SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE_______________________________JEFFREY S. NEWTON, )CASE NO. _______________________RICHARD A. NEWTON, ) By assignment, and )DEPT. NO. ______ESTATE OF JOYCE A. NEWTON, )JUDGE: HONORABLE ______________ Jeffrey S. Newton, P.R. ) )Hearing Date: Thursday, June 23, 2011, 11:00 a.m.Plaintiffs, )vs. ) )MOTION FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENTBANK OF AMERICA, N.A. )INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO CREDITORS a national banking corporation, )SUIT AND FOR FRAUDULENT TRANSFERTHOMAS PATRICK FREYDL, )PURSUANT TO CCP 708.180(c), 708.240FREYDL & ASSOCIATES, and )AND 3439.07FREYDL & ASSOCIATES, LTD, ) )FOR ENFORCEMENT OF DOMESTICATEDDefendants. )1999 MICHIGAN CONSENT JUDGMENT ) )DECLARATIONS OF GOOD CAUSE & NOTICE )MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES ) )FOR ENFORCEMENT OF DOMESTICATED )1999 MICHIGAN CONSENT JUDGMENT_______________________________)

TO:Thomas Patrick Freydl, Freydl & Associates (Judgment Debtors), any attorney of record of Judgment Debtors; Freydl & Associates, LTD, Inc. (Successor In Interest to Judgment Debtor Freydl & Associates), any attorney of Record of Freydl & Associates, LTD, Inc.,:NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT on Thursday, June 23, 2011 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32 of the Court located at 700 Civic Center Drive, Santa Ana, California, Jeffrey S. Newton, the Judgment Creditor, will move the Court for an Order restraining Bank of America, and the Judgment Debtors, and any servants, agents, employees or attorneys for Bank of America or the Judgment Debtors and any person(s) in active concert and participating with Bank of America or the Judgment Debtors, from transferring, encumbering, assigning, disposing or spending any interest in any and all funds in Bank of America Bank Account Number 2363871631, or from paying any of these described funds (or permitting their withdrawal, encumbrance, assignment, disposition or spending) to or by the Judgment Debtors (or to any of them, or to their Successors in Interest, either now known or later formulated), or to any person(s), corporation(s), partnership(s), limited liability company(ies) or other legal ent(ies), until Judgment in the Creditors Suit filed concurrently herewith, is entered.This Motion will be based on this Notice, the attached Declaration of Jeffrey S. Newton, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities set forth below, and the complete files and records of this Action.REQUESTED RELIEF AND DURATION THEREOF1.Plaintiff-Judgment Creditor[footnoteRef:1] respectfully requests the entry of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) Order immediately freezing (restraining and enjoining) Bank of America from releasing any funds, or permitting the transfer, withdrawal or other disposition of said funds, in any amount whatsoever, to Thomas Patrick Freydl, Freydl & Associates, Freydl & Associates, P.C., Freydl & Associates, LTD, Inc., or any of them, or any derivation of said names, or any of them, from Bank of America Account Number 2363871631, until (ownership of the money in said bank account is conclusively determined pursuant to the Complaint for Creditors Suit, Fraudulent Transfer, Injunctive Addition of Corporate Entity as Judgment Debtor And For Other Relief, filed concurrently herewith, the disposition of said money pursuant to the resolution of said action is conclusively determined, and payment to the Judgment Creditor or all such funds determined to properly be payable to the Judgment Creditor is fully and finally accomplished. [1: For simplicity, simply Newton.]

