not purchased nor legally acquiredf rom CMKM. The above described CMKM investigation has identified certain individuals, trusts and companies who maintain ownership of shares in CMKM based on the curent list of the official company tansfer agent. CMKM hereby brings this action to cancel such illegally obtained shares.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Conversion against All Defendants)
22. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
23. CMKM owned or was entitled to possession of all illegally issued stock and millions of dollars in funds which were obtained from the sale of securities since 2002. The Defendants continue to maintain ownership of CMKM shares
24. Defendants improperly exercised dominion or assumed control over these funds and have applied the funds to their own personal use, including use of the funds to purchase real
property or transferring the funds into their personal accounts.
25. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Constructive Trusts against All Defendants)
26. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
27. Improper acts by Defendants and other third parties as set forth herein resulted in the receipt by Defendants of cash, stocks and other investments. CMKM requests that this Court exercise its equitable powers and order that all assets received by Defendants from their wrongful acts and the resulting investments from those assets be awarded to CMKM. All assets
received by Defendants through these illegal acts should be deemed held for CMKM as the result of a constructive trust.
28. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is
brought.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Unjust Enrichment)
29. CMKM realleges each and every allegationc ontained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as thoughs et forth in full.
30. Defendants enriched themselves at the expense of CMKM by their self-dealing and engaging in opportunities belonging to the corporation. Additionally Defendants traded billions of shares of CMKM stock and were unjustly enriched by the receipt of funds from the sale of such stock.
3l. CMKM was the rightful recipient of the funds that were taken by the Defendants, and the unjust enrichment of Defendants has come at CMKM's expense.
32. Defendants should be made to disgorge all benefits derived from unjustly owning, holding or disposing of CMKM stock or assets. Defendants should be made to return all funds they received directly from CMKM or as proceeds from the sale of CMKM stock or other assets.
33. It would be contrary to the fundamental principals of equity and justice to allow Defendants to retain the benefit and use of CMKM's assets or the fruits of illegally obtained funds.
34. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought. As a fuither direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has been required to retain attorneys to prosecute this action and CMKM is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(CIVIL CONSPIRACY)
35. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
36. The Defendants, with specific intent to defraud, agreed and performed overt acts to accomplish an unlawful purpose through unlawful means. The individual Defendants conspired to commit stock fraud and securities violations to the detriment of CMKM and its shareholders.
37. The Defendants agreed to performed overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy. Defendants, with specific intent, committed overt acts to dilute CMKM stock and to convert
funds received from the sale of CMKM common stock to the personal use of the Defendants
38. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
39. As a futher direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has been required to retain attorneys to prosecute this action and CMKM is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(STOCK CANCELLATION
40. Plaintiff was formerly a Nevada corporation. While a Nevada corporation, over 700 billion shares of company common stock were issued. A majority of the stock was issued illegally to friends and relatives of Urban Casavant, the CEO of CMKM. Financial records show that many shares of company stock were issued to individuals without their knowledge. Some stock was issued for no consideration. Some stock was issued for unreasonably low and thus insufficient consideration. Plaintiff will show that Defendants either failed to pay proper consideration for their shares or their shares were obtained through fraud and other illegal acts. An ongoing shareholder audit has identified the Defendants as individuals as individuals who have acquired stock illegally or without paying lawful consideration for such shares.
41. Plaintiff will further show that it has no adequate remedy at law to correct the unlawful issuance of the certificates owned by the individual defendants. The relative position of all CMKM shareholders have been reduced and altered by the addition of the shares still remaining in the name of these individual Defendants. The financial standing of the Plaintiff corporation doesn't reflect a true picture of the assets and capita laccounts of Plaintiff as long as the named Defendants hold shares which were issued for no or insufficient consideration.
42. Upon trial hereof, Plaintiff requests the Court to render its decree canceling CMKM share certificates set out in Exhibit "A".
DAMAGES
43. As a direct and proximate result of the occurrence made the basis of this lawsuit, and Defendants' acts as described herein, Plaintiff was caused to suffer serious and devastating stock
dilution and financial losses. Exhibit "A" contains a surnmary of the losses occurring to the Plaintiff. The volume of CMKM stock represented in Exhibit "A" contains a summary of outstanding shares shown on certificates issued by the transfer agent belonging to the Defendants. All amounts are based on .0001 per share for illustrative purposes. Most stocks were traded above .0001 per share. Banking account records, stock trading records and transfer agent records confirm that each of the named Defendants received at least the amounts set forth in Exhibit "A".
44. As a direct and proximate result of the occuffence made the basis of this lawsuit, Plaintiff has incurred the following damages:
A. Financial losses and stock dilution to the Plaintiff as set forth above
B. Attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiff
45. By reason of the above, Plaintiff has suffered losses and damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
46. Plaintiff would further show that the acts and omissions of Defendants complained of herein were committed with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff. In order to punish said Defendants for engaging in unlawful business practices, committing fraud and to deter such actions and/or omissions in the future, Plaintiff also seeks recovery from Defendants for punitive or exemplary damages.
