O'Sullivan Industries officials failed to file income tax returns in 1999 and owe nearly $1 million, IRS officials say. The information was included in a document filed Monday in U. S. District Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
O'Sullivan officials dispute the claim, saying they filed a consolidated tax return on Sept. 15, 2000.
The claim was one of three O'Sullivan officials asked the bankruptcy judge to disallow, according to the documents. The others were from Ames Department Stores, Inc. for $2.6 million, and from Sentry Insurance for approximately $988,000.
O'Sullivan Industries emerged from bankruptcy the day after the documents were filed.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
News-Leader profiles Blunt's transgender opponent
Midge Potts, the transsexual who is opposing Seventh District Congressman Roy Blunt in the Republican primary, is profiled in today's Springfield News-Leader.
Saturday, April 15, 2006
Lobbying investigation needs to reach into both parties
I haven't found much to agree with the RightMissouri.com blog, but it makes a valid point in its response to the Kansas City Star's Thursday article about a federal investigation into lobbying practices in Missouri.
Any investigation should definitely include a look into malfeasance by Democrats, as well as Republicans. For those of us who recall the Bob Griffin years with less than fondness, and know that gubernatorial terms of Mel Carnahan and Bob Holden also had some problems, to focus strictly on one political party would be wrong.
Any investigation should definitely include a look into malfeasance by Democrats, as well as Republicans. For those of us who recall the Bob Griffin years with less than fondness, and know that gubernatorial terms of Mel Carnahan and Bob Holden also had some problems, to focus strictly on one political party would be wrong.
Gag order placed on Bucher documents
A federal district court judge Friday issued a gag order relating to certain documents entered into evidence in the sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Glenna McKitterick against former Branson priest Philip Bucher.
In the documents filed in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Judge Richard E. Dorr wrote, "The parties, including their counsel, shall not give, show or otherwise divulge any documents, other materials or information, or any copies, prints, negatives or summaries thereof, or the contents thereof, produced in this action by defendants and marked as confidential, to any entity or person except their employees, experts and consultants employed and retained by them or their counsel in connection with the specific action."
All of those people will also be covered by the order, the document said, and the order will extend even after the case has concluded.
More information about the case can be found in earlier Turner Report postings.
In the documents filed in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Judge Richard E. Dorr wrote, "The parties, including their counsel, shall not give, show or otherwise divulge any documents, other materials or information, or any copies, prints, negatives or summaries thereof, or the contents thereof, produced in this action by defendants and marked as confidential, to any entity or person except their employees, experts and consultants employed and retained by them or their counsel in connection with the specific action."
All of those people will also be covered by the order, the document said, and the order will extend even after the case has concluded.
More information about the case can be found in earlier Turner Report postings.
Contributors pay Ruestman's NRA dues
It shouldn't surprise anyone that Rep. Marilyn Ruestman, the Joplin Republican who sponsored the frontier justice bill recently passed by the House, is a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association.
According to the April quarterly campaign disclosure report filed earlier this week with the Missouri Ethics Commission, Ms. Ruestman's $35 one-year membership was paid for by Citizens for Ruestman.
The expenditure was part of $4,931.94 spent by the Ruestman campaign during the past three months. No contributions were reported, leaving the campaign with $50,624.12.
Among the expenditures listed were: $101.40 for a subscription to the Neosho Daily News, $300 for contract labor to Dustin Storm, Webb City; $204.27 to the Department of Natural Resources for advertising, $1,500 tot he 131st Legislative District Committee, $1,500 to the 127th District Legislative Committee; and $475 to the 129th District Legislative Committee (the committee expenditures were listed as reimbursements) and $548.57 to Dell Financial Services, Austin, Texas, for a new computer.
Home school proponents donate heavily to Nodler PAC
K12 Inc., a McLean, VA based provider of curriculum materials to homeschoolers, contributed $5,000 to the Nodler Leadership PAC in January, according to the quarterly statement filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission earlier today.
The company does not limit its curriculum services to homeschooled students, according to its website.
"K12 has created a nationally acclaimed learning program which includes thousands of lessons in traditional subjects, academic assessments, and planning and progress tools delivered through the innovative and powerful K12 Online School. The learning program also incorporates many traditional learning materials including books, workbooks, classical stories, K12 PhonicsWorks tile system, math and science supplies, maps, art books and tools, instruments, music CDs, and much more. More than 70,000 students nationwide are currently using the K12 learning program in a variety of learning environments, including traditional public school classrooms, virtual (online) public schools, and homeschools."
