Sylvia Nobel Williams Phoenix, AZ July 11, 2008 State Bar of Arizona 4201 N. 24th St., Suite 200 Phoenix, AZ 85016-6288 Re: Mark K. Briggs, Wendy G. Briggs, and Quarles & Brady, L.L.P. To Whom It May Concern: I am submitting this letter as my complaint against Mark K. Briggs, his law firm Quarles & Brady, LLP and Mr. Briggs's wife, Wendy G. Briggs, also a lawyer. I am filing this complaint because Mr. Briggs as my lawyer has breached the fundamental principles of an attorney-client relationship. The law firm and Mr. Briggs have engaged in professional misconduct in which Mrs. Briggs has joined. Mr. Briggs has been dishonest, and he is not trustworthy and is guilty of malpractice. He has engaged in the specific acts of dishonesty, deceit and misrepresentation which I identify in more detail in this complaint. He engaged in self-dealing, conversion of funds, back-dating of documents, and misconduct which have all severely prejudiced me in my business and personal affairs. His actions were driven by his own self-interest when he knew I was relying on him and the law firm of Quarles & Brady to protect my interests and those of other investors from whom he took money. The facts are simple. Mr. Briggs was acting as my attorney, and he embezzled money from my production company that was intended to produce a movie and instead, without our knowledge, bought Sugar Daddy's Bar in Scottsdale with the funds. He tried to justify what he did by saying it was simply an investment of idle funds. I can understand how criminals can act this way, but not a lawyer. Not the lawyer's lawyer-wife. Not a big law firm. Lawyers who act this way should not be lawyers. I have suffered substantial damage because of the actions of Quarles & Brady, Mr. Briggs and Mrs. Briggs. The damages, itemized in exhibit 1, exceed $9 million. As a result, my husband and I have filed a lawsuit against Mark and Wendy Briggs, Quarles & Brady, et al., to recover damages. An attempt has been made to settle that litigation, but it was rejected. A copy of the complaint and amended complaint filed on my behalf are attached as exhibits 2 and 3 respectively. A copy of the settlement proposal to Quarles & Brady and its response are attached as exhibits 1 and 4 respectively. I am an author and have written four books in a mystery series and two other published novels. I have a large national following of readers. The first book in the mystery series, Deadly Sanctuary, tells the story of Kendall O'Dell, a Philadelphia journalist who moves to rural Arizona and becomes involved in the investigation of several murders. More than 6,500 of my fans were informed by e-mail and U.S. Mail that I was involved in the process of making Deadly Sanctuary into a movie. This fact is listed on my publisher's website (www.niteowlbooks.com), and I have been contacted frequently about the movie by my fans at book signing events, by mail and e-mail, inquiring about progress on the film. Because of Mr. Briggs's actions, the movie is dead. This is a continuing source of embarrassment for me. I have spent ten years of my life plus countless hours and dollars to bring the novel version of Deadly Sanctuary to the big screen. Since completing the fourth novel in the series in May of 2006, I cut back substantially on the sale of my books at events such as craft fairs, bookstore signings and public speaking engagements. I delayed writing book five in the series so I could devote full time to production of the film. In late 2004 and early 2005, I met with a local filmmaker, Chris LaMont. He convinced me that the project could become a reality if we were able to raise enough money; he stated more than once that he had several sources for financing the film. We teamed up to write the script. Our partnership in Castle Valley Films (the name of the film company was derived from the fictional town in my series based on Wickenburg, Arizona) was formed specifically for production of films based on three books in the Kendall O'Dell mystery series: Deadly Sanctuary, The Devil's Cradle, and Dark Moon Crossing. Chris LaMont and I were ready to move forward on the project in the spring of 2006, but we faced the challenge of raising substantial amounts of money. We needed legal work done for a securities offering, so Mr. LaMont introduced me to an acquaintance of his named Mark Briggs, an attorney and partner at the law firm of Quarles & Brady, who served on the board of the Phoenix Film Foundation (I found out much later that they had actually been friends for ten years). Mark Briggs expressed an interest in the Deadly Sanctuary project. In the summer of 2006, Mr. Briggs, through Quarles & Brady, prepared