DISCOVERY
Pursuant to the Rule 194.3 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff has attached the following as Exhibits "8" and "C" for service upon the Defendants along with this Original Petition and Citation to Appear: Exhibit "B" Plaintiff s Request for Disclosure to each of the named Defendants; Exhibit "C" Plaintiff s First Request for Production
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Defendants be cited to appear and answer herein, and that upon a final hearing of the cause, judgment be entered for the Plaintiff against Defendants for damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the Court; and as allowed by Sec. 41.008, Chapter 41, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code; cancel all certificates as requested above; award damages together with prejudgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by law; post-judgment interest at the legal rate, costs of court; and such other and further relief to which the Plaintiff may be entitled at law or in equity.
Frrzzell Law Firm
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 7570I
(903) 595-1921
(903) 595-4383 fax
State Bar No. 07484500
Attomey for Plaintiff
JURY DEMAND
COMES NOW the Plaintiff and demands a trial by jury on the issues in this cause and respectfully requests that this case be placed on the Jury Docket, and files herein the required Jury Fee.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bill Frizzell
Exhibit "A"
A B c D E r
1 Name Money
CMKM Stock
lssued Other Stock
Cert(s)
Held
Current
Position
2
3 CorrineW ard 2,117,600,000S3,ooo,o-o uos cA
4 Eric Reid S267,ooo 21,000,000,000 8292 20,000,000
5 MargareRt eid 3,060,000,000 6826,6827 1",000,000,000
6 CarolynC asavant 54,816,1-52 3,000,000,00503,000,00- u0s cA 6799,6780 1,000,000,000
7 Dale Casavant 5105,000 5,000,000,000 7849,7850 1,000,000,000
8 Ron Casavant s290,000 13,090,000,000 7862,7863 1,000,000,000
9 Victor Casavant Stqo,Ms 37,300,000,000 1.1.270 30,000,000
10 Max Casavant 52o,ooo 6,030,000,000
1.1DiamondQ uality 6,000,000,000
68526, 853
68537, 908 2,499,999,999
t2
De La Norte
TradingL, TD 4,339,000,000 s60s,6 720 260,000,000
1.3
EletaB runnelle
CommerciaIln, c 2,L02,1,40,00O 5607,6722 260,000,000
t4
FazaG ee
Industrialln, c 4,346,465,996 6723 160,000,000
_tJ
FeasibilitSyt udies
InternationIa 714,000,000 s892 367,000,000
t6
Moncom
EnterpriseLsT D 9,700,882,293
5613, 5888-
5891,,6728,
8851 'J,,026,251,,840
17
HuntioTnr ading
Limited 2,331,033,600 5610,6725 260,000,000
L6
TobianT rading
Limited 8,326,394,407
561,4,6729,
8849 699,000,000
19
Kolba
MeadmakersIn, c 950,000,000 5621,,6736 210,000,000
ZU
JulesE ngelhardt,
lnc 2,099,500,000 6727 160,000,000
2t
Inde Enterprises,
Inc Trust 1,527,000,000 56Lt,6726 260,000,000
22 HiageGt earsI,n c 8,090,250,000 5609,48809 10s,000,000
23 FutolaA lloysl,n c 1,740,000,000
5618, 6733,
7954 460,000,000
z.+
Agap Serene
ServicesIn, c 6,659,000,000 5603,6718 260,000,000
ArumaM inine,I nc 2,070,000,000 5616,673r 210,000,000
A B c D E F
26 BazzarGo earsI,n c 1,070,000,000
5617,6732,
8640 370,000,000
27 BermaG iorgioI,n c 3,756,168,000
48803, 48804
48805,48806 30,000,000
28
ElanF irst
MerchanLti mited 2,894,949,571
48807,4 8808
5606,6721 271,560,000
29 GiorgioM etals,ln c 2,080,000,000 6734 210,000,000
30
JasminTer ee
FarmsI,n c 1,070,000,000 5620,6735 210,000,000
31
LaJollLae athers,
lnc 870,000,000 5622,6737 210,000,000
32 OlesB ooksI,n c 1.,070,000,000 5624,6739 210,000,000
33
QuappleT offee,
lnc 950,000,000 5625,6740 2L0,000,000
34
SuerlanG ezebos,
Inc 1,070,000,000 56rr,6742 210,000,000
35 Viford Tradins LTD 5,242,272,3O8 6730 l_60,000,000
36
37 TOTALS s6,238,297 L7L,666,596,L65s6,000,00-0 u scA 13,338,811,839
E,xhibit 6(B))
Cause No.
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
VS.
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
NO.
$$$
s
$
$$
$
$
$s$
$
$
DEFENDANTS $ SMITH COUNTY. TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S REOUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
TO: Corrine Ward, Eric Reid, Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant, Ron Casavant, Victor
Casavant and Max Casavant
Pursuantt o Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure,y ou are requestedto disclose,
within 50 days of service of this request, the information or material as set forth below in Exhibit
.,Brr.
The disclosuresm ust be signed in accordancew ith Texas Rules of Civil Procedure,R ule
191.3, and delivered to the undersigned attorney. If you fail to comply with the requirements
above, the Court may order sanctions against you in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure.
Respectfull y submitted,
Bill Frizzell
Fnzzell Law Firm
TexasB arN o. 07484500
By:
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 75701
Tel. (903) 595-1921
Fax (903) 595-4383
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
CMKM Diamonds[,n c.
EXIIIBIT "B'
REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE
1. R.194.2(a).:
State the conect names of the parties to the lawsuit.
2. R.194.2(b).:
Stateth en arnea, ddressa,n dt elephonen umbero f anyp otentiapl arties.
