Bridgewater File 7

Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 101 Filed: 07/29/2020 Page 1 of 6
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

ASSOCIATION, INC.
V. CAUSE NO. 19-272
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

DAVID L. LANE, DAVID W. LANE, AND JOHN DOE
DEFENDANTS NOS. 1 THROUGH 5 DEFENDANTS
PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR DEFENDANT DAVID L. LANE TO APPEAR AND

SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”), by and through counsel,
petitions this Court to order Defendant David L. Lane (“Lane”) to appear and show cause as to
why he should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with this Court’s April 14, 2020 Order
(“April 14 Order”) [MEC No. 60], attached as Exhibit 1. In support thereof, BOA states as
follows:
1. This action was commenced by BOA on November 6, 2019, alleging, among other
things, Lane’s theft of funds from BOA accounts held by Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc.
(“Ridgway Lane”) for the benefit of BOA in connection with Ridgway Lane’s management of
BOA. [MEC No. 1].
2. Other HOAs filed similar actions against Lane and other defendants containing the
same or similar allegations arising from the same course of conduct.
3. On December 13, 2019, this Court entered an injunction (the “Injunction”) freezing
real and personal property of Lane and other defendants. [MEC No. 21].
4. On January 13, 2020, this Court entered an order consolidating the clams and
actions of the HOAs against Lane and other defendants for purposes of discovery and trial. [MEC
No. 24].
5. On March 4, 2020, this Court entered judgment in favor of the HOAs and against
Ridgway Lane and Lane in amounts corresponding to each HOA’s economic loss, exclusive of
attorney fees and other damages claimed and incurred by the HOAs. [MEC No. 53].
6. Lane complied with certain provisions of the Injunction requiring that he identify
assets, including real property, that he owned at the time of entry of the Injunction.
7. Among the real property identified by Lane in a sworn statement of assets is the
following:
 “Oxford condominium, #159 The Quarter, Tax Assessor’s True
Value…$81,000…Mortgage Balance…(45,000)”
8. The April 14 Order authorized the HOAs, including BOA, to “take such steps as
they deem necessary to a) sell the interests of David L. Lane…in the subject properties on terms
and using procedures (including any agents or brokers) approved by the HOAs by and through
their counsel, and b) sell the properties themselves to the extent necessary to liquidate the interests
of David L. Lane…in the subject properties on terms and using procedures (including any agents
or brokers) approved by the HOAs by and through their counsel.” See April 14 Order, ¶ 10.
9. Consistent with the April 14 Order, BOA engaged an appraiser to conduct an
appraisal of Lane’s condominium in Oxford, Mississippi. After obtaining an appraisal, BOA
engaged a real estate agent to market and sell Lane’s condominium in Oxford, Mississippi.
10. On July 29, 2020, the real estate agent BOA engaged email counsel for BOA,
stating that he had contacted Lane about listing the condominium. He further informed BOA
counsel that Lane stated “he wasn’t interested” in having the condominium listed and would not
cooperate with the real estate agent’s efforts to do so. In other words, Lane is knowingly and
intentionally violating BOA’s unqualified right—pursuant to order of this Court—to sell the
2
condominium on its “terms and [] procedures” to liquidate Lane’s real property in satisfaction of
its judgment.
11. In addition, Lane is living in the condominium in Oxford and refuses to cooperate
with BOA’s efforts to market and sell it. In other words, he is knowingly and intentionally flouting
this Court’s order.
12. Lane has a civil judgment in excess of $2,700,000 against him for the theft and
misappropriation of funds he managed for BOA and other HOAs. He should not be permitted to
thumb his nose at BOA—the judgment-creditor he defrauded—while, at the same time, he
intentionally violates this Court’s order.
12. Civil contempt orders are necessary to enforce a party’s compliance with a court’s
order. Hanshaw v. Hanshaw, 55 So.3d 143, 147 (Miss. 2011) (citing Purvis v. Purvis, 657 So.2d
794, 796 (Miss. 1994)). The court has “wide discretion” in the enforcement of its decrees. Id.
(citing Matthews v. Matthews, 86 So.2d 462 (Miss. 1956)). The court may award the petitioner
for contempt attorney fees incurred in enforcing compliance with the court’s order. Id. (citing
Ladner v. Logan, 857 So.2d 764, 773 (Miss. 2003)). Contempt is “purged” by paying costs and
expenses and complying with the terms of the court’s orders. Common Cause of Miss. v. Smith,
548 So.2d 412, 415 (Miss. 1989).
13. This Court has the authority, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 9-1-17, to fine and
imprison for up to thirty days any person guilty of contempt.
14. Given Lane’s willful, knowing, and intentional failure and refusal to fully comply
with the April 14 Order (by doing all things necessary to effectuate the listing and sale of the
Oxford condominium), Lane should be required to show cause why he should not be held in
3
contempt of this Court, made to comply with the April 14 Order, and pay attorney fees and costs
incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the April 14 Order.
Wherefore, BOA requests that this Court:
a. Order David L. Lane to appear (including by telephone or by video, if necessary) and show
cause as to why he should not be held in contempt for refusing to comply with the April
14 Order;
b. Hold David L. Lane in contempt of court and, to ensure he fully complies with the April
14 Order, order him confined in the Rankin County Jail for a period up to thirty days,
pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 9-1-17 or until full and continuing compliance is
demonstrated;
c. Order David L. Lane to immediately vacate and not reenter the condominium located in
Oxford, Mississippi;
d. Order David L. Lane to fully comply with the April 14 Order and fully cooperate with
BOA’s efforts to enforce its rights under it, including fully cooperating with BOA’s
selected agent in listing the Oxford condominium for sale and signing all documents and
doing all things necessary to list and ultimately consummate a sale of that property;
e. Order David L. Lane to pay attorneys’ fees, in the amount of $1000, to BOA for having to
prepare and file this petition to seek relief from David L. Lane’s willful and intentional
disobedience of this Court’s mandate; and
f. Grant BOA any other relief to which it is entitled or which may be just under the
circumstances.
* * * *
This the 29th day of July, 2020.
4
Respectfully submitted,
BRIDGEWATER II OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

INC.
By: /s/Chadwick M. Welch

Chadwick M. Welch (MB #105588)
Its Attorney
OF COUNSEL:
Chadwick M. Welch (MSB #105588)

