Cardiffs’ contempt stay motion infuriates FTC


The FTC isn’t completely satisfied concerning the Cardiffs’ newest try and stall regulatory proceedings towards them.

Eunjung and Jason Cardiff have disregarded this Court docket’s Orders because the day they had been served with the Momentary Restraining Order.

They now search to have the Court docket keep or put aside three of its Orders, all of which had been issued after intensive briefing and voluminous factual shows, together with 1000’s of pages of displays, quite a few declarations, 4 knowledgeable stories, 4 Receiver’s affidavits of non-compliance, a preliminary injunction listening to at which Eunjung and Jason Cardiff personally appeared and addressed the Court docket, and a four-day contempt listening to at which they each testified underneath oath and had been discovered to have “lied” and perpetuated a “fraud on the Court docket.”

Ouch.

The FTC’s response to the Cardiffs’ request for a keep pending their contempt attraction, is the results of alleged misrepresentations made previous to submitting.

Previous to submitting,

the Cardiffs’ counsel advised counsel for the FTC (and subsequently confirmed by e mail) that the Cardiffs’ movement and proposed order for a keep pending attraction can be “restricted to the sale of the home”.

What the Cardiffs ended up submitting is a request for a blanket keep on proceedings.

One part of the keep order pertains to the Receiver promoting the Cardiffs household residence, which they’ve since withdrawn the attraction for.

Within the contempt part of their attraction, the Cardiffs

they weren’t afforded due course of and that the Court docket “prejudged the information,” “did not compartmentalize [its] emotions towards the Cardiffs,” and evidenced a “closed thoughts to any movement filed by the Cardiffs.”

The FTC claims these arguments are a mis-characterization of proceedings, and do

a disservice to the authorized and factual evaluation explicated within the Court docket’s detailed opinion.

The Court docket has repeatedly and explicitly cautioned the Cardiffs about compliance with the PI since they appeared personally on the PI listening to on November 7, 2018, however they’ve openly defied its Orders at each flip; the newest Order that they purge themselves of their ongoing contempt – and as soon as once more giving them further time to return into compliance earlier than dealing with civil contempt sanctions – is neither acceptable for reconsideration nor ought to it’s “stayed.”

The FTC’s objection cites non-compliance with the granted injunction, at current as April 14th.

And the contempt continues, together with a model new occasion by Eunjung Cardiff on April 13, 2020, when she deposited $4,500 USD in money into the FCCU Account – cash that was instantly used to pay for unapproved bills charged to the Cardiffs’ bank cards – as an alternative of turning the cash over to the Receiver, which she had been ordered to just do two weeks earlier, in addition to by the TRO, PI, and first Purge Contempt Order.

The FTC subsequently requests the Cardiff’s movement for a keep be denied. They’re joined in opposition by the court-appointed Redwood Receiver.

Pending a choice on the Cardiff’s keep movement, keep tuned…