3. R.194.2(c).:
State the legal theories and, in general, the factual bases for your claims or defenses.
4. R.194.2(d).:
Stateth ea mounta nda nym ethodo f calculatinge conomicd amages.
s. R.194.2(e).:
State the narne, address, and telephone number of persons having knowledge of
relevant facts, and a brief statement of each identified person's connection with the case.
6, R.194.2(9).:
Producea nyi ndemnitya ndi nsuringa greemenatss d escribedin Rule 192.3(t).
7. R.194.2(h).:
Producea ny settlementa greementsa s describedi n Rule 192.3(9).
8. R.194.2(i).:
Producea nyw itnesss tatemenatss d escribeidn Rule 192.3(h),
9. R.194.20).:
Produce the name, address, and telephone number of any person who may be
designateda s a responsibleth ird paffy.
Exhibit KC))
Cause No.
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
$
$$$$$$
s
$
$
$s$$s
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
VS.
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT
NO.
DEFENDANTS SMITH COUNTY. TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQI]EST FOR PRODUCTION
TO: Corrine Ward, Eric Reid, Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant, Ron Casavant, Victor
Casavant and Max Casavant
Please take notice that request is hereby made by CMKM Diamonds, lnc., pursuant to Rule
196 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, that Defendants produce or permit the undersigned
attorney, Bill Frizzell, to inspect and copy or reproduce the items hereinafter designated on Exhibit
"C" attachedh ereto.
Within 51 days after service of these First Request for Production, you must serve a written
responseto the undersigneda ttorneya t 602 S. Broadway,T yler, Texas 75701, including the items
requestedo r statingw ith respectt o eachr equestt hat an inspectiona nd copying or reproductionw ill
be permitted as requested.
In the event a request is objected to, please specifically state (a) the legal or factual basis for
the objection, and (b) the extent to which you refuse to comply with the request. Pursuant to Rule
193. 2(b) of the TexasR ules of Civil Procedure,a party must comply with as much of the requestt o
which the party has made no objection unless it is unreasonabluen dert he circumstancetso do so
before obtaining a nrling on the objection.
Respectfullys ubmitted,
By:
Bill Frizzell
FizznlllawFirm
TexasB arNo. 07484500
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 75701
Tel. (903) s95-r921
Fax(903) 595-4383
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
CMKM Diamonds[,n c.
DEF'INITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS
l. As used herein, the terms "you" and "your" shall mean Corrine Ward, Eric Reid,
Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant,R on CasavantD, ale CasavantV, ictor Casavant,M ax Casavanto r
Vince Ma".rei and all attomeys, agents, and other natural persons or business or legal entities acting
or purporting to act for or on behalf of each of them.
2. As used herein, the term "documents" shall mean all writings of every kind, source
and authorship,b oth originals and all non-identicalc opies thereof, in your possessionc, ustody,o r
control, or known by you to exist, inespective of whether the writing is one intended for or
transmitted internally by you, or intended for or transmitted to any other person or entity, including
without limitation any govemment agency, department, administrative, or private entity or person.
The term shall include handwritten, typewritten, printed, photocopied, photographic, or recorded
matter. It shall include communications in words, symbols, pictures, sound recordings, films, tapes,
and information storedi n, or accessibleth rough, computero r other information storageo r retrieval
systems,t ogetherw ith the codesa nd/or programmingi nstructionsa nd other materialsn ecessaryto
understand and use such systems. For purposes of illustration and not limitation, the term shall
include: affidavits; agendas;a greements;a nalyses;a nnouncementsb; ills, statements,a nd other
records of obligations and expenditures; books; brochures; bulletins; calendars; canceled checks,
vouchers, receipts and other records of payments; charts, drawings; check registers; checkbooks;
circulars; collateral files and contents; contracts; corporate bylaws; corporate charters;
correspondencec;r edit files and contents;d eedso ftrust; deposits lips; diaries,d rafts; files; guaranty
agreementsi;n structions;i nvoices; ledgers,j oumals, balances heets,p rofit and loss statementsa, nd
other sources of financial data; letters; logs, notes, or memoranda of telephonic or face-to-face
conversationsm; anuals;m emorandao f all kinds, to and from any persons,a gencies,o r entities;
minutes;m inute books; notes; notices;p arts lists; papers;p ressr eleases;p rinted matter (including
books, articles, speeches, and newspaper clippings); purchase orders; records; records of
administrativet,e chnical,a nd financial actionst aken or recommendedr; eports;s afetyd epositb oxes
and contentsa nd recordso f entry; scheduless; ecuritya greementss; pecifications;s tatemento f bank
accounts; statements, interviews; stock transfer ledger; technical and engineering reports,
evaluationsa, dvice, recommendationsc,o mmentariesc, onclusions,s tudies,t est plans, manuals,
procedures, data, reports, results, and conclusions; summaries, notes, and other records and
recordingso f any conferencesm, eetings,v isits, statementsi,n terviews or telephonec onversations;
telegrams; teletlpes and other communications sent or received; transcripts of testimony; UCC
instruments;w ork papers;a nd all other writings, the contentso f which relate to, discuss,c onsider,
or otherwise refer to the subject matter of the particular discovery requested.