HEIDELBERG PATTERSON WELCH PLLC
207 W. Jackson Street, Suite 200
Ridgeland, Mississippi 39157
Telephone: 601-790-1583
E-mail: cwelch@hpwlawgroup.com
Roy H. Liddell (MSB #1252)

WELLS MARBLE & HURST PLLC
300 Concourse Boulevard, Suite 200
Telephone: 601-605-6900
Facsimile: 601-605-6901
rliddell@wellsmar.com
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on July 29th, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk
of the Court using the MEC system which sent notification of such filing to all counsel of record.
s/Chadwick M. Welch
Chadwick M. Welch
6

ASSOCIATION, INC., A MISSISSIPPI
NON-PROFIT CORPORATION
V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, DAVID W. LANE AND JOHN DOE
PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR DEFENDANT DAVID L. LANE TO APPEAR AND

SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”), by and through counsel,
petitions this Court to order Defendant David L. Lane to appear and show cause as to why he
should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with this Court’s March 23, 2020 Order [MEC
No. 57]. In support thereof, BOA states as follows:
1. On March 4, 2020, BOA and other homeowners’ associations in this consolidated
action obtained civil judgments against David L. Lane and Defendant Ridgway, Lane &
Associates, Inc. (“Ridgway Lane”). See Agreed Judgments (Mar. 4, 2020) [MEC No. 53].
2. On March 23, 2020, BOA and David L. Lane jointly submitted by email to this
Court an agreed order regarding the liquidation of two accounts controlled by David L. Lane.
3. On March 23, 2020, this Court entered the order (the “March 23 Order”). See Order
(Mar. 23, 2020) [MEC No. 57]. This Court ordered as follows:
(i) That David L. Lane liquidate an account in the name of “Ridgway, Lane &
Associates, Inc.,” account number -2685, with a balance of $9,798.10 as of March 1, 2020;
(ii) That David L. Lane liquidate an account in the name of “The Lane Company,”
account number -2635, with a balance of $931.01 as of March 1, 2020; and

(iii) That “the monies in the foregoing accounts shall, no later than three (3)
business days after entry of this Order, be deposited into the registry of this Court.”
4. Twenty-six (26) days have elapsed since the deadline for David L. Lane to comply
with the March 23 Order.
5. Since the Court’s entry of the March 23 Order, BOA has, on numerous occasions,
requested that David L. Lane comply by liquidating the above-described accounts and depositing
the proceeds into the registry of this Court.
6. In one case, BOA was told that the COVID-19 situation has precluded David L.
Lane from complying. In other cases, BOA’s requests for compliance have been ignored or
unanswered.
7. BOA appreciates the unusual circumstances presented by COVID-19 but
respectfully submits that David L. Lane’s claimed inability to comply with the March 23 Order is
disingenuous.
8. This Court entered the order 11 days prior to the Governor’s April 3, 2020 shelter-
in-place order. The March 23 Order required David L. Lane to comply by no later than March 26,
2020—more than one week before the statewide shelter-in-place order was issued.
9. Even if David L. Lane’s compliance in March carried some elevated risk to his or
the public health, he could have complied in other ways. By way of example, David L. Lane could
have initiated a wire transfer or simply written checks drawn on the two accounts.
10. David L. Lane did neither of these things and never petitioned this Court for any
sort of relief from the March 23 Order. He instead has systematically failed to respond to BOA’s
requests to comply and, therefore, has forced BOA to file this petition.
2
11. BOA is mindful of this Court’s customary requirement for a separate memorandum
brief in support. Due to the straightforward nature of this motion, however, BOA respectfully
requests the Court waive the requirement for a separate memorandum brief in this instance. Should
the Court require a separate memorandum brief, BOA will submit one expeditiously.
WHEREFORE, BOA respectfully requests that this Court:
(i) Order David L. Lane to appear (including by telephone, if necessary) and show
cause as to why he should not be held in contempt for failing to comply with this Court’s March
23 Order;
(ii) Hold David L. Lane in contempt of court until he complies with this Court’s March
23 Order, including by ordering him confined in the Rankin County Jail until he so complies or
for 30 days, whichever occurs first, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 91-1-17;
(iii) Order David L. Lane to pay attorneys’ fees, in the amount of $1000, to BOA for
having to and prepare and file this petition to seek relief for David L. Lane’s willful disobedience
of this Court’s mandate; and
(iv) Grant BOA any other relief to which it is entitled or may be just under the
circumstances.
* * * *
Dated: April 24, 2020

Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc.
/s/ Chadwick M. Welch

Chadwick M. Welch (MB # 105588)
Watson Heidelberg PLLC
2829 Lakeland Drive, Suite 1502
Flowood, Mississippi 39232
Tel. 601.939.8900
3
Fax 601.432.4400
cwelch@whjpllc.com
Roy H. Liddell (MB # 1252)

Wells Marble & Hurst, PLLC
Tel. 601.605.6900
Fax 601.605.6901
rliddell@wellsmar.com
Its Attorneys
4
I, Chadwick M. Welch, do hereby certify that I have this, the 24th day of April, 2020,
filed a copy of this paper with the Clerk of Court using the MEC system, which will cause
noticed to be delivered to all counsel of record.
/s/ Chadwick M. Welch

Chadwick M. Welch
5
Case: 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document #: 4 Filed: 02/07/2020 Page 1 of 8
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 50-1 Filed: 02/26/2020 Page 1 of 8
IN T H E C H A N C E R Y C O U R T O F MADISON C O U N T Y , MISSISSIPPI
IN T H E M A T T E R O F T H E DISSOLUTION
O F T H E M A R R U G E O F DAVID and A ,
PAMELA LANE C I V I L A C T I O N NO. r^" ILVl^
F I N A L J U D G M E N T O F D I V O R C E ON T H E
GROUNDS O F I R R E C O N C I L A B L E D I F F E R E N C E S
THIS D A Y this cause came on to be heard on the Joint Complaint for Divorce filed herein
and said Complaint having been on file for more than sixty (60) days in compliance with Miss.
Code Ann. § 93-5-2, and this Court having considered the matter, and finding that it has
jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter, and being fully advised in the premises, further
finds as follows:
1. The Wife is an actual, adult, voluntary, citizen and resident of Madison County,
Mississippi, and the Husband is an actual, voluntary, bona-fide Caucasian citizen and
resident of the state of Mississippi, County of Madison and have been such for more than
six (6) months next preceding the filing of the original Joint Complaint for Divorce herein.
2. No children were bom of the marriage and none are expected as Wife is not now pregnant.
3. Irreconcilable differences have arisen and do now exist between the parties, and such
irreconcilable differences cause these parties to separate on or about the time the Joint
Complaint for Divorce was filed \x\f\\\^^',^ County, Mississippi, and such irreconcilable
differences entitle these parties to a divorce pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-2.
4. The Property Settlement Agreement which has been executed by the parties, the original of
yfAxich is annexed to the Joint Complaintfor Divorce and a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A," makes adequate and sufficient provision by vsritten agreement for the
F
f settl«a^nt£fall
TT settiepoent^t all property rights, and all other obligations and rights of the parties arising
I L E n
MADBON COUNTY
f FEB 07 2020
R^JplYLQTT.aHANCERY CLERK
vJf\l/V(\. OQA J /I t f A .
C a s e61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA
Case: : 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document
Document #:
#: 450-1 Filed: 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020Page 2 of28of
Page 8
out of the marital relationship of the parties. Said Properly Settlement Agreement is fair
and reasonable in ail respects and is in the best interests of the parties, and is approved by
this Court and should be incorporated in and made a part of this Judgment.
IT IS, T H E R E F O R E , O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D that the parties be and they are
hereby awarded a divorce one from the other upon the grounds of irreconcilable differences; and
the bonds of matrimony heretofore existing between the parties are hereby wholly severed and set
at naught; and the parties are hereby restored all of the nghts and privileges of single persons.
IT IS, F U R T H E R , O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D that the Property Settlement Agreement
executed by the parties, a true and correct copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit "A," be and
the same is hereby approved, ratified and confirmed; and both parties be and they are hereby
ordered and directed to carry out and perform all the terms and conditions therein set forth, for
which let execution issue. ^
SO O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D , this the 20^.
CHANCELLOR
Prepared By;
Matthew S. Poole, Wife's Attorney
MS Bar # 101670
Case: 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document #: 4 Filed: 02/07/2020 Page 3 of 8
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 50-1 Filed: 02/26/2020 Page 3 of 8
IN T H E C H A N C E R Y C 0 U R 1 O F M A O I S O N C O U N T Y , M I S S I S S I P P I
IN I H E M A T T E R O F T H E D I S S O L U H O N
..I']-not
O F I H E M A R R I A G E O F D A V I D and
PAMELA LANE C I V I L A C T I O N NO.
PROPERTY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Pamela Lane, heicinaCier referred lo as " W i f e " and David Lane, hereinafter
referred to as "Husband"; and
WHEREAS, the parlies hereto were married on or about 11-7-2007 in Rankin County,
Mississippi, and have lived together as Husband and Wife; and
WHEREAS, there were no minor children born o f the marriage; and
WHEREAS, the parlies hereto recognize that certain unhappy and irreconcilable
differences have arisen between ihem and they desire to define their respective obligations lo each
other, to make sufficient and adequate settlement o f property rights and all other respective rights,
remedies, privileges and obligaiion to each other arising out o f their marital relationship or
otherwise, shall be fully prescribed and bound thereby; and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto are substantially informed o f the others' assets, properly
holdings and income and are aware o f their respective rights, remedies, privileges and obligations
arising out o f their marital relationship; and
WHEREAS, the parlies hereto each warrant and represent to the other that they, and each
of them, fully imdcrstand all o f the terms, covenants, conditions, provisions, and obligations
encumbered upon each o f them by virtue o f this Agreement to be performed or contemplated by
each o f them hereto, and each believes the same to be fair, just and reasonable and in their
respective interests.
C a s e61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA
Case: : 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document
Document #:
#: 450-1 Filed: 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020Page 4 of48of
Page 8
N O W , T H E R E l ' O I l E , FOR A N D I N C O N S I D E R A T I O N o f the mutual benefits and
advantages accruing to each, the undersigned Husband and Wife do hereby solemnly covenant,
agree and contract as follows:
R E A L PROPERTY
The parties agree thai husband and wife shall vacate the property when the property is sold at the
price and sole discretion o f the wife, and all proceeds o f said sale, less costs, w i l l be divided
evenly. Decisions as to brokerage and agency are exclusively ihe decision ofthe wife. Price o f
sale is exclusively at the wife's discretion.
PERSONAL PROPERTY
1. Wife and Husband shall own, have and enjoy independent o f any claim o f the other, all o f
those articles o f property which are particularly personal, such as apparel, personal effects,
goods and furnishings which they each brought to the marriage, and their individual
wedding gifts, antiques, and heirlooms. Both parties agree to execute any documents
necessary to clarify ownership i f requested.
2. Wife and Husband shall own, have and enjoy independent o f any claim o f the other all
automobiles registered in their respeciive names.
3. Each parly shall keep their own retirement account, any interest that accrues or has accrued
on the same.
4. That any materials o f a personal, marital relationship including photographs, videos, or
otherwise made before or during the marriage shall not be disseminated by Husband or
Wife lo any public or private forum or lo any third part)'.

