Quantcast

Holdings company granted access to documents after homeowner refuses to pay court-ordered $5.3M judgement

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Thursday, December 26, 2024

Holdings company granted access to documents after homeowner refuses to pay court-ordered $5.3M judgement

Lawsuits
Gavelmoney

SAN FRANCISCO — The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted a holdings company its request for sanctions after a former homeowner not only failed to pay the $5.3 million the company was awarded in a judgement but also refused to deliver documents relating to his financial status.

Twenty months after the $5.3-million judgement in favor of Forrestream Holdings—with no sign of the man, Gregory Shenkman, making any efforts to pay—Forrestream filed discovery requests to see what assets Shenkman had in his possession to pay.

Shenkman refused, and two months later the court ordered him to show the documents and comply with Forrestream’s request.


U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler

He still refused, and Forrestream responded with a motion for sanctions, which it would give it discovery for records in the form of hard-copy documents and electronic data-storage devices.

These said records had already been found at Shenkman’s previous home following his default on his mortgage. The district court sided with Forrestream and granted its motion, despite Shenkman’s challenge to the sanction when it came to his laptop.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler ruled on the case and pointed out that Shenkman had not challenged Forrestream’s request concerning the hard-copy documents.

Shenkman did, however, strongly object to the data-storage devices sanction concerning his laptop. In its request, Forrestream wanted the court to order Shenkman to produce computers, memory sticks, passwords, key codes, and other related items and necessary information to access them.

Ultimately, the court determined that Shenkman’s refusal to comply was willful and should be sanctioned. It said that Shenkman, on multiple occasions, had “offered vague promises that he would comply or excuses for his failure to comply” as he consistently pushed back and completely avoided Forrestream’s request for documents, including claims he was sick and on bed rest.

The court made its ruling on Dec. 11.

More News