3. In accordancew ith Tex. R. Civ. P. Rule 192.7,a documenti s deemedt o be in your
possessionc, ustodyo r control ifyou either have physical possessiono fthe item or have a right to
possessiono f the item that is equalo r superiort o the personw ho hasp hysical control of the item.
4. Any and all data or information, which is in electronic or magnetic form, should be
producedi n a reasonablem anner.
TIME PERIOD
Unless specifically stated in a request for production of documents, all information herein
requestedis for the entire time period from January1 , 2001, through the date of productiono f
documentsre questedh erein.
1.
2.
EXHIBIT "C"
All bank statementsfr om the banks in which you depositedf unds from the sale of
CMKM stock in 2003,2004,2005,2006,2007 and 2008 including copies of all
checks, wires and deposits
Any trust agreements in which you are either a grantor, trustot, trustee or beneficiary
since 2002, This includes, but is not limited to, the Sally Wind Trusts 1,2,3 and 4
and the CEC 2005 Irrevocable Trust
Any deeds,r eal estatec ontracts,l easeso r other documentationw hich would provide
eviienceo fany purchaseo r acquisitiono freal estateb y you since2 002'
Any brokerage account statements from any brokerage firms which were used by
you since 2002
Any "service contracts" or other documents which evidence payment of any money
by you to CMKM Diamonds,ln c. or its predecessoern tities
Any documentation which evidences any services you rendered to the company
which would entitle you to shares of CMKM common stock
Copies of any CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock certificates in your possession or
claimed to be owned by you.
Any documents evidencing investments of any kind such as real estate, annuities,
private or public stocks, oi *y other type of investment made by you from funds
received the sale of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock
Any documents pertaining to the purchase or sale of 501 Cafiwright St'#41,
SaskatoonS, askatchewanC, anada
All documents evidencing deposits into the Sally Wind 1,2,3 &' 4 Trusts and the
CEC 2005 Irrevocable Trust
3.
A
a.
5,
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT NO. 7th Judicial Court
VS
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT,
DEFENDANTS
SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES CMKM DIAMONDS, INC., (CMKM) hereinafter called Plaintiff, complaining of and about CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID, MARGARET REID, CAROLYN CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT, RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT and MAX CASAVANT, hereinafter called Defendants or Defendant if referred to individually, and for
cause of action would show unto the Court the followins:
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN LEVEL TWO
1. Pursuant to Rule 190.3, et seq., of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff seeks to conduct discovery in accordance with this declaration.
PARTIES AND SERVICE
2. Plaintiff is a corporation, existing under the laws of the State of Texas, and having its principal place of business and registered office in Tyler, Smith County, Texas.
3. Individual Defendants are residents of Canada, and may be served with process by deliveringa copy of this petition and the citation to him or her at his or her residence pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure of the State of Texas, Rule 1 08a. Plaintiff also requests that these Defendants be served by certified mail, return receipt requested. Additionally, these Defendants should be served by serving the Texas Secretary of State pursuant to CPRC Section 17.045 with duplicate copies of process.
4. Defendant Corinne Ward may be served at her residence at RR 5 Site 2l Box 62, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S6V5R.
5. Defendant Eric Reid may be served at his residence at 1140 3'd St. East, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6 V0J6.
6. Defendant Margaret Reid may be served at her residence at 1140 3'd St. East, PrinceAlbert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V0J6.
7. Defendant Carolyn Casavant may be served at her residence at 501 Cartwright St.#41 , Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S 7 T I E L
8. Defendant Dale Casavant may be served at his residence at RR 5 Site 16, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6VR3.
9. Defendant Ron Casavant may be served at his residence at Box 22, RR 5 Site 16, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V5R3.
10. Defendant Victor Casavant may be served at his residence at Box 2044, Vegreville, Alberta T 9C1T 3.
11. Defendant Max Casavant may be served at his residence at 326 6th St. East, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, Canada S 6V0N1.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
12. This court has jurisdiction over the parties because Plaintiff is a Texas corporation.
13. Venue is proper in Smith County, Texas under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Section 15.002 AND 15.006, because all or a part of Plaintiff's causes of action accrued in Smith County, Texas and Plaintiff is domiciled in Smith County, Texas.
FACTS
14. In 2002, CMKM, via its predecessor entities, accumulated over 1,000,000 acres of mineral claims in and around Saskatchewan, Canada. CMKM was formed to develop those
claims.
15. CMKM began promoting the sale of its common stock through various means. Shareholders were told that promising kimberlite pipes had been discovered on the CMKM mineral lands. Company management issued press releases stating that CMKM had acquired other mineral properties including zinc claims, uranium prospects and a gold mine in South America. Management circulated rumors that a major buyout of CMKM was forthcoming
because of its huge diamond discoveries and the skillful acquisitions being made by company management.
16. Beginning tn 2002, various individuals including the Defendants were issued large blocks of CMKM common stock as a result of fraudulent and illegal activities by insiders of the company. Urban Casavant was the sole officer and director of the company at all relevant times. The Casavant Defendants are immediate family members or relatives of Urban Casavant. The individuals named as persons receiving the shares either sold such stock or now maintain ownership of stock by virtue of having their names on CMKM stock certificates. It is believed and therefore alleged that some individuals were never told that stock was issued in their name and certain insiders forged their names to documents which resulted in stock transfers back to the insiders or their designates. Billions of such shares were then sold to the unsuspecting public. Over $200 million in CMKM cornmons tockw as sold to the public.
