Over the last several months, the Las Vegas Tribune has published articles about a Nevada Judge, Allan Earl, who rendered a Ruling that violated a United States Supreme Court Case Precedent.
Judge Earl’s only agenda for such a Ruling was to pay a non-prevailing attorney contrary to Trust law and statutes in both Nevada and New Hampshire.
Judge Allan Earl had a problem with his Ruling and award of attorney fees. All assets were held in a family Trust created and governed under the laws of New Hampshire.
The Judge would have no subject matter jurisdiction to control out-of-state Trusts outside of Nevada’s borders. The Trustee of the Real Estate Trust from New Hampshire is Clark Feeley and he is named
in the Trust document.
Clark Feeley as Trustee knew that Judge Earl’s Court had no jurisdiction to award attorney fees from a New Hampshire Trust. No less than the United States Supreme Court has established just that in a binding, mandatory Decision whereby it became the law of the land that any state could not control the assets of any other state’s Trust assets. It appears that anyone who ignores the law of the land as established by the Supreme Court could face jail, as we recently learned in the case of Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk.
Clark Feeley explained to the Las Vegas Tribune that a Nevada District Court Judge certainly occupies an office of higher authority than a Kentucky Town Clerk. For a Judge to ignore a U.S. Supreme Court Decision would be a high crime committed under the color of law.
To protect the assets of the New Hampshire Trust, Clark Feeley took the advice of a manager of People’s United Bank, Travis Carloni, and obtained a Cashier’s Check in the name of the New Hampshire Trust.
The purpose of the Cashier’s Check was to purchase another home on Lake Winnipesaukee when the Nevada Court’s illegal actions were exposed and overturned on Appeal.
Judge Allan Earl decided to show Clark Feeley who the boss was and he threatened to jail Feeley if he did not surrender the Cashier’s Check to the Court. Clark Feeley knew the law and told the Judge that he had
to follow the law.
Judge Allan Earl stated to Clark’s attorney, Roger Croteau, that he should tell Clark that he is making a big mistake. Clark asked this reporter if she felt comfortable living in a State in which Judges inform citizens that they are making a mistake if they ask a Judge to rule by the law.
Judge Allan Earl had no experience in Trust law and he decided that he made the laws and he instructed the losing defense attorneys in this case to enter into an agreement with People’s United Bank in Connecticut to stop payment on the Cashier’s Check that Clark Feeley was holding to buy another home for the beneficiaries.
There are Federal Banking laws that prohibit stopping payment on Cashier’s Checks. Those laws don’t matter in Earl’s Court where he makes the law.
A bank officer told the Judge that they could not stop payment of a Cashier’s Check unless the check was lost destroyed, or stolen. Judge Earl entered an Order instructing the losing defense attorney to enter an agreement with the bank stating the check was stolen and in the hands of a person not amenable to process of service. As Clark Feeley explained to the Las Vegas Tribune, he has always had the check, he is
the Trustee of the Trust, a primary beneficiary, and he is the prevailing party before the court, listed as the judgment creditor.
The Order that Judge Earl signed is bank fraud, a Class “A” Felony. When a Nevada District Court Judge induces a bank and submits fraudulent documents to a Federally insured national bank he is violating Federal Codes under the color of law. Those violations create liability to the State of Nevada and taxpayers.
Banking laws under Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) regulations have been enacted by all states and statutes passed by the Legislature become law and public policy. Even though Judge Earl issued a Nevada Order directing an agreement be entered into with People’s United Bank UCC and state statutes provide that any court order issued after the Cashier’s Check was presented to a holder is too late to be honored.
People’s Bank legal department should have known this. Further, the bank knew that the check was issued to Clark Feeley and a Trust.
Trusts are exempt from any court actions per State Statutes in Nevada and New Hampshire.
NRS 163.417 Limitations on actions of creditors and courts: Trust property not subject to trustee’s personal obligations; beneficial interests may not be transferred under certain circumstances.
1. A creditor may not exercise, and a court may not order the exercise of: (a) A power of appointment or any other power concerning a trust that is held by a beneficiary; (b) Any power listed in NRS 163.5553 that is held by a trust protector as defined in NRS 163.5547 or any other person; (c) A trustee’s discretion to: (1) Distribute any discretionary interest; (2) Distribute any mandatory interest which is past due directly to a creditor; or (3) Take any other authorized action in a specific way; or (d) A power to distribute a beneficial interest of a trustee solely because the beneficiary is a trustee.
2. Trust property is not subject to the personal obligations of the trustee, even if the trustee is insolvent or bankrupt.
3. A settler may provide in the terms of the trust instrument that a beneficiary’s beneficial interest may not be transferred, voluntarily or involuntarily, before the trustee has delivered the interest to the
(Added to NRS by 2009, 785) Any bank that entertains reissuing a Cashier’s Check per the UCC lost
check provision is required to acquire an Indemnification Agreement from the last person to hold the check attesting through an affidavit that the check is lost, destroyed, or stolen. The only person that could sign such an affidavit is Clark Feeley.
People’s United Bank failed to obtain a valid affidavit and entered a fraudulent agreement when they knew that Clark Feeley had the Cashier’s Check. A bank officer of People’s United Bank was obviously induced to enter such a fraudulent agreement and to participate in a scheme that amounted to bank fraud.
Clark Feeley presented to the Las Vegas Tribune the following Decision from the highest Court in the land establishing that any scheme perpetrated against a Federally Insured bank is the crime.
U.S. Supreme Court
KEVIN LOUGHRIN, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES
No. 13-316 June 23, 2014
Opinion of the Court
JUSTICE KAGAN delivered the opinion of the Court.
A provision of the federal bank fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1344(2), makes criminal a knowing scheme to obtain property owned by, or in the custody of, a bank “by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.” The question presented is whether the Government must prove that a defendant charged with violating that provision intended to defraud a bank. We hold that the Government need not make that showing.
Clark Feeley reminded the Las Vegas Tribune that all this was done to pay non-prevailing attorneys from Trust assets. That action is illegal and violates all Trust principles and the very reason to have an Estate Trust.
The Radio Tribune street reporter is on site in front of the headquarters of People’s United Bank. Banking laws dictate that banks that refuse to honor their own Cashier’s Checks are liable to pay the check plus all interest, expenses and consequential damages. The bank will have to pay the expenses of the reporter and he will be on site advising bank customers that any money deposited with People’s United Bank is in jeopardy and not safe.
On Friday September 18, 2015 Aaron Feeley was interviewed by a TV camera crew on site in Connecticut. This interview will expose the banks illegality to many customers, directors, stockholders, employees, and news media.
This is a national story because Cashier’s Checks are vital to commercial transactions throughout the United States. Further, baby boomers are scheduled to receive trillions of dollars bequeathed to them in Trusts. Any bank that does not follow and abide by Trust law will be out of business.
The actions done by Judge Earl, the Nevada Courts, and People’s United Bank have Violated United States Supreme Court law of the land and the Constitutional property Rights of legitimate beneficiaries to enrich unethical lawyers.
This story will make its mark in history not because of one family but because of the corruption and lawlessness of judges, lawyers, and bankers who are all sworn to uphold laws that affect all Americans.