It appears K12, which is a heavy contributor to Republican legislators in Missouri, is getting its money's worth considering the success thus far of the virtual school program in Missouri, which has passed the Senate and has had its first reading in the House. It's almost a sure bet that legislators will find a way to get K12 involved in establishing the curriculum for the virtual school.
***
The Nodler Leadership PAC received $12,100 during the past three months and spent $11,450, leaving it with $7,554 in the bank at the end of the period.
In addition to the $5,000 from K12 Inc., the PAC received $2,500 from NutraBlend, Neosho, which is, of course, connected to Moark, $150 from Freeman Health System CEO Gary Duncan and his wife, Suzanne; $500 from UST, a pharmaceutical company, and $500 from QC Holdings, Overland Park, Kan., one of the nation's largest payday loan companies.
The Nodler Leadership PAC contributed $10,000 to the Senate Majority Fund, in $5,000 increments on March 9 and March 20 and $600 apiece to two Republican state senate campaigns.
FBI investigating license fee offices
Today's Kansas City Star features the news that the FBI is conducting an investigation into the awarding of license fee offices in Missouri by the Blunt administration.
Friday, April 14, 2006
Banker to head Missouri Gaming Commission
Noel Shull, 63, executive vice president of UMB in Liberty, will take the reins as the new head of the Missouri Gaming Commission. The appointment was announced this week by Governor Matt Blunt.
Shull replaces former Kansas City Police Chief Floyd Bartch, who seemed an ideal fit for the head job since the commission was created in 1993 to regulate gambling boats and to protect gambling operations from criminal activities and to ensure that games are conducted fairly, according to state statute.
Where Bartch, who will remain on the commission as a member, had a background that made him uniquely qualified for the position, Shull's main qualification appears to be the amount of money he and his wife, Peggy, have funneled into Blunt's campaign accounts.
Missouri Ethics Commission records show Mrs. Shull donated $1,000 on Dec. 2, 2005.
During 2004, Shull and Mrs. Shull each gave the maximum $1,200, while in 2003, they each gave the maximum $1,175.
That should make him uniquely qualified to keep criminal influences out of the gaming industry.
Shull replaces former Kansas City Police Chief Floyd Bartch, who seemed an ideal fit for the head job since the commission was created in 1993 to regulate gambling boats and to protect gambling operations from criminal activities and to ensure that games are conducted fairly, according to state statute.
Where Bartch, who will remain on the commission as a member, had a background that made him uniquely qualified for the position, Shull's main qualification appears to be the amount of money he and his wife, Peggy, have funneled into Blunt's campaign accounts.
Missouri Ethics Commission records show Mrs. Shull donated $1,000 on Dec. 2, 2005.
During 2004, Shull and Mrs. Shull each gave the maximum $1,200, while in 2003, they each gave the maximum $1,175.
That should make him uniquely qualified to keep criminal influences out of the gaming industry.
Ethics Commission paralyzed by Blunt inaction
Today's Columbia Tribune features an article about the problems that are being caused by Governor Matt Blunt's failure to appoint members to replace those whose terms have expired.
State supreme court will not hear adoption appeal
A five-year-old Jasper County girl will be allowed to remain with her adoptive parents after the Missouri Supreme Court decided Tuesday not to hear the appeal of her mother, whose penchant for entering into abusive relationships cost her custody of her child.
On Feb. 1, The Turner Report featured a post on the Missouri Southern District Court of Appeals' ruling in this case.
The girl, called B.D.W. in court records, was initially taken from her mother by Jasper County Circuit Court Judge David Dally. BDW was less than three months old when she came under the jurisdiction off the Jasper County Juvenile Court, according to the opinion.
The Division of Family Services received a report in January 2001 concerning domestic violence in her home. The father was arrested, marijuana and drug paraphernalia were found, and a subsequent investigation revealed that the father had been convicted nine years earlier on a misdemeanor charge of assaulting an infant.