the legal documentation needed to proceed. Mr. Briggs stated that he would do the legal work in exchange for a percentage of eventual profits, and he claimed to have past experience with producing films, finding financing, and he said he had even worked on the blockbuster film, "The Passion of the Christ." (A year later, Mr. Briggs admitted in several meetings that he did not know anything at all about making films.) While I had engaged Mr. Briggs as my counsel for the legal aspects for the production of Deadly Sanctuary, I was unaware that he had entered into a separate business relationship with Chris LaMont. On May 19, 2006, they filed articles of organization for a company called Valley Films, LLC, the members of which were Mark Briggs and Chris LaMont. I was under the impression that Valley Films was Mr. LaMont's company for the production of Deadly Sanctuary. By the fall of 2006, development was underway for the film project. My husband and I formed Starfire Productions, L.L.C., using lawyers at Baird, Williams and Greer. Articles of organization were filed on October 10, 2006. (The name "Starfire" is based on the Starfire Ranch that I use in Deadly Sanctuary and subsequent Kendall O'Dell novels). Mark Briggs was preparing paperwork for an entity called Castle Valley Films, LLC. I thought at first that this was just a different form of the partnership shared by Chris LaMont and myself, but I was wrong. When I questioned Mr. Briggs about the effect of the earlier partnership agreements I had made with Mr. LaMont for the production of Deadly Sanctuary and other movies, he said it was irrelevant and that the newly formed Castle Valley Films replaced that. He gave no other explanation. The members of this LLC were Valley Films, LLC (Mr. Briggs's and Mr. LaMont's company), Starfire Productions, and Chris LaMont Productions, Inc. It was important for us to have Castle Valley Films formed and operating in order to be eligible for Arizona state motion picture tax incentives. Investors would get a state tax deduction up to 20% of their investment in the year the film is made. The Arizona Department of Commerce sent a letter to Chris LaMont in December of 2006 regarding Castle Valley Films' qualification for tax incentives and its priority entitlement to these credits. In early 2007, Mr. Briggs began working on the private placement memorandum for Castle Valley Films. Mr. Briggs informed me again that he was doing this work in exchange for his interest in Castle Valley Films LLC. I contacted my attorneys at Baird, Williams & Greer for comments on the work Mr. Briggs was doing but, Baird, Williams & Greer never became involved because of Mr. Briggs's insistence that he would handle all necessary paperwork. Mr. Briggs refused to involve them, and I acquiesced because, of course, Mr. Briggs was my lawyer too. Mr. Briggs assured me there was no reason for us to involve other lawyers. In early March 2007, Jerry and I made a special trip to Los Angeles to meet with two experienced Hollywood filmmakers. I had met veteran stunt coordinator, Walter Scott, ten years earlier and had been working with him to get a movie produced. It was his plan to persuade his former brother-in-law, James Caan to join the project. He introduced us to William Wages, an award-winning cinematographer and director who had expressed interest in directing Deadly Sanctuary. We were thrilled that these two experienced professionals were anxious to work on a small, independent film. On April 23rd, 2007, my husband and I contributed the initial $50,000.00 to the project. We were both working hard, talking with friends and clients to raise money, keeping both Mr. LaMont and Mr. Briggs apprised of our progress. Our director, Bill Wages, had read the script Mr. LaMont and I had collaborated on for two years and Bill declared it too expensive to film for our anticipated budget of $4 million. He suggested that he and Atlanta screenwriter, Phillip Bellury do a complete re-write making it less expensive to film and also expand one of the lead roles to attract James Caan. Mr. LaMont was not happy about the re-write, but the original script was set aside. After several contentious phone calls with Bill Wages' agent Debbie Haeusler, Mr. LaMont (who had bragged to me about his expertise in negotiating contracts) said, "I can't deal with this woman," and he informed me that I would have to take over. I had never done any negotiations of this magnitude, but accepted the challenge and got along quite well with Ms. Haeusler. But because of her prickly dealings with Mr. LaMont, Debbie Haeusler advised Bill and Phil to cease the re-write on the script until