17. The dilution carried out by these insiders was massive. The company currently has over 700 billion shares of issued and outstanding stock and minimal funds to operate the company. Rather than use the funds raised through sales of the company common stock for the benefit of the corporation, the insiders and promoters funneled the money into their personal bank accounts and trusts for their personal use, all to the detriment of CMKM. This action seeks to recoup a portion of the funds from certain individuals who have participated in the acquisition and sale of CMKM stock without paying proper consideration. These illegal distributions and damages to CMKM were not discovered until April of 2007 when new management assumed control of the company. The Defendants continue to maintain their control over the "ill gotten gains"by asserting ownership of CMKM stock as set out in Exhibit "A".
18. New management filed suit in April of 2007 immediately upon taking office. The company began issuing subpoenas for bank records which were not to be found in records turned over to new management. The bank records obtained through these subpoenas and a thorough examination of records in the possession of the transfer agent revealed the massive fraud that had occurred. The Defendants in this case were all recipients of various amounts of cash, checks, and CMKM stock. There are no company records of these Defendants providing any meaningful services to CMKM nor having paid for the issuance of CMKM stock.
19. Two examples of the types of stock fraud which resulted in benefits to the Defendants are as follows: Ex. I On March 2, 2004, Urban Casavant passed a board resolution directing the issuance of 50 billion shares to various individuals and entities who purportedly held "service contracts" with CMKM. No "service contracts" have been located after an exhaustive search of company records. There is no evidence that the individuals
identified in this resolution performed any services for CMKM. Anita Cohen was named as an individual who was to receive 2 billion shares from this distribution. Anita Cohen's name was
forged on an irrevocable stock power and such shares were immediately transferred to Eric Reid (brother-in-law of CMKM CEO Urban Casavant) who then deposited such shares into his
personal trading account. Ex.2 Urban Casavant passed a board resolution on March 12, 2004 directing that 20 billion shares be issued to Dave Gutka. Dave Gutka died August 16,2003. Dave Gutka's name was forged on various documents resulting in the transfer of 20 billion shares to Eric Reid (Urban Casavant's brother-in-law), Victor Casavant (Via Com Holdings owner and brother of Urban Casavant) and others. Eric Reid and Victor Casavant then sold such stocks and retained the proceeds to the detriment of the Plaintiff.
20. CMKM has cooperated with law enforcement and securities regulators in an ongoing investigation into the stock manipulation and dilution of CMKM. CMKM's investigation has uncovered forged stock powers among company records which were used to facilitate the transfer of securities into brokerage accounts controlled by third parties. Defendants benefitted from the illegal efforts of the insiders and continue to maintain ownership of CMKM stock which was illegally obtained.
21. Billions of shares of CMKM stock were obtained from the company and sold through shell companies set up for the sole purpose of laundering money received from illegal stock sales. There are issued and outstanding certificates for billions of shares that were not purchased nor legally acquiredf rom CMKM. The above described CMKM investigation has identified certain individuals, trusts and companies who maintain ownership of shares in CMKM based on the curent list of the official company tansfer agent. CMKM hereby brings this action to cancel such illegally obtained shares.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Conversion against All Defendants)
22. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
23. CMKM owned or was entitled to possession of all illegally issued stock and millions of dollars in funds which were obtained from the sale of securities since 2002. The Defendants continue to maintain ownership of CMKM shares
24. Defendants improperly exercised dominion or assumed control over these funds and have applied the funds to their own personal use, including use of the funds to purchase real
property or transferring the funds into their personal accounts.
25. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Constructive Trusts against All Defendants)
26. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
27. Improper acts by Defendants and other third parties as set forth herein resulted in the receipt by Defendants of cash, stocks and other investments. CMKM requests that this Court exercise its equitable powers and order that all assets received by Defendants from their wrongful acts and the resulting investments from those assets be awarded to CMKM. All assets
received by Defendants through these illegal acts should be deemed held for CMKM as the result of a constructive trust.
28. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is
brought.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Unjust Enrichment)
29. CMKM realleges each and every allegationc ontained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as thoughs et forth in full.
30. Defendants enriched themselves at the expense of CMKM by their self-dealing and engaging in opportunities belonging to the corporation. Additionally Defendants traded billions of shares of CMKM stock and were unjustly enriched by the receipt of funds from the sale of such stock.
3l. CMKM was the rightful recipient of the funds that were taken by the Defendants, and the unjust enrichment of Defendants has come at CMKM's expense.
32. Defendants should be made to disgorge all benefits derived from unjustly owning, holding or disposing of CMKM stock or assets. Defendants should be made to return all funds they received directly from CMKM or as proceeds from the sale of CMKM stock or other assets.
33. It would be contrary to the fundamental principals of equity and justice to allow Defendants to retain the benefit and use of CMKM's assets or the fruits of illegally obtained funds.
34. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought. As a fuither direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has been required to retain attorneys to prosecute this action and CMKM is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(CIVIL CONSPIRACY)
35. CMKM realleges each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint and incorporates the same herein as though set forth in full.
36. The Defendants, with specific intent to defraud, agreed and performed overt acts to accomplish an unlawful purpose through unlawful means. The individual Defendants conspired to commit stock fraud and securities violations to the detriment of CMKM and its shareholders.