C a s e61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA
Case: : 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document #:
Document #: 50-1
4 Filed; 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020 Page 5 of5 8of 8
Page
DEBTS
The parties warrant that they marital debt which is solely attributable to the husband and that
he will be responsible for ail debts that have arisen from his employment/occupation at
Ridgcway/Lane and Associates, any alUliates, cosignatories, heirs, or assigns as well as any
and all debt other than the sole encumbrances that arc solely in the name o f the wife. Any
debt individually w i l l be the responsibility o f the signor thereto.
A T ' I Q R N E Y S FEES A N D C O U R T COSTS
5. Wife and Husband warrant that they shall each be independently responsible for all
attorneys' fees and court costs and litigation expenses in this matter.
W A I V E R OF C L A I M S A G A I N S T ESTATES
6. Subject to the provisions o f this Agreement, each ofthe parties may in any way dispose of
his or her property, real or personal, and each o f the parties and their heirs and assigns
hereby waive Ihe right to any subsequent claim against the other and their respective
estates.
. l U D l C l A L S A N C T I O N PROVISION
7. That in the event that ai\ provision o f this Agreement be found void by a Court o f
competent jurisdiction, that all other provisions o f this Agreement remain fully
enforceable.
Case: 45CHl;19-cv-01202 Document #: 4
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 50-1 Filed: 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020 Page 6 of 8
Page 6 of 8
M I S C E L L A N E O U S PROVISIONS
8. The parties jointly and severally agree to execute any and all documents necessary and
proper to carr)' out the intent o f this Agreement.
9. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and each parly
ackjiowledges that there have been no other or further agreements not expressly included
herein, and that this Agreement may be modified, altered or amended only in writing, duly
notarized and signed by each in the form ofthe original, or as modified by law provided.
Under no circumstances shall this Agreement be voided.
10. This Agreement is not entered into for the purpose o f procuring a divorce between the
parties and is not contingent upon either party procuring a divorce from the other. In the
event, however, that either party or both parties shall apply for or be granted a divorce, then
so much or such parts o f this Agreement as may be appropnaie to judicial sanction may be
included in any judgment o f divorce granted between the parties; and, further, this
Agreement shall stop and preclude either party from making other or further demands or
claims upon the other not included herein, except that such legal action may be taken by
either party as is necessary to enforce the terms and provisions hereof, or for modification
as provided by law.
11. Wife has been advised by Matthew S. Poole, Mississippi Bar Number 101670, and
Husband is representing himself Tax advice has been rendered to neither party.
C a s e61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA
Case: : 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document #:
Document #: 450-1 Filed: 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020Page 7 of7 8of 8
Page
I N WITNESS WHEREFORE, Wife and Husband have affixed their signatures on the date
of their signature below.
WITNESS M Y S I G N A T U R E , this the ^ ^ ^ d a y o f TfANakP-^ , 20 Z 6
Wife
WITNESS M Y S I G N AT U R E , this the day o f cJ^NUAPf ^ 20 2^.
Husband
STATE OF A'i/^U' >Jiyj7i
C O U N T Y OF
P E R S O N A L L Y APPEARED BEFORE M E , the undersigned authority in and for the
jurisdiction aforesaid, the within named _, who, after having
been by me duly sworn, states on oath that all o f the matters, facts and things set forth in the above
and foregoing Properly Seulement Agreement are true and correct as therein slated.
SWORN T O BEFORE M E , this the J ^ a y of ^A/^0-/^y , 20J21P
.Ml
NOTARY PUBLIC
. / \X j
My Co)mmission Expires: ''.O'/-..

Case: 45CHl:19-cv-01202 Document #: 4
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 50-1 Filed: 02/07/2020
Filed: 02/26/2020 Page 8 of 8
Page 8 of 8
STATE OF ffhTllUS^P-
C O U N T Y OF / ? ! P6i M^/O^
P E R S O N A L L Y APPEARED BEFORE M E , the undersigned authority in and for the
jurisdiction aforesaid, the within named _, who, after having
been by me duly sworn, slates on oath that all o f the matters, facts and things set forth in the above
and foregoing Properly Settlement Agreement are true and correct as therein stated.
SWORN T O BEFORE M E , this t h e ^ day o f 'JT^K/UPOryr ^2 0 " ^
NOTiS?!^' ^ B L I C
" ID ft 97173
GAYLANDCO;<
f / • Z . y l . ^ - . V . C o ' n m i B s i o n Expires/ :
, , • Sept. 29, 5.022 - i " * ^ . '
My Commission Expires: -•.C'^^*
BRIDGEWATER OWNERS ASSOCIATION,

INC.,
Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-00272-A
Plaintiff,
v.

DAVID L. LANE, DAVID W. LANE, AND JOHN
DOE DEFENDANTS NOS. 1 – 10
Defendants.
BRIDGEWATER OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.’S MOTION FOR COURT

