On 11/14/22, Defendant Timothy L. Barton files this Response in opposition to the Receiver’s Motion to Supplement Order Appointing Receiver [ECF No. 41] (“Motion”), and requests a hearing on the Motion.
Learn about the 8 critical errors made by the District Court in its handling of the SEC case against Timothy Barton. These mistakes violated due process, destroyed businesses, and wrongly accused an innocent man.
On 11/11/22, HNGH claims The Receiver’s motions rest on the faulty premise that 2999 Turtle Creek Boulevard is owned by an entity under Defendant Timothy
On 01/31/23, Receiver’s motion to approve the sale of property consisting of approximately 4.538 acres of undeveloped land in Collin County, Texas (the “Property”) [Doc.
On 03/02/23, Mr. Barton respectfully asks the Court to abstain in ruling on the Receiver’s initial motion (ECF No. 133) or as to the new
On 08/23/24, Receiver Cortney C. Thomas (the “Receiver”) respectfully requests that the Court schedule a “Show Cause Hearing” compelling Defendant Timothy Barton (“Barton”) to appear
On 08/14/24, Two motions from Daniel Crow pertaining to Venus 59, LLC (“Venus 59”). In both motions, Crow argues he owns 90% of Venus 59,