a firm contract was in place, further delaying the development process. It was at this point that Mark Briggs was asked to draft a simple letter of intent and iron out compensation for the writers. Mr. Briggs initially offered less than Writer's Guild standard minimums thus causing the project to be delayed again. The original date to begin filming was fall 2007. (We know now that because Mr. Briggs was secretly removing the funds from the bank, he was delaying the project as long as possible.) On June 28th, 2007 we met with an old friend and client of Jerry's, Mary Dunn Cox, who was then 91 and has been a fan of my books since 1998. When informed of our plans for producing a film based on Deadly Sanctuary, she was thrilled and after thinking it over for a couple of days, offered to invest $1 million. She told me that she wanted to be my "angel" and hoped to be part of the project by visiting the set. She said it would give her something to look forward to. I gave her a copy of the script to read, which she enjoyed. I informed Chris LaMont about the $1 million investment two days later. On July 3, 2007, Mary completed the investment paperwork and on the evening of July 11, we gave Chris LaMont Mrs. Cox's checks totaling $1 million. He delivered the checks to Mark Briggs at Quarles & Brady the following morning for deposit into Castle Valley Films' bank account that Mark Briggs had opened at M&I Bank and where, according to the private placement memorandum, the funds were to remain for the sole purpose of producing the film. On July 12, 2007, Mr. Briggs received the $1 million investment from our friend, Mary Dunn Cox. That same day, he and his wife, Wendy Briggs, formed a company called Sugar Management, LLC. Wendy Briggs was listed as the manager of this entity. Neither Jerry nor I were aware of the formation of this company. Likewise, we were unaware of the fact that Mr. Briggs removed $100,000 from the Castle Valley bank account in August of 2007. In September of 2007, Mr. Briggs removed $560,000 from the Castle Valley Film's bank account and used it to buy a rather notorious bar in Scottsdale called Sugar Daddy's. There are various "Sugar" entities that were formed by Mr. Briggs, but they all involved himself, his wife (who is also a lawyer), his brother and other associates. Ultimately, unbeknownst to me or Jerry, Mr. Briggs appropriated more than $800,000.00 from Castle Valley Films. We believe the money was used to buy the bar and for other unknown purposes, clearly not for the film. Attached to this letter are copies of the web pages from the Sugar Daddy's bar, exhibit 5. This bar has scandalous entertainment, shows involving semi-nude women and other raucous activities. Sugar Daddy's is where Mike Tyson was arrested for drug and cocaine use, and it is a hot spot in Scottsdale in the sense that it is the place the Scottsdale police department can expect their next shooting, stabbing, fight or drug deal. I would never consent to the investment of funds in such an establishment, nor would Mary Cox and the other investors who put their trust in me and Mr. Briggs. I was concerned about proper care of money because it was ours and our friends' money that made up the entire amount of investment funds for the film production of Deadly Sanctuary. Neither Mark Briggs nor Chris LaMont ever raised one penny for the project. I was assured many times by Mr. Briggs that he was properly taking care of all of the documentation with regard to the acceptance of money, the necessary securities offering, the proper documentation of our arrangement with Castle Valley Films for its production of the movie, and, of course, the care and custody of the money in an interest-bearing bank account. My trust was misplaced. The private placement memorandum prepared by Mr. Briggs and delivered to people like my friend Mary Dunn Cox, was a sham because it contemplated the actual existence of Castle Valley Films, LLC, which never became a reality because the operating agreement was never executed. I never understood the relationship between the operating agreement and the securities offering. I never signed this operating agreement, although Mr. Briggs acted like and told people he and Mr. LaMont were in charge. I disagreed and told him so, and I assured people to whom he had made this statement that it was not so. Exhibit 6 is a copy of the operating agreement provided to me by Mr. Briggs in early January, 2007; it is an unsigned draft. The question of who was in control was never resolved. Mr. Briggs knew I disagreed with his assertion of control before the end of September 2007. Mr. Briggs was condescending and assured me