Thursday, November 3, 2016

Here is an ex parte letter that my brother, Missouri lawyer David Shuler, sent to judge hearing our eviction case--villifying me and ensuring we would get cheated

David Shuler
Have you ever had someone say or write something about you that was so vile and nasty -- and disconnected from the truth -- that you wondered if the person had experienced a psychological break with reality? Have you ever wondered why such a person would hold such ill will, when you've done nothing to cause it?

My experience with such behavior came from my brother, attorney David Shuler of Springfield, Missouri. And he did not communicate the ugly stuff to me directly -- or to someone we both know or are related to. Nope, he put it in a letter to a judge, just one day before a hearing here in Missouri on landlord Trent Cowherd's efforts to unlawfully evict my wife, Carol, and me.

That means my brother's letter, expressing ill will toward me that I can't begin to explain, is part of the court file. And that means it is a public record that anyone can see. With that in mind, I'm going to make it available here for anyone to see. (Full letter is embedded at the end of this post.)

Amazingly, my brother states in the letter that he intends to work on behalf of landlord Trent Cowherd -- and against Carol and me. David gives no indication that he's going to do anything on behalf of his supposed client -- our mother, Gondy Shuler, whom Cowherd wrongfully sued because she was co-signer on our lease. Evidence strongly suggests that David wanted Cowherd to sue our mother so he would have an excuse to be involved in the case and help work against Carol and me. Cowherd immediately dropped its claim against our mother once the eviction was complete.

How low can a family member go to stab you in the back? I can't imagine how one could go any lower than my brother already has gone.

Because my brother's letter was part of a court case, it goes way beyond one sibling expressing distaste, disgust, resentment, jealousy, etc. with another sibling. The letter, addressed to Judge Kelly Halford Rose, was blatantly prejudicial and likely played a major role in the eviction that resulted in one deputy pointing an assault rifle at my head and another breaking Carol's arm. It also was an ex parte communication that never should have been in the record and probably violates Missouri bar rules.

During the eviction hearing, I moved for Rose to recuse herself due to the prejudicial letter. As I expected, she denied the motion -- harrumphing and striking her best self-righteous pose.

Let's go over a few key sections of the letter. You can decide for yourself if it was likely to be prejudicial for the judge to whom it was addressed. You also might ask yourself this question: What on earth was David Shuler thinking when he wrote this, and why does he hold such obvious resentment toward his brother? (Note: I asked David at least three times, maybe four, to serve me with a copy of the letter; as a party to the case, I was entitled to a service copy. He never sent me one, so I got my own copy. If he was proud of his handiwork, why didn't he want to share it? Or is it possible he didn't think I would discover the letter?)

Here is the opening paragraph:

Dear Judge Halford:
I am writing regarding the above referenced case. Roger Shuler is my brother who has been estranged from my family for approximately 25 years. Recently, a family friend helped him relocate to the Missouri area. Unfortunately, my 85 year old mother made the mistake of agreeing to co-sign a lease for Roger with Trent Cowherd Construction. She agreed to pay his moving expenses and his rent for thirteen months to help him get back on his feet. She never dreamed that Roger Shuler would then refuse to pay his rent and/or vacate the property.

Let's interject a few facts here:

(1) I've not been estranged from my family for 25 years; my family has been estranged from me. In 1992, three years after Carol and I had been married, my mother let me know via a phone conversation that Carol "wasn't raised like me" and that "Carol was trying to come between me and my family." I responded by saying that Carol and I had taken five trips as a couple -- one was our honeymoon to Destin, Florida, and the other four were to Springfield, MO, to visit my family. If Carol was trying to "come between me and my family," she sure had a funny way of doing it --agreeing to go on four round trips of more than 1,000 miles each. I had never heard Carol say anything unkind about anyone in my family and her actions told me she thoroughly enjoyed each of our trips to the Midwest. (Note: My mother's curious statements came not long after she and my father, and maybe David, had visited us in Birmingham. It was a political year, and I said something to the effect that I thought it was interesting a guy from Arkansas [Bill Clinton] could become president, given that many of our relatives, including my mother, are from Arkansas, and the state generally has been seen as a backwater with little influence on the national scene. My mother said one of my brothers certainly would not be voting for Clinton because of the abortion-rights issue. I said that was fine with me, but Carol and I supported Clinton and abortion rights. I thought that was the end of it, no problem, but I now think culture-war politics played a large role in our family split. Of course, David mentions none of that in his letter to the judge. He gives the impression that I'm 100 percent responsible for any estrangement.) For the record, I hoped for years that we would receive a genuine apology and life would go on -- with an extended family I had always thought was pretty good. When it became clear no apology was forthcoming, we stayed in touch somewhat with the Missouri side of the family, but we made no more trips to the Midwest. That was my decision, not Carol's. I didn't want to subject her to an ugly environment, and I thought we could do better things with our time.

Judge Kelly H. Rose
(2) I never refused to pay rent or vacate the property. Rather, Carol and I were planning to actually follow the lease, which called for it to go month-to-month at the end of 13 months, with us picking up the rent payments. Before that could happen, we got a notice to vacate attached to our door. When I called the Cowherd office to inquire about it, I was told we got the notice because we had failed to sign a new lease, in our name, now that the co-signer wanted off the agreement. I asked the woman on the other end of the line if she could point to a provision in the lease that required us to sign a new lease, even though we already had one. She couldn't point to such a provision, because there wasn't one, but she then said they were unilaterally invoking their right not to rent to us and force us out -- on a whim, you might say. But this was contrary to what she had just told me -- that they wanted us out because we were determined to follow the actual language of the lease -- not something they were pulling out of their fannies. Ultimately, the woman said Cowherd was going to take legal action to force us out, whether we paid the rent or not (and that is contrary to Missouri law). In other words, I didn't "refuse" to pay the rent; I didn't pay it because the landlord told me not to pay, citing grounds that were not in the lease. I captured this conversation on audiotape and entered it into the public record, so there is no doubt about what really happened. A Cowherd representative admitted on the stand there was no provision in the rental agreement that would require us to sign a new lease, acknowledging they were violating the contract we had with them.

Here is a second section of my brother's letter, and this one makes me wonder if he actually went to law school -- of if he learned anything while he was there:

My purpose in writing this letter is to let you know that I intend to appear on behalf of my mother. Gondolyn Shuler intends to cooperate with the Petititioner (Trent Cowherd) in the matter and assist in any way to help them regain possession of the rental property currently occupied by Mr. Shuler.

I've read this probably a dozen times or so, and it still blows my mind. What do we learn?

(1) Landlord Trent Cowherd is suing my mother, Gondy Shuler, but she is going to "assist them in any way to help them regain possession of the rental property." How often does a person sue you, and you vow to help them -- against your own son. What kind of mother do I have? I don't have an answer to that question anymore.

(2) David Shuler is admitting that he has no reason to represent Gondy Shuler. His entire goal is to help Trent Cowherd, doing his best to hurt Carol and me in the process.

I don't claim to be an expert on legal ethics, but this sounds real close to a fraud on the court. David Shuler's role in the case was to represent his client, Gondy Shuler, but it's clear his real goal was to help Trent Cowherd.

Gee, I can't understand why I have a hard time trusting anything my brother or mother might say these days.

I did confront my brother via e-mail about his letter, and you might find his response interesting. We will address that in an upcoming post. For now, here is the full letter:


