|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | [[Image:Valorie-davenport-2006-08.jpg|thumb|Valorie Davenport, August 2006.]]
| |
| − | '''Valorie Wells Davenport''' (U.S. citizen, born 1956-01-22, also known as '''Valerie Davenport''') is an attorney in Houston, Texas, a director of [[Activated Ministries]], and the sister of [[Family International]] member [[Jeff Wells]] and Activated Ministries treasurer [[Denise Wells Novotny]].<ref>Sources indicating that Davenport is Novotny's sister include:
| |
| − | *Judge Jeff Bohm, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/04-03618_opinion-2006-05-10.pdf Memorandum Opinion] on (1)the defendant's motion to enlarge time to file notice of appeal; and (2) the plaintiff's motion to strike/dismiss defendant's motion to extend time to file notice of appeal and request for evidentiary hearing, May 10, 2006.
| |
| − | * "Woman Is Acquitted in Trial For Using the Men's Room," New York Times, 1990-11-03.
| |
| − | * Jennings, Peter, "Houston, Texas / Woman Using Men's Restroom", ABC Evening News for Tuesday, Oct 30, 1990, 05:55:30pm -05:58:10.
| |
| − | * Belkin, Lisa, "Seeking Some Relief, She Stepped Out of Line," New York Times, 1990-07-21.
| |
| − | </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Davenport graduated from the University of Houston Law Center in [[1984]].<ref> [http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Member_Directory&Template=/CustomSource/MemberDirectory/Search_Form_Client_Main.cfm State Bar of Texas Member Directory], accessed July 31, 2006. </ref> She has been licensed to practice in Texas since October 26, 1984.<ref>Ibid.</ref> After graduation, Davenport served as a briefing attorney for the Texas Court of Appeals, First District <ref> [[Image:Icon pdf.gif]] United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618, Memorandum Opinion dated February 7, 2006 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf Part 1]), by Judge Jeff Bohm, page 4. </ref> She later worked for a number of law firms and in [[1989]] founded her own civil litigation practice.<ref> Ibid, 4.</ref> She has been admitted to the following federal courts: US Supreme Court, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Texas Eastern District Court and Texas Southern District/Bankruptcy Court.<ref> [http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Member_Directory&Template=/CustomSource/MemberDirectory/Search_Form_Client_Main.cfm State Bar of Texas Member Directory], accessed July 31, 2006. </ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | In June 2003, Davenport filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and in April 2004, her case was converted to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.<ref>[https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/docket-0338089-davenport.html Docket Report], United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 0-38089-11, July 30, 2006. </ref> In August 2004, a former associate at her law firm, Ron S. Rainey, filed an adversary proceeding complaint challenging the dischargeability of her debt to him.<ref>[https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/rainey-v-davenport-ap-04-03618-docket-report.html Docket Report], United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618 </ref> Rainey alleged that her debt to him, based on her agreement to provide him with a percentage of the contingent fees for certain cases he worked on during his tenure at her firm, was not dischargeable because Davenport committed one of the following: fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, larceny, or willful and malicious injury to Rainey.<ref> [[Image:Icon pdf.gif]] United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618, Memorandum Opinion dated February 7, 2006 , by Judge Jeff Bohm, page 3 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf Part 1])</ref> In February 2006, United States Bankruptcy Judge Jeff Bohm ruled that Davenport's debt to Rainey was not dischargeable because Davenport had committed embezzlement by spending Rainey's share of certain contingent fees rather than giving it to Rainey or depositing it into a trust or escrow account.<ref> [[Image:Icon pdf.gif]] United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618, Memorandum Opinion dated February 7, 2006 , by Judge Jeff Bohm, pages 3 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf Part 1]), 72-76 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part4.pdf Part 4]) and 89 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part5.pdf Part 5]). References to embezzlement are found on pages 3 and others including a detailed analysis of how Bohm determined that Davenport had embezzled on pages 72-76. A summary of Bohm's ruling regarding this issue is found on page 89 where he writes: <blockquote>2) This claim is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(4) because the Debtor embezzled the funds she should have paid to Rainey.
| |
| − | <br>
| |
| − | (3) In the alternative, even if this court is incorrect that the Debtor embezzled the funds, the Debtor's spending the funds constitutes a willful and malicious injury by the Debtor to Rainey under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6), thereby making Rainey's claim nondischargeable; ...</blockquote></ref> In a scathing 117-page opinion, <ref>[[Image:Icon pdf.gif]] United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case 03-38089-11, Adv. No. 04-3618, Memorandum Opinion dated February 7, 2006 ([https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf Part 1], [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part2.pdf Part2] [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part3.pdf Part 3], [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part4.pdf Part 4], [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part5.pdf Part 5], [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part6.pdf Part 6]), by Judge Jeff Bohm.</ref> Judge Bohm strongly questioned and attacked Davenport's credibility and honesty:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <div style="padding: 1em; margin: 10px; border: 2px dotted green;">
| |
| − | Because she is a well-educated person who is capable of understanding complex issues, its is logical to infer that she understands the difference between truth and lies. (29)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf 29]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | These initial reactions, plus post-trial reflections, have led the Court to conclude that the Debtor is not credible. (30)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf 30]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | This Court can only conclude that the Debtor speaks out of both sides of her mouth. Her credibility with this Court is nil. (36)<ref>Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part1.pdf 36]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Under these circumstances, the Court finds that the Debtor's testimony about Rainey's incompetence is not credible. (38)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part2.pdf 38]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Finally, the debtor's credibility is compromised by a pleading she filed in one of the suits comprising the Davenport/Brio litigation. (43)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part2.pdf 43]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | If the debtor was willing to file pleadings in Judge Kent's court which were "disingenuous at best and deceitful at worst," this Court cannot help but question her credibility in this adversary proceeding. Indeed, the example cited by Judge Kent - that the Debtor astoundingly represented in her motion to withdraw that her withdrawal would not delay the suit - underscores the very problem the debtor has exhibited in the adversary proceeding before this Court: she does not want to face reality...In sum, the Debtor's testimony was not credible, and this Court gives very little, if any weight to her testimony. (44)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part2.pdf 44]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Sir Walter Scott, the Scottish author and novelist, once wrote, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive!"<sup>54</sup><ref>footnote 54 on page 86 of the opinion states: ''Sir Walter Scott, ''Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.'' The Court notes that the word "practise" is not misspelled in this quotation.</ref> His observation aptly describes the Debtor in this adversary proceeding. (86)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part5.pdf 86]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | But the Debtor's pattern of deception did not stop with her conduct toward Rainey. She continued her attempts to deceive through her litigation strategy in this Court. (87)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part5.pdf 87]</ref>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The Debtor speaks out of both sides of her mouth. Accordingly, this court only sees one side of the Debtor: one of deceit. At trial, the Debtor testified that "You know, I'm probably one of the most ethical lawyers you'll ever meet." [Transcript D1, p. 241, lines 3-5]. Based upon the Debtor's testimony and the exhibits introduced at the trial, this court disagrees and finds that the Debtor's unethical conduct has made Rainey's claim against her to be nondischargeable. (89)<ref> Ibid, [https://media.xfamily.org/docs/legal/usa/misc/valorie-davenport/bankruptcy/03-38089-11-ap-04-3618-rainey-v-davenport-2006-02-07-part5.pdf 89]</ref>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − |
| |
| | | | |
| | Starting in [[1995]], Davenport represented a number of Family members who filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against the City of Austin and other parties. Besides representing Family members and serving on the board of directors of a Family-run charity, Ms. Davenport has publicly defended the organization when questioned by members of the [[:Category:Press|press]]. In a November 2005 ''[[:Category:Press:Houston Press|Houston Press]]'' story, Davenport was quoted as writing that adult-child sex has been an excommunicable offense in The Family "for at least a decade" (since 1995, when the [[Love Charter]] was introduced): | | Starting in [[1995]], Davenport represented a number of Family members who filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against the City of Austin and other parties. Besides representing Family members and serving on the board of directors of a Family-run charity, Ms. Davenport has publicly defended the organization when questioned by members of the [[:Category:Press|press]]. In a November 2005 ''[[:Category:Press:Houston Press|Houston Press]]'' story, Davenport was quoted as writing that adult-child sex has been an excommunicable offense in The Family "for at least a decade" (since 1995, when the [[Love Charter]] was introduced): |
