29 August 2007

KingCast interview in Texas on TX 35038: American Tower violated trespass and Texas Property Code 91.005 on Consent to sublease.

This is the site in question. Even though I won the second Employee of the Week award I'm not ashamed to say that American Tower is still doing its dirt in this post as I sent in from Franconia this weekend. Dee Schauer called me tonight to explain that ATC settled a first trespass on her property when they were digging holes but then returned with another guy and a lawyer named Stephen Wren doing local work for Baker Hostetler, who BTW has an ugly website. This second guy refused to give his name and she eventually filed a criminal complaint after a rookie cop initially took his word over the property owner.

Nobody EVER accused any telecommunications company for whom I worked for trespass, much less settled, but then again a company that would renege on a promise with Teresian monks will do anything for profit.

American Tower Corporation again violated Texas Law 91.005 (that's an American Bar Association comment from those of you who accuse me of being unethical) because their lease did not include the consent requirement that I have warned about on prior occasion. They put up Sprint, AT&T and others without a single notice or consent letter. Attorney Crnilovic-Phillips and I told them it was unethical behavior when we worked there and I will file an ethics complaint on them sooner than they can say WTF??

The complaining party asked me about my association with these Corporate, back-dating thugs and I said:
"They don't want to mess with me. We'll make another movie out of them and it's going to be bad news for them."

That means much worse than American Lawyer Two and Three because this time it's not about me. It's about a person who never even knew me, but who does know corporate abuse from 1,800 miles away.

To compound (that's industry talk, a play on words) matters ATC lied and said that there were emergencies that prompted the second trespass. Unbelievable but true; read the comments for the email chain. And Attorney Wren tried to keep her from having any guns on her property (this is Texas, mind you). He said "I'll tread on your Constitutional Rights anytime I want to."

She has witnesses ready to write an affidavit on that.

Dear ATC: I recommend you settle with Dee on the new complaint at a reasonable sum or I will do my level best to make your life the living hell that you made mine after I correctly requested overtime pay for my trainees.

Related post: Look what their scumbag area attorney and former Mass Bar Association President Richard C. Van Nostrand tried to do to keep their name off of this blawg. After the Blogger attorneys reviewed his lies on behalf of his client, I spanked him good and the content was restored.


Christopher King said...

Dee Schauer spinner1@flash.net wrote:
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee Schauer spinner1@flash.net
Subject: RE: Boyd TX/#35038
To: Kimberly Calcasola Kimberly.Calcasola@AmericanTower.com

Kim get ready for this: they are tresspassing again, right NOW. I have called the cops this time because this really big man refused to get off my property. It isn't going to be so easy to settle this time. My heart went nuts going over that hill to find out what was going on and then back here to use the phone.

Kimberly Calcasola Kimberly.Calcasola@AmericanTower.com wrote:
Things are fine, thank you for asking. I've been in Chicago for the past three days. But, oh my god...I'm so sorry about all of these money issues. I will look into it and find out as I'm not 'finance' girl but I am fairly quick at understanding amounts and this does seem strange.

From: Dee Schauer [mailto:spinner1@flash.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 1:46 PM
To: Kimberly Calcasola
Subject: RE: Boyd TX/#35038

Kim, so sorry to bother you once again. I am hoping things are improving for you and your family. Been there.
Got a check but it is in the wrong amount. I can't even figure how they did their math.
There are several invoice numbers all on the same day, 02 Oct 06
-115.00 (115.00)

My math is a little different. The old annual amount, $4,830.00, x 15%, is 724.50.
$724.50 x 7 years (back pay) is $5,071. That, added to the $2,000 for damages comes to $7,071.00. The check is for $7,127.50. But remember I was shorted $690.00 in this year's annual check, (under the new lease) which now leaves me short $633.50. I don't understand all these odd amounts mentioned in the invoice. Any help appreciated.