THIS HONORABLE COURTS AUTHORITY FORMAKING THE ABOVE ORDER ON AN EX PARTE BASIS

Code of Civil Procedure 527; 708.180(a)-(d); 708.240(a), (b); 3439.07, 1710.45.CREDITORS SUIT AND COMPLAINT FOR FRAUDULENT TRANSFER, INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF, AND FOR ADDITION OF CORPORATE DEFENDANT TO LIST OF JUDGMENT DEBTORS

The Judgment Creditor has filed a Creditors Suit and Complaint for Fraudulent Transfer, Injunctive and Other Relief concurrently herewith. In the interest of judicial economy, and also for ecological concerns, the instant motion will not recreate the Courts previously granted, similar Motion, but will instead refer to it as needed. All references to exhibits are to those on file in this Court in Civil Case 30-2011-00469301-CU-EN-CJC.Temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief is readily available to Judgment Creditors upon the filing of a Creditors Suit, pursuant to CCP 708.240(a) and (b), respecting transfer prohibition to the Judgment Debtor (subsection a) and anybody else (subsection b). Bond (undertaking) is discretionary. Newton submits that the facts herein do not require bond, given the large amount of the Consent Judgment (over $342,000.00), the relatively small amount of the bank account funds (approximately $21,000.00), the fact that the Judgment Debtors consented to pay the Consent Judgment, the fact that the funds representing the Consent Judgment were stolen from the Judgment Creditor in the first instance, and the fact that the funds were fraudulent transferred into the corporate bank account by the Judgment Debtor to hinder, delay and frustrate the Judgment Creditors legitimate collection efforts. Additionally, the Judgment Debtor has expended approximately four thousand dollars ($4,000.00) in travelling to California from New York and Michigan for collection proceedings.Mr. Freydl has abused the corporate form by effectively laundering funds belonging to him (or to Freydl & Associates) through the Freydl & Associates, LTD Bank of America account. Upon information and belief, the sole purpose of the corporate entity styled Freydl & Associates, LTD. is to launder money, conceal and fraudulently transfer assets and avoid paying the Judgment Creditor (and perhaps others). There is no legitimate corporate purpose, there are no shares, Freydl is the alter ego of the corporation, the corporation is suspended for failure to pay California franchise taxes (and has been continuously suspended for almost the entire duration of its corporate existence; e.g., upon information and belief, since October 10, 2007), and cannot maintain a corporate bank account.CIRCUMSTANCES CONSTITUTING GOOD CAUSE FORGRANTING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED ORDER ON AN EX PARTE BASIS

1.Freydl stole at least $74,500.00 from Newton in 1994-1995 his entire life savings. This caused The Judgment Creditor to lose his house (with $180,000.00 of equity in it) and ruined his life. Freydl finally entered into a Consent Judgment with The Judgment Creditor in 1999 after vigorously litigating the matter for over two years, only to completely disregard the Consent Judgment and The Judgment Creditor thereafter. The Judgment Creditor finally located Freydl here in Southern California and has initiated collection measures against him here at great expense. 2.Freydls financial and ethical conduct is utterly deplorable in the extreme and resulted in his outright disbarment in California for stealing money from clients. The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board also found that he misappropriated client funds and wrote checks off of bank accounts that he knew or should have known had been closed. He did exactly the same thing with the Judgment Creditor. A copy of the Board Opinion in Grievance Administrator v Freydl, 96-193-GA, was previously filed with this Court, and is available at: http://www.adbmich.org/download/96-193.pdf. Freydl has been continuously disbarred in California since 2002: http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/member_detail.aspx?x=159567.3.Freydl practiced law in California and Michigan under the name Freydl & Associates at the time that Freydl & Associates wrote The Judgment Creditor the two $17,500.00 account closed or nonsufficient funds checks upon which the Consent Judgment in this matter is based. Exhibit 1,[footnoteRef:2] List of Judgments (including The Judgment Creditors) showing Freydls use of Freydl & Associates in 1995 and that The Judgment Creditors Judgment is against Freydl & Associates; Exhibit 2, $17,500.00 account closed or nonsufficient funds checks from Freydl & Associates to The Judgment Creditor. [2: Exhibits are on file in this Court, as noted.]

