TNJ....... Getting Down to the Nitty Gritty of Stuff....

Part One

I wanted to be sure these admissions worked for me. That meant I didn't just want to expose BG and WF with them. There were other functions that were equally as important. I wanted to spell out any kind of details that might have bearing on the case.

In addition these admissions were a good way to begin to build the foundations required to present documents I had received from them. If you think about trials you have seen on TV sometimes evidence is disputed based on "no foundation."

In this instance a foundation is a series of steps building up to the actual presentation of the evidence. How this is done might be different for different types of evidence so there is no "pat" answer for what a foundation is. Mentioning documents, like I was doing in the admissions, would be considered introducing the information the evidence exists which is an acceptable step in building a foundation.

In some instances I didn't need to get into the detail on those documents in the admissions. I only needed a confirmation the documents existed to be laying my groundwork.
199.BG used emails to notify MiKael Caillier he would not be working horses.
I used admissions just like the one above to reflect all means of communication of cancelled work days including phone calls, text messages and the fact sometimes he didn't tell me he wasn't going to work horses. I showed up only to find BG was gone.

It was important that I establish that WF worked a job away from the facility and when she was gone to that job. This would affect what it would be appropriate for WF to testify to as truth. If she hadn't been there, all she had to go on was what BG told her which would be hearsay. It was also important to show the court her attitude about their obligation to me. The following admissions were designed to deal with these things.
203.WF works a job away from the X Arabians facility.
204.WF’s work schedule is normally Monday through Friday.
205.Sometimes WF works on Saturdays.
206.WF normally is gone to her job when MiKael Caillier arrives with horses to be worked.
207.WF normally expects BG to be finished working horses when she arrives home from work.
208.WF usually arrives home from work around 5 p.m.
209.WF usually does not come to the barn when she returns home from work.
210.Most of the work done with MiKael Caillier’s horses is done when WF is not on the premises.
211.Most days WF is not present during any of the time BG works MiKael Caillier’s horses at the X Arabians facility.
212.On many occasions WF had BG do errands for her instead of working horses for MiKael Caillier.
213.WF told MiKael Caillier that if BG even touches a horse it counts.
214.That statement means to WF that BG gets paid full price even if he doesn’t do all the work.
215.The charges for horses worked on BG’s accounting exhibit reflect that belief.

It was important to establish that BG accomplished other things on the days he worked my horses. Anyone who knows horses knows he couldn't be doing everything he said he did for me and still train other horses, give lessons or run errands.
216.On days that BG worked horses for MiKael Caillier, he also worked horses for other clients.
217.On days that BG worked horses for MiKael Caillier, he sometimes gave lessons to other clients.
218.On days that BG did not work horses for MiKael Caillier, he sometimes worked horses for other clients.
219.On days that BG did not work horses for MiKael Caillier, he sometimes gave lessons to other clients.

Then there were those days where work was affected because of horse shows. BG had a particular pattern around horse shows that affected our work schedule too.
220.BG did not work horses for MiKael Caillier during horse shows.
221.Packing for the horse show is done the day before a transport day so BG did not work horses for MiKael Caillier.
222.Transport to the horse show happens the day before the horse show so no horses are worked for MiKael Caillier on that day.
223.Unpacking after the horse show is done the Tuesday after the show so BG did not work horses for MiKael Caillier.

Sometimes I broke up the points I was trying to prove so they were not so obvious. The following statements again show WF's attitude about the work BG was supposed to be doing for me.
224.Sometimes WF directed BG to be finished working horses by noon on Saturdays.
225.To accomplish this the number of MiKael Caillier’s horses that were worked by BG was decreased.

There were lots of issues surrounding horse shows that needed to be addressed: training charges on horses at home, training charges at the horse shows and damage to a horse trailer. To deal with this I wanted it on the record what I did in those situations as well as what BG did or didn't do. It was also important to establish how many of my horses were there and what was done with each. The following admissions are examples of the things I covered about horse shows.
231.At this show (AHACO) BG told Doug Stewart that Louie had a little over sixty days under saddle.
235.MiKael Caillier took only two horses, Louie and Legs, to the Region 4 Championships in Salem in 2009. (this is an error on my part, I took Rhet to this show too.)
236.BG provided no service to MiKael Caillier with Legs at this horse show.
237.MiKael Caillier provided all grooming, feeding and care for Legs at this horse show.
238.MiKael Caillier provided much of the grooming and all of the feeding and care for Louie at this horse show.
239.CG(the kid who showed Louie) bathed Louie the day before Louie’s class.
240.Before his class Louie was show groomed including braiding by MiKael Caillier and three of the kids who are clients of BG.
241.At this show BG again talked to Doug Stewart about Louie. This time they talked about the fact the horse had only about ninety day under saddle.
242.BG helped clean Louie’s hooves before the class.
243.BG gave lessons to his youth rider(CG) on Louie at this show.
244.The lessons to CG and the hoof cleaning are the only services that BG did for MiKael Caillier’s horses at this show.

It was important to deal with the issue of Dandy on these admissions. I needed more specific information about the horse's use at horse shows, his care and his transport. I also needed to establish that Louie had been in their trailer in place of Dandy.
245.BG’s two clients took Dandy to the Region 4 Championships Show in 2009.
246.MD was responsible for Dandy’s transport to the show since her daughter was showing the horse.
247.X Arabians did not want to haul Dandy to the Region 4 Championships.
248.Louie filled Dandy’s spot in the X Arabians trailer and Dandy filled Louie’s spot in MiKael Caillier’s trailer.
249.MD paid for that transport because it was essentially Dandy’s ride.
250.There was damage to the X Arabian trailer that was blamed on Louie.
251.MD, even though the client, for the trip was not asked by X Arabians to pay for this damage.
252.This damage happened in June of 2009.
253.In January of 2010, X Arabians claimed this damage on the accounting sheet provided by BG that has been introduced as an exhibit in this case.
254.To date X Arabians has still not approached MD about this charge.

I methodically went through each horse show where I had been stabled with these people looking for their perspective so I could deal with their claims. I was prepared for as little as it took or as much as it took. I just needed to know what that was.

To be continued.............................

No Stone Unturned.........

The foal in this picture is Image. I suppose you could say that Image was star crossed right from the start but OH how this colt had my heart.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ.............. With the Horses Gone....What's Left??

Part One

With the horses out of the way, it was time to work on other aspects of this case. There were circumstances that clearly affected the charges which needed to be defined and attitudes that needed to be exposed. There were also foundations for evidence that needed to be laid and these admissions were a great way to accomplish that.

I went through all of these the same as I had for the horses. I wanted BG and WF to acknowledge what they did or didn't do, where they were or whatever their behaviors had been. It was important to define what my role had been with my horses as well. Then based on their acceptance or denial I would know which direction I needed to go to prove my side of this case. I was very much using these admissions to set them up for the fall they so deserved.

I began on the work I did with my horses at BG's facility and how the horses actually got there .
148.During the course of this contract most of the time MiKael Caillier groomed the horses before they were worked.
149.During the course of this contract most of the time MiKael Caillier tacked up the horses before they were worked.
150.During the course of this contract most of the time MiKael Caillier cooled the horses out after they were worked.
151.During the course of this contract most of the time MiKael Caillier untacked the horses after they were worked.
152.In the equine community the grooming, tacking, cooling out and untacking are services considered to be included in training fees.
153.During the course of this contract with limited exceptions MiKael Caillier has transported the horses to and from X Arabians.
154.An exception to this would be Reflection who was at X Arabians in a full care stall through May 25, 2009.

Then I addressed the issue of the horse living in the pen. It was important to get them to state that the board being charged as a full care stall actually was for that additional horse that stayed in the pen. I didn't want them to pull a fast one later and state is was the board for Reflection. Not that I couldn't deal with that issue but because it would help to have them on two misrepresentations instead of just one and it would avoid confusion for the court over board.
155.During part of the time Reflection was boarded, for his convenience, BG kept another horse belonging to MiKael Caillier in a pen in the arena or outside under the cover behind the barn.
156.MiKael Caillier told BG she could not afford to pay board for another horse.
157. BG said he would not charge for this since the horse was there for his convenience
158.BG further stated since MiKael Caillier was paying full care board for Reflection, he could keep a horse in a pen without charge.
159.On the accounting sheet provided by BG, MiKael Caillier was charged $325 for a pen.
160.X Arabians regular charge for one of these pens is $225.
161.No horse stayed on the premises of X Arabians after May 25, 2009.