Jiles Nida Jiles.Nida@AmericanTower.com wrote:
Subject: RE: Copy of Lease site 35038
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:24:45 -0400
From: "Jiles Nida" Jiles.Nida@AmericanTower.com
To: "Dee Schauer" spinner1@flash.net

I;m on the way to the site
Jiles "Jay" Nida
Operations Manager - South Plains
12503 Exchange Dr. Suite 540
Stafford, TX 77477
O 281.491.0640 x308
F 281.277.2810
M 281-635.0466 - Operations
M 713.539.0611 - XM O&M
From: Dee Schauer [mailto:spinner1@flash.net]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 4:54 PM
To: Jiles Nida
Subject: RE: Copy of Lease site 35038

Mr. Nida, people have tresspassed again, are on my property right now, and refused to leave when I asked them to. A very big man told me he would not leave. There is a "no tresspassing" sign on my fence now so no excuse. I told him there had just been a payment made to me for this sort of thing and he said he didn't know about that and would not leave. This one is not going to be so easy. He refused to get off MY LAND.
I have called 911 and am waiting for the police to arrive right now. You'd better do something about this stuff. Again my heart was stressed as I went over the hill to see what my daughter was talking about, to see for myself, and back again to start making phone calls and emails.

Dee Schauer

Jiles Nida Jiles.Nida@AmericanTower.com wrote:
I have passed this on to our Legal department. Someone should be following up with you early next week. If you don’t get a call back by Tuesday, please let me know.


Jiles "Jay" Nida
Operations Manager - South Plains
12503 Exchange Dr . Suite 540
Stafford , TX 77477
O 281.491.0640 x308
F 281.277.2810
M 281-635.0466 - Operations
M 713.539.0611 - XM O&M

Christopher King said...

Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christopher King" kingjurisdoctor@yahoo.com
Subject: Breach of contract on Stamford/TX 35038
To: yannis.macheras@americantower.com, ir@americantower.com, mike.flint@americantower.com, cathy.piche@americantower.com, terri.beck@americantower.com, danny.agresta@americantower.com, peter.starke@americantower.com, ed.disanto@americantower.com, brad.singer@americantower.com, jim.bourne@americantower.com, matthew.peterson@americantower.com, attorneys@woodruffwren.com, Kimberly.Calcasola@AmericanTower.com, Jiles.Nida@AmericanTower.com

Good day to American Tower counsel and others:

Please don't take this personally if I have not dealt
with you before, but you better hope I don't get
called as a witness on the Stamford/TX 35038 site
matters because I'll tell ALL ABOUT how ATC had me backdating leases and violating Texas code just as you did with Ms. Schauer. And I see Attorney Crnilovic-Phillips all the time so she can join the fun and I'm certain her memory is keen as to what you told us to do.

I abhor the things that ATC does to hard-working
people and I will not stand for it, so any time I hear of it you will hear from me.

Are we clear?


Good. Next thing you know I'll have copies of this
blawg entry all over Huntington Avenue. And that could happen on Friday if I feel like it, and continue the beating until the morale improves.

And a special hello to Yannis Macheras, who told me he would meet me to discuss my employment at American Tower and instead gave me a box of my personal effects; too much of a punk to even say "we're firing you because you correctly requested overtime for your trainees."

Payback is a Mother.

Query, you got any more managers with clit vibrators running around out there in Woburn for crazy bathroom breaks?

I'll tell that, too.

Very truly yours,

Christopher King, J.D.

Christopher King said...

Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 19:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee Schauer spinner1@flash.net
Subject: lease
To: Jiles Nida jiles.nida@americantower.com

What on earth makes them think the lease is not broken? What was the point of even having a lease and a fenced-off area if they think they are entitled to come into my horse pasture any time they want? That's downright idiotic. They have a lease so that they may operate WITHIN THAT LEASE which they did not do.

Christopher King said...

No one knows whether the client gave Wren authority to walk out on the settlement discussions for the second trespass, but Ms. Schauer believes Wren did it sua sponte.

Perhaps ATC will sua sponte relieve him of his duties so they can get out of this mess.

Imagine this: Here's another abusive attorney thinking he's going to run roughshod over someone and then the next thing you know it's BLAM!!

.....then the guy's wondering if there's going to be an Internet movie about what a jerk he is.

Christopher King said...

