375+ # 0384

Big Tex, you are correct, he had quite a few properties just west of the Cincinnati City Line. I had mentioned my experience with Karl to classmate (I was an Engineering student), who exclaimed "Oh my God! That's Crazy Klevey!" This guy had grown up on the West Side of Cincinnati and told me that Karl was a legend. He took me out to see a few of Karl's properties. One was an area that was about seven or eight acres that was filled with old cars just sitting there rusting away, at least half were Cadillacs. The second one was a small, one acre lot with a small run down house on it and an eight car garage, of somewhat newer vintage, I wiped the dirt off of a window and looked inside. Ther was a row of cars inside, all with covers over them. All of these were extra long hood cars, at least two were were Packards, I could see the shape of the grill through the covers. All had to be from the 20's and 30's due to the length of the hoods. One of them may have been his early 30's V 16 Cadillac he got from his mother. On the day that he picked up the car that I sold him, one of the wheel brakes were locked up. As we were kneeling there taking the wheel and hub off, I asked him why he wanted this old car. He told me that he had always loved Cadillacs, and that his first car had been a V 16 Cadillac. I asked "don't you wish you still had that?" He replied "Oh, but I still do". I was pretty surprised, and wondered who is this guy? We talked about his car that had been his mother's. During to war, he removed eight of the pistons and installed eight dummy crankshaft bearings so that he could run it as an eight cylinder engine due to the shortage of gasoline. I'm going to guess that he removed the rocker arms off of the dead cylinders as well so the intake and exhaust valves would remain closed. The last property that I saw was an overgrown area with a lot of junk on it, with also a old airplane fuselage sitting there back in the trees. Frank

 

#0384 was parked between two diesel locomotive engines, as I understand it.
He most likely had the aero engine from that plane, as well..

Investing the time to read this entire thing would yield a lot of great photographs.

Sorry for all the mud slinging quotes, but as you see, once stolen, it had a lot of fingerprints all over the car, some of them matching INTERPOL files..


But there's some great video links Ocean Joe has posted of his FBI interviews, or depositions, towards the end of his life.....

I had a huge 1976 Eldorado 500CI V8, and rock a 2007 CTS myself.
You need a Caddy, for Date Night......

 

3279 to be precise.

More Encyclopaedia Brittanica than War and Peace

 

If I were 49caddy I'd wait till Thursday to start that thread review. There is a chance, slightly smaller than a planet-ending asteroid strike, that the court-ordered mediation on that date in London will dispose of the entire saga, mooting all that has gone before.

In the meantime, I wonder if one of the players in this drama was among the five bidders on the line to Christies NYC last night, bidding a 1955 Picasso up to $179.4 million.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

And some of think that Ferrari prices are nutso? But then I'm not a big Picasso fan.

 

You can't argue with an oil painting with boobs, though...Picasso's glasses were cracked.

 

Geez, for that you could get a pretty significant instant vintage Ferrari collection.

 

didn't take notice at first glance, then you brought up it, caused me to take a second look and counted 9... did I miss any :=)

 

The Ferrari was never sitting between two locomotive engines. it was surrounded by other vintage junk cars. I sat in the remains of the car before it was stolen

 

Wow!! That piece is fantastic!!!!!!!!!!

 

I was going to take a picture of my oil paintings, this morning .....but didn't want to bore anyone...

 

Big Tex stated that 375 plus was sitting between two locomotive engines. It never was sitting between two locomotive engines. It was surrounded by other vintage junk cars. I set in the car before it was stolen.

 

Thanks Harry, and welcome also!!

I'm sorry for that, I recalled from memory an inventory of the property, that included some train engines.

At least you can say you were in it!

 

No big deal. First saw the car in 1976. Cannot believe the twists and turns in it's history. Karl never had any idea what he had or what it was worth, at least not until 1989.

 

Considering Picasso knocked out over 10,000 pictures I would say that the Ferraris are a bargain.

Women from Algiers or the Ferrari equivalent of three GTO's ?

I know what I would rather get my hands on, metaphorically speaking of course

 

The mediation started last Wednesday, 14th May and according to the other site all of the "Ohio contingent" are in attendance.

Judge Flaux believed there was a chance that mediation could avoid expensive litigation. If they are still going after a week then maybe he's right.

As a great man once said "jaw-jaw is better than war-war"

 

Morning all, I take it we've no news on the mediation. Mediations being mediations I'm not surprised that it's gone quiet. But with the amount of people in the know on this forum I hoped that we would know by now.

Also, thinking of heading into London to see how this plays out in the court, could one of you clever people advise how I'd do that and where it is.

I love this thread, this saga needs to be made into a movie pronto.

 

The next hearing is scheduled for Friday 5th June at the Admiralty, Commercial and London Mercantile court in the Rolls Building off Fetter Lane in London EC4.

