We have not as yet been served on the new lawsuit, which was apparently filed on Christmas Eve. We will supplement this to the Oregon State Bar complaint. Historically Marshal has filed complaints under her company umbrella. This one was filed by Joel’s firm. Still they are no doubt working in concert with Marshall.
I sent an email to Joel Chritiansen on the 29th of December and at least one attorney has told us about this lawsuit. As far as I can tell, the lawsuit is just another effort to harass me personally and to keep private all of the false assertions by Max as well keep from the public eye the overwhelming evidence we had supporting our position. But in the interest of addressing some of their concerns for Max, I sent an email offering to make modifications. And I further noted that we are not marketing the blog nor is there much traffic.
Periodically I have turned the blog to a private setting so only those who have already visited have an opportunity to review the blog. Our goal in doing this was to identify the visitor traffic from the Max group and to distinguish it from other searches.
I have not heard back from Joel, but the email follows. I did remove Max’s last name on the following:
“——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Blog and new lawsuit
Date: Tue, December 29, 2015 10:34 pm
Without conceding any concern on my part about retaliation or defamation, the blog is not about Max and I would be happy to consider changes you two would like to alleviate Max’s concern short of taking the blog down. I could for example remove references to Max Z and use M or MZ or Z instead. That way should anyone search for Max Z, they will only find the lawsuits he filed and were filed against him as opposed to any chapter of the blog.
This will in no way eliminate the Rico & Defamation claim we intend to file. But we should talk. You may have to be added as a party to that lawsuit.
By the way, Sandra is well aware of the porn. In fact, she was in attendance at a mediation held in New Jersey. At that time we fully explored the probable criminal risk to MZ because some of the porn appeared to be cp & the NJ state police had already come by his house twice.
The blog has not been marketed. We only get 5 visits a day or so. Most of those are you guys. The most popular chapters are the ones on Judicial activism and those searches are from outside the US.
I am going to need to find out who contacted Judge Jones’ Chamber and suggested one of my blog posts was a veiled physical threat.
I’ll stop by and see you when you have time.
Now, I have not changed any other references to Max’s last name in my other post but am willing to do so after we discuss this. Unfortunately, the evidence in the arbitration is the evidence and the truth of our assertions are material to yet another veiled threat. we can probably redact his name.
In my experience former employees wish to make all kinds of false statements so they can enlist an attorney to hurt their former employer and ultimately garner some economic gain. That being true, the litigation process has to be as fair to the employer as it is to the employee. And this is in large measure what this blog is about.
Should future employers of Max wish to find out about him they will find his other lawsuits and their ultimate claims and they might also see my blog…as of right now. But the blog is not about Max. It is about the litigation process and the risks of arbitration. And we have very small visit volume by choice. I have not marketed the blog.
They will also find that Max has asserted that I have been engaged in some kind of fraud. So Max, recognize that you are engaged in defamatory actions with great frequency and yet only sensitive to those you perceive to be directed to you.
As soon as Joel reaches out to me and we discuss their goals, I will of course take some action to take out Max’s last name or reference him in other ways, if that’s what they need. But the lawsuits he filed will always be public. The forensic findings will be what they are. The testimony will be what it is.
We will add this to the Marshall complaint.