7. Freydl & Associates, LTD., Inc. is suspended for failure to pay corporate taxes, and has been so continuously since October 10, 2007. Exhibit 6, Secretary of State Official Records Showing Suspension. Freydl, of course, being disbarred, could not represent said corporation even if it were not suspended, notwithstanding that the corporate purpose is legal. Id.8.Freydl & Associates, LTD., Inc. is a sham corporation and alter ego of the Judgment Debtors.[footnoteRef:3] Moreover, the original Michigan Complaint alleged DOES Defendants.[footnoteRef:4] Freydl comingles funds and uses the bank account as his own personal account. Copies of checks written to Freydl himself and deposited into the account are on file in this Court, as noted. [3: In fact, the only probable reason that Freydl created the corporation was to defraud Newton (and others) by the fraudulent transfer of assets, and since, due to his lengthy history of check-kiting, was otherwise unable to acquire a bank account. Newton, upon information and belief, surmises that a Bank of America insider, probably the branch manager where the account is held, permitted Freydl to acquire an account, notwithstanding the CheckSystems flag that surely prevented the opening of an account upon the application for one by Thomas Patrick Freydl, Freydl Group, Freydl & Associates, et. cetera.] [4: The original Complaint is warehoused at the Michigan Court and can be supplied to this Court if requested.]

9.Upon information and belief, Judgment Debtors have an insider at Bank of America whom they called upon to arrange for release of the funds to Freydl, which is not only despicable but also constitutes contempt of Court and fraud on the Court. This is especially probable, given the nonconforming method used (i.e., no Objections, verbal advisement from California counsel for Freydl & Associates). Moreover, Bank of America is well aware that Freydl & Associates is a Judgment Debtor, as proven by Exhibit 8 (on file), the April 15, 2011 Order to Appear (Subpoena) that was filed and served five (5) days prior to the April 20, 2011 Amended Garnishee Disclosure. 10.Bank of America has refused to restrain the funds, despite telephone request from The Judgment Creditor, but will do so if Court Orders them to do so (assuming, of course, that Freydl did not clean out the account). Bank of Americas garnishment departments fax number is (212) 548-0744 (for Court Restricted and perfect for service of the Order); (617) 310-2751 for all other faxes. Their physical address is 5701 Horatio Street, Utica, NY 13502.11.The Judgment Creditor desperately needs the garnished funds to save all of his lifelong belongings and personal property, which is up for storage auction on August 3, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (furniture, paintings, china, stereo, et. cetera). If these circumstances do not qualify for the imposition of injunctive relief in the form of a temporary restraining order (TRO) freezing a bank account, then precisely what circumstances do so qualify?12.Freydl & Associates, LTD is the alter ego[footnoteRef:5] of Thomas Patrick Freydl and, due to the suspension of its corporate powers occasioned by its total failure to pay California franchise taxes since 2007 through present, actually is Freydl & Associates, a Judgment Debtor.