The time and court number for the hearing are posted on the HM Court website the day before

Admiralty, Commercial & London Mercantile Court daily cause list

Popcorn and photographs are prohibited but the general public are welcome

 

Joe, an excellent question, and one with regard to the Ohio title, you may wish to consider.

I have just read the postings on the "other site"

The suggestion is that Kristi Lawson served as an executor on her fathers estate and excluded any items relating to 0384AM from the comprehensive list of assets that were declared for the estate. The reason suggested is that the car had already been sold to Swaters and the money collected.

Simple question: Given the value you have attributed to Karl Kleves ownership of 0384AM, was it listed as part of his estate and if not why not ?

 

I have actually bookmarked the Hamilton County Clerk's on-line dockets for the three Ohio cases, and I do actually check in from time to time to monitor for new filings. Things have been quiet since Judge Martin shipped Gardner v. Ford off to Florida for arbitration, and the Court of Appeals stayed Swaters v. Lawson pending an order from the London High Court.

But today the Swaters v. Lawson case has some action. Specifically, someone has filed a "Motion for Temporary and Permanent Injunction Prohibiting Swaters and Gardner from Litigating Ohio Issues in England." That has to be one of the strangest pleadings I have ever seen. Taken at face value, and given that the UK's Justice Flaux has apparently ruled that all four parties to the Ohio case have made a general appearance in his court -- i.e., with no limitation on the parties' requests for relief or on the available remedies -- it appears that Ford and Lawson are asking the Ohio court for an order to tie Swaters'and Gardner's hands behind their backs (blindfolds optional?), while Ford, Lawson, Bonhams, and Wexner open fire. An interesting proposal.

I hope Joe Ford shares a copy of the moving papers, if only for the entertainment value of his attack on this part of the Court of Appeals March 11, 2015 opinion in Swaters v. Lawson:

"ecause the parties have, for all practical purposes, prevented the trial court from taking any further action in this matter until the validity of the Heads of Agreement is resolved by the London court, we order the trial court to stay all proceedings once reinstated. Withe the exception of vacating its contempt order and staying the proceedings, the trial court is to take no further action in this matter. The litigation is to remain stayed until such time as the London court determines that the Heads of Agreement is not a valid and enforceable document, or until such time as the London court enforces the Heads of Agreement and directs the parties to dismiss by agreement the action in Hamilton County. A certified entry from the London court is necessary to trigger further action in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas."

Actually, while typing this quote from the Swaters v. Lawson opinion I realized that Ford and his pathetic attorneys Smith and Rinear, if true to form, will not even address this disabling threshold issue. But I could be wrong.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

My visit to the Ohio website was to check on the Order to Show Cause issued on April 23, in the moribund Lawson v. Swaters case. The hearing on that OSC was calendared for a hearing today. I have speculated that Ford and Lawson would revive this case in order to issue abusive discovery with greater latitude than they would enjoy in London. But first they needed to survive today's OSC hearing. Apparently they were successful, because a dismissal hearing and continued OSC is now set for June 29.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Bill, if you were to guess, what do think this separate case is seeking to claim ?

 

Will you be present once again so we can hear the unfiltered truth?

>8^)
ER

 

In Post #2561 Joe Ford wrote "the subject of the new Ohio case A1404305" is "a deliberate, public, and provable fraud," apparently consisting of Gardner "represent[ing] himself as the 'owner' capable of transfering title to the Ohio Parts and Ohio Documents." In Post #2624 Ford described the action as a "'conspiracy to defraud claim.'" In Post #2085, Ford wrote this:

"We now believe that Sept 2013 auction was never Bonhams' plan, despite the express Sept 2013 auction provision. If we were in the USA I would hit Bonhams hard for deceptive and unfair business practices and frauid in the inducement as to the HOA. As it stands now, I think the HOA will be declared by the UK or Ohio court to not be a contract, authority to sell will be lacking, and UK juriusdiction will end with that.

"ALL of the above, as between Lawson, Haas, and myself, is documented by a trail of emails, each and every step of the way. Lawson and I realize we do not yet know the full extent of betrayal, self-dealing, misrepresentation, and fraudulent inducement.

"Suffice to say we filed a new lawsuit in Ohio alleging civil conspiracy and fraud by Gardner and Swaters, and I think they will lose bigtime (Ford and Lawson v Gardner and Swaters, case A1404305)."

My guess is that the Complaint in Lawson & Ford v. Swaters & Gardner includes the allegations that Swaters fraudulently induced Lawson and Ford to sign the Heads of Agreement. The filing of the case, on July 23, 2014, was at approximately the same time as Joe Ford started posting about some "game-changing" new evidence he had discovered, such evidence consisting of Swaters emailing Bonhams that the September 2013 auction should be postponed if that would increase the proceeds from the auction. The fraud claim against Gardner probably characterizes as fraudulent of any representation by Gardner that he is anything more than Ford's financier, i.e., any claim by Gardner to ownership of whatever interest Lawson has transferred to Ford.