Sarah E. Buck Chicago lawyer who teaches at Chicago Kent School of Law is charged with obstruction of justice, witness tampering and fraud. Stay away from Sarah E. Buck!
Sarah E. Buck Chicago lawyer who teaches at Chicago Kent School of Law is charged with obstruction of justice, witness tampering and fraud. Stay away from Sarah E. Buck!
Sarah E. Buck Chicago lawyer who teaches at Chicago Kent School of Law is charged with obstruction of justice, witness tampering and fraud. Stay away from Sarah E. Buck!
EASTERN DIVISION --------------------------------------------------- ) In the Matter of: ) ) ) No: ) ) ) ) ) Sarah Elizabeth Buck 6199585, ) Respondent ) --------------------------------------------------- TO Sarah Buck 6199585, Hays Firm LLC, 55 W. Wacker Drive, 14 th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60601 NOTICE OF FILIN! ATTORNEY COM"LAINT "LEASE TA#E NOTICE that on the $$$$$$$$$ %a& '( Au)u*t +,-., I fied !ith the "erk of the "ourt the attached #ttorne$ %iscipinar$ "o&paint
"hristopher Stoer 6'(5 )* +rand #pt (1( "hica,o, Iinois 6'6-9 -1.-8-( 9/1/ 1 ATTORNEY ADMISSIONS NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION --------------------------------------------------- ) In the Matter of: ) ) ) No: ) ) ) ) ) Sarah 0i1a2eth Buck, 6199585, ) Respondent ) --------------------------------------------------- ATTORNEY MISCOND/CT COM"LAINT - A!AINST SARAH B/C# 3he Respondent, Sarah 0i1a2eth Buck . , is char,ed !ith coachin, a cient to ie in a "i4i "ook "ount$ "ase "ase No* 1( "5 '6/59 !here Ms Buck and her partner6s) #ttorne$ #ndre! 5a$s and #ntonia 5a$s ha4e co&&itted o2struction of 1 It shoud 2e noted that the "o&painant has aso fied an Iinois #ttorne$ %iscipinar$ "o&paint !ith the #R%" a,ainst Ms* Buck 1( IN '---.* 5o!e4er the "har,es 2ein, asserted in this co&paint are distin,uisha2e fro& the #ttorne$ discipinar$ char,es that current$ ha4e 2een raised 2$ the co&painant 2efore the #R%"* . Sarah Buck is an #d7unct 8rofessor at 9ent :a! Schoo !ho teaches draftin, of peadin,s to third $ear a! students !ho has a2dicated her duties and 2rou,ht disrepute to hersef and the 9ent :a! Schoo* . 7ustice, en,a,ed in conduct that Ms. Buck knows is criminal or fraudulent, and a Prohibited Transaction. With knowingly and willfully assisting their client Mark Stoller to commit a crime or fraud in Cook County Civil Case No. 2014 CH06759 Exhibit 1. The Respondent is charged ith extortion! ob"ect o# "$stice and itness ta%pering. "ARTIES Re*0'1%e1t Sarah Buck2 C'30lai1a1t Chri*t'0her St'ller 4 BAC#!RO/ND FACTS #ttorne$s; #ndre! 5a$s, #ntonia 5a$s and Respondent Sarah Buck, represent , Mark Stoer, (- the son of "hristopher Stoer, 65 the co&painant in "ook "ount$ "ase No. 2014 CH06759 !here Mark Stoer is - * - char,ed !ith defraudin, his father out of <6/,''', aided and a2etted 2$ the said respondents !ho are na&ed defendants* See E5hibit - 6C'30lai1t7 Respondent Buck is e=tortin, the attorne$ for&er >ud,e )a$ne Rhine representin, "hristopher Stoer, fro& >u$ /, .'1( to #u,ust .., .'1( !ith threats of inti&idation and has caused hi& to !ithdra! fro& the representation of "hristopher Stoer 2$ threatenin, to fie a Rue 1-/ Sanction co&paint a,ainst Mr* )a$ne Rhine, a for&er "ook "ount$ >ud,e for .( $ears* #s a direct resut of Respondent Buck threats Mr* Rhine has fied a re?uest to !ithdra! fro& the case and a re?uest to !ith dra! the a&ended co&paint, !hich "hristopher Stoer !as ,i4en ea4e to fie 2$ the tria court >ud,e* "hristopher Stoer o27ects to the !ithdra!a of the a&ended co&paint for !hich ea4e !as ,i4en to a&end 2$ the "ook "ount$ 3ria "ourt* The civil case o. !"#$ C%"&'() involves a scheme whereby the *efendant Mark Stoller $+, the com,lainant-s son defrauded his father, out of his entire retirement funds of .&',"""."". /n ovember of !"#+ Mark Stoller who lives in Phoeni0, 1ri2ona called his father and told him that he could get his father a !"3 return on his .&',"""."", Christo,her Stoller would merely send to him all of his money. Mark Stoller also claimed that his father could have his money back at any time. 1fter Mark Stoller received Christo,her Stoller-s .