From there I wanted to define as many reasons I could remember that BG had cancelled working my horses. The following admission are only a small sampling of those I had in my document but they will give you an idea of I did them to cover the complete assortment of reasons, including breeding the dog and taking care of puppies, BG did not work my horses.
166.In the late fall of 2008 BG cancelled working horses to deliver a horse trailer with a purebred Arabian mare, K M (hereinafter Missy), inside to the ferry in Bellingham.
167.Missy’s owner compensated BG for this service.
194.In 2009 BG cancelled working horses on many days to evaluate horses for clients. 195. In 2009 BG cancelled working horses on many days to locate horses for MM that she might purchase for resale in Alaska.
196.MM compensated BG for this service.
197.From the beginning of the contract, BG cancelled working horses on many days to go to doctor appointments.
198.From the beginning of the contract, BG cancelled working horses on many days to go to chiropractor appointments.

I hoped by pointing out to the court that BG had indeed been compensated for many of his trips, it would make it easier for the court to see BG's would be aware he had done other things. I tend to remember those things I get paid for, I'm pretty sure BG did. I hoped that would help the court see missing days was no oversight on BG's part. It was a deliberate attempt to pad the charges.

To be continued...........................

This colt is Scandalous Legend. He was Leg's first colt and absolutely huge. His legs were so long he couldn't figure them out. It took Dave, the vet AND me to get him to his feet. The legs just went everywhere but where they belonged. However, once he was up, belive me, he was up. This picture was taken about an hour after he finally got his legs figured out. Pretty catty for a dumb colt who took hours to teach to get to his feet.

TNJ................ Let's Eliminate Some Horses.....Shall We?

Part One

I know you must be wondering if I'm ever going to get through all of this stuff in these admissions. However, this document is so important to the outcome of my case, to leave out important details would not give you a true picture of how this document carried the power it did. The only way you can see why it carried such power is by showing you how I used this format to further my goal.

Every horse in my herd got an admission. Most of my herd was never worked by BG and most did not ever go to his facility. It didn't matter if the horses had been to BG and WF's facility or not, I named them in the admissions. If they had been there, I defined what was done and who did it. I wanted each horse accounted for one way or the other. By the time I got through with this BG would not be able to add any horses from my herd to correct the error he had made on his accounting sheet or to mess up my expert testimony about work done by claiming he'd worked with different horses than we'd evaluated.

Towards this end I went through all the horses that had been to the facility even if they had never been touched by BG at all.

83.Dare has not been at the X Arabians facility since Nov of 2008.
83.Dare has not been at the X Arabians facility since Nov of 2008.
82.BG never worked the horse, Scandalous Dare (hereinafter Dare) during the terms of this contract or at any other time.
83.Dare has not been at the X Arabians facility since Nov of 2008.

Dare had been to the facility to be lunged a couple of times in Nov so I wanted to acknowledge that she had been there and still rule out that BG had done any kind of work with her or that the horse had been there after that time knowing I could prove BG had done no work with this mare. If he denied the admissions regarding this mare, I had more lies to add to my list for the court. If he didn't, I had one more horse off the list of horses potentially he could claim to fit into his numbers.

Of course, I wanted to address the issues of the conditioned horses too. For the horses that were being conditioned, I handled them in this manner.
84.Work with the horse, Secret Envy (hereinafter Rhet), was limited to lunging.
85.BG lunged Rhet on some days.
86.MiKael Caillier lunged Rhet on some days.
87.Rhet has not been to the X Arabians facility since April 2009.
88.MiKael Caillier has done all work of Rhet on her farm from that point forward.
Those horses were Rhet, Scarlet and Gypcy. There is an admission that states about the time Gypcy was added, Scarlet was dropped. It was important I get them to make some kind of statement of what was done with these horses. Either way, the groundwork was laid to dispute the way BG charged me training for these horse when only conditioning was done and there was always the expert who could explain to the court why yearlings were not being trained by BG.

Then at a later point in the admissions I addressed the credit BG had given me for Totally Klear and what BG's role with that horse was.
162.Per the accounting sheet provided as an exhibit by the Defendants, BG allotted $150 per month from the $300 training fee he was paid to MiKael Caillier for schooling the horse, Totally Klear (hereinafter TK)
163.Of the $300 training fee BG retained the balance of $150 for the conditioning of TK.
164.“Conditioning” of a horse in this situation is basically lunging.
165.Per the accounting sheet provided as an exhibit by the Defendants, BG charged MiKael Caillier $300 per month for lunging the horses, Rhet, Gypcy and Scarlet.

As BG had said in his email there were horses who were at the facility but only for a brief time. It was important to specify which horses those were and how many times each was worked so they could be either confirmed or denied by BG and WF. Either way would work for me, I just needed them to decided which. The only way I could pin them down was to have them either accept or deny these very specific statements.

Those horses included Lucy, Dancer and Suede. Lucy was there just to verify that she had indeed been started under saddle before I bought her. The admissions on this mare reflected that and the fact she was only at the facility for approximately 5 days. The other two horses, Dancer and Suede, were both started by BG but each of them was only there a few times as well.

106.BG started the horse, Scandalous Dancer (hereinafter Dancer).
107.BG worked with Dancer approximately 12 days.(although this is an error, Dancer was only worked about 5 days before a major wreck happened.)
108.Dancer is currently “not safe” to ride.
109. “Not safe” is defined as a horse that has been ridden but does not have enough experience to be considered reliable as to expectation of safety for the rider.
110. BG has not worked with Dancer since that time.
111. Dancer has not been to the X Arabians facility since approximately Nov of 2008.
112. The reason Dancer is “not safe” is totally due to lack of training time under saddle.

The admissions for Suede included the information that the last time the horse was worked, which was in Jan of 2010, BG would not ride the horse because it had been too long since the horse had been ridden. With so few rides for Suede, BG didn't feel safe and he didn't have a kid there he could put on the horse which is what he did to start this horse in the first place. Since the horse was first started in July of 2009 (which I did not include in the admissions but could prove), BG admitting to this information and the fact the horse was not broke enough for him to feel safe at later date would help me substantiate all the time in between when BG did not work my horses.

Once I had the non-regular horses out of the way, I addressed the three geldings that BG had started under saddle. Those horses are Louie, Percy and Tag. Louie was the one that got the most work because the goal had been to get him in the show ring so I've used the admissions relating to him to show how I handled these geldings.
128.The horse, Scandalous Image (hereinafter Louie) had some groundwork done with him before BG began working with the horse.
129.BG initiated the beginning of the under saddle work for Louie.
130.Once Louie was considered “safe, ” MiKael Caillier began participating in the working of the horse.
131.There were times over the course of the contract that both BG and MiKael Caillier worked Louie in the same schooling session.
132. Over the course of the contract there have been schooling sessions where MiKael Caillier has been the only party working Louie.
133. Louie was shown at an Arabian horse show in 2009.
134. In BG’s opinion Louie was “ready” to participate at the Regions 4 Championship pre-show in June of 2009.
Louie was the only horse that had any groundwork done with him before BG started him so the admissions with Percy and Tag don't have that one or those around the show. Other than this set of admissions for Louie pretty much mirrors what I did for Percy and Tag.

When I had gone through all of the horses that had been to BG's facility, I began listing all of my horses that had never been there. Each horse got an admission just like this stating it's registered name, barn name and the fact it had never been worked by BG.
135. BG has never worked the horse, Ballyhoohoo (hereinafter Lilly).

As you can see by these admissions particular to each horse, they define the status of each in relationship to BG as well as what I did with them. Doing this would close up those holes left by BG's use of just numbers of horses worked. Most of my herd was eliminated by name and many of the others were now defined also by name and the actual amount of time each had been to BG's facility. This would go a long way in bringing BG's numbers down to what was real.

To be continued........................

With the Horses Gone.... What's Left??

This picture is Dandy on the day he was born. With those mile long legs of his he had a heck of a time figuring out how to stand up. Once he did, he did NOT want to lay down. He's napping with the wall holding him up.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ................. Looking to Compare.........

Part One

There were important things I wanted to establish about my horses in these Verified Admissions. I needed the court to know which ones were broke before we started, how broke they were, which ones were broke after we started and which ones weren't broke at all if they were to understand at all what the work should have represented and what the horses are really like.

I also needed to court to know in what capacity each horse was at BG's facility and which horses were never there. Because I have 30 horses, I knew if I didn't pin BG and WF to exactly which horses had been to their facility, I would never be able to corner them on their misrepresentations of fact.

To do that every single horse I own was named in at least one admission. Some of them were named in more than one depending on what I needed to establish about that horse.