37. The Defendants agreed to performed overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy. Defendants, with specific intent, committed overt acts to dilute CMKM stock and to convert
funds received from the sale of CMKM common stock to the personal use of the Defendants
38. As a direct and proximate result of the joint actions of the Defendants, CMKM has suffered damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
39. As a futher direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, CMKM has been required to retain attorneys to prosecute this action and CMKM is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(STOCK CANCELLATION
40. Plaintiff was formerly a Nevada corporation. While a Nevada corporation, over 700 billion shares of company common stock were issued. A majority of the stock was issued illegally to friends and relatives of Urban Casavant, the CEO of CMKM. Financial records show that many shares of company stock were issued to individuals without their knowledge. Some stock was issued for no consideration. Some stock was issued for unreasonably low and thus insufficient consideration. Plaintiff will show that Defendants either failed to pay proper consideration for their shares or their shares were obtained through fraud and other illegal acts. An ongoing shareholder audit has identified the Defendants as individuals as individuals who have acquired stock illegally or without paying lawful consideration for such shares.
41. Plaintiff will further show that it has no adequate remedy at law to correct the unlawful issuance of the certificates owned by the individual defendants. The relative position of all CMKM shareholders have been reduced and altered by the addition of the shares still remaining in the name of these individual Defendants. The financial standing of the Plaintiff corporation doesn't reflect a true picture of the assets and capita laccounts of Plaintiff as long as the named Defendants hold shares which were issued for no or insufficient consideration.
42. Upon trial hereof, Plaintiff requests the Court to render its decree canceling CMKM share certificates set out in Exhibit "A".
DAMAGES
43. As a direct and proximate result of the occurrence made the basis of this lawsuit, and Defendants' acts as described herein, Plaintiff was caused to suffer serious and devastating stock
dilution and financial losses. Exhibit "A" contains a surnmary of the losses occurring to the Plaintiff. The volume of CMKM stock represented in Exhibit "A" contains a summary of outstanding shares shown on certificates issued by the transfer agent belonging to the Defendants. All amounts are based on .0001 per share for illustrative purposes. Most stocks were traded above .0001 per share. Banking account records, stock trading records and transfer agent records confirm that each of the named Defendants received at least the amounts set forth in Exhibit "A".
44. As a direct and proximate result of the occuffence made the basis of this lawsuit, Plaintiff has incurred the following damages:
A. Financial losses and stock dilution to the Plaintiff as set forth above
B. Attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiff
45. By reason of the above, Plaintiff has suffered losses and damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of the Court and for which this lawsuit is brought.
EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
46. Plaintiff would further show that the acts and omissions of Defendants complained of herein were committed with malice or reckless indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff. In order to punish said Defendants for engaging in unlawful business practices, committing fraud and to deter such actions and/or omissions in the future, Plaintiff also seeks recovery from Defendants for punitive or exemplary damages.
DISCOVERY
Pursuant to the Rule 194.3 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff has attached the following as Exhibits "8" and "C" for service upon the Defendants along with this Original Petition and Citation to Appear: Exhibit "B" Plaintiff s Request for Disclosure to each of the named Defendants; Exhibit "C" Plaintiff s First Request for Production
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Defendants be cited to appear and answer herein, and that upon a final hearing of the cause, judgment be entered for the Plaintiff against Defendants for damages in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the Court; and as allowed by Sec. 41.008, Chapter 41, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code; cancel all certificates as requested above; award damages together with prejudgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by law; post-judgment interest at the legal rate, costs of court; and such other and further relief to which the Plaintiff may be entitled at law or in equity.
Frrzzell Law Firm
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 7570I
(903) 595-1921
(903) 595-4383 fax
State Bar No. 07484500
Attomey for Plaintiff
JURY DEMAND
COMES NOW the Plaintiff and demands a trial by jury on the issues in this cause and respectfully requests that this case be placed on the Jury Docket, and files herein the required Jury Fee.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bill Frizzell
Exhibit "A"
A B c D E r
1 Name Money
CMKM Stock
lssued Other Stock
Cert(s)
Held
Current
Position
2