At that time, the mother was allowed to keep BDW on the condition that the two remain in the Lafayette House in Joplin, a women's shelter. The mother filed for a protection order against the father saying he had hit, choked, and slapped her and had "consistently abused" her for two years. The full order was never granted because the mother did not pursue it, the opinion said. The mother said, "It is hard to resolve any problems if we can't talk."
Apparently, the problems were not resolved. On March 26, 2001, Lafayette House officials reported concerns over the mother's behavior, saying she was not properly caring for the child, according to the opinion.
"Mother left the child unattended for long periods of time in her carrier, reportedly spending long periods of time on the phone with Father and her participation in the domestic violence program at Lafayette House was minimal."
BDW was placed in the home of the foster parents who eventually adopted her on that same day.
Although Lafayette House officials arranged different living quarters for the mother, she decided to move back in with the father, the opinion said. The mother missed five of 10 appointments with her counselor. The parents were granted one supervised visit with BDW per week, but soon lost even that right due to the father's action, according to the opinion.
"On June 25, 2001, Father was holding BDW and stated he could snap the child's neck before anyone could do anything about it. On July 2, 2001, Father verbally assaulted and threatened a DFS caseworker and was arrested; he later pled guilty to assault, peace disturbance and unlawful use of a weapon.
Parental visitation was terminated but DFS continued in its efforts to eventually reunited BDW with her mother, offering the mother counseling. A month later, the mother was able to again have a one-hour supervised visit each week. That arrangement did not work, however when the father threatened a DFS security guard and an aide during a Sept. 26, 2001 meeting.
The DFS caseworker told the mother she had little chance of keeping her daughter if she kept the father in her life, but on the next visit, she again arrived with him and soon after she began missing appointments with her counselor, according to the opinion.
The mother and father were married in September 2001, but the caseworker was not told about the marriage. The DFS continued working with both of them, telling them exactly what would be required for them to be reunited with their daughter, including attending classes on domestic violence, individual counseling, marriage counseling and team meetings. In December 2001, the father was admitted to a state institution to be treated for "depression with psychotic features." His doctor said he had a 50 to 75 percent relapse rate "if he did not stay on medication."
Later tests showed he was using marijuana on a daily basis. Eventually, the caseworker told the mother the time had come to consider giving up her parental rights. "Mother told the caseworker that she had married Father in order to bring their family together and she still trusted Father despite the fact that her relationship with him interfered with possible reunification between her and BDW."
The loving marriage did not work out well for the mother. On Oct. 11, 2001, she filed a second petition for a protection order saying her husband had "put a screwdriver to her throat, beat her with a flashlight, kicked her in the ribs, hit her in the nose, pinned her to the floor, choked her and accused her of 'sleeping around.' She admitted that she feared he would abuse her over the 'slightest thing' and stated that he had threatened to kill her." But a few days later, she dismissed the petition, according to the opinion.
On Nov. 2, 2002, he again beat her and was charged with assault. Later, the mother told the DFS caseworker her husband had broken her nose at least five times..."but she still maintained that he would improve his ways. She stated that her goal was to reunite her family. She hoped Father would want her and BDW and that he would one day be safe to be around."
The court ordered the mother's visit to her child terminated on Nov. 5, 2002. The father received 30 days of shock jail time and had his sentence suspended. "Mother remained by his side."
She told DFS in January 2003 that she was still with her husband, attending marriage counseling and they were doing well. However, the next month they were evicted from their home for not paying rent. Both parents were ordered to pay child support, but neither paid a cent, the opinion said, though later the mother did begin to pay some.
The mother finally split from her husband and moved in with her father. By this time, BDW had been in foster care for 33 months. At the hearing to terminate her parental rights, a psychologist testified that before she hooked up with the father, the mother had a long-term relationship with a man who cheated on her, treated her badly and was "eventually arrested for sodomy of teenage girls and producing pornography."
Psychologists testified there was no way that BDW should ever live with her father and also recommended against allowing her to live with her mother. Testimony also showed that the girl considered her foster parents to be her parents.
Judge Dally ruled that both parents' rights should be terminated.
On Feb. 1, The Turner Report featured a post on the Missouri Southern District Court of Appeals' ruling in this case.
The girl, called B.D.W. in court records, was initially taken from her mother by Jasper County Circuit Court Judge David Dally. BDW was less than three months old when she came under the jurisdiction off the Jasper County Juvenile Court, according to the opinion.