Don't look now, here they come:

Aug 30 2007
38 pages viewed
Win XP Explorer 1280x1024

Christopher King said...

They may be coming but I'm not running for cover:

I'll stand right out in the open with this black MacBook just like in the olden days of the Wild Wild West and shoot right back at them until somebody folds:


Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 05:27:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christopher King" kingjurisdoctor@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Breach of contract on Stamford/TX 35038
To: yannis.macheras@americantower.com, ir@americantower.com

Go ahead. Just dare you not to take care of Ms. Schauer. You'll notice I kept this within American Tower and I can always issue an update on the blawg -- which I would be happy to do -- before I go ballistic on you.

And I mean violently ballistic in the legal sense, not in the sense that you can go out and get (another) bogus restraining order on me and then lie to Chief Dunn and tell him the police escorted me out of ATC after I correctly demanded overtime pay for my trainees.

Very truly yours,

Christopher King, J.D.

It all comes down to how many fliers they want to see around downtown Boston in the coming weeks, and how many movies they want online and sent to all the lawyers who are suing them for securities fraud and all of that.


Christopher King said...

For the record Ms. Schauer told me that Attorney Calcasola has always been respectable and even-tempered so I don't want to cast her in the same vein as the rest of those creeps, but now she really knows the kind of company with whom she is dealing.


Shoot me an email for lunch; I'll tell you all about it.

Christopher King said...

Sometimes you've just gotta' sue 'em:

Telegraph editorial 4 Feb. 2007:

"Has the United States reached such a point of political correctness and potential lawsuit aversion that we are willing to give up essential liberties for the sake of avoiding uncomfortable debate?

Apparently so in Nashua, a least until the threat of a real lawsuit looms.

Nashua Board of Education members unanimously voted last Monday to eliminate a year-old restriction on public comments at their meetings. The limits, both vague and potentially unconstitutional, prohibited citizens from discussing “administrative and personnel-related problems.”

In any public or private enterprise “administrative and personnel-related” issues cover a great deal of territory. Interpreted broadly, the policy could have been used to shut out public comment on almost any issue brought before the school board.

The rule went largely unnoticed until October 2006 when Paula Johnson, a former alderman, was told she could not speak about Superintendent Julia Earl, who was, and still is, on paid leave.

Two more months passed before Nashua resident Chris King again attempted to speak about Earl during a December meeting. When he was told to stop, King’s response was a pledge to get the policy revoked.

The school board began an internal review of the rule, but received vastly differing opinions from city and outside attorneys, and appeared themselves to be split on the issue.

To justify the policy, several board members cited the potential for defamatory speech by members of the public targeted at school employees.

While anything is possible, it is a thin excuse and a legal leap of faith to assume the school board could be held liable for such behavior. Nonetheless, several of the board’s lawyers backed up this contention.

So King, who has practiced as a lawyer in Ohio, threatened his own lawsuit against the board and came within hours of filing the paperwork. The suit was avoided when the board called a policy committee meeting, leading to the vote last week to change the rule.

The about-face on the part of the school board is to be praised as a common sense decision. However, more praise would be due if the change had not been due largely to outside pressure and the threat of a lawsuit.

The school board, and its attorneys, would be well served to remember who the public in “public comment” is: their employers, the taxpayers.

The school board has done the right thing, but the impression we are left with is that many members did it grudgingly. The board needs to change its thinking and reframe its approach when dealing with the public.

Yes, there should be rules enforced to maintain a civil and productive public debate during governmental meetings.

However, there is no excuse for imposing rules out of fear at the expense of an open and public discussion of the issues.


BACKGROUND: The Nashua Board of Education, under threat of a lawsuit, has reversed its previous policy of not allowing members of the public to comment on school personnel during the public comment section of its meetings.

CONCLUSION: The school board has done the right thing and this should be a first step in reframing how the board deals with the public.

Christopher King said...

I understand that ATC has settled the Teresian Monk case and that the Monks pretty much got what they alleged.


Now let's see if Dee can extract the same modicum of Justice.

Stamford CT Real Estate said...

All the thanks goes to British Government who initiated and supported the rescue at the time of ultimate difficulty