My Evidence Matters
Lawsuit Misconduct / Warnings
Please click on the red hearts to view the Court Documents
On Demand filed a Lawsuit against me
I Counter-sued On Demand Direct Response, LLC, On Demand and Direct Response III, LLC.
I filed a Third-Party Complaint against: Kevin Harrington; As Seen On Tv, Inc.; Spiral Toys; Mark Meyers; Jay at Play Int'l; Jay Franco & Sons; Hutton Miller; Echo Factory; Digital Target Marketing; Dragon-I Toys
On January 19, 2017, I filed an Amended Third-Party Complaint (Dkt 225)
On Demand's Local Counsel and Lead Counsel file motions to withdraw for failure to be paid.
On September 8, 2017, Cantor Colburn, LLP (On Demand's Lead Counsel) files Lawsuit against On Demand
Entry of Default against Kevin Harrington (Dkt 106)
Order setting aside Kevin Harrington's Default Judgment (Dkt 157)
Entry of Default against As Seen On Tv, Inc. (Dkt 160)
Entry of Default against Dragon-I Toys (Dkt107)
Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Ferenbach that all of On Demand's claims against me should be dismissed with prejudice (Dkt 161)
Order Accepting Magistrate Judge Ferenbach's Report and Recommendation DISMISSING all of
On Demand's claims against me (Dkt 171)
Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Koppe
recommending a Default Judgement against On Demand
and for On Demand to be Held in Contempt of Court (Dkt 341)
"In this case, Ms. McCart-Pollak has explained that the missing discovery is not only important with respect to her counterclaims involving On Demand, but is also important with respect to her pending claims against third-party defendant Harrington."
Order Harrington and his Lawyers are Ordered to Show Cause why they should not be sanctioned (Dkt 345)
Order "The Court Cautions Mr. Harrington and his counsel that they must comply with all applicable rules and all orders moving forward Failure To Do So May Result In The Imposition of Sanctions, Up To And Including Case-Dispositive Sanctions. As this is the second such warning see docket 310" (Dkt 355)
Order Accepting and Adopting Magistrate Judge Koppe's Report and Recommendation by Judge Du (Dkt 362)
"Because On Demands responses to discovery requests at issue are needed for McCart-Pollak to prosecute her third-party claims, the court will wield its civil contempt power to compel On Demand to respond to the discovery request. Accordingly, the court finds On Demand and Miller are in contempt of court orders."
On Demand and Miller Held in Contempt of Court
Court issued a Default Judgement against On Demand (Dkt 363)
Minute Order in Chambers ...The Court has reviewed the sealed Order signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro in 2:18-mj-17 (ECF No. 2.) Attorney Jeffrey Anthony Miller is terminated as counsel. (Dkt 400)
Lawyer for On Demand
Jeffrey Miller DISBARRED
Order and Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Foley to find Spiral Toys in Civil Contempt and Further Recommended that the district court..."issue an order to Show Cause why Contempt Sanctions should not be entered against Mark Meyers (Dkt 434)
Order [My] Reconsideration DENIED (Dkt 436)
Order and Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Foley to find On Demand and Jeffrey Miller in
Further Contempt (Dkt 456)
Order Accepting and Adopting Magistrate Judge Foley's Report and Recommendation . Finds Spiral Toys in Contempt (ordered to pay $18.81) and Finds On Demand in Further Contempt (ordered to pay $50.00) (Dkt 465)
Spiral Toys and On Demand NEVER PAID the Court's Order
Judgment against On Demand for $537,097.92 (Dkt 466)
On Demand NEVER PAID the Judgment
and is no longer located at their business address.
Hearing Tony Abbatangelo, On Demand's local counsel, admitted he only had the contact information for On Demand's lawyer Jeffrey Miller (who was terminated in the case in 2018 and disbarred in 2019) and NEVER had the contact information for his clients On Demand (Dkt 478 Tr. pg 10 line 21 - pg 11 line 2)
Default Judgments against As Seen On Tv, Inc. and Dragon-I Toys for $0.00 (Dkt 475)
I Filed my Opening Brief for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Case No: 19-15948
Kevin Harrington filed his Answering Brief for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Mark Meyers filed his Answering Brief for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Jay@Play filed its Answering Brief for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
May 26, 2020
I Filed my Reply Brief for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Case No: 19-15948
If, in your opinion, you believe that My Evidence Matters and that The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals should REMAND this case back to the District Court, for a Jury to decide at Trial
Keep Going ... There is More to the Story
go to the next page of the website by clicking on the "Lots of Love Buddies" Logo below
Case Law which supports the Right to a Jury Trial
(Withholding and/ or Suppressing Documents, Seventh Amendment, Light Most Favorable, Credibility, and Faulty Recollection)
Please click on the Soldier hugging his daughter below to
view the Case Law Page
Thank you for taking the time to view my website My Evidence Matters.
The mission of this website is NOT to defame anyone or to say that anyone is guilty.
(That determination lies solely in the province of a jury at trial.)
The sole purpose of the website is that
I believe, in my honest opinion, that My Evidence Matters
and that My 7th Amendment Right to a Jury Trial has been violated.