To start this off I began with Storm.
46.MiKael Caillier started Storm under saddle before the terms of this contract.
47.At the initiation of this contract, Storm was “green broke.”
48.The term “green broke” means the horse was most likely “safe to ride” by an experienced rider but reliability beyond that was limited.
49.At the initiation of this contract Storm had a basic understanding of lateral movement off the leg of a rider at the walk and trot.
50.At the initiation of this contract Storm had a limited understanding of the cues to walk, trot, lope, whoa, and back.

I needed to establish these things because I had three other horses that were worked at BG's facility that were green broke and started by me too. Each horse was at approximately the same place in their training at the beginning of BG working with then. It was important for BG and WF to acknowledge that.

The only exception to that would be Reflection who had that scare to work through. That horse was not safe when BG got him. That horse is still not safe today and I wanted BG and WF to acknowledge that as well.

51.MiKael Caillier started the horse, Scandalous Reflection (hereinafter Reflection) under saddle before the terms of this contract.
52.Reflection had experienced a trauma in his early saddle work.
53.Reflection had been trained for two months by another trainer before BG for relief from this trauma.
54.Reflection was not safe to ride when BG began working with him despite the work of the other trainer.
55.At the initiation of this contract, Reflection was “green broke.”
56.Reflection did have limited understanding of lateral work at the time the horse came into training with BG.
57.MiKael Caillier occasionally rode Reflection along with BG.
58.MiKael Caillier worked Reflection by herself several times in Dec of 2009.
59.MiKael Caillier was dumped by Reflection in Dec of 2009.
60.Reflection had days under saddle where the horse behaved in a safe manner through January 2010.
61.Reflection had days under saddle where he exhibited unsafe behavior through January 2010.
62.Reflection left training with BG still unpredictable under saddle.
63.The work done with Reflection at the X Arabians facility did not proceed past Jan 16, 2010.

I included that admissions related to Reflection because he is the exception in these three horses but you can get the gist of what I was trying to accomplish with the admissions on both Storm and Refection. For Vee and Hope the admissions are pretty much identical and mirror those of Storm.

64.MiKael Caillier started the horse, Scandalous Love (hereinafter Vee) under saddle before the terms of this contract.
65.Vee spent time in the long lines with MiKael Caillier before the terms of this contract.
66.Vee was “green broke” at the time BG began work with her.
67.Vee had a basic understanding of lateral movement off the leg of a rider at the walk and trot before BG worked with her.
68.Vee had a limited understanding of the cues to walk, trot, lope, whoa, and back before BG worked with her.
69.There were times over the course of the contract, both BG and MiKael Caillier worked Vee in the same schooling session.
70.In a few of those combined sessions, BG long lined Vee and MiKael Caillier rode the horse.
71.In some of those combined sessions, BG long lined Vee and MiKael Caillier and BG both rode the horse.
72.Over the course of the contract there have been schooling sessions where MiKael Caillier has been the only party working Vee.
73.The work done with Vee at the X Arabians facility did not proceed past May of 2009.

With BG supposedly doing the training on all four of these horses now they should still all be at approximately the same stage since BG's accounting sheet reflected little time horses weren't worked. Once WF and BG either acknowledged or disputed the state these green horses had been at when BG got them, I would be able to respond.

If they agreed with the information I could use my expert to evaluate how these horses compared to each other in the amount of training accomplished and that included Storm. That's right I intended to use Storm's level of training as my measure for where the other horses should be. The expert would be able to determine the differences and what those differences suggested.

When I first came up with this plan I was basing in on BG telling me Storm was going to be ready to show in 2010. It had not dawned on me yet, that the horse wouldn't be properly finished. I expected the comparison would be against a well trained western pleasure horse in the bridle ready to go into the show ring.

The actuality was the horse was so poorly trained all proper forward was gone from him but it would still work for a measure of work, even if the work was poor. The horse knew a frame and was artificially rated. None of the three other horses have a clue about frame and know nothing about rate. A competent expert could even look at the damage done to Storm and be able to have an "expert's opinion" about how long it had taken to accomplish that and that the other horses had not had that kind of time put into forcing them into a frame.

Storm, Reflection, Vee, Hope, Legs and Dandy were the only horses worked at BG's facility who were trained by me before they got there. Any of the admissions that BG and WF failed to answer "Yes" to would be easy to dispute and I would have them for lying. Either way, they would be opening the door to me being able to use the horses to prove they were lying. These Admissions were a win/win for me.

To be continued.................

Let's Eliminate Some Horses.....Shall We?

This picture is Dare with her mother, Solidare, in the background. Dare was Legs' second baby and the little stinker stole my heart instantly.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ............. Working Towards a Plan..........

Part One

Some of the statements in the admissions I hoped would play on the ego of BG. While I had never seen the man as a show horse trainer, he most certainly did. It would be important to put his perception of himself to work for my benefit.

With the amount of time he was claiming horses had been worked, there should have been plenty of time for a trainer of reasonable abilities to get some of these horses into the ring. That just wasn't the case. None of these horses was anywhere near ready to be shown.

It had always been my intent to use this credit for Storm to get young horses started under saddle. Had we stuck to that, I would have been able to get all the horses I needed started going and it would have been easy to determine, the work had been done or not. Figuring sixty days per horse times the number of horses started it would have been pretty clear.

We had wavered from my goals because BG claimed to have people interested in particular horses. That meant horses were being worked beyond that scope of getting them started. Louie specifically had been worked to get the horse into the ring. Going beyond just getting them safe for me to get on made determining how much time had actually been done on each horse more difficult to judge. Not to mention BG's use of numbers instead of actual names made it impossible to say which horses should have how much training. With the horses themselves really my best witnesses it was important for me to utilize what I could to expose BG and WF in terms of training.

To this end I deliberately made statements defining BG's training abilities in a ways that I thought would reflect his view of himself. Because an expert's opinion about the training done was going to be subjective at best, I needed BG to make claims about his training abilities. Those claims would give the expert some specific parameters to use in making judgements about the horses' level of training AND about the quality of that training.

To this means, I composed the following admissions:

40.The long-term goal for any horses trained under this contract was to reach such proficiency under saddle as to be ready to show on the Arabian horse show circuit to increase the saleability of the horse.
41.The term “ready” means that the horse is going in a manner consistent with the class specifications in whatever division that horse might be showing.
42.BG has started horses under saddle that have reached that goal while under his training.
43.With the quality of training provided by BG a horse would be “ready” within the stated “ reasonable amount of time”.
44.“Reasonable amount of time” is defined as that amount of time required by a competent trainer in the Arabian horse industry to produce the desired skill level in a “typical horse.”
45.“Typical horse” is defined as a horse of average athletic ability for the discipline it is being trained in.

There was a specific reason I thought this was important. The expert wasn't going to be able to determine an actual amount of time each horse had been worked. By laying out some terms, I was giving the expert a platform to make a decision. I hoped by having a standard of "reasonable time" for a "competent trainer" on a "typical horse" to apply, the expert would be able to say that my numbers made much more sense than BG's did based on the skill level of the horses.

If that wasn't the case, I expected the expert would at least be able to say under those terms a "typical horse" would be ready for the show ring in 16 months. The expert would easily be able to testify my horses were not only not ready, but nowhere near ready, for the show ring and should be able to determine that each of my horses fit the term of "typical horse."

From there it is an easy leap to my horses training didn't reflect the skill level BG claimed to have for the amount of time he claimed the horses were worked. The expert would easily be able to testify to the possibilities for the discrepancy being either BG wasn't as good as he claims, the horses were not worked as much as he claims , or maybe even both of those things.

This kind of an opinion from the expert would be better than nothing. It would leave a clear question in the mind of the court about what BG said especially if the expert did not see BG's skill level at the same place BG claimed. It was also raise the question about BG's intent behind representing himself as a competent trainer to engage in this contract.

I thought it was equally important that WF speak to BG's skill level too. If she reiterated what she'd said before the contract that BG was not really a trainer, it would support my claim I only wanted young horses started by BG.

I would never had allowed him to continue working those first horses knowing he didn't have the skill to get them finished. Had horses been worked all the time he claimed there would have been many other young horses started here because I would not have allowed him those extra hours on the horses that were already started. That training was for me to do.

There was a problem with BG getting more young horses started. BG's assistant left soon after regionals and he did not replace her. Why did BG do that, and why had WF gone along with it when they both knew BG didn't get on the horses for those first rides and more horses would need to be started to fulfill the terms of our contract?