APPROVAL OF CONTRACT TO SELL HOME OF DAVID L. LANE
COMES NOW Plaintiff Bridgewater Owners Association, Inc. (“BOA”), on behalf of itself
and Plaintiffs Bridgewater II Owners Association, Inc. (“BOA II”), Dinsmor Property Association,
Inc. (“Dinsmor”), Palisades Homeowners Association, Inc. (“Palisades”), Lakebend Homeowners
Association (“Lakebend”), Oakhurst Homeowner’s Association, Inc. (“Oakhurst”), Bruenburg
Property Owners Association (“Bruenburg”), The Barrington Condominium Association, Inc.
(“Barrington”), Eastbrooke Condominium Association, Inc. (“Eastbrooke”), and Timbers
Homeowners Association (“Timbers”) (collectively, the “HOAs”), and hereby moves this Court
to approve a contract for the sale of Defendant David L. Lane’s home and distribute proceeds of
that sale under specified conditions. In support thereof, BOA states as follows:
Background Facts
1. HOAs are plaintiffs in consolidated proceedings pending in this Court against Defendant
David L. Lane and others.
2. HOAs have suffered losses from David L. Lane’s misappropriation, theft and conversion
of HOA funds in an aggregate amount exceeding $2,500,000.
3. On December 13, 2019, this Court entered an Agreed Preliminary Injunction Order (the
“Injunction”) that, among other things, freezes David L. Lane’s real property, confers upon
the HOAs an unqualified right to approve a contract for the sale of David L. Lane’s home,
and directs that proceeds of the sale of David L. Lane’s home be deposited into the registry
of this Court. See Injunction, ¶¶ (iv) & (xii) [MEC No. 24].
4. On December 20, 2019, Lakebend obtained a default judgment (the “Judgment”) against
David L. Lane in the amount of $1,238,500. See Default J., Case No. 1:19-cv-282 [MEC
No. 19].
5. Lakebend has assigned the Judgment to the HOAs for the benefit of all the HOAs. As of
the date of this filing, the Judgment remains in effect as to David L. Lane.
6. On February 7, 2020, Lane became divorced from Pamela Lane. See Final J., In the Matter
of the Dissolution of the Marriage of David and Pamela Lane, Case No. 1:19-cv-1202
(Madison Cnty. Chancery Ct.) [MEC No. 4], attached as Exhibit 1.
7. In connection with their divorce, David L. Lane and Pamela Lane executed a property
settlement agreement (the “PSA”). The PSA purports to address division of property
between David L. Lane and Pamela Lane, and it states, in pertinent part:
The parties agree that husband and wife shall vacate the property when the
property is sold at the price and sole discretion of the wife, and all proceeds
of said sale, less costs, will be divided evenly. Decisions as to brokerage
2
and agency are exclusively the decision of wife. Price of sale is exclusively
at wife’s discretion.
See PSA (“REAL PROPERTY”) (part of Exhibit 1).
8. The Injunction was first in time and, consequently, its terms control over the PSA. HOAs
have moved the Madison County Chancery Court to reopen the divorce proceedings
between David L. Lane and Pamela Lane, permit HOAs to intervene under Mississippi
Rule of Civil Procedure 24, and set aside or amend the PSA to conform to the Injunction.
9. On February 25, 2020, counsel for HOAs was notified that a contract had been submitted
for the purchase of David L. Lane’s home (the “Contract”). The Contract is attached hereto
as Exhibit 2.
10. The Contract provides that it must be approved by this Court on or before March 6, 2020;
otherwise, the buyer’s offer will lapse.
11. The Contract reflects a purchase price of $293,000, from which certain brokerage fees and
closing costs will be deducted.
12. HOAs move this Court to approve the Contract and enter an appropriate order regarding
the distribution of net proceeds from that sale.
Argument
A. This Court should approve the Contract.
13. HOAs believe the contract price of $293,000, from which certain brokerage fees and
closing costs will be deducted, is commercially reasonable under the circumstances.
14. On February 23, 2020, David L. Lane and Pamela Lane ratified the contract.
15. Therefore, with all parties in agreement, this Court should approve the Contract.
3
B. This Court should order that all net proceeds of the sale be distributed to the
HOAs.
16. HOAs collectively have lost more than $2,500,000 as a result of David L. Lane’s
conversion, misappropriation, and/or embezzlement of HOA funds.
17. Moreover, HOAs have documentary evidence proving that such conversion,
misappropriation, and/or embezzlement had been occurring for at least the last seven years.
18. HOAs have documentary evidence showing David L. Lane made unauthorized transfers
from HOA accounts, including to an account styled in the name of “The Lane Company.”
19. HOAs further have documentary evidence that checks payable to “David L. Lane” were
drawn on the account styled in the name of “The Lane Company” in close temporal
proximity, and for substantially equivalent amounts, as the above-described unauthorized
transfers. In other words, David L. Lane transferred HOA funds to “The Lane Company”
and then caused “The Lane Company” to write checks or transfer funds to himself and for
deposit into his own account.
20. As the Injunction required him to do, David L. Lane produced to HOA counsel a sworn
statement of his financial assets. This statement reflected, among other things, that the
home covered by the Contract had, as of December 2019, a mortgage balance of $135,000.
21. Moreover, the Contract shows that in 2017, David L. Lane replaced the entire roof on the
home.
22. There can be no doubt that David L. Lane used monies wrongfully obtained from HOA
accounts to service the note on the home and replace the roof in 2017.
23. The net proceeds from the sale will represent only a fraction of the HOAs’ aggregate loss.
24. The net proceeds from the sale will represent only a fraction of the Judgment, which is
currently in place and is held for the benefit of the HOAs.
4
25. Therefore, this Court should order all net proceeds to be distributed to the HOAs, via their
attorneys.
C. In the alternative, this Court should direct the net proceeds of sale to be
deposited into the registry of this Court for disbursement later.
26. In the strict alternative, this Court should direct the net proceeds of the sale to be deposited
into the registry of this Court until such time as the Court can determine how to allocate
said proceeds among HOAs and Pamela Lane.
27. In such case, this Court should require David L. Lane and/or Pamela Lane to affirmatively
establish that tainted funds were not used to service the note on the home, replace the roof,
or otherwise pay for the maintenance of the home. See, e.g., SEC v. Private Equity Mgmt
Grp., Inc., 2009 WL 2058247, *3 (C.D. Cal. Jul. 9, 2009) (“[I]t is now up to [enjoined
party subject to asset freeze] to demonstrate that the assets he possesses are untainted by
the fraud.”) (citing SEC v. Quinn, 997 F.2d 287, 289 (7th Cir. 1993)); SEC v. Stein, 2009
WL 1181061, *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2009) (defendant not entitled to assets where he failed
to trace assets to their origin and prove untainted by fraud); U.S. v. Eleven Vehicles, 836
F.Supp. 1147, 1154 (E.D. Pa. 1993) (where ill-gotten “proceeds received by a claimant are
greater than the value of the assets seized, it would be appropriate to shift the burden to the
claimant to show other sources of legitimate income”).
28. If, as claimants, David L. Lane and/or Pamela Lane cannot make this showing, HOAs
should be entitled to all net proceeds of the sale.
29. If David L. Lane and/or Pamela Lane can affirmatively establish that some portion of the
proceeds of sale are untainted and have not been comingled with or derived from tainted
funds, the Court should determine the amount of proceeds to which HOAs are entitled.
Conclusion
5
For the foregoing reasons, HOAs respectfully request this Court:
(i) Approve the Contract; and
(ii) Order all net proceeds of the sale, pursuant to the Contract, be distributed to
HOAs.
In the strict alternative, HOAs respectfully request this court:
(iii) Approve the Contract;
(iv) Order all net proceeds of the sale, pursuant to the Contract, be deposited
into the registry of the Court;
(v) Require David L. Lane and/or Pamela Lane to affirmatively establish
tainted funds were not used to service the note on the home, replace the roof
on the home, or otherwise pay for the maintenance of the home; and
(vi) Determine the amount of net proceeds to which HOAs are entitled.
* * * *
This, the 26 day of February, 2020.
BRIDGEWATER OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.
By: /s/ Chadwick M. Welch ___________

Chadwick M. Welch (MSB No. 105588)
One of Its Attorneys
OF COUNSEL:
Chadwick M. Welch (MSB# 105588)

WATSON HEIDELBERG PLLC
2829 Lakeland Drive, Suite 1502
Flowood, Mississippi 39232
Telephone: (601) 939-8900
6
Facsimile: (601) 932-4400

Email: cwelch@whjpllc.com

WELLS MARBLE & HURST, PLLC
Telephone: (601) 605-6900
7
Certificate of Service
I, Chadwick M. Welch, do hereby certify that I have this day caused a copy of the foregoing
pleading to be filed with the Clerk of Court on the MEC System, which caused notification to be
delivered to all counsel of record.
Dated: February 26, 2020 /s/ Chadwick M. Welch

