BOOK III. CHAPTER 10. THE COURT TRIAL

(23) The third court appearance was the trial. I was prepared with my arguments, essentially saying that many of the Petitioner’s accusations were untrue. Plus, Petitioners’ “hands were not clean.” That argument asserts that these lawsuits were not about what Petitioners claimed but an attempt to silence me.

(24) The following are excerpts from the trial are statements MADE BY THE JUDGE, in the order they came up in the trial.

24a. Many of (the petitions) are cut and pasted, from one petition to the next petition.· If there’s an e-mail that has an act shown in it that would lead to the issuance of a restraining order, you’re welcome to present that.

(Comment by Frank Wodley - this shows that at least four of the five board members used a "master sheet" to fill out their individual orders. This shows collusion; members were not acting individually but as a group.)

24b. I’ll advise all parties that the burden of proof is very high for restraining orders. I’ll note that four out of the five requests for temporary orders· were denied. It’s a very low burden of proof at the temporary stage. It’s a much higher burden of proof at the trial stage, which is clear and convincing evidence.

24c. I always try to state that because if the parties have an opportunity to work something out, especially in a case where temporary orders were· denied, I always encourage them to do that.

24d. The only issue is whether Mr. Wodley’s acts have risen to the level of need for a restraining order. So, like I said, I can see what’s coming, just by reading the petition, and that’s not the issue before the Court.

24e. I don’t think this is a case, based on what’s been presented in writing, a restraining order type case, I would be happy to issue that as an order, under CCP 665.6

24f. What you’re committing to, today, (is) more of a gentleman’s agreement, rather than anything else.

24g. These type of agreements are so much more successful than court orders, because everybody buys into it. If you guys can reach an agreement with your relationship in mind, that’s the best way to resolve it, because you all leave my courtroom with buy in. Short of that, the evidence gets put on by both sides, either restraining orders are granted or they’re not. And one side or the other leaves disappointed with the resolution, without the buy in. And so I encourage you guys to try and work something out that works for everybody, ultimately, for the success of this HOA. Ultimately, that’s the goal.

24g. There’s nothing in the paperwork that I read, that there’s been any direct threats or anything (of the) like.

(Comment by Frank Wodley. This is the judgment of the court. The board has NOT provided evidence to show I threatened them, directly or otherwise. In other words, I won!)

24i. This is just an agreement between the parties. It’s not a court order. It’s just making the best effort between these parties to have peace in this neighborhood and peace in the HOA.

Comment by Frank Wodley. The judge suggested we all have a gentleman's agreement to have peace. The stay-away order applied to all board members and their families, not just me as MichaelPaul's March newsletter indicated.)

24j. It’s difficult to get a restraining order that prevents somebody from participating in the political process.

24k. So there’ll be no restraining orders in effect. I’ll remind everybody that this agreement is on the record. It’s an enforceable agreement. Once again, if anything -- in the future, if there is a violation of this agreement, it will be a fact that’s considered in issuing future restraining orders, no matter which direction they may go.

24l.. All right. So I’m going to consider the matter resolved.