3 CorrineW ard 2,117,600,000S3,ooo,o-o uos cA
4 Eric Reid S267,ooo 21,000,000,000 8292 20,000,000
5 MargareRt eid 3,060,000,000 6826,6827 1",000,000,000
6 CarolynC asavant 54,816,1-52 3,000,000,00503,000,00- u0s cA 6799,6780 1,000,000,000
7 Dale Casavant 5105,000 5,000,000,000 7849,7850 1,000,000,000
8 Ron Casavant s290,000 13,090,000,000 7862,7863 1,000,000,000
9 Victor Casavant Stqo,Ms 37,300,000,000 1.1.270 30,000,000
10 Max Casavant 52o,ooo 6,030,000,000
1.1DiamondQ uality 6,000,000,000
68526, 853
68537, 908 2,499,999,999
t2
De La Norte
TradingL, TD 4,339,000,000 s60s,6 720 260,000,000
1.3
EletaB runnelle
CommerciaIln, c 2,L02,1,40,00O 5607,6722 260,000,000
t4
FazaG ee
Industrialln, c 4,346,465,996 6723 160,000,000
_tJ
FeasibilitSyt udies
InternationIa 714,000,000 s892 367,000,000
t6
Moncom
EnterpriseLsT D 9,700,882,293
5613, 5888-
5891,,6728,
8851 'J,,026,251,,840
17
HuntioTnr ading
Limited 2,331,033,600 5610,6725 260,000,000
L6
TobianT rading
Limited 8,326,394,407
561,4,6729,
8849 699,000,000
19
Kolba
MeadmakersIn, c 950,000,000 5621,,6736 210,000,000
ZU
JulesE ngelhardt,
lnc 2,099,500,000 6727 160,000,000
2t
Inde Enterprises,
Inc Trust 1,527,000,000 56Lt,6726 260,000,000
22 HiageGt earsI,n c 8,090,250,000 5609,48809 10s,000,000
23 FutolaA lloysl,n c 1,740,000,000
5618, 6733,
7954 460,000,000
z.+
Agap Serene
ServicesIn, c 6,659,000,000 5603,6718 260,000,000
ArumaM inine,I nc 2,070,000,000 5616,673r 210,000,000
A B c D E F
26 BazzarGo earsI,n c 1,070,000,000
5617,6732,
8640 370,000,000
27 BermaG iorgioI,n c 3,756,168,000
48803, 48804
48805,48806 30,000,000
28
ElanF irst
MerchanLti mited 2,894,949,571
48807,4 8808
5606,6721 271,560,000
29 GiorgioM etals,ln c 2,080,000,000 6734 210,000,000
30
JasminTer ee
FarmsI,n c 1,070,000,000 5620,6735 210,000,000
31
LaJollLae athers,
lnc 870,000,000 5622,6737 210,000,000
32 OlesB ooksI,n c 1.,070,000,000 5624,6739 210,000,000
33
QuappleT offee,
lnc 950,000,000 5625,6740 2L0,000,000
34
SuerlanG ezebos,
Inc 1,070,000,000 56rr,6742 210,000,000
35 Viford Tradins LTD 5,242,272,3O8 6730 l_60,000,000
36
37 TOTALS s6,238,297 L7L,666,596,L65s6,000,00-0 u scA 13,338,811,839
E,xhibit 6(B))
Cause No.
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
VS.
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
NO.
$$$
s
$
$$
$
$
$s$
$
$
DEFENDANTS $ SMITH COUNTY. TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S REOUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
TO: Corrine Ward, Eric Reid, Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant, Ron Casavant, Victor
Casavant and Max Casavant
Pursuantt o Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure,y ou are requestedto disclose,
within 50 days of service of this request, the information or material as set forth below in Exhibit
.,Brr.
The disclosuresm ust be signed in accordancew ith Texas Rules of Civil Procedure,R ule
191.3, and delivered to the undersigned attorney. If you fail to comply with the requirements
above, the Court may order sanctions against you in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure.
Respectfull y submitted,
Bill Frizzell
Fnzzell Law Firm
TexasB arN o. 07484500
By:
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 75701
Tel. (903) 595-1921
Fax (903) 595-4383
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
CMKM Diamonds[,n c.
EXIIIBIT "B'
REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE
1. R.194.2(a).:
State the conect names of the parties to the lawsuit.
2. R.194.2(b).:
Stateth en arnea, ddressa,n dt elephonen umbero f anyp otentiapl arties.
3. R.194.2(c).:
State the legal theories and, in general, the factual bases for your claims or defenses.
4. R.194.2(d).:
Stateth ea mounta nda nym ethodo f calculatinge conomicd amages.
s. R.194.2(e).:
State the narne, address, and telephone number of persons having knowledge of
relevant facts, and a brief statement of each identified person's connection with the case.
6, R.194.2(9).:
Producea nyi ndemnitya ndi nsuringa greemenatss d escribedin Rule 192.3(t).
7. R.194.2(h).:
Producea ny settlementa greementsa s describedi n Rule 192.3(9).
8. R.194.2(i).:
Producea nyw itnesss tatemenatss d escribeidn Rule 192.3(h),
9. R.194.20).:
Produce the name, address, and telephone number of any person who may be
designateda s a responsibleth ird paffy.
Exhibit KC))
Cause No.
CMKM DIAMONDS,INC.,
PLAINTIFF
$
$$$$$$
s
$
$
$s$$s
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
VS.
CORRINE WARD, ERIC REID,
MARGARET REID, CAROLYN
CASAVANT, DALE CASAVANT,
RON CASAVANT, VICTOR CASAVANT
and MAX CASAVANT
NO.
DEFENDANTS SMITH COUNTY. TEXAS
PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQI]EST FOR PRODUCTION
TO: Corrine Ward, Eric Reid, Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant, Ron Casavant, Victor
Casavant and Max Casavant
Please take notice that request is hereby made by CMKM Diamonds, lnc., pursuant to Rule
196 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, that Defendants produce or permit the undersigned
attorney, Bill Frizzell, to inspect and copy or reproduce the items hereinafter designated on Exhibit
"C" attachedh ereto.
Within 51 days after service of these First Request for Production, you must serve a written
responseto the undersigneda ttorneya t 602 S. Broadway,T yler, Texas 75701, including the items
requestedo r statingw ith respectt o eachr equestt hat an inspectiona nd copying or reproductionw ill
be permitted as requested.
