Wellstone Filters Filed Motion to Dismiss With Arizona Court of Appeals in Suit About Illegal Market Manipulations Through Junk Faxes

Share Article

Wellstone Filters claims in its motion to dismiss that the appeal was not taken from a final judgment or otherwise appealable order of the Mohave County Superior Court. However, Judge Chavez stated in his order that plaintiff Christine Baker had 30 days to appeal his decision and accordingly she timely filed her notice of appeal.

Past News Releases

RSS

After receiving countless unsolicited faxes, Christine Baker filed suit against Wellstone Filters, its CEO Learned J. Hand and others for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) on October 5, 2004, in Kingman, Arizona, Superior Court, CV-04-915.

Ms. Baker alleges in her complaint that Wellstone Filters was illegally promoted through unsolicited faxes and the court granted the Wellstone Filters motion for summary judgment without giving Ms. Baker the opportunity to conduct discovery.

On 9/21/05, Ms. Baker filed the notice of appeal to the Arizona Court of Appeals, case # 1 CA-CV 05-0765. On 12/9/05, Wellstone Filters attorney Douglas Irish, partner at Lewis and Roca in Phoenix, filed the motion to dismiss, claiming that the appeal was not taken from a final judgment or otherwise appealable order of the Mohave County Superior Court.

On 12/20/05, Ms. Baker objected:

“Judge Chavez specifically stated during the 8/23/05 oral arguments that Baker had 30 days to appeal, [Order doc. # 52 attached and Transcript of the 8/23/05 Oral Arguments, pg. 8, lns. 21-25], indicating that there should be a final judgment or otherwise appealable order of the Superior Court.”

The court filings are posted at http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/5136/5708.html

Ms. Baker alleged in her suit that Wellstone Filters is liable for the junk faxes even if it was not aware that the promotions included faxes. In 1995, the FCC established the advertisers' liability for junk faxes in the Reconsideration Order 12391:

“35. Decision. We clarify that the entity or entities on whose behalf facsimiles are transmitted are ultimately liable for compliance with the rule banning unsolicited facsimile advertisements …”

The TCPA allows for treble damages for “willful or knowing” violations and the advertiser is liable for at least $500 in statutory damages per violation.

Some of the WLSF junk faxes and additional research are posted at Ms. Baker’s Fight Back web site at http://fight-back.us/forum/index.php?showforum=71

According to the charts, the Wellstone Filters shares reached record highs of $1.60 in December 2004, after a 3 for 1 split in October 2004. In recent months, WLSF shares traded in the 40 to 50 cent range according to Pink Sheets. For current quotes please check http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/quote.jsp?symbol=WLSF or http://otcbb.com/

According to its SEC filings, Wellstone Filters President Carla Cerami Hand and her father sold WLSF shares during the time of the promotions and Wellstone issued $20 million in stock options to employees and for services. The SEC filings are posted at http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001092802

While Rosanne Baack, Wellstone Filters Public Relations, acknowledged in March 2005 that they were aware of the fax promotions, Wellstone Filters has refused Ms. Baker’s requests for assistance with the identification of the persons behind the extensive 1.5 year market manipulations.

Judge Chavez declined to allow Ms. Baker to conduct formal discovery to find out which promoters were hired by Wellstone and which major shareholders sold during the time of the illegal promotions and he granted the Wellstone motion for summary judgment.

On 5/30/05, Ms. Baker had submitted her complaint about the WLSF illegal market manipulations to the SEC and in response to her request for an update, Ms. Kerry McGovern with the SEC advised on 6/24/05:

“The SEC generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation until we bring charges against someone involved. We cannot provide you with updates on the status of your complaint or of any pending SEC investigation…”

The SEC complaint and correspondence are posted at http://fight-back.us/forum/index.php?showtopic=772

Ms. Baker continues to offer a reward for information leading to the identification of the responsible persons at http://mylitigation.net/pr/news/release/1000_reward_for_info_leading_to_conviction_of_wellstone_filters_otcbbwlsf/

# # #

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Christine Baker
Visit website