Replies

Here is the court ruling below. If Gilchrist could prove the three were not directors he would have done so.

***TEXT OF RULING***

The court, finding serious issues concerning the credibility of the claims of both Jim Gilchrist and the defendants to control the affairs of The Minuteman Project, grants the preliminary only in part. The defendants, their agents, servants, employees, representatives and all persons acting in concert or participating with them are enjoined and restrained during the penedency of this action from engaging in, committing, or performing, directly or indirectly, any of the following acts:
1) Using Minuteman project Inc letterhead and/or envelopes containing the printed signature of Jim Gilchrist, 2) diverting, dissipating, spending or otherwise using donations made to Minuteman project, Inc. The application for preliminary injunction is denied in all other respects. While the court makes the necessary findings of an inadequate legal remedy, irreparable harm, and probability of success, further relief is deemed inappropriate so as t maintain the status quo between the parties pending final adjudication of the merits of the case.
Plaintiffs are ordered to post an undertaking of $15,000 for the preliminary injunction.

The application for the writ of possession is denied.
The court sets an order to show cause hearing for April 25, 2007 at 1:30 pm as to why the courts should not appoint a receiver to control the affairs of The Minuteman Project Inc, during the pendency of this litigation. Counsel for the parties, or if unrepresented, the parties are to personally meet no later than April 10, 2007 to try and stipulate , as to whether a receiver should be appointed, what powers the receiver should be given, who should be appointed the receiver, and what compensation should be paid to the receiver for his or her services.
Plaintiffs are to personally file their response to OCS by April 16, and defendants will file their response by April 19, 2007