that all the problems would be worked out. They were not. His behavior was totally inconsistent with being counsel. He was duplicitous and guilty of extreme misconduct. Mr. Briggs continuously reiterated that, since it was my story that I was to be in charge of the creative side and his role was merely that of a negotiator on the business end; a teamwork approach, based on his expertise as a negotiator. It was a total lie. Mr. Briggs distracted me with other matters while he was stealing money from Castle Valley Films to buy Sugar Daddy's. His theft was so reckless that he caused one of Castle Valley Films' bank accounts to be overdrawn by $17,809.00. Exhibit 7 are copies of bank statements showing funds in and out of Castle Valley's accounts. I was concerned about problems brewing with the production of the film, but I attributed them to Chris LaMont's increasingly unprofessional behavior. I confided my concerns to Mr. Briggs as early as September 2007. Mr. Briggs told me, quoting him, "I am an honest and loyal person . . . I am not comfortable keeping secrets from my business partners . . . . " He said this in the context of my discussions with him concerning my doubts about Chris LaMont. What I did not know was that he was secretly looting the film production company while he was telling me he was honest and loyal and uncomfortable with covert activities. Exhibit 8 is Mr. Briggs's honest-person e-mail declaration. One of the problems with our progress was difficulty concluding arrangements with the director and screenwriter. Although Mr. Briggs touted his experience in similar negotiations, his efforts failed to result in a contract with the writers. What should have been virtually ministerial functions on Mr. Briggs's part had already taken five months and required substantial efforts by me behind the scenes to keep things together. It was now too late to film in fall 2007. In late September or early October 2007 at Quarles & Brady's offices, I asked Mr. Briggs why we had not signed a contract with the casting agent as we should begin casting by at least February of 2008 if we were to begin filming later in the spring. He said it was too soon in the process and we needed to raise more money. I informed Mr. Briggs that I had some suggestions for crew that included a professional make-up artist with an extensive resume of film work. I also told him I'd been working with a local musician, who agreed to work on the musical score. Both had agreed to work for below scale. Mr. Briggs became irate and admonished me in front of my husband and my Hollywood contacts, stating that I had no business arranging anything without his permission. I was embarrassed and puzzled by his unprofessional behavior. In October 2007, based on records my attorneys obtained, Mr. Briggs withdrew $42,809.00 to pay himself and Quarles & Brady for legal services he performed on behalf of Castle Valley Films and Starfire Productions. See exhibit 7. I was unaware of this event and, ultimately sickened that Mr. Briggs paid Quarles & Brady for work that he promised to do in exchange for a percentage of anticipated film profits. It is clear that he deliberately embezzled the investment funds to pay himself and his law firm. On top of that, Mr. Briggs purported to give his and Mr. LaMont's company, Valley Films, a 40% interest in Castle Valley Films, for which Mr. Briggs invested nothing and did nothing that benefitted the project. I always had concerns about the exact terms of the operating agreement for Castle Valley Films and requested meetings to iron out differences that we had been unable to resolve. Mr. Briggs never scheduled such a meeting. In fact, when the operating agreement for Castle Valley Films was produced to my lawyers as part of the pending litigation, I was shocked to see the "signature" of Starfire Productions on the operating agreement: neither I nor Jerry signed that document. What was produced by Mr. Briggs is obviously a forgery. Exhibit 9 is a copy of that forged signature. On November 13, 2007, my husband Jerry sent an e-mail to Mr. Briggs asking for clarification on many points. Exhibit 10. None of the concerns were ever directly addressed by Mr. Briggs. I had been working for months trying to move the project forward. I spent untold hours on long-distance phone calls with Mr. Wages and Mr. Bellury revising the script and was pressing to initiate a face to face meeting among all the parties. I finally convinced Mr. Briggs to host it at his office. There was much consternation on Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont's part about money being spent for such a meeting. Flight arrangements were made