[footnoteRef:6] [5: Notwithstanding the Postal Instant Press decision, the alter ego identity is true.] [6: The alleged corporation (even if it were not suspended for failure to pay taxes), fails almost every single test of the alter ego doctrine:A.Comingling of funds and other assets, failure to segregate funds unauthorized diversion of corporate funds or assets to uses other than the benefit of the corporation: Freydl used the bank account to deposit many, many checks written to himself individually or to Freydl & Associates (not to Freydl & Associates, LTD). Newton believes that most of the deposited checks were made out to Freydl individually, to Freydl & Associates, and not to Freydl & Associates, LTD. In fact, because the corporation, Freydl & Associates, LTD., is suspended (and therefore legally incapable of conducting business or owning a bank account) and because its corporate purpose, the practice of law, is, and always has been, legally impossible due to Freydls disbarment, all funds owned by the corporate bank account belong to Freydl or to Freydl & Associates, not to Freydl & Associates, LTD.B.An individuals treatment of corporate assets as his or her own: same; Freydl uses the account as his own personal bank account. C.Failure to obtain authority to issue or subscribe stock: unknown.D.Holding out by an individual that he or she is personally liable for the debts of the corporation: unknown.E.The failure to maintain separate and adequate corporate records: same bank account.F.The identical equitable ownership or control in the two entities: same bank account.G.The use by both entities of the same office or business location and the employment of the same employees or attorneys or both: 14 Swift Ct. Newport Beach and 20434 South Santa Fe Avenue, Long Beach, CA for Freydl and the alleged corporation.H.The failure to capitalize a corporation adequately: unknown.I.The use of a corporation as a mere shell, instrumentality, or conduit for a single venture or the business of an individual or another corporation: single venture is Freydls law practice, mere shell, instrumentality or conduit for Freydl himself, he is sole owner and shareholder of the alleged corporation.J.The concealment and misrepresentation of the identity of the responsible ownership, management and financial interest, or the concealment of personal business activities: same bank account.K.The disregard of legal formalities and the failure to maintain arms length relationships among related entities: same entity, total disregard of corporate obligations (suspended for total failure to pay taxes).L.The use of the corporate entity to produce labor, services, or merchandise for another person or entity: namely, Freydl and his law practice.M.The diversion or manipulation of assets from a corporation by or to a stockholder or another person or entity, to the detriment of the creditors: Freydl diverted and converted individual Freydl or Freydl and Associates funds to the alleged corporation, to the detriment of creditors (Newton). This shows total bad faith on the part of Freydl and the alleged corporation.N.The use of the corporation for an illegal transaction: the practice of law without a license. This will be Freydls second conviction for this offense, which should shock the conscience of this Court and which carries with it a mandatory jail sentence.O.The formation and use of a corporation to transfer to it the existing liability of another person or entity. Here, the opposite: Freydl is using the corporation to avoid liability for Freydl and/or Freydl & Associates. Associated Venders, Inc. v Oakland Meat Co., 20 Cal. App 2d, 825, 838-40; 26 Cal. Rptr. 806 (1962); The Name Game: Equitable Estoppel Principles Are Increasingly Used To Pierce The Corporate Veil When The Technical Requirements Of The Alter Ego Doctrine Cannot Be Met, 17 Los Angeles Lawyer, No. 11, Page 28, February, 1995 (by Ovvie Miller)]

