Legacy Plus

Help Support Steer Planet:

OH Breeder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
5,954
Location
Ada, Ohio
afhm

I didn't want to post all of it follow this link. 

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-nedce/case_no-4:2007cv03193/case_id-41208/
 

DL

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
3,622
OH Breeder said:
afhm

I didn't want to post all of it follow this link. 

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-nedce/case_no-4:2007cv03193/case_id-41208/

I gather to make a long story short - the bull was owned by many people - they all had equal access to semen - semen was not to be sold to others but progeny could be. The bull spent the spring at one place and the fall at another. Apparently he was said to have developed a condition and was euthanized, however - he was never euthanized and was actually sold to another individual -some of the people who owned him knew and others did not. Apparently he was "hidden" in another state and collected - it appears to be a sticky wicket of the biggest kind and involves some of the biggest breeders in our breed - if the allegations are accurate it raiss some very interesting questions about our association, board and it’s “prestigious” members.
 

frostback

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,068
Location
Colorado
What does this mess have to do with the board, association, or members, other than they happen to belong to association and one is on the board?
 

DL

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
3,622
frostback said:
What does this mess have to do with the board, association, or members, other than they happen to belong to association and one is on the board?

IMHO the AMAA has registered the bull and the offspring and should be involved. Prominent breeders of the Maine breed are involved on both sides of the issue. Board members are on both sides of the issue. This bull was both an American and Canadian Champion and promoted far and wide.

If a cop or schoolboard member or road commission member etc is accused of a crime - generally they are suspended pending trial. Here we have a board member of the AMAA accused of committing multiple crimes - I think he should be suspended - how can he possibly make rational or decisions about our breed? Would you trust him to make ethical decisions? In the dog world (AKC) this type of behavior would result in suspension of registration privileges at the very least. I personally think these guy should be suspended pending trial and if found guilty banned for life. This is a pretty good example of really bad and slimy behavior and it is not good for the breed.

It brings in to question the integrity of the herd book - if Legacy Plus was collected in Wisconsin as the petition alledges what name was used for the dead bull? This is a real bad deal.

What do other people think should happen?
 

DLD

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
1,539
Location
sw Oklahoma
I must be missing something here -  I don't see a board member listed as a defendant? Plaintiff, yes, but I don't really see that affecting their performance on the board.

I also feel compelled to point out that in the case of the defendants that there is more than one prominent cattle operation owned by people of the same name from the same town, but not the same people. Of course I'm still waiting to learn more before I hold anything against anyone, but in any case you can't hold it against cousins that run a completely seperate operation.
 

afhm

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,621
Location
parts unknown
DL how did yo find all the extra info about the case, like where he was collected, etc...?  I followed the link and all I could find was the names of who was involved.
 

frostback

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,068
Location
Colorado
DLD said:
I must be missing something here -  I don't see a board member listed as a defendant? Plaintiff, yes, but I don't really see that affecting their performance on the board.

I also feel compelled to point out that in the case of the defendants that there is more than one prominent cattle operation owned by people of the same name from the same town, but not the same people. Of course I'm still waiting to learn more before I hold anything against anyone, but in any case you can't hold it against cousins that run a completely seperate operation.
Thanks DLD thats more of what I was looking for. I thought maybe I was misunderstanding the legal stuff here.
 

DLD

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
1,539
Location
sw Oklahoma
You're welcome frostback. That's why I posted it - it looked confusing. It's a large extended family, almost all of whom are involved in the cattle business, but certainly not all together. Only the two families are involved in registered and club calf stuff, the others are strictly commercial, but among them they number several auctioneers, order buyers, even politicians. Looking at a google search it appears that several of them sometimes use "(family name) Cattle Company", but in this case it was simply used in addition to the named individuals in order to allow them to purchase an additional interest in the bull.
 

JSchroeder

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
1,099
Location
San Antonio, Tx
The Journal Star did a good job of describing the situation...

http://journalstar.com/articles/2007/08/02/news/local/doc46b1169f4ee0b894112605.txt

The full timeline based on court documents...

http://www.cattle.com/blog/blog/default.aspx?id=20&t=Legacy-Plus-Timeline

One of the interesting little facts I found in the court docs was a discrepancy regarding his birth date.  The complaint claims he was born March 13th, 1997 but his registration information with the association claims he was born May 3rd.  That's a difference between being a Spring Yearling Bull vs a Early Summer Yearling Bull and a full age division difference.

http://maine-anjou.weaveyourwebdreams.com/breed/pedigree.asp?RegNo=257903
 

Jill

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
3,551
Location
Gardner, KS
Ok, so I have a non-related question.  I have a calf with Legacy Plus listed as the sire, but the breeder is not one of the syndicate owners.  If only offspring can be sold, how did this breeder breed to Legacy Plus, and I know it's not just me because when you put in the name he is all over the place?
 

Telos

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,267
Location
Dallas, Texas
Jill, I always wondered how some breeders get semen and others can not. That has always turned me off re to who has access and who doesn't.

 

afhm

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,621
Location
parts unknown
Hey Jeff, how did you find all of the info on your timeline?  My google skills are obviously lacking.  The only thing I could find about the bankruptcy proceeding were from 2005 and it didn't list anyone who owed him money(probably a very interesting list to read), just the otherway around and very lengthy at that.  Thanks. 
 

JSchroeder

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
1,099
Location
San Antonio, Tx
You can find most documents filed in district courts online but you have to pay a nominal fee for them.

Check your e-mail on here.
 

DL

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
3,622
The Legacy Plus Joint Venture (LPJV) included Hartman, Lee, Hall,, Weber, Glover, Pannell, Buck

It is alleged that Glover sold a share of the bull to Ray without contacting or communicating with the other members of the LPJV and that Buck and Pannell were aware that the bull was alive and taken to Wisconsin to Mays.

Buck (a board member) is listed as a "relevant non party"  - he is not a defendant - (apparently) - I still think this is bad and that his being on the board is a conflict of interests - sorry I got everyone myself included confused.

I do not know what name the bull was collected under

I think the whole thing is really bad for the breed - bull dies in Oklahoma - bull is resurrected in WIsconsin  what is wrong with these people??.

Like Jeff says these documents are available - public information
 

DLD

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
1,539
Location
sw Oklahoma
When I posted earlier that I must be missing something, I was. I only knew the named plaintiffs and defendants in the case - I knew the others had owned an interest in the bull, but not having seen them listed as principals in the lawsuit, I assumed they were out of the picture. I agree that it is bad for the board.
 

DL

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
3,622
DLD (or anybody else) - any insight into why anyone would do this? It just seems like such a stupid thing - it makes no sense to me..... :eek: :eek: :eek:
 

DLD

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
1,539
Location
sw Oklahoma
I don't have a clue DL. At this point, I have to believe that there's way more to this than meets the eye. I know several of these guys fairly well, and I certainly wouldn't have expected this of them. There has, however, been one name mentioned that has his fingers in a whole lot of pies and seems to be able to exert alot of influence wherever he goes... That's not to say they aren't all responsible for their own decisions.
 
Top