click image to enlarge
Well folks, the Karma Patrol from the "SLAPP suit Refund House" visited the William Brennan Courthouse last Friday!
On or about March 18, 2016, debtors Lane Bajardi and Kim Cardinal Bajardi, are to begin paying a six-figure judgment to one "John Doe" Defendant.
Judge Barry Sarkisian ordered Lane Bajardi to pay the MAXIMUM allowable salary-attachment: 25% of his disposable income, which equals $907.42 per bi-weekly paycheck, $1,814. 84/month, $21,778.08/ year.
Let's be clear, this wage execution is simply a reimbursement of legal fees and NOT DAMAGES.
Bajardi had opposed the garnishment motion, and submitted a certification to the court claiming that his weekly household expenses totaled $1,695.83, without attaching a single receipt, or proof. Bajardi also estimated additional "unexpected expenses" in the amount of $100/week.
The court appeared unsympathetic to Lane Bajardis' claimed weekly household expenses. For example, he claimed: $21.92 on "hair care for 3," $300 for "food," $69.23 for "household items," $34 for "Zip Car/Car sharing," $19.23 for "Lane and Kimberly clothing"- noting expenses to the penny without providing a single receipt.
It appeared to GA, who was in the courtroom, that Bajardi had prepared to testify on the wage garnishment, but balked at the sight of a reporter's video camera; John Heinis from Hudson County View, filmed the proceedings and published his article today.
|Read the article|
Bajardi's 25% salary garnishment is not the first collection on the $276,677.00 judgment.
In January, a named-Defendant, Horse, was granted a writ of execution which froze the Bajardis' TD bank checking account and put their money in escrow. In February the court granted a release of their funds to attorney Alex Booth.
Today, Horsey revealed the amount: $4,223.75.
Note, the Bajardis filed a Notice of Appeal several months ago, but stopped the 'Appeal clock" with the filing of Appellate motions. Last week, the Appellate DENIED both of the Bajardis' motions, hence the 'clock' should resume ticking with the scheduling of briefs.
Which brings us to the present.
The email below is a peek behind the curtain at the "SLAPP suit disguised as a defamation case..." One man's "calling things as I see them" is another man's "attack" for which he seeks "damages... to send a message..."
There is no clearer description of abusing the courts to step on the First Amendment.