Part 20 — Not Enough Gravity

 

NASA visualization of a black hole’s gravity distorting light around it. We do not see the black hole itself; we see the effects of its pull.

---

Scientists do not see a black hole the way we see a building, a car, or a signed contract.

They see what happens around it.

They see light bend.

They see stars move.

They see matter accelerate.

They see objects behave in ways that do not make sense unless something powerful, unseen, and massive is pulling on them.

That is the shift in this series.

Up to now, I have mostly walked through direct facts.

Documents.

Dates.

Signatures.

Missing signatures.

Metadata.

Court orders.

Hearing records.

The story has been mostly linear.

Valeo withheld compensation.

Valeo sued me.

Valeo did not produce a signed Compensation Agreement.

Valeo’s lawyer later admitted there was no signed Compensation Agreement.

Unsigned 2010 agreement exhibits were generated from the same Word document shortly before summary judgment.

Judge Welch denied my Trial Rule 53.1 request herself.

A higher-court document later appeared with an earlier date and later electronic activity.

Now the judgment is being enforced against my family’s daily life.

That is the direct record.

But after Part 19, the question changes.

The next question is not only:

What happened next?

The next question is:

What has enough gravity to explain what happened?

Part 19 — The Vortex

In Part 18, I explained the limbo.

The missing Compensation Agreement should have stopped the case from moving forward cleanly.

It did not.

The Trial Rule 53.1 problem should have stopped the case from moving forward cleanly.

It did not.

The court-authority question should have been resolved before enforcement continued.

It was not.

And now the same judgment is being enforced against my family’s daily life.

That is why I keep coming back to the same image.

A vortex.

Part 18 — The Limbo

In Part 17, I showed the point where the court became part of the story.

Judge Welch denied my Trial Rule 53.1 request herself.

The published procedure said the Chief Administrative Officer was supposed to decide whether withdrawal was warranted.

I asked Judge Welch to correct it.

She denied correction too.

Then a higher-court document appeared with an earlier date and later electronic activity.

That left me in a position that is difficult to explain unless you have lived inside it.

I call it the limbo.

---

The Same Pattern Again

This was not the first time I was stuck between two doors that were both locked.

Earlier in the case, I had asked for the Compensation Agreement.

Valeo’s own Employment Agreement said my compensation was governed by a separate Compensation Agreement.

Valeo’s own Employment Agreement said the complete agreement included the Compensation Agreement.

So I asked for it.

I denied that a valid Compensation Agreement had been produced.

I raised it in filings.

I asked to inspect the original instrument.

But the case kept moving anyway.

That was the first version of the trap.

The document mattered.

The document was not produced.

The case moved forward anyway.

Then the same kind of thing happened with Trial Rule 53.1.

Part 17 — When the Court Became Part of the Story

In the last status update, I explained why this is no longer just an old lawsuit.

The same judgment I have been writing about is now being enforced against my family’s daily life.

My daughter’s vehicle.

My wife’s property interests.

My tools.

My ability to work.

So now I need to move faster through the record.

Not recklessly.

But faster.

Because at a certain point, this stopped being only a story about Valeo.

It stopped being only a story about Valeo’s lawyers.

It became a story about what the court allowed.

This is that point.

Status Update — Now It Reaches My Daughter’s Car

I need to pause the numbered series for a current update.

This is not just history anymore.

The same judgment I have been writing about is now being enforced against my family’s daily life.

And once again, one of my children is being pulled into a lawsuit that was never against them.

---

First Ethan. Now Emily.

Earlier, I wrote about my son Ethan’s bank account.

That account included money he earned from his summer job at UPS and money intended for college.

It was frozen anyway.

Now the court has entered an order and writ that lists my daughter Emily’s Toyota 4Runner as property to be seized.

Emily is not a defendant.

She is not part of this lawsuit.

She uses the 4Runner in Colorado to get to and from work.

She has made the payments.

I am connected to the title because she needed a co-signer to qualify for financing.

There is still a sizeable loan on it. I’m unsure of the balance because I do not have a login or make payments. Emily does.

It is not sitting in my driveway.

It is not hidden.

It is my daughter’s transportation.

And it is now listed in a sheriff’s writ.