by Mr. Briggs's assistant at Quarles & Brady. A huge argument occurred over my choice of a hotel, the Courtyard Marriott. Mr. LaMont wanted to house everyone at the Homewood Suites, a significantly lower quality accommodation that would have saved a few hundred dollars. I felt it was appropriate to treat our important guests well and so I prevailed. Because no payment arrangements were made by Mr. Briggs, I had to pay the total hotel bill and several restaurant tabs personally. It would take over four weeks, several phone calls and e-mails and finally a personal trip downtown to get reimbursed the approximately two-thousand dollars due to me. Much later we learned that the bank account was overdrawn. On December 11th, 2007 our associate producer, Walter Scott; director William Wages; and screenwriter, Phillip Bellury, flew into Phoenix for the production meeting and location scout. During the meeting, Bill Wages asked how much money we had raised and Mr. Briggs answered, "$1.2 million plus interest." On the very same day of the meeting, behind our backs, Mr. Briggs withdrew another $100,000. A 3rd draft of the script was discussed, the plan was for principal photography to begin in late April or early May of 2008, exteriors to be shot mainly in Wickenburg, interiors in the Phoenix area. Jerry and I had previously, at our own expense, made six location scouts to Wickenburg and lined up people and locations, met with the Wickenburg Film Commission and the Chamber of Commerce. There were some uncomfortable moments during the meeting between Mr. Briggs and the director, William Wages and again with Mr. LaMont and Wages. Because of all the problems created by Mr. LaMont and Mr. Briggs during the prior six months, including contentious phone calls and e-mails (exhibit 11) with our associate producer, director, the director's agent, and the screenwriter, it had been a difficult balancing act for me to try and keep the experienced professionals from Hollywood from walking away from the project. They stayed on only for my sake, because they loved the material and respected me too much. They let me know they were unhappy trying to deal with Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont and questioned why I needed them on the project at all since they appeared to be deliberately sabotaging it. A week later we received the annual Christmas letter from Chris LaMont. One glaring omission in his letter further heightened my growing suspicions that something was seriously wrong. (Exhibit 12.) Mr. LaMont mentioned Mark Briggs in his letter, his family activities, and all of the film projects he'd worked on the past year. There was NO mention of the Deadly Sanctuary project, even though it was slated to be his biggest project to date. Things started to come to a head on January 9, 2008. Jerry and I told Mr. Briggs that, for the good of the project, Chris LaMont should step aside. At that time; we believed he was the major problem. Jerry was holding commitments for an additional $1 million in investment funds, but our demands for changes in the operating agreement would have to be met before we would deposit those funds. At the same meeting, we aired our concerns about Mr. LaMont's unprofessional behavior and the proposed budget he and Mr. Briggs had put together that, to everyone else involved in the project, seemed inflated, and showed additional payments of $20,000.00 each being made to Mr. LaMont and Mr. Briggs. When questioned about this, Mr. LaMont stormed out of the meeting. Afterwards, when Jerry and I questioned Mr. Briggs about Mr. LaMont's lack of professionalism Mr. Briggs defended him and even stated that Mr. LaMont would be coming to his house that Sunday for a cookout. It appeared that our concerns were falling on deaf ears. At that point, we explained that we were reluctant to continue with the project under the present circumstances and that if Mr. Briggs was unwilling to deal with Mr. LaMont, then he, too, should consider resigning from the project. Jerry suggested that we take over management of the stalled project and Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont could go their separate ways as they had nothing invested in the project with the exception of their time at that point. On suggestion that Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont go their separate ways presented a problem for Mr. Briggs. We did not know, of course, that he had converted funds, so we could not know why he blanched at our suggestion that he just walk away for the good of the project. When we saw his reaction, we thought we could mollify him by offering to pay for his legal work; we did not