17.Freydl has made no attempt to pay The Judgment Creditor anything at all on the Consent Judgment, nor even apprise The Judgment Creditor of his whereabouts - for 12 years. Freydl has shown a complete lack of good faith towards The Judgment Creditor, violently swearing at him in Federal Court in New York City on March 29, 2011, and practicing both law (without a license) and subterfuge with Bank of America to hijack a legitimate and much needed garnishment. Moreover, Freydl stole the money from The Judgment Creditor in the first place - 17 years ago, and did so with alacrity. In doing so, he ruined their lives by taking all of his liquid money, which eventually caused him to lose his paid for, free and clear condominium for condominium assessment fees and, ultimately, expensive foreclosure mortgage financing, none of which would have been necessary absent Freydls theft of The Judgment Creditors life savings. Freydl will immediately clean out his bank account if it is ever unfrozen by the Court.[footnoteRef:7] [7: If Freydl has taken any money out of the account, Newton shall seek criminal prosecution of him.]

18.The requested relief merely maintains the status quo until the conclusion of the Creditors Suit. Pursuant to statute, the restraining order remains in effect until judgment is entered in the Creditors Suit. CCP 708.240(a).MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITYIMPACT OF SUSPENSION OF FREYDL & ASSOCIATESIn California, the corporate powers, rights and privileges of a domestic taxpayer may be suspended . . . if any tax, penalty, or interest . . . that is due and payable . . . is not paid. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code 23301(a) (emphasis supplied). Any taxpayer which has suffered the suspension . . . provided for in Section 23301 . . . may be relived therefrom upon making application therefor in writing to the Franchise Tax Board and upon the filing of all tax returns required under this part, and the payment of the tax, additions to tax, penalties, interest, and any other amounts for nonpayment of which the suspension of forfeiture occurred . . . and upon the issuance by the Franchise Tax Board of a certificate of revivor. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code 23305. As a result of its failure to pay taxes since 2006, Freydl &Associates corporate powers, rights and privileges were suspended and have never been reinstated. A corporation may not prosecute or defend an action, nor appeal from an adverse judgment in an action while its corporate rights are suspended for failure to pay taxes. Reed v. Norman, 48 Cal. 2d 338, 343, 309 P.2d 809 (Cal. 1957) (emphasis supplied). The incapacity of a defendant corporation to be sued for failure to comply with the applicable tax provisions, however, does not relate to its amenability to suit per se, but rather to its inability to take any action, in court, in its defense, once suit has been commenced against it. Weinstock v. Sinatra, 379 F Supp 274, 277 (C.D. Cal. 1974) (emphasis supplied). Thus, a suspended corporation is not protected from collection efforts to enforce a judgment duly entered against it. Freydl &Associates corporate powers, rights, and privileges have been suspended due to its failure to pay its corporate taxes. This suspension precludes Freydl & Associates from participating in litigation but does not protect Freydl & Associates from the consequences of a default. Unless and until Freydl & Associates takes the steps necessary to obtain a Certificate of Revivor from the Franchise Tax Board, Freydl & Associates has made a willful decision to admit to the garnishment against it and is not protected from collection. Finally, Freydl &Associates has been aware of The Judgment Creditors collection efforts for over two months and, upon information and belief, has not taken any steps whatsoever to remedy its tax liability. Freydl &Associates deliberate refusal to take measures to reinstate its litigation privileges, and thereby resorting to impermissible, direct telephone contact with Bank of Americas legal department with the added chutzpah of feigning legal representation of his suspended corporation, fully warrants the imposition of injunctive relief against Freydl & Associates. AVAILABILITY OF INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO RESTRAIN TRANSFERS TO THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR OR TO ANYBODY

Upon the creditors ex parte application, the Court may forbid a third person from transferring property to the judgment debtor (or paying a debt owed to the judgment debtor) until ownership of the property (or the existence of the debt) is determined. CCP 708.240(a). Similarly, the Court may forbid transfer (or other disposition) to any person. CCP 708.240(a), 525 et. seq. Violation of the Order is punishable by contempt (see CCP 1209-1222), with Judgment entered against the violator for the amount of the illegal transfer in violation of the Order. CCP 708.280(d).Unlike a noticed motion to restrain a transfer or payment, there is no express requirement that the Court find the judgment debtor probably owns an interest in the property in the third persons possession or control, or that the debt is probably owed by the third person to the judgment debtor; nor is the judgment creditor required to furnish an undertaking. See 16 Cal. L. Rev. Commn Rep. 1127 (1982).WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs-Judgment Creditor, Jeffrey S. Newton respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter its Order:1.Temporarily restraining Bank of America from transferring to, or permitting Thomas Patrick Freydl or Freydl & Associates or Freydl & Associates, P.C. or Freydl & Associates, LTD., Inc., and any derivation or modification of said names, as well as their agents, assigns, heirs and the like, as well as any other persons or entities, from withdrawing any funds whatsoever, or from encumbering, transferring, selling, disposing or concealing, funds from the Bank of America account until further Order of this Court;2.Temporarily restraining Thomas Patrick Freydl, Freydl & Associates, Freydl & Associates, LTD., or any like person or entity bearing any similar name or derivation thereof as well as their agents, assigns, heirs and the like, from withdrawing or from encumbering, transferring, selling, disposing or concealing, any funds whatsoever from the Bank of America account until Judgment is entered in the Creditors Suit filed by the Plaintiff-Judgment Creditor; and3.Any other and further relief that the Court deems appropriate and just in the premises.Respectfully submitted,____________________Jeffrey S. NewtonJudgment CreditorDATED:June 22, 2011

VERIFICATIONSTATE OF CALIFORNIA)))ssCOUNTY OF LOS ANGELES)

I, Jeffrey S. Newton, first being duly sworn, do hereby declare, under penalty, that the foregoing is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief.

Respectfully submitted,____________________Jeffrey S. NewtonDATED:June 22, 2011

1

12