&',"""."", Mark Stoller ke,t the money and ( would not return the money when Christo,her Stoller re4uested it. See attached Civil 5aw suit Com,laint. Christo,her Stoller filed four criminal com,laints against his son, Mark Stoller for defrauding him out of his money. The first was filed with the /llinois orth 5ake Police *e,artment 6e,ort o. #$7"#$"+. The second was filed with the /llinois Securities *e,artment Consumer Com,laint. The third was filed with the /llinois 1ttorney 8eneral Senior Citi2en 9raud *ivision. 1nd the fourth was filed with the :nited States Postal /ns,ection Mail 9raud 6e,ort. *es,ite this egregious fact ,attern that clearly evidences that Mark Stoller defrauded his father out of his .&',""" Sarah Buck and her ,artner 1ndrew %ays concocted a fraudulent defense for Mark Stoller and told him to say that the .&',"""."" was a ;gift< and that he would not have to ever return the money to his father $ . Mark Stoller admitted to Christo,her Stoller that Sarah Buck and 1ndrew %ays coached him to say it was a gift. Then Sarah =li2abeth Buck and 1ndrew %ays then conducted a cam,aign to intimate the '! year old attorney, former >udge 6hine, of Christo,her Stoller with threats to file a frivolous 6ule #+' in order to destroy former >udge 6hine-s re,utation and Ms. Buck has succeeded in ( See attached %efendant;s Motion to 3ransfer to the :a! %i4ision drafted 2$ Sarah Buck at pa,e t!o @ 1 A3he present &atter arises fro& a ,ift of <6/,''' !hich !as transferred fro& "hristopher Stoer 6A8aintiffB) to his son* %efendant no! seeks the return of those funds fro& %efendant*B E5hibit + 5 driving Mr. 6hine out of the case o. !"#$ C%"&'() see attached Motion to Withdraw Exhibit 2. Ms. Buck has also coerced and tam,ered with a ,otential witness against her, 1ttorney Wayne 6hine. Ms. Buck coached her client, Mark Stoller falsely assert that the .&',"""."" was a ;gift< when in fact Ms. Buck knew or should have known from the fact ,attern in the case that no father would give a gift of .&',"""."" to their son and then file criminal com,laints against his son for failing to return the .&',"""."" if in fact, the father actually gifted the .&',"""."" to the son.? Secondly it is not even ,robably that a &( year old, disabled father, the com,lainant, would gift his . last .&',"""."" to his son in order for the father to then live in ab@ect ,overty. :nder any circumstances, Ms. Buck took unlawful advantage of a disabled &( year old father, coached her witness Mark Stoller to lie, tam,ered with another witness, Wayne 6hine, '!, attorney for Christo,her Stoller, and e0torted Wayne 6hine with threats of a 6ule #+' Sanction unless he were to withdraw his amended com,laint and withdraw from re,resenting the Com,lainant in case Cook Count Case o. !"#$ C%"&'(). Ms. Buck and Mr. 1ndrew %ays took a ,age out of *efense attorney Beau Brindely-s ,lay book. See attached Chicago Tribune article dated 9riday, 1ugust !!, !"#$. =0hibit +. 6 8HEREFORE2 "o&painant pra$s that the #ttorne$ #d&issions i&&ediate$ assi,n this &atter to a hearin,, pane, that a date for hearin, 2e i&&ediate$ set, that the hearin, 2e conducted and that the pane &ake findin,s of fact, concusions of a! and a reco&&endation for such discipine as is !arranted 2$ its findin,s* * "hristopher Stoer , "o&painant 6'(5 )* +rand #pt (1( "hica,o, Iinois 6'6-9 -1.-8-( 9/1/ / Certi(icate '( Maili1) I here2$ certif$ that this &otion is 2ein, deposited !ith the C*S* 8osta Ser4ice as first "ass &ai, on #u,ust .5, .'1(, in an en4eope addressed to: #ndre! 5a$s Chicago7&ent College of 'a #ntonia 5a$s (&( W 1dams St, Chicago, /5 &"&&# Sarah Buck, #tt: Harold J. Krent , %ean Hays Firm LLC, 55 W. Wacker Drive, 14 th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60601 >ero&e :arkin %irector #ttorne$ #d&issions Iinois #ttorne$ Re,istration 0astern %istrict and %iscipinar$ "o&&ission .19 S* %ear2orn St 1-' N* Randoph Street, Suite 15'' "hica,o, Iinois 6'6'( "hica,o, Iinois 6'6'1 >a&es "o&e$ :isa Madi,an %irector of DBI "hica,o Iinois #ttorne$ +enera .111 )* Roose4et Rd* 1'' )* Randoph St* "hica,o, I 6'6'6 "hica,o, Iinois 6'6'1 -1.-8.9-5/-. "hica,oEie*f2i*,o4 Fachar$ 3* Dardon Mai Draud %i4ision Cnites States #ttorne$ Gffice 8osta Inspection Ser4ice Northern %istrict of Iinois (-- )* 5arrison, Roo& 5'19' .19 S* %ear2orn St, 5 th Door "hica,o, I 6'669-..'1 "hica,o, I* 6'6'( -1.--5--5-''
Motion To Default Attorneys From Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, Zuckerman Spaeder LLC, Wright, Finaly & Zak, For Failure To Respond To Criminal Contempt Charges