Chadwick M. Welch
8
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-a Document #: 21 Filed: 12/13/2019 Page 1 of 9

V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”) respectfully moves the Court
for entry of an order requiring Defendants Ridgway Lane & Associates, David L. Lane and
David W. Lane (collectively, “Ridgway Lane”) to show cause why they should not be held in
contempt for their intentional failure to abide by orders of the Court, including the Temporary
Restraining Order entered on November 12, 2019 [Doc. No. 11], the Modified Temporary
Restraining Order entered on November 19, 2019 [Doc. No. 13], and the Second Modified
Temporary Restraining Order entered on November 27, 2019 [Doc. No. 15] (collectively, the
“Orders”). In support hereof, BOA states as follows:
1. BOA commenced this action by filing its Complaint [Doc. No. 1] on November 6,
2019, seeking recovery from Ridgway Lane of hundreds of thousands of dollars of BOA funds
stolen from BOA accounts.
2. On November 11, 2019, BOA moved for temporary, preliminary and permanent
injunctive relief [Doc. No. 8], including a freeze of Ridgway Lane accounts and property and
other relief.
3. On November 12, 2019, the Court entered a Temporary Restraining Order
freezing Ridgway Lane’s accounts and assets and requiring Ridgway Lane to “immediately
identify” all bank accounts in which they hold an interest and all fidelity bonds, insurance
policies and other insurance instruments that may be responsive to the losses incurred by BOA.
[Doc. No. 11].
4. Thereafter, the Court extended the injunctive relief on the same or similar terms
by entry of orders dated November 19 and 27, 2019. [Docs. Nos. 13 and 15].
5. Despite entry of the Orders, Ridgway Lane has to date failed and refused to
identify all accounts, property and insurance policies, or to take action to immediately and fully
comply with solemn Orders of the Court.
6. Instead, Defendant David W. Lane, through counsel, has identified a single bank
account but has not provided any other information; and David L. Lane, through counsel, has
indicated a willingness to identify property but has not done so as of the date of the filing of the
instant Motion.
7. On information and belief, Defendant David L. Lane’s house remains listed for
sale in violation of the Orders.
8. Defendant David W. Lane quitclaimed real property to his spouse on the day the
first TRO was entered (Ex. 1), and has yet to provide evidence of that property being transferred
back to David W. Lane by his spouse.
9. Ridgway Lane’s failure to fully comply with the Orders has seriously impeded
BOA’s and other victims’ efforts to identify property, accounts and insurance policies that may
exist and be used to address victims’ losses that result from Ridgway Lane’s fraud and theft of
BOA’s funds.
2
10. Civil contempt orders are necessary to enforce a party’s compliance with a court’s
order. Hanshaw v. Hanshaw, 55 So.3d 143, 147 (Miss. 2011)(citing Purvis v. Purvis, 657 So.2d
794, 796 (Miss. 1994)). The court has “wide discretion” in the enforcement of its decrees. Id.
(citing Matthews v. Matthews, 86 So.2d 462 (Miss. 1956)). The court may award the petitioner
for contempt attorney fees incurred in enforcing compliance with the court’s order. Id. (citing
Ladner v. Logan, 857 So.2d 764, 773 (Miss. 2003)). Contempt is “purged” by paying costs and
expenses and complying with the terms of the court’s orders. Common Cause of Miss. v. Smith,
548 So.2d 412, 415 (Miss. 1989).
11. Given indisputable evidence of Ridgway Lane’s failure and refusal to fully
comply with the Orders (by immediately identifying bank accounts and assets and insurance
policies), Ridgway Lane (including Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and David
W. Lane) should be required to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the
court’s Orders and made to comply with same immediately and pay attorney fees and costs
incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.
Wherefore, BOA requests:
a. That Ridgway Lane (including Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and
David W. Lane) be ordered to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the
court’s Orders and made to comply with same immediately and pay attorney fees and
costs incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the Orders.
b. That the Court grant BOA any other relief to which it may be entitled under the
circumstances.
This the 10th day of December, 2019.
3
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

INC.
By:s/Roy H. Liddell
Its Attorney
OF COUNSEL:

300 Concourse Blvd., Suite 200
Ridgeland, MS 39157
P. O. Box 131
Jackson, MS 39205-0131
Telephone: 601-605-6900
Facsimile: 601-605-6901
E-mail: rliddell@wellsmarble.com
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that on December 10, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court using the MEC system which sent notification of such filing to all counsel of
record.
s/Roy H. Liddell
Roy H. Liddell
#272256
4
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF
VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, AND JOHN DOE
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, the Defendant, Ridgway, Lane & Associates (hereafter referred to as
Defendant), through counsel, and files this, its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and in support
thereof shows as follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendant upon which relief may be
granted and should therefore be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules of
Civil Procedure.
And now, having set forth the above defense, but without waiver thereof, the Defendant
responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:
INTRUDUCTION
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.
However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s allegations
to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The Defendant denies
1
that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all other respects, the
Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statements made in Paragraphs 2-3 of the Complaint.
3. The Defendant admits the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraphs 4-5
of the Complaint.
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
5. The Defendant does not question the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the
Defendant denies any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law.
6. The Defendant does not question the venue selected by the Plaintiffs. However, the
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7.. Paragraphs 9-29 of the Complaint appear to require no response from the
Defendant. However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
Defendant denies that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all
other respects, the Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
COUNT ONE – BREACH OF CONTRACT
8. The Defendant denies the allegations made in paragraphs 30-33 of the Complaint.
COUNT TWO – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
2
COUNT THREE – CONVERSION
COUNT FOUR – FRAUD
COUNT FIVE – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT
COUNT SIX – NEGLIGENCE
COUNT SEVEN – GROSS NEGLIGENCE
COUNT EIGHT – UNJUST ENRICHMENT/IMPOSITION OF CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
This unnumbered paragraph of the Complaint appears to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seek to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, having fully answered the allegations of
Plaintiff’s Complaint and having set forth its defenses thereto, this Defendant moves this Court to
dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice at Plaintiff’s cost, and for an award of reasonable
attorney fees and expenses against the Plaintiff.
3
This the 10th day of December 2019.
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant
BY: /s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL
MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL (MB# 7782)