In the event a request is objected to, please specifically state (a) the legal or factual basis for
the objection, and (b) the extent to which you refuse to comply with the request. Pursuant to Rule
193. 2(b) of the TexasR ules of Civil Procedure,a party must comply with as much of the requestt o
which the party has made no objection unless it is unreasonabluen dert he circumstancetso do so
before obtaining a nrling on the objection.
Respectfullys ubmitted,
By:
Bill Frizzell
FizznlllawFirm
TexasB arNo. 07484500
602 S. Broadway
Tyler, Texas 75701
Tel. (903) s95-r921
Fax(903) 595-4383
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
CMKM Diamonds[,n c.
DEF'INITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS
l. As used herein, the terms "you" and "your" shall mean Corrine Ward, Eric Reid,
Margaret Reid, Carolyn Casavant,R on CasavantD, ale CasavantV, ictor Casavant,M ax Casavanto r
Vince Ma".rei and all attomeys, agents, and other natural persons or business or legal entities acting
or purporting to act for or on behalf of each of them.
2. As used herein, the term "documents" shall mean all writings of every kind, source
and authorship,b oth originals and all non-identicalc opies thereof, in your possessionc, ustody,o r
control, or known by you to exist, inespective of whether the writing is one intended for or
transmitted internally by you, or intended for or transmitted to any other person or entity, including
without limitation any govemment agency, department, administrative, or private entity or person.
The term shall include handwritten, typewritten, printed, photocopied, photographic, or recorded
matter. It shall include communications in words, symbols, pictures, sound recordings, films, tapes,
and information storedi n, or accessibleth rough, computero r other information storageo r retrieval
systems,t ogetherw ith the codesa nd/or programmingi nstructionsa nd other materialsn ecessaryto
understand and use such systems. For purposes of illustration and not limitation, the term shall
include: affidavits; agendas;a greements;a nalyses;a nnouncementsb; ills, statements,a nd other
records of obligations and expenditures; books; brochures; bulletins; calendars; canceled checks,
vouchers, receipts and other records of payments; charts, drawings; check registers; checkbooks;
circulars; collateral files and contents; contracts; corporate bylaws; corporate charters;
correspondencec;r edit files and contents;d eedso ftrust; deposits lips; diaries,d rafts; files; guaranty
agreementsi;n structions;i nvoices; ledgers,j oumals, balances heets,p rofit and loss statementsa, nd
other sources of financial data; letters; logs, notes, or memoranda of telephonic or face-to-face
conversationsm; anuals;m emorandao f all kinds, to and from any persons,a gencies,o r entities;
minutes;m inute books; notes; notices;p arts lists; papers;p ressr eleases;p rinted matter (including
books, articles, speeches, and newspaper clippings); purchase orders; records; records of
administrativet,e chnical,a nd financial actionst aken or recommendedr; eports;s afetyd epositb oxes
and contentsa nd recordso f entry; scheduless; ecuritya greementss; pecifications;s tatemento f bank
accounts; statements, interviews; stock transfer ledger; technical and engineering reports,
evaluationsa, dvice, recommendationsc,o mmentariesc, onclusions,s tudies,t est plans, manuals,
procedures, data, reports, results, and conclusions; summaries, notes, and other records and
recordingso f any conferencesm, eetings,v isits, statementsi,n terviews or telephonec onversations;
telegrams; teletlpes and other communications sent or received; transcripts of testimony; UCC
instruments;w ork papers;a nd all other writings, the contentso f which relate to, discuss,c onsider,
or otherwise refer to the subject matter of the particular discovery requested.
3. In accordancew ith Tex. R. Civ. P. Rule 192.7,a documenti s deemedt o be in your
possessionc, ustodyo r control ifyou either have physical possessiono fthe item or have a right to
possessiono f the item that is equalo r superiort o the personw ho hasp hysical control of the item.
4. Any and all data or information, which is in electronic or magnetic form, should be
producedi n a reasonablem anner.
TIME PERIOD
Unless specifically stated in a request for production of documents, all information herein
requestedis for the entire time period from January1 , 2001, through the date of productiono f
documentsre questedh erein.
1.
2.
EXHIBIT "C"
All bank statementsfr om the banks in which you depositedf unds from the sale of
CMKM stock in 2003,2004,2005,2006,2007 and 2008 including copies of all
checks, wires and deposits
Any trust agreements in which you are either a grantor, trustot, trustee or beneficiary
since 2002, This includes, but is not limited to, the Sally Wind Trusts 1,2,3 and 4
and the CEC 2005 Irrevocable Trust
Any deeds,r eal estatec ontracts,l easeso r other documentationw hich would provide
eviienceo fany purchaseo r acquisitiono freal estateb y you since2 002'
Any brokerage account statements from any brokerage firms which were used by
you since 2002
Any "service contracts" or other documents which evidence payment of any money
by you to CMKM Diamonds,ln c. or its predecessoern tities
Any documentation which evidences any services you rendered to the company
which would entitle you to shares of CMKM common stock
Copies of any CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock certificates in your possession or
claimed to be owned by you.
Any documents evidencing investments of any kind such as real estate, annuities,
private or public stocks, oi *y other type of investment made by you from funds
received the sale of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock
Any documents pertaining to the purchase or sale of 501 Cafiwright St'#41,
SaskatoonS, askatchewanC, anada
All documents evidencing deposits into the Sally Wind 1,2,3 &' 4 Trusts and the
CEC 2005 Irrevocable Trust
3.
A
a.
5,
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.