know he had already paid himself. He said, "Don't worry about me. I've already been taken care of." He would not tell us what he meant by this non sequitur. He did become agitated, and announced that he felt certain that he could bring in the remainder of the investment funds because he was an important person-that because of his standing in the community and his connections with influential political figures such as Janet Napolitano, it would go a long way toward making our production company a financial success. Mr. Briggs and his wife, Wendy hosted a fund-raising event at their home on January 10, 2008, for Governor Janet Napolitano to create an exploratory committee for national political aspirations and had even solicited us for a donation. (Exhibit 13.) He also trumpeted the political influence of his wife, Wendy Briggs, saying she was a well-respected, well-connected lobbyist in Arizona who knew all the right people in state government. And, by the way, "could we come downtown to his office and sign some papers he'd neglected to have us sign earlier." We never did that. We were not satisfied with Mr. Briggs's equivocation, so we contacted our attorneys at Baird, Williams & Greer for advice. I also contacted the agent for the director and screenwriters in California who provided me copies of emails showing what had really been happening between her and Mr. Briggs, actions by Mr. Briggs that were hindering the production of the film. In March, 2008 I was shocked to learn from the Wickenburg Chamber of Commerce that Chris LaMont was scheduled to begin production on a different film during the exact time frame as our film and use some of the same locations we had previously scouted for Deadly Sanctuary. My contact at the Chamber informed me that she'd been told that the Deadly Sanctuary project was dead. It was further proof that Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont, from the inception, never intended to complete our project. I was very distressed by Mr. LaMont's treachery and disloyalty and Mr. Briggs's gross professional misconduct. I could no longer trust Mark Briggs and became gravely concerned about the investor funds. Mr. Briggs had ignored our requests for access to bank statements or to reveal the amount of interest we should have earned on the funds. I decided it was time to act and contacted my attorney at Baird Williams & Greer. My attorney wrote to Mr. Briggs and demanded an accounting of records by February 15, 2008. That letter is attached as exhibit 14. Mr. Briggs did respond with various letters and documents to my counsel, for example, Mr. Briggs piecemealed information to my attorneys; indeed, in an email sent February 13, 2008, Mr. Briggs took the position that I was interfering with the production of the film, including putting the project in jeopardy as a whole and risking loss of investors, vendors, tax credit, actors, etc., exhibit 15. In fact, Mr. Briggs was insistent that my husband and I, whom he characterized as clients of Baird, Williams & Greer, desist from all further activity with regard to the film. Id. Speaking to Baird, Williams & Greer, Mr. Briggs said, "I sincerely hope we can get things back on track with your clients, and soon." Id. There is no question, of course, that Mr. Briggs understood that Baird, Williams & Greer represented me and my husband not him or Mr. LaMont. He knew I wanted an accounting of the investment funds. Mr. Briggs stonewalled. As a result, on February 20, 2008, Baird, Williams & Greer wrote another letter to Mr. Briggs, exhibit 16, once again demanding documents requested including bank statements. On February 21, Mr. Briggs sent an email, exhibit 17, to Mr. Baird at Baird, Williams & Greer. He informed him that he and Mr. LaMont had retained counsel who would respond to Mr. Baird's demands by February 25. On February 22, 2008, Mr. Baird demanded copies of the bank statements; Baird told Mr. Briggs that he was dragging his feet. Exhibit 18. On February 25, 2008, Mr. Baird again requested the bank statements, wanted Mr. Briggs's counsel to contact us, and suggested some sort of buy-out to resolve what appeared to be intractable problems. Exhibit 19. Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont's new counsel, Geoffrey Sturr, responded to the request for the bank statements on February 25. A copy of that response is exhibit 20. He did not respond to anything, nor was there a production of demanded documents. He simply said that he thought Baird, Williams & Greer could not proceed because of a conflict of interest. I thought this position was outrageous and designed to buy time and inhibit my ability to obtain the documents I had demanded. I still think that. On February 25, 2008, I received a phone call from Chris LaMont. He had borrowed a friend's cell phone so I would not recognize the number as he knew I would not answer if I saw that it was him. I asked him what he wanted. He said he'd just met with his and Mr. Briggs's attorney, Geoffrey Sturr and he sounded distressed. He pleaded for us to please meet with him and settle the situation quickly or "it was going to get really messy". I told him it would get messy alright-for him-and then asked what he wanted. He wanted to meet and discuss us buying him and Mr. Briggs out of the project. If we agreed, they would resign. I asked him how much he wanted and he said, "$50,000". I told him I'd have to ask Jerry and also our attorney. He then stated that I could not use the attorney from Baird Williams and Greer as it was a conflict of interest and if I did try to use her, I'd be in "big trouble". I asked him again what had happened to the investment funds and he would not answer. I told him that I would not agree to meet unless Mark Briggs sent me copies of the bank statements and other documents my attorney had requested. He said he'd see what he could do. The next afternoon, a certified package arrived from Quarles & Brady. I had to sign for it. Inside was a letter and enclosures. I was stunned. For the first time I was seeing copies of Mr. Briggs's online bank records for Castle Valley Films and saw that Mr. Briggs (and possibly Mr. LaMont) had looted the account for over $850,000. I also received phony and forged documents. Mr. Briggs, (perhaps at the advice of Mr. Sturr), had fabricated many of these documents including the promissory notes by his Sugar entities to Valley Films, LLC, his company, and, then, by Valley Films to Castle Valley. (Exhibit 21.) There was also a Producer Services Agreement that I had never seen before stating that Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont would receive $350,000.00 even if the film was never made. Exhibit 22. The document was backdated to November 2006, but the signature page dated February 8, 2008 was signed only by Mr. LaMont and Mr. Briggs. The operating agreement for Castle Valley Films sent on February 26, 2008, still did not have signed signature pages. On March 3, 2008, our attorney received a letter from Mr. Briggs's & Mr. LaMont's attorney, Geoffrey Sturr, denying all our allegations and stating that we were aware and had agreed with the loans of Castle Valley funds. He further states that a "prompt negotiated resolution" would be in everyone's best interests. Exhibit 23. He implied that Valley Films would resign from the project and keep the $350,000 producer's fee. In March 2008, Mr. Briggs wrote a check to Mr. LaMont for $7500 in payment for the original screenplay that would never be used. I received a check by registered mail for the same amount which I refused to cash because there had been no provision for such a payment and it would have been unethical. On March 31st, the $1.25 million Arizona state tax credits expired because very little money had been expended on the project, as required, and were relinquished back to the Film Commission by Mr. Briggs with the stated reason: Lack of Funding. All the investors and potential investors were thereby denied their anticipated tax deductions. The forged signature of Starfire Productions was produced later, along with a replacement of the worthless personal guarantee signed by Mr. Briggs, worthless because it was not signed by his lawyer-wife, Wendy Briggs. I suspect that Mr. Sturr may have been involved in this. The replacement is one she signed when the problem was pointed out. These guarantees were backdated, of course, as were the promissory notes they supposedly guaranteed. The money looted from Castle Valley had been raised for the production of "Deadly Sanctuary," but had been funneled through Valley Films and used to buy Sugar Daddy's. This was camouflaged via loans by Castle Valley Films to Mr. Briggs's and Mr. LaMont's company, Valley Films, which in turn, loaned the money to Sugar Investments, which in turn, bought the bar. I believe Mr. Briggs's wife, Wendy, is involved in the deception. It is important to note that neither Mr. LaMont nor Mr. Briggs ever raised a dime of investment funds, deliberately delayed the project, and in reality, never intended to make the movie. These two con artists would make more money in fees and side business endeavors than by making the movie. It is obvious to us that Chris LaMont and Mark and Wendy Briggs, with malice and intent, cleverly scammed us and our investors and destroyed a ten-year effort by me to make this film. There is also considerable damage, professionally and personally, to both my husband and myself due to loss of reputation, book income and potential profits from the success of the film. Other parties were adversely affected as well: support and crew people, investors, potential investors and the town of Wickenburg. It was because of all these revelations, Jerry and I decided to file a lawsuit to get our and our friends' money back. It was filed by lawyers other than Baird, Williams & Greer given the conflict claims raised by Mr. Sturr. That lawsuit was in the nature of a derivative action because Mr. LaMont and Mr. Briggs were refusing to protect the interests of Castle Valley Films. Miraculously, however, in May 2008, Mr. Briggs came up with the resources necessary to repay Castle Valley Films after the lawsuit was filed. However, rather than returning that money to Castle Valley Films, he returned it to the various investors, effectively destroying any hopes we had of producing Deadly Sanctuary and rendering the expenses incurred in the hopes of making a movie a total waste. After the money was returned to various investors, the attorneys for Quarles & Brady and the attorneys for Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont filed motions to dismiss the derivative action. Their position was, essentially, no harm, no foul. They want to cover up the unethical behavior and possible malfeasance of Mr. Briggs and his conspiracy with his wife, brother and Mr. LaMont to prevent any review of the culpability of Quarles & Brady. It was concluded after consultation with still more lawyers that no conflict of interest existed that would prevent the lawyers of my choice, Baird, Williams & Greer, from proceeding with the litigation against Quarles & Brady, Mr. Briggs, Mr. LaMont, et al. They, therefore, joined in filing an amended complaint seeking damages, exhibit 3. I want Baird, Williams & Greer to represent me in my claims against Quarles & Brady, Mr. Briggs and Mr. LaMont because Mr. Williams is a distinguished and capable lawyer with a reputation for complicated cases involving the sort of misconduct at issue in this case. Mr. Sturr is aware of this reputation and is concerned. This is the likely motivation to attempt to remove Baird, Williams & Greer. When he was able to return to the scene, I authorized the settlement proposal delivered to the attorney for Quarles & Brady, which is attached as exhibit 1. That settlement letter sets forth, at least in part, the damages and problems caused me on account of the actions of Quarles & Brady and its partner Mr. Briggs. My damages are itemized. Frankly, I believe that Mr. Briggs's attorney, Geoffrey Sturr, is complicit in the actions of Mark Briggs because of the specious and outrageous claims of conflict of interest raised for tactical purposes. This is an abuse of process, the sort in which no lawyer should involve himself. The timing of producing questionable documents once the fraud was discovered also implicates him, in my opinion. I recognize that litigation between me, Mr. Briggs, Quarles & Brady and the other defendants is ongoing. I fully expect that additional materials and activities will come to light that will bear upon the unprofessional conduct of both Quarles & Brady and Mr. Briggs. I also think criminal charges are appropriate. One thing, however, is certain, Mr. Briggs is not fit to be a lawyer. His wife is, likewise, unfit. Quarles & Brady and Geoffrey Sturr apparently condone their unethical conduct. If we can ever get past the deliberate legal delays to the discovery phase, certain questions may be answered such as: Were Castle Valley Films' investment funds used for purposes other than the purchase of the sleazy Sugar Daddy's bar? Were Castle Valley funds used to help purchase Wendy Briggs's new office building during this period? Did any of the funds wind up being contributed to Governor Janet Napolitano at Mr. Briggs's fundraiser? I feel it is my civic duty to expose these people and their nefarious activities. It is my belief that Mark and Wendy Briggs have probably done this type of thing before based on the swift creation of the Sugar documents when they learned of the forthcoming $1 million investment. Mr. Briggs continues to enrich himself through Sugar Daddy's, a business he acquired with stolen money from my film project. Mr. Briggs and Quarles & Brady betrayed me and my trust. It is my hope that by filing this complaint that firm action will be taken, which will prevent some other innocent person from experiencing the same fate. Very truly yours, Sylvia Nobel Williams Enclosures cc: Daryl Williams |