COXWELL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
Post Office Box 1337
Jackson, Mississippi 39215-1337
Telephone: (601) 948-1600
ATTORNEY FOR RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., DEFENDANT
This is to certify that I, Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell, Counsel for Defendant Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the above and
foregoing Answer with the Clerk of Court using the ECF system, which sent notification of same
to all counsel of record.
This the 9th December 2019.
/s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

4
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC. PLAINTIFF
VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-272

DAVID L. LANE, AND JOHN DOE
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, the Defendant, Ridgway, Lane & Associates (hereafter referred to as
Defendant), through counsel, and files this, its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and in support
thereof shows as follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendant upon which relief may be
granted and should therefore be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Mississippi Rules of
Civil Procedure.
And now, having set forth the above defense, but without waiver thereof, the Defendant
responds to the specific numbered paragraphs:
INTRUDUCTION
1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint appears to require no response from the Defendant.
However, to the extent that a response is required, the Defendant denies the Plaintiff’s allegations
to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The Defendant denies
1
that any alleged duty to the Plaintiff has been breached under any law. In all other respects, the
Plaintiff’s allegations are denied.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statements made in Paragraphs 2-3 of the Complaint.
3. The Defendant admits the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraphs 4-5
of the Complaint.
to the truth of the Plaintiff’s statement made in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
5. The Defendant does not question the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the
6. The Defendant does not question the venue selected by the Plaintiffs. However, the
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7.. Paragraphs 9-29 of the Complaint appear to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
COUNT ONE – BREACH OF CONTRACT
COUNT TWO – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
2
COUNT THREE – CONVERSION
COUNT FOUR – FRAUD
COUNT FIVE – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT
COUNT SIX – NEGLIGENCE
COUNT SEVEN – GROSS NEGLIGENCE
COUNT EIGHT – UNJUST ENRICHMENT/IMPOSITION OF CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
This unnumbered paragraph of the Complaint appears to require no response from the
allegations to the extent that the Plaintiff seek to impose liability upon this Defendant. The
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, having fully answered the allegations of
Plaintiff’s Complaint and having set forth its defenses thereto, this Defendant moves this Court to
dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice at Plaintiff’s cost, and for an award of reasonable
attorney fees and expenses against the Plaintiff.
3
This the 10th day of December 2019.
RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant
BY: /s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

MÉRRIDA (BUDDY) COXWELL (MB# 7782)

COXWELL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
Post Office Box 1337
Jackson, Mississippi 39215-1337
Telephone: (601) 948-1600
ATTORNEY FOR RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC., DEFENDANT
This is to certify that I, Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell, Counsel for Defendant Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., do hereby certify that I have this day electronically filed the above and
foregoing Answer with the Clerk of Court using the ECF system, which sent notification of same
to all counsel of record.
This the 9th December 2019.
/s/ Mérrida (Buddy) Coxwell

4

V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

MOTION OF PLAINTIFF BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION, INC.

FOR ENTRY OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Pursuant to Miss. R. Civ. P. 65, Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”)
respectfully moves the Court for entry of an order granting temporary, preliminary and,
ultimately, permanent injunctive relief against Defendants herein. In support hereof, BOA states
as follows:
1. BOA filed suit against the Defendants claiming, among other things, conversion
of funds from BOA bank accounts at Community Bank that were held in trust for the benefit of
BOA and intended for use in paying operating expenses and funding capital improvements for
BOA. (See Ex. 1, Affidavit of Cindy Dunbar Verifying Complaint and Ex. 1-A, Complaint.)
2. BOA incorporates herein each of the allegations of its Complaint. (Ex. 1-A).
Temporary Restraining Order and Relief Sought
3. BOA hereby seeks entry of a temporary restraining order under Rule 65(b) and
ultimately preliminary and permanent relief freezing bank accounts and assets of Ridgway, Lane
& Associates, Inc., David L. Lane and David W. Lane, including accounts that are owned and
maintained by them or any of them at Community Bank and at any other financial institution (the
“Accounts”) and real and personal property of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc., David L. Lane
and David W. Lane (“Assets”).
4. BOA specifically asks the Court to restrain, prohibit and preclude movement or
transfer of any Accounts or Assets by Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc. and any of its
principals, owners, employees or other related persons or entities pending further order of this
Court, including without limitation David L. Lane and David W. Lane.
5. If movement or transfer of the Accounts and Assets is not restrained, BOA will
suffer irreparable injury in the loss of limited funds necessary to address the loss alleged in
BOA’s Complaint and such loss will have occurred before Defendants can be heard in
opposition.
6. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to each immediately identify all
bank accounts in which they hold an interest (including banking institution, account type and
account number) and provide same to counsel for BOA.
7. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to each immediately identify
and preserve all fidelity bonds, insurance policies and other insurance instruments that may be
responsive to the losses alleged in the BOA complaint and immediately provide such information
to BOA and its counsel.
8. BOA further asks that the Court order Defendants to preserve all of their financial
records and business records relating to the operation of Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc. and
not destroy same.
BOA Is Entitled to a TRO and Injunctive Relief
9. Entry of a temporary order is thus necessary to prevent further loss that would
otherwise be likely and inevitable.
2
10. There exists a substantial likelihood that BOA will prevail on the merits of its
Complaint.
11. At least one other homeowners’ association has filed suit alleging the same
wrongdoing and seeking similar relief. (See Bridgewater II Owners Assn., Inc. v. Ridgway Lane
& Associates, Inc. et al.; Civil Action No. 1:19 cv 276-SSR).
12. Other neighborhood associations reportedly have suffered similar loss according
to published reports. See Jackson Jambalaya, “Palisades Plundered” (Nov. 10, 2019) and “Now
Dinsmor HOA Discovers ‘Irregularities’” (Nov. 8, 2019).
13. The threatened injury to BOA in the absence of the relief requested far outweighs
any inconvenience or claimed harm to Defendants that could occur as a result of the granting
relief as requested.
14. Entry of an order granting the relief sought herein is clearly in the public interest.
15. Due to the sensitivity of this matter and the urgency required to protect BOA and
its membership, notice should not be required, but BOA’s undersigned counsel hereby certifies
that he is providing notice of these proceedings and the relief requested to a functioning email
address for David L. Lane, the registered agent for Defendant Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc.,
and if advised Defendants are represented by counsel, will notify such counsel in advance of the
hearing hereon.
16. Under the circumstances, the Court has discretion to grant the relief requested and
to act immediately to protect the interests of BOA and its membership and others who may have
been harmed. In the Matter of the Conservatorship of the Estate of Mary Elizabeth Brewer
Jackson, 203 So. 3d 4 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016); Animale Grp., Inc. v. Sunny’s Perfume, Inc., 256 F.
App’x 707 (5th Cir. 2007).
3
Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief
17. BOA incorporates herein its foregoing allegations and requests for relief.
18. BOA asks that upon the granting of temporary relief as sought herein, that the
Court, after notice to Defendants, set this matter for a preliminary injunction hearing as soon as
practicable and grant BOA preliminary injunctive relief on the same terms and ultimately
permanent injunctive relief on the same terms until the merits of this case are resolved.
19. If movement or transfer of the Accounts and Assets is not restrained, BOA will
suffer irreparable injury in the loss of limited funds necessary to address the loss alleged in
BOA’s Complaint and such loss will have occurred before Defendants can be heard in
opposition.
20. BOA seeks any other relief to which it may be entitled under the circumstances.
21. BOA reserves all of its rights as asserted in its Complaint for additional relief.
Wherefore, BOA asks the Court to enter a temporary restraining order, and ultimately a
preliminary and permanent injunction under Rule 65:
a. Freezing bank accounts and assets of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc.,
David L. Lane and David W. Lane, including accounts that are owned and maintained by
them or any of them at Community Bank and at any other financial institution (the
“Accounts”) and real and personal property of Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc., David
L. Lane and David W. Lane (“Assets”).
b. Restraining, prohibiting and precluding movement or transfer of any
Accounts or Assets by Ridgway, Lane & Associates, Inc. and any of its principals,
owners, employees or other related persons or entities pending further order of this Court,
including without limitation David L. Lane and David W. Lane.
4
c. Ordering Defendants to each immediately identify all bank accounts in
which they hold an interest (including banking institution, account type and account
number) and provide same to counsel for BOA.
d. Ordering Defendants to each immediately identify and preserve all fidelity
bonds, insurance policies and other insurance instruments that may be responsive to the
losses alleged in the BOA complaint and immediately provide such information to BOA
and its counsel.
e. Ordering Defendants to preserve all of their financial records and business
records relating to the operation of Ridgway Lane & Associates, Inc. and not destroy
same.
f. Granting BOA any related relief to which it may be entitled under the
circumstances.
Dated: November 11, 2019.
BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