If WF agreed with the statements in the admissions about BG's skills it would support she was helping to misrepresent BG's skills. I knew my expert would never support his claims of expertise. Why would WF want to be part of a contract that BG couldn't really fulfill if she had no ulterior motives? And why had she made her FB comment sound like I was being ungrateful for what BG was doing for me, if the work could only be less than par?

Either way WF went would raise questions and that's exactly what I wanted those Verified Admissions to do. Any kind of seeds of doubt I might plant in the consciousness of the court about the integrity and intent of either of these two was important.

To be continued..................

Looking to Compare...........

This is another picture of Patriot with Aana. He is about a week old here.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ............. Using Admissions to Tighten the Noose.....

Part One

The biggest problems this case had at this point was the vagueness of the documents provided to the court as exhibits by BG and WF. I could visualize the things they would say to get around my responses to their claims. My goal with the Verified Admissions was to make it impossible for them to do so without incriminating themselves more.

Anything I planned to use as evidence against BG and WF, I presented in the admissions in some way. The basis for all of my causes of action were included in one form or another. Each simple statement had some role in my strategy for trial. Whether it was to get them to commit to their perspective on something or to get an acknowledgement of fact of some kind, these admissions would open the door for the court to see BG and WF for who they really were.

It was really important the court see the Unjust Enrichment aspects of BG and WF charging me for the use of Dandy so I devoted a significant number of admissions to cover all aspects of the horse's use and to set things up for testimony by my expert. It was important the court understand BG and WF knew full well what kind of a horse Dandy was right from the start. I tried to make sure the admissions defined the type of horse Dandy represents and covered every aspect of the horse's use in their barn.

I began with th terms of the contract.
21 According to the terms of the oral agreement, any training of the horse, Scandal Sheet (hereinafter known as Dandy), was exempt from being a training charge in this contract. (note this item says "oral agreement" which is a huge mistake on my part. To be correct it should read "verbal contract" and had they not already acknowledge these terms, it could have been a problem.)
22.According to the terms of the verbal contract, as an exemption for Dandy, there would be no amount credited towards the balance owed on Storm.
Then I defined what BG had done in terms of work with the horse.
23.BG never rode Dandy. 24. BG never boxed Dandy.
25. BG did no long lining of Dandy after the Pacific Rim show of Oct of 2008.
26.BG’s actual involvement with Dandy after Oct of 2008 was giving lessons to his two clients who rode and showed the horse.

From there I defined Dandy's role at their barn with a different admission for each piece of information.
27. Dandy would be considered by the Arabian horse community at large to be a “broke to death” horse.
28.The definition of “broke to death” would be a horse that is suitable for all skill levels of riders. a horse as safe as a horse can get.
29.A “broke to death” horse is suitable for a walk/trot rider to show.
30. Safe, reliable walk/trot horses are hard to find in the Arabian Horse Community.
31.Two clients of BG’s showed Dandy for the 2009 show season through the Region 4 Championships.
32.The JOTR (Junior Owner to Ride) rider is the daughter of a paying client of BG’s.
33.MiKael Caillier allowed the JOTR rider to ride and show Dandy so that the horse would also be available for the walk/trot rider.
34.The walk/trot rider is the daughter of a paying client of BG’s.

Then I defined my role in their use of my horse.
35.MiKael Caillier loaned the use of Dandy without charge solely so these two girls could show.
36.MiKael Caillier provided all of the Dandy’s board and care throughout this loan to BG’s clients.

I ended with a statement that closed the door to them for other explanations about Dandy's use that might be contrary to what actually happened.
37.To BG’s best knowledge, no other person showed Dandy during the 2009 show season.

It wasn't just about Dandy that I went into great detail in these admissions. I tried to cover every aspect of the case that was wide open to interpretation or manipulation to tighten the parameters for each issue I had with BG and WF's claims. There was no detail so small it didn't reflect on my goals in that regard. For example 39.Generally the five-day workweek began on Tuesday and ended on Saturday.

This item was important because we did have a declared workweek and I'd used it in making my calendar. The last thing I needed was BG or WF claiming he'd worked on Sundays and Mondays with me not having documentation for them. At least if they did deny this, I would have time to get evidence to dispute this claim and to show where I'd been on those days.

I used admissions to open the door to questionable business practices as well. An example of that can be seen in my use of these two admissions.
5.According to the terms of the verbal contract, the fees being charged existing clients determined the rate of training fees for the oral contract.
13. According to the terms of the verbal contract, the purchase price of that puppy would be consistent with the price of other similar quality puppies from the litter.

The first one establishes the measure for how I expected them to deal with me, the same as the other clients. BG is the one who set that standard and they did use it for the training but NOT for the puppy.

I had been told before the contract what the breeder they were dealing with thought the price for the boxer puppies should be. That conversation wasn't about a price for me but for the price of show quality puppies. I was charged that price, however, that's not what they sold the other show quality puppies for and that's one of the reasons I wanted business records from their dog business.

It was reasonable for me to assume that they would treat me fairly and not charge me any more for my puppy than they charged for the other show quality puppies. The fact that had not done so was a violation of the statue defining Unfair Business Practices and Breached the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Practices.

To be continued..................

Working Towards a Plan........

This picture is Bey Aana with Patriot. The bay colt was born on Memorial Day so Lindsay thought his name should reflect that. She calls him Pat for short. He's a full brother to Storm.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ.......... My Expansion of Discovery...........

Part One

The interesting dynamic about the legal system is the discovery process. You just don't get to bring something to court without the other side getting to see it first. Clearly how discovery is done can make or break a case. Looking at my evidence along with BG and WF's propensity for manipulation, it was obvious I needed to make sure that discovery worked for me and not against me.

The local court rules have a set time limit set up for that process that is determined by the starting date of the case. Up until now I had spent much of my time working my own evidence but I had not initiated any formal discovery requests. The clock had been ticking and now time was running out.

The judge had instructed opposing counsel to keep things moving in the process but she had not initiated anything either. I think she was waiting and probably hoping that I would miss deadlines and therefore default because I was unable to use my evidence because it had not been submitted within the court guidelines. She had, however, included exhibits for the court so those would have been admissible. Obviously, by themselves and undisputed by any evidence from me, my case would be lost.

I had been very protective of my information up until this time. I had not wanted BG or WF to find out what I had or what I planned to do with that information because I didn't want them to have the time to manufacture evidence to counter my claims. It was important I find a way to make my discovery requests provide the evidence I needed without tipping my hand. Knowing their attorney knew nothing about horses helped but I still needed to be careful.

There were a couple of things that I saw as problems areas with my case. One was witnesses for them since there were rarely any witnesses present when we worked and I believed there were some members of their barn who would lie for them. The other was the actual numbers of horses worked and the days worked. It would take locking them into some more specific information to be able to show the court the issues with their claims. With their paperwork set up as vague as it was, it left way too much wiggle room. That wiggle room was the enemy and discovery needed to eliminate it.

It was also important I be able to show the court other elements outside this case that indicated the nature of the character of these two people. I believed a good step in that direction was to pursue the information that BG and WF were operating both their boarding business and their dog breeding business without the required licenses. That information suggested knowing their specific business practices would be helpful in disclosing more anomalies that would show they had a history of suspect business practices.

Because they had opened the door to both of those business by supplying the court with documents from each, I had the right to pursue any related information so I asked for ALL business records for both businesses.

The request for documents specifically stated, but was not limited to, business licenses, income tax records, phone records, cell phone records, text message and emails, that had anything to do with either business or our contract and dispute. Also requested but not limited to were any logs, journals or records relating to training. I also requested membership information for BG, WF and their facility for the Professional Horsemen's Association, the Unites States Equestrian Federation and the Arabian Horse Association.

What I was most interested in were their tax records because I suspected if they hadn't bothered to register with the state as required by law, they probably weren't paying their taxes on that income either. Being able to show the court my tax records which even reflected the amount of training that had been traded for Storm would be an eye opener compared to someone evading paying taxes at all.

I was also very interested in their practice of getting some things in writing and doing other things in an oral fashion. Getting to look at their business records could show a pattern that would be helpful.

In the form of Verified Interrogatories I asked for an exact accounting of the work done with the horses. I asked for the dates each horse was worked, the name of the specific horse , how long the horse was worked, what was done with each horse and the location where each horse was worked on any given day.

If I could get this specific information, I would be able to dispute it's validity with the evidence that showed horses had not been worked on some of those days and that on some work days all of the horses claimed had not actually been worked. A specific statement by BG naming a horse worked on a particular day countered by vet receipts that supported the horse could not have been worked would be important to show these were not simple accounting errors but deliberate attempts to pad the bill.