The Division of Family Services received a report in January 2001 concerning domestic violence in her home. The father was arrested, marijuana and drug paraphernalia were found, and a subsequent investigation revealed that the father had been convicted nine years earlier on a misdemeanor charge of assaulting an infant.
At that time, the mother was allowed to keep BDW on the condition that the two remain in the Lafayette House in Joplin, a women's shelter. The mother filed for a protection order against the father saying he had hit, choked, and slapped her and had "consistently abused" her for two years. The full order was never granted because the mother did not pursue it, the opinion said. The mother said, "It is hard to resolve any problems if we can't talk."
Apparently, the problems were not resolved. On March 26, 2001, Lafayette House officials reported concerns over the mother's behavior, saying she was not properly caring for the child, according to the opinion.
"Mother left the child unattended for long periods of time in her carrier, reportedly spending long periods of time on the phone with Father and her participation in the domestic violence program at Lafayette House was minimal."
BDW was placed in the home of the foster parents who eventually adopted her on that same day.
Although Lafayette House officials arranged different living quarters for the mother, she decided to move back in with the father, the opinion said. The mother missed five of 10 appointments with her counselor. The parents were granted one supervised visit with BDW per week, but soon lost even that right due to the father's action, according to the opinion.
"On June 25, 2001, Father was holding BDW and stated he could snap the child's neck before anyone could do anything about it. On July 2, 2001, Father verbally assaulted and threatened a DFS caseworker and was arrested; he later pled guilty to assault, peace disturbance and unlawful use of a weapon.
Parental visitation was terminated but DFS continued in its efforts to eventually reunited BDW with her mother, offering the mother counseling. A month later, the mother was able to again have a one-hour supervised visit each week. That arrangement did not work, however when the father threatened a DFS security guard and an aide during a Sept. 26, 2001 meeting.
The DFS caseworker told the mother she had little chance of keeping her daughter if she kept the father in her life, but on the next visit, she again arrived with him and soon after she began missing appointments with her counselor, according to the opinion.
The mother and father were married in September 2001, but the caseworker was not told about the marriage. The DFS continued working with both of them, telling them exactly what would be required for them to be reunited with their daughter, including attending classes on domestic violence, individual counseling, marriage counseling and team meetings. In December 2001, the father was admitted to a state institution to be treated for "depression with psychotic features." His doctor said he had a 50 to 75 percent relapse rate "if he did not stay on medication."
Later tests showed he was using marijuana on a daily basis. Eventually, the caseworker told the mother the time had come to consider giving up her parental rights. "Mother told the caseworker that she had married Father in order to bring their family together and she still trusted Father despite the fact that her relationship with him interfered with possible reunification between her and BDW."
The loving marriage did not work out well for the mother. On Oct. 11, 2001, she filed a second petition for a protection order saying her husband had "put a screwdriver to her throat, beat her with a flashlight, kicked her in the ribs, hit her in the nose, pinned her to the floor, choked her and accused her of 'sleeping around.' She admitted that she feared he would abuse her over the 'slightest thing' and stated that he had threatened to kill her." But a few days later, she dismissed the petition, according to the opinion.
On Nov. 2, 2002, he again beat her and was charged with assault. Later, the mother told the DFS caseworker her husband had broken her nose at least five times..."but she still maintained that he would improve his ways. She stated that her goal was to reunite her family. She hoped Father would want her and BDW and that he would one day be safe to be around."
The court ordered the mother's visit to her child terminated on Nov. 5, 2002. The father received 30 days of shock jail time and had his sentence suspended. "Mother remained by his side."
She told DFS in January 2003 that she was still with her husband, attending marriage counseling and they were doing well. However, the next month they were evicted from their home for not paying rent. Both parents were ordered to pay child support, but neither paid a cent, the opinion said, though later the mother did begin to pay some.
The mother finally split from her husband and moved in with her father. By this time, BDW had been in foster care for 33 months. At the hearing to terminate her parental rights, a psychologist testified that before she hooked up with the father, the mother had a long-term relationship with a man who cheated on her, treated her badly and was "eventually arrested for sodomy of teenage girls and producing pornography."
Psychologists testified there was no way that BDW should ever live with her father and also recommended against allowing her to live with her mother. Testimony also showed that the girl considered her foster parents to be her parents.
Judge Dally ruled that both parents' rights should be terminated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)