INC.
By:s/Roy H. Liddell
Its Attorney
OF COUNSEL:

300 Concourse Blvd., Suite 200
Ridgeland, MS 39157
P. O. Box 131
Jackson, MS 39205-0131
Telephone: 601-605-6900
Facsimile: 601-605-6901
E-mail: rliddell@wellsmarble.com
271926
5
Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-a Document #: 9-2 Filed: 11/11/2019 Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT 2

Bridgewater File 7

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Bridgewater File 7

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Case: 61CI1:19-cv-00272-JA Document #: 101 Filed: 07/29/2020 Page 1 of 6

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR DEFENDANT DAVID L. LANE TO APPEAR AND

Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”), by and through counsel,

BOA. [MEC No. 1].

same or similar allegations arising from the same course of conduct.

 “Oxford condominium, #159 The Quarter, Tax Assessor’s True

9. Consistent with the April 14 Order, BOA engaged an appraiser to conduct an

appraisal of Lane’s condominium in Oxford, Mississippi. After obtaining an appraisal, BOA

this Court’s order.

thumb his nose at BOA—the judgment-creditor he defrauded—while, at the same time, he

intentionally violates this Court’s order.

548 So.2d 412, 415 (Miss. 1989).

imprison for up to thirty days any person guilty of contempt.

incurred by BOA in seeking compliance with the April 14 Order.

Wherefore, BOA requests that this Court:

disobedience of this Court’s mandate; and

This the 29th day of July, 2020.

BRIDGEWATER II OWNER’S ASSOCIATION,

By: /s/Chadwick M. Welch

Chadwick M. Welch (MSB #105588)

Roy H. Liddell (MSB #1252)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF RANKIN COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

BRIDGEWATER OWNER’S PLAINTIFF

V. CAUSE NO. 19-272

RIDGWAY, LANE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR DEFENDANT DAVID L. LANE TO APPEAR AND

Plaintiff Bridgewater Owner’s Association, Inc. (“BOA”), by and through counsel,

No. 57]. In support thereof, BOA states as follows:

1. On March 4, 2020, BOA and other homeowners’ associations in this consolidated

account number -2635, with a balance of $931.01 as of March 1, 2020; and

with the March 23 Order.

the proceeds into the registry of this Court.

7. BOA appreciates the unusual circumstances presented by COVID-19 but

WHEREFORE, BOA respectfully requests that this Court:

of this Court’s mandate; and

Dated: April 24, 2020

/s/ Chadwick M. Welch

Roy H. Liddell (MB # 1252)

noticed to be delivered to all counsel of record.

/s/ Chadwick M. Welch

IT IS, T H E R E F O R E , O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D that the parties be and they are

IT IS, F U R T H E R , O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D that the Property Settlement Agreement

which let execution issue. ^

SO O R D E R E D A N D A D J U D G E D , this the 20^.

PROPERTY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

referred to as "Husband"; and

Mississippi, and have lived together as Husband and Wife; and

WHEREAS, there were no minor children born o f the marriage; and

otherwise, shall be fully prescribed and bound thereby; and

arising out o f their marital relationship; and

encumbered upon each o f them by virtue o f this Agreement to be performed or contemplated by

N O W , T H E R E l ' O I l E , FOR A N D I N C O N S I D E R A T I O N o f the mutual benefits and

agree and contract as follows:

sale is exclusively at the wife's discretion.

necessary to clarify ownership i f requested.

automobiles registered in their respeciive names.

4. That any materials o f a personal, marital relationship including photographs, videos, or

Wife lo any public or private forum or lo any third part)'.

debt individually w i l l be the responsibility o f the signor thereto.

A T ' I Q R N E Y S FEES A N D C O U R T COSTS