I intended to use Verified Admissions as a means to gather specific information to support what I knew would be helpful to my case. According to the way I understood this tool, I was to make a statement and it was up to them to deny it or to agree with it. If they didn't do either they must explain in detail and, I believe, with documentation to prove why they could not answer yes or no.

When I researched admissions what I found suggested making the admissions too complex would allow the people answering them to have excuses not to answer or to avoid dealing with important details. To avoid this pitfall, I created simple one sentence statements.

The purpose of the admissions I devised was to get them to verify truths that were important to the case. By utlilizing the method that each admission was a simple statement, I hoped to get them to confirm information that did not look threatening by itself but put together in terms of the bigger picture would show that BG and WF knew full well what they were doing.

I planned to use these items to force BG and WF to be specific. If they denied them, I pretty much had proof to the contrary on most things. If they approved them, I had a specific statement about where they stood that couldn't be changed later. Either way BG and WF would decrease the amount of the wiggle room they had created with their generic accounting. That would make it easier to catch them in their lies.

I am going to post about the specific areas I concentrated on in my admissions. I hope by doing this you will have an idea of what I was trying to accomplish with this form of discovery.

For example, I began with the terms of the contract.

My very first admission read 1. According to the terms of the oral agreement, the purchase price of the Arabian horse, Scandalous Storm (hereinafter Storm), was $30,000.

From there I continued on through each component of the terms making each admission contain only one component. I wanted to make sure everything that was spelled out in our agreement was covered including the terms to show Storm, the terms on the boxer puppy, the exclusions of Legs and Dandy and board. Any specific information that might relate to that term, I used subsequent admissions to define it or clarify what I wanted them to take some form of stance on.

By way of example see 8 According to the terms of the oral agreement, Storm was to be shown at the US Nationals in Tulsa, OK in 2009. 9. To be eligible to show at the US Nationals Show in Tulsa, the horse, Storm, was to have been shown in the necessary qualifying shows.

Then I used this item to clarify their position. 10. Storm was not shown in 2009 because the Defendants did not believe the horse was ready to be shown.

While that may not look important, the term of the contract had no provision for the horse not to be ready. They were in fact in breach of contract on this element alone.

Because of the complexity of these issues I will go through the major situations I was trying to address in these documents and give you some idea of how I went about getting that done. Hoipefully in going through that process you either will see or be able to imagine the traps that I laid for BG and WF. I know this will be going over some details again but as I have said all along, the devil is in the details and these admissions were going to make those detail matter.

To be continued...................

Using Admissions to Tighten the Noose.......

This is one of my favorite pictures of the twins. They were laying there like puzzle pieces of puppy piles wrapped up together. How often do you get to see horses laying together like this?

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ............... Wrapping Up Loose Ends............

Part One

There's not much left on BG's accounting sheet but, like everything else on that list there's a manipulation hanging there along with his so called charges. The last item was stated as "h" but it really should have been "j" so people don't get confused I will refer to it as the second h) Reflections full care and training will adjusted when cancelled checks that are verified amount that could change as stated above.

It's been previously stated that I paid for Reflection's stall and that I had cancelled checks and receipts to show that amount was paid in full. I think BG was planning to claim I hadn't paid for those months I bought his hay but for once I'd listened to that listen voice inside and my receipts reflected his deliveries.

The issue of training has already been answered since BG's numbers did not support he'd worked all the horses he'd claimed. Even with the horse in the pen and Reflection added to the list, the numbers he claimed were not reached so there's no way it's appropriate to add either horse to this list of duplicated charges. The only reason I put this item by itself was to address the issue of board.

When all was said and done BG's Just in Case list that he claimed:
Note: This amount alone would exceed $5000.00 Amount here will need to be adjusted

really came to a whopping Actual Total: $292.50 and a tank of gas. Even at that the total is based on giving him consideration where nothing is due. There were no provisions in the contract for any such fees and as the favors they were, believe me they were met with plenty of favors from me.

Considering the man had made a concerted effort to make me look like I was not grateful by making such notes as "gas would be appreciated, " it should be no surprise the last thing on the page read: *Loaned pair reins and apertures (returned)

I do not have these reins and the item he is referring to as apertures are really nothing more than two snaps added to those reins. Using the word aperture makes them sound like they are some fancy technical piece of equipment when it's probably a $3 piece of hardware that can be purchased at any tack store.

It's important to point this out because like all these things by themselves they don't look that bad. Put them all together and the picture gets pretty clear BG's intentions were less than honorable.

I will say I wish I had those reins. If I did I'd be holding them hostage for the assortment of saddle racks that I loaned to BG for his set-up at horse shows. A least a half dozen of the racks are just a 4 x4 board with a hook on the end. The hook slips into an eye bolt mounted on a board or wall to form the desired saddle rack. They may not be fancy but they work, don't take up much room in the horse trailer and come in quite handy at horse shows. One saddle rack is a very nice framed rack constructed of wood and suitable for a big fancy western saddle. It has a bridle hook on one end and the eye bolt on the other. I won it years ago at a poker ride. Racks like this one sell for more than his pair of reins. BG's using my fancier rack in his barn for all his work pads.

I might as well add on more than one occasion when I looked at those things on BG's lists that were supposed to be "friends helping friends" that he was now billing me for, I wanted to say what about all the stuff that I did. If I was just like BG, I'd be billing for all that stuff too. Instead I just feel the fool because I bought his line and I did things for him I wish I hadn't.

Believe me with everything that's happened, I'd love to have back the
brand new mountain climbing rope I gave him that was long enough he built a complete set of long lines and a lunge line. I really wish I hadn't helped him with problems with clients or helped get him new clients. I'd really like to have the money back in my wallet for the dinner we bought both BG and WF at the Red Lobster to celebrate our budding business relationship/contract. What a fool I was.

Before I get onto discovery, there was one more set of documents I gathered for my case I should tell you about. To show the court why I would NEVER have allowed BG to train Legs I was prepared with show records for each and every horse that has come through their barn in the last three years that was trained or coached by BG.

Since the show records not only show placings but how many horses are in each class, it is easy to tell when a horse is only getting a ribbon because there are so few horses in the class there is a ribbon for each horse. Those kinds of ribbons are not a measure of good training. It is obvious from those records that the horses are not finished as show horses need to be. I also had pictures and video of some of those horses in the show pen that would support that fact.

For comparison I had Legs' complete show record, pics and videos of him in the pen. Legs is far more successful in the ring than anything BG has been involved with. It's pretty easy to see that my horse is far closer to being finished than anything BG has worked with. Why would I pay the man to do something he doesn't do as well as I?

To support this would be another good place to use my expert to testify. The expert could easily explain the difference in training necessary to have a successful show record like Legs compared to the limited success of the horses has to his credit and the likelihood a person with my knowledge would allow a seasoned show horse like Legs to be trained by someone with lessor abilities for me to ride, just didn't seem likely.

If you're wondering why I even let BG touch Legs, I'm wondering that myself too. Although there's a big difference between letting BG do groundwork with my horse and allowing him to train him. As I said before I would have never allowed him to touch Legs if he hadn't told me he wanted to continue boxing him to help me as a friend. There's that "friend" thing again coming back to bite me but BG's work with Legs did not help me in the ring despite what he would say. The horse was clearly not using his back as evidenced by his lack of muscle tone. That makes that work useless as far as I'm concerned.

This argument of the show records of the horses in his barn also helped support the fact what I wanted from BG was to start unbroke horses. That was a term of our contract although BG seemed to forget that point. There's a big difference between properly starting a young horse and getting one finished for the show ring. The expert would be able to support that it made more sense for me to want BG to start young horses than it did for him to work with Legs or Dandy.

In support of all of the information I have provided along the way, I had other witnesses that I had not really mentioned. I did talk about them as my support system throughout this journey from the first days I took horses to BG's before anything about a contract ever happened, all the way through and beyond.

These three woman have heard about my days, about my horses and about the story with BG and WF every step of the way. How that fits into the picture of this lawsuit may not be obvious. Everyone seems to know about hearsay and anything that isn't first hand is just that. People think that hearsay means that something doesn't count in terms of the law.

The good thing about telling the truth is you never have to worry about what you're saying. The story never changes because, well, it's the truth. It may come out in different words but it's still the same story. That's what these three women had to offer this case. Each one of them had the same story to tell in their own words. If they read these posts today, they would agree, "That's what happened."

So does the law care about such witnesses? You're darn right! You see there's this provision that allows for people to testify to what they have heard when the purpose of that testimony isn't to prove the truth of the statements but the fact that they were said.

As far as I was concerned this provision was perfect for me. BG couldn't keep his stories straight on his four pieces of paper and my story hasn't changed since day one. These women were going to help me show the court that I am true to my word.

To be continued.............

My Expansion of Discovery.........

I'd be remiss in posting baby pics and not posting this one. Who do you think this little darling might be?

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ........................ BG's Just in Case Fatal Flaw.................

Part One

When it came to the next two items on BG's "Just in Case " charges, I must admit for months I read them wrong but by the time I began building my discovery requests the light bulb in my head finally went on. Thank goodness, there was an important piece of evidence there and I was totally missing it.

Stated as item i) The stall here for Rising Rainbow was used to float a horse that was currently being trained but needed additional work either on the day of training and days where horses were not being transported. These horses are not listed as charges by month and should be accountable. Percy, Tag, Louie or Vee....On Occasion another horse would be left. (stall was provided until Region !V 2009. (approx daily $13.04)

First off I must confess I originally read this item as being about the board for the pen that a horse of mine stayed in part of the time. That pen had been charged as a monthly charge as a full care stall and so I thought BG was double billing for the stall.

It was only once I began figuring out what I needed to clarify in discovery, so that BG and WF couldn't manipulate what they said, that I realized it was not the board BG was claiming I still owed but the training of this horse, as well as the training of Reflection that was stated in the next item on his list.

That was when the light bulb went on and I realized BG's own numbers could not be supported by the number of horses actually worked. In his manipulation of the numbers, he'd gotten so creative he had figured himself right out of what was possible.

I will explain what I mean but first off I want to address the fact that BG had already listed Percy as an additional charge included it the totals for the month of Dec. on page one of his accounting sheet. This, too, showed he wasn't doing a very good job of keeping up with his manipulations.

Since he'd listed him separately from the number of horses claims that month, he could say that was a one time thing. But why had he done it the one time and not the others instead of adding the horse onto the last sheet? What was up with that. It was a very weird way to do accounting, that's for sure. This was something that needed to be addressed in discovery to close doors so he couldn't escape being accountable for this statement.

That, however, was not the big issue that I really hadn't realized because I was focused on the charge being about board. BG's charges are way above what work he actually did BUT his total number had made sense to me based on his manipulations. He was claiming a horse had been there in a pen the whole time and Reflection was there to so if we had worked two loads of horses and he worked the 2 he claimed to be there, the total would indeed be 8.

Now, I knew he wasn't entitled to claim 8 horses for an assortment of reasons. Most of them I've already stated and there was Legs too which I haven't really dealt with in the context of court yet. For me, I was looking at the number of figuring out I'd understood how BG had manipulated the numbers to get to that figure.

You see the list of horses that BG wrote in his email to me http://risingrainbow.blogspot.com/2011/02/fork-in-road-worm-turns.html is an accurate list of what horses were worked at BG's facility up to regionals with the exception of Reflection. BG left Reflection off for whatever reason or more likely forgot him. Once I understand that BG way saying two of my horses are not included in his totals, the alarm bells rang in my head. How did he think he could justify his numbers and leave 2 horses off.

When I go down that list of horses looking at when they were worked or how many times they were worked, knowing that BG claims two horses do not count in his numbers, the possibilities change. I suddenly realized when Reflection and the horse in the pen are excluded, there are not enough horses left on the list to reach the number BG claims to have worked.

That is easiest to see on the first months before I began conditioning halter horses but it works consistently throughout the whole course of his monthly charges.

To see what I mean, it goes like this. There are 12 horses on BG's list of horses he said he worked over time. Again, Reflection is not included. Since BG claims he did not include him on the accounting sheet, I will leave the list as BG sent it to me. Those horses are Legs, Dandy, Percy, Louise, Tag, Love, Rhett, Scarlett, Dancer, Gypsy, Hope, Lucy.

In his "Just in Case" list he claims two horses were not included in his monthly charges, Reflection and the horse living in the pen. Since Reflection was left off the list, I will just remove one horse from his list to reflect possible horses BG could charge me for. For the sake of simplification I am going to remove the name of Percy to represent the horse living in a pen although the horse in the pen was rotated. The horses left are Legs, Dandy, Louise, Tag, Love, Rhett, Scarlett, Dancer, Gypsy, Hope, Lucy. There are 11 of them.

Then since Rhet, Scarlet, Gypcy and Dandy did not begin work at BG's facility until after the first of the year, I removed their names from the list so I could compare his numbers before that time to horses on the list. That brought his list down to 7 horses that could have been worked from Oct through Dec. Legs, Louise, Tag, Love, Dancer, Hope, Lucy

Dancer and Lucy were each only worked about 5 times. Each was worked in the place of a horse that was out due to soreness etc. That means in terms of just numbers (which is how BG charged me) Dancer and Lucy are both part of a number belonging to another horse. Neither gets a number of their own so they can be removed from the list. When I do that it leaves only 5 horses left that could possibly have been worked by BG per his own information. Legs, Louise, Tag, Love, and Hope.

BG's own accounting sheet states he worked 8 horses a month from Oct through Dec, yet there are only 5 horses left on his list that could have been worked. Those 5 include Legs who wasn't even a training horse for him. Without going into the specifics of why Legs shouldn't count and what work I did with the others, BG's own documentation shows his numbers do not add up. There is no way he could have worked the number of horses he claims to have worked.

His own greed caught him trying to manipulate the charges to add up to as much as possible. He lost track of what he did and didn't charge for, or maybe he didn't care. Because he didn't do the simple math, he was caught and it was my job to be sure he couldn't wiggle out of this in court with more lies. That's where discovery comes in.

To be continued...........................

Wrapping Up Loose Ends.........

This is another picture of Scandalous MizScarlet. Since she has an admirer, or two, who missed the posting of her first foal pic, I thought I'd post another.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ............. BG's Just in Case List Gets Creative................

Part One

The next thing on BG's "Just in Case " list was another one of those things he must have thought sounded good. It was one thing to manipulate information to suit his needs, another to just out and out make stuff up and this would be one of those things. It sure isn't anything he did and how he thought he was going to prove he had was beyond me. I just shook my head when I saw listed as item h) 10 days that I (BG) went to your facility and worked horses while Mikael was traveling (3 horses) (approx $13.04 per horse plus gas would be appreciated)

Considering there were no allowances made on the accounting sheet for me ever being gone except for my trip to US Nationals, BG probably meant that he worked horses while I was gone to Tulsa. Knowing, however, BG changed his story when he felt caught, meant I needed to consider other possibilities as well.

I needed to be concerned about proving there was NO time in which BG worked horses at my facility. PERIOD! and that is indeed the case. BG has never trained any of my horses at my farm. NADA, NOT ONE, NO TIME, NO HOW.

I know I said this already but really...... how BG thought he was going to get away with this charge really makes me wonder. What in the heck was the man thinking? This is at my farm with my people here taking care of the horses and they have 30 horses to take care of, which is an all day job.

My daughter, Lindsay, is here each and every day cleaning stalls and watering, feeding, etc during any time BG would have been here. And most days, Dave is here as well, with the exceptions being when he is out looking for a job or running to get hay or feed. Even then Dave is in and out enough he would have seen BG if he was training horses here.

The only time Lindsay is not at the barn, during the hours that WF would be gone to work (which would be the only time BG would even think of training because WF demands his full attention when she is home), would be for lunch and potty breaks. The rest of the time Lindsay is out there working her way in and out of the barns and stalls doing her thing.

To get to the manure pile Lindsay must walk right by the round pen. There is NO other way to get to the manure pile so there's no chance he worked them and Lindsay didn't see him. Besides the dogs would have barked like crazy warning her of visitors if he'd showed up and Lindsay always checks to see why the dogs are barking in case a horse got loose or someone has come.

Even at that, there is NO WAY that BG could work horses here without leaving evidence behind. There just is no suitable area except for the round pen to do any training. The pastures are uneven and grow rocks regularly and I can tell you during this period the rocks needed to be picked. On those occasions when I do long line or lunge horses in the field, there is a track worn to show it's been done and BG ALWAYS starts every session with long lining. The circle patterns would have been obvious. I would create some and then take pics of the circles to prove it to the court.

Before leaving for nationals, I had raked the whole surface of the round pen, bringing the edges down and smoothing the entire surface hoping to avoid the puddles of water that build up in the winter rains. I knew there was the possibility those rains would come while I was gone so I made sure this task was done before I left. There was not one foot print, not one hoof print, but a kitty paw print or two, on the smooth surface when I was finished. It was still like that when I got home, kitty foot prints and all.

During other times I was gone he made no allowances for me being gone and charged training when it was not done. If he did claim he was here any times working horses other than my nationals trip, he would in effect be double billing as well.

So the court could see BG could not have been overlooked here working 3 horses on 10 different days I was going to provide a site map and many pictures showing the different views of my property and the places horses could possibly be worked. I wanted the court to see the view was always clear for Lindsay or Dave to know that someone was here working with the horses.

To be continued...............

BG's Just in Case Fatal Flaw........

This is Doc, Scandalous Mr Goodbar. The only half-Arabian I have ever bred. He is out of Dare and by the AQHA reining stallion, The Mighty Oak.


Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ.................... More Issues with BG's Added Charges.........

Part One


As if the whole fiasco with Louie at the horse show was not enough, the next item on BG's accounting sheet really takes the cake as far as I am concerned. This item appeared as d) Damage to horse trailer $825. (Hauling Louie from Region V)

BG talked to me about this damage maybe a week or more after the horse show and showed me the trailer. To be honest I don't know if my horse did the damage to that trailer or not. I did not see which slot the horse was loaded into the trailer.Considering all the other lies, I have no idea if Louie did that damage or not but that's not really the point here.

When BG showed me the damage, I asked BG if he had talked to MD about this. Because she was the client for the haul, I wanted to know what her response was to this charge. BG said he hadn't so I told him my belief that she was the responsible party since she was the one paying him for the transport. (I had hauled Dandy for them because WF did not want to haul him. That's why MD was paying for Louie to ride in their trailer.)

I spoke to MD about this and she felt the same way I did. If there were charges to pay, then they should ask her for them. She would pay them. It is my understanding that they never did ask MD to pay for the trailer damage.

Now with the charges appearing on this document, I already knew the law in regard to this matter and I was prepared with documentation to substantiate my claims including legal references to the applicable laws or precedents. BG and WF cannot charge me for something that was contracted between MD and them. As a third party, even though I own the horse, I had no liability. Would I have paid this charge if MD declined? Under different circumstances absolutely, "Yes!" Considering what was happening with BG and WF at this time in regards to the contract, not likely. On the report I did for the court on the charges for this item I put a big zero.

The next thing BG had on his list showed as item e) Region 5 trip (Gas would be appreciated).

This was another one of those things that was really more of an insult than a big bill for a couple of reasons. For July 2009 he had indicated, once again, horse show did not affect. That meant he was charging me for $450 for training that week when he did none but thought I should pay for his fuel to be at the show.

Now, BG was supposed to have arrived at the show originally on Wednesday, which changed to Friday, then Saturday at noon. The man actually didn't show up until after 5 on Saturday night when Rhet showed in the evening session.

I had only entered this horse show with Rhet on the promise that BG would be there to help me. I needed assistance to get the colt ready because at that point in time I couldn't get the horse bathed or clipped by myself. He was still too naughty for that. My posts about the problems because BG did not do as promised begin here.

Had it not been for the help of Rhet's breeder the horse either would not have been ready for his class or would have been a frazzled wreck. Shades of what happened with Louie all over again, just a different date and time.

Asking for even gas for both of these reasons is just plain wrong. I was prepared to show the court why. I would use BG's own document and then my posts about the problems caused at the show because BG did not show up as promised to prove why these charges were not valid in any way. Still, if this charge was appropriate what are we talking about 1/2 tank of fuel, next to the $480 he charged me for work not done, this charge looks pretty petty to me.

Of course BG did not stop there. The next thing he plugged into his list was labelled as f) Approximately 7 days that I (BG) picked up trailer and hauled loads myself (Gas would be appreciated).

BG did in fact pick up horses here using my horse trailer a few times and I tried to pay him for fuel at that time. It was another one of those situations where he refused saying we were "friends, just helping friends." Who knew all those friendly gestures were going to come back on me someday.

As with all of BG's numbers, this one is not accurate. He really didn't like using my horse trailer because it was not wired correctly for his truck and Dave hadn't gotten a proper pigtail made up. Since their facility is so close, BG tried it but was not comfortable with it so the activity was quite limited.

I suspect he's charging me for the time after my surgery until the time he got hurt. He did not, however, do this on all of those days. I have an email from him cancelling because he had problems with his tractor and couldn't drag the arena. Then there were blog posts stating he was working on the tractor and that took additional days. From what I can tell, BG actually only hauled one load on three different occasions. So what would that be in full for a 5 minute trip. For the purposes of an accounting to the court I was quite generous putting down 1/2 tank but if you think about the additional training he was charging me for that he didn't do, he was really no due anything.


BG's next set of charges also leave a bitter taste with his reference to item g) Breeding horses (3)

That would be Solidare's ill fated handling by the man. Even seeing these charges on the list was insulting. Of course I didn' t know when I first got BG's accounting the outcome for Solidare would be her death. I did know she had been injured because of his lack of knowledge.

Even though this was another one of those things BG did not want payment for at the time, he was clearly asking for it now. I wanted the court to understand how petty these charges were so I calculated out the rate on these smaller items so the court could see just how small they were. I figured this probably took BG maybe half an hour at most but I calculated the risk factor in and figured $50 a session would be more than fair. I have a number of people who would do it for less than that. Still at 3 times that would make this charge all of $150.

If you've been watching these charges as they are accruing, you'll notice they are not much. $22.50 for overnight pens, haul in fees of $120, a tank of fuel and now $150 for breeding. Each of this circumstances were originally used by BG to suck me in to believing we were friends so he could perpetuate his fraud against me. Now that he didn't need that persona of friendship anymore, they were showing up on his accounting sheet as charges he was owed. It was an important point to show the court this side of the dynamics that propelled BG and WF.

There are only three more items left on BG's sheet of additional charges. It is the last two of those that would really blow things wide open for me. Once I realized what they meant, I couldn't imagine the court could give any credence to anything they said. It was a mistake that I never imagined and I nearly missed.


To be continued..................

BG's Just in Case List Gets Creative........

Sorry, I got sidetracked and forgot to post, this picture is Vee at about two months old. And as Nicole said in the comments she was and still is quite impressed with herself. She was rearing because I had the camera. That's what a ham she is.


Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ................ Louie's Experience at Region 4.....

Part One

Because Louie did not get shown at the first show, I guess I missed BG's role in getting horses from his barn into the ring. Had I noticed that BG really did not do anything to see that horses were prepared to show maybe I could have saved Louie some of the trauma that happened at the second show. I certainly would have known not to rely on BG to act like a trainer in any way had I been paying attention.

Even thinking about this experience and others with BG at the horse show causes me to remember WF's initial statement that BG really was not a trainer. Even BG himself said numerous times he wasn't and didn't want to be a trainer. Of course, those statements were made mixed in with all the selling he did of himself AS a trainer. He's denials of being a trainer came across to me as an insecurity instead of the true statement it was.

Since this discussion about Louie began because of BG wanting to claim trainer's fees for the horse at a horse show, I think it's important to know what BG actually did at that horse show that he thinks entitles him to reimbursement. Although I must admit it might actually be easier to tell you what he didn't do instead of what he did.

The man may have been there but he did not function as trainers I have known. Getting tack rooms set up and assigning stall locations are not anything I would say constitutes training. Along with those duties about the only thing BG was reliable about at a horse show was sitting on the rail when others rode and sometimes being in the warm-up ring before their class.

The man takes no responsibility for the care of the horses. He doesn't do it, he doesn't oversee it. He doesn't know which horse shows when and pays no attention to the usual preparations to get them shown. Clipping, bathing, schooling, feeding, watering, cleaning stalls, nothing is kept track of by BG, nor does any one do that job for him but then remember they do not charge show fees. Considering BG's role at those shows, no show fees makes sense to me.

BG does usually answer questions when asked and will do something with a horse if he is asked, but rarely anything is done of his own volition, nothing with horses of mine anyway. I certainly saw the same thing with the clients. If the clients or WF didn't keep track of it, then it got missed and believe me, things got missed. Louie was not the only horse that nearly missed his class that show.

Because of that behavior, Louie was not properly prepared to show. I had written in a post briefly about Louie's experience but really had not been honest about WHY it happened. Considering I told the story about Louie in two paragraphs , long time readers should have suspected something was up.
The only reason that Louie got schooled the first day at the show was because I reminded BG it needed to be done. During that schooling session he spent most of this time talking with a trainer friend of mine about the horse and paid little attention to the kid riding the horse. Louie did ok and the kid did ok. At least that part was good.

Later in the day I realized that Louie hadn't been bathed so I pushed for that to get done. I knew there wasn't time to fit a bath in the morning along with schooling and braiding etc. The bathing and clipping needed to be finished on this first day instead. Being of the belief that a kid getting to show my horse needs to be the one taking care of the horse, I saw to it the kid riding him got the horse bathed and talked to him about clipping him.

I remember I had planned to make sure that clipping was done too after the horse dried but it didn't happen. Maybe it was because of the problems getting a handler for Rhet that I forgot about getting the horse show clipped. I don't know for sure but BG didn't think about it. It's my understanding the kid did think about it but was afraid of screwing it up. That would have been OK had he said something to remind be but the kid didn't think about it and the horse didn't get show clipped.

Then for the morning start time BG told the kids they didn't need to be there until 7 am. With an 8 am start time, that didn't leave much time for schooling. When they showed up at the barn I was pushing like crazy to get Louie up to the ring for schooling before the session. We got there just in time to have the ring closed for dragging and I don't remember if Louie even got the chance to see the inside of that ring. He sure didn't get a chance to work in it.

Here's poor Louie his first time ever to go into the show ring and he didn't even get to see the inside of that arena before his session. It's sure not what I would do to a green horse. Not only that but Louie still needed to be clipped and braided and still get to his class. What it took to get the horse and rider ready for this class was not a pretty sight.

Louie seemed to tolerate all of these preparations even though everything seemed to be happening at once. He had people braiding while we were still clipping and someone working on his feet. It was a lot to throw at a young horse. Louie did not freak out externally anyway but looking at his actions later, this had clearly all been too much for the horse.

Louie nearly missed his class. There was little time for schooling so the horse did not get the opportunity to wind down from all the drama getting him ready. I suspect he went into the arena still wound up tighter than a drum, the poor boy, but you could not see it externally.

I remember thinking as I was looking down into the ring at him, the horse was doing pretty well with his composure but not using himself properly. He was heavy on the forehand and he wasn't really committed to the bridle either. People on the rail were impressed with how well he was doing for only 90 days under saddle but I was really looking at him next to the other horses out there thinking he didn't belong in the ring.

Looking back at it, the horse really was not ready. The horse was not far enough along in his training to be there. He was not groomed properly to be there. Emotionally he was not ready to be there. The way the horse had been prepared, then shoved into the ring traumatized the horse.

Louie had a traumatic experience that's all there was to it, It was evidenced by his behavior which I posted about in my next post about the show.
I wrote about the behavior that manifested after this class was over but I only posted about it the one time. Louie exhibited this behavior throughout the entire horse show.

Sadly I must say the horse is still affected by the experience today. He cannot go anywhere away from home without getting stressed out and pushing at me to take him home. Just riding him in a strange arena causes the horse to sweat. He does a little shaking and a lot of spooking. Louie who started off valiant and brave got pushed beyond his limits and it's going to take some time to fix.

This experience happened because of BG's lack of focus and responsibility for this horse which I guess is what I get for relying on him in the first place. I did expect, since he was training Louie, he would take some interest in seeing things got properly done to get the horse shown but I was most definitely wrong.

To be honest when I did my blog posts, I was seething that BG had done absolutely nothing to assure the horse was ready to be shown. I did not realize at that time that the experience had impacted the horse as profoundly as it did. I only learned that when I took him to a strange place to work him. That was when this behavior resurfaced.

I still cannot get over the fact BG was supposed to be Louie's trainer yet the horse almost didn't make his class and he was totally unprepared. I labored with my posts trying not to let the anger I felt spill over into the text as I tried to tell what happened to Louie in a way I didn't get BG all riled up. Storm was still not paid for and I was hoping I could hang on long enough to get some other horses started.

BG clearly dropped the ball with Louie at both horse shows and did nothing with my other horses except for Dandy being used by his clients but still expected to be paid for something he did not do. Considering what happened to Louie it takes a lot of gall for him to even suggest he should be paid for that nightmare.


To be continued...................

More Issues with BG's Added Charges.........

This is Lilly, the midget mare, with Faith, I think, but to be honest I am going to have to go back and check markings to be sure.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY

TNJ.......... A Little about Louie....... the First Show......

Part One

As I mentioned in the last post, BG did oversee, if that's what you want to call it, things with Louie at two horse shows. I don't really know what to call BG's role there with Louie. He didn't do what any trainer I have ever seen does in terms of taking horses to horse shows and getting them shown.

At that first horse show we were there, stabled with them that part is true. If I hadn't been the one keeping track of Louie he probably would have been totally forgotten. I had to remind BG the horse needed to be schooled and pretty much everything else I took care of myself and I do mean everything.

What BG did was he gave some instruction to the teenage boy who rode the horse although he did try to pass it to me. Since I hadn't been around to even see the horse schooled or to know what terms BG was using to coach, I didn't feel comfortable taking that on. I did, however, tell BG what I thought the kid should be doing and he passed it on in his terms.

If you think that could be charged as a lesson, I guess with BG's thinking you're probably right but BG had the teenage boy riding the horse instead of BG doing the work himself. That was a common practice for BG getting the work done with my horses. He had an assistant ride whenever possible. I don't have a problem with that when the rider is competent and the instruction is there.

What I do have a problem with is the fact he didn't take care of a trainer's responsibilities at the show but still wants to charge me for that. Giving this kid a lesson or two on the horse at a horse show only because he was reminded by me the horse needed to be worked doesn't fit what I think a responsible trainers should do. Trainers charge show fees because they hire grooms etc to take care of the horses, all the care of the horses, not just this little blip that BG did.

Both horse shows were a wreck as far as Louie was concerned. The horse didn't even make it into the ring at the first show. Knowing what I know now, I can't help but wonder if Louie hadn't gotten onto the horse trailer to go to the show already having that problem.

The horse was getting schooled at home without me present. It still makes no sense to me he got such a bad burn from a bell boot in just one ride in the warm up arena that he was lame. It just was not that long nor that intense of a ride.

With Louie out of commission with that burn, BG just forgot about him. The horse would have stood in his stall the entire show without any hand walking or care if it wasn't for me. When I did take the horse's blanket off to groom him before taking him out for a walk I found a sweat mark all dry and crackly like still on his back from the schooling session. There were sweat marks from the girth to match and looking closer there was even still dried sweat from the bridle behind his ears.

I wasn't happy my horse had been put away in such condition. I specifically had asked both BG and the kid if the horse had been properly put up and had been told "yes" by both. I spoke to BG and he directed me towards the kid blaming him. While I do get that the kid rode the horse and shouldn't have put him away like that, he was BG's assistant and BG's responsibility. BG should have been the one dealing with him not me. At least that's what I thought, anyway, obviously BG didn't feel he was obligated at all.

Louie was a star at this show but I found myself pretty unhappy about BG's lack of concern for my horse. By this time it was getting more obvious to me that BG wasn't really taking his commitment to me all that seriously. Since they had kept Storm's registration papers and I was believing I was going to be up sh*t creek not getting what I was owed, I did not rock the boat.

I was hoping I could hold things together for as long as I could to get as much of the training I was owed as possible. I had not yet discovered the papers weren't transferred yet or that I had the option of getting a duplicate set to keep them from negotiating the originals when they hadn't fulfilled the contract. My blog post about this situation with Louie reflected my attempts to not make any waves. I posted about how the horse handled the situation at the show but did not share about how BG or his assistant had done.

It was only later I realized that Louie really was not ready to be shown at the first show or the second one for that matter. Looking back at it I recall when the horse did roll over into a frame when asked it was because BG had put what he calls an aperture on him.

I would learn much later that the horse didn't really under stand about going into the bridle yet even though I was told otherwise. Because I wasn't seeing the horse worked, I was relying on what I was being told. Looking down onto Louie going around the ring at the second show is really when I saw the first hints that Louie wasn't performing as I knew he was capable of doing.

The reasons for that would come gradually to me over the course of time. In the meantime I went on listening to what BG was telling me. We'd had such conversations about frame versus function. I thought the man did good with it in the lines but some how it didn't translate over to riding. It had not yet dawned on me that BG was just another one of those people who talked a good game when it came to the under saddle work.

Hind sight is always 20/20. I could slap myself for what Louie went through just being forced into a frame let alone what happened at the second horse show.

To be continued..............

Louie's Experience at Region 4......

This collage of pics was taken by twosuperstudponies by way of my live web cam back when Bey Aana foaled. This was the first time I actually was able to catch this mare foaling. She has the reputation of being a very sneaky mare and on this occasion it was a good thing I caught her. She required some assistance and it all worked out. The foal is Patriot and he is a full brother to Storm.

Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY