First National Center

[Lafferty Daniel]

Sums it up.

I was thinking something more explicit. But the sigh will do.

[CaptDave]

I really thought "we" were getting close to FNC gaining better ownership. Very disappointing development today.

[BrettM2]

I was thinking something more explicit. But the sigh will do.

Can't argue with that. I'd join in with you, not that it would change anything.

[ljbab728]

I just wonder how that attorney could say this with a straight face.

“The resolution of this matter is beneficial to all involved,” Swedlow said.

[Snowman]

I just wonder how that attorney could say this with a straight face.

Read it more as: the resolution of this matter is beneficial to all who are paying me

[ljbab728]

Read it more as: the resolution of this matter is beneficial to all who are paying me

Actually, in the long run, I'm not sure that's true either.

[HangryHippo]

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.

[wsucougz]

I have a feeling this isn't over. Whatever payments Capmark received, they'd better set that money aside because it might be getting clawed back. This is strictly my opinion based on publicly available information on Aaron Yashouafar's dealings.

[Pete]

I have a feeling this isn't over. Whatever payments Capmark received, they'd better set that money aside because it might be getting clawed back. This is strictly my opinion based on publicly available information on Aaron Yashouafar's dealings.

That's a good point.

The guy is getting sued and prosecuted all over the place for misappropriation of funds. There was already an outcry from the Las Vegas condo owners about him possibly shifting insurance payments for their property (again!) to feed to Capmark.

There are plenty of people wanting money from him and his various shell companies and the fact he was able to come up with somewhere around $12 million is going to draw the attention from other creditors.

[Bailey80]

[QUOTE=OKCTalker;586083]The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com

[Steve]

[QUOTE=Bailey80;586445]

The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

[Pete]

“To grant a name change in this case would be to assist that which is fraudulent,” Graves wrote. “It is notable that Genesis 1:27-28 states: ‘So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth ...' The DNA code shows God meant for them to stay male and female.”

The judge also wrote about not wanting to be “complicit in legitimizing sex changes through changes of names.”

Wow.

[Pete]

[QUOTE=Steve;586447]

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

Steve, did you have any feel for if Capmark's attorneys were happy to allow the continuances in the hopes of getting paid?

Or were they pressing Graves to put the property in the hands of the receiver on Thursday?

[Steve]

They were not happy on Thursday. They were eager and ready to go to a receiver.

[HangryHippo]

Wow.

Wow doesn't even begin to cover this. But I suppose that's for another thread, ha. Anyway, what a disappointment that this was allowed to happen.

[ethansisson]

The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com

Interesting. Not sure if I agree with a judge denying name changes to people who clearly have no fraudulent intent, but he did propose some well-stated legal and social problems that make it a complex issue.

[Pete]

Interesting. Not sure if I agree with a judge denying name changes to people who clearly have no fraudulent intent, but he did propose some well-stated legal and social problems that make it a complex issue.

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?


He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

[hoya]

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.

Should we strip all property rights from people accused of crimes? Yashouafar has pled guilty, but he has not yet been sentenced. He isn't a convicted felon yet. Now, that day may be coming very soon, or he may have a plea agreement where he avoids a felony conviction. Judge Graves does not have any duty in this situation towards the well-being of the building.

[QUOTE=Steve;586447]

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

The attorneys are officers of the court. They have a duty to be truthful with the judge. They can't stand up and argue "the check is in the mail" (which is basically what they did here) if they know it to be false. Now I know a lot of attorneys who draw a very fine line on what they "know". But Judge Graves gave them 5 days after Capmark had two or three agreed continuances on the matter, and he managed to come up with the money during that time. So clearly the attorneys representing old boy were not being untruthful.

Judges are supposed to be impartial. They aren't supposed to be looking for an excuse to hammer someone who isn't popular.

I don't like this outcome any more than you guys do. But it is what it is. If this was a guy struggling to keep his house, and the judge granted him 5 days to come up with the money after the bank demanded final payment, and he managed to come up with it, everyone would be happy. We just don't like this guy and we want our building back.

[hoya]

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?


He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

Yeah that part I'm not gonna defend. Probably easier for the name change people to just go to a different judge though, rather than filing an appeal.

[Snowman]

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.

While their property rights should not be striped away upon accusation, when there is a clear patter of operation then they should not continually get the most favorable ruling for them.

[Pete]

Going to a different judge does not address the issue of a judge who -- as you clearly stated above -- is sworn to be impartial and isn't even attempting to do so.

It also sharply calls into question his judgement in general. What the heck was he even thinking?

[ethansisson]

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?

He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

No, in saying "well-stated legal and social problems," I clearly wasn't referring to his use of scripture or vilifying transgender persons, thank you. Just because I don't get emotional about things easily doesn't mean I don't disagree with his decision. I'll restate my point. Judge Graves pointed out some legitimate and significant legal and social issues with people who have undergone surgery to alter their apparent and physiological gender changing their names to be more consistent with their preferred gender identity. I don't condone or condemn his ruling. His decision will likely be overturned, but it is much more difficult for a judge to be removed from office than as a result of rulings. Judges are typically removed for habitual behavioral issues, and uncommonly for unpopular rulings.

[Pete]

I apologize ethan if I appeared to be attacking you.

The issue is that we have a judge who is deciding important court cases of all types who is brazenly inserting his personal views and own moral judgments AND doesn't seem to even comprehend this is not appropriate.


Anyway, let's get back to discussing FNC. Sorry for my role in hijacking.

[ethansisson]

I apologize ethan if I appeared to be attacking you.

The issue is that we have a judge who is deciding important court cases of all types who is brazenly inserting his personal views and own moral judgments AND doesn't seem to even comprehend this is not appropriate.

Anyway, let's get back to discussing FNC. Sorry for my role in hijacking.

I didn't take it personally. I know things like that can be hot-button topics. I am pretty disappointed that Yashouafar will keep FNC. Good for him for coming up with the money, but I would rather the building go to someone who would give it the care it deserves.

[HangryHippo]

No, and that isn't what I said either. Yashouafar wasn't merely accused of crimes, he's plead guilty and is awaiting sentencing. In this case, yes, he should be stripped of his property rights. And the judge does have a duty to not leave this building in the hands of a guilty embezzler that is under more investigation by federal authorities.

[QUOTE=hoyasooner;586486]Should we strip all property rights from people accused of crimes? Yashouafar has pled guilty, but he has not yet been sentenced. He isn't a convicted felon yet. Now, that day may be coming very soon, or he may have a plea agreement where he avoids a felony conviction. Judge Graves does not have any duty in this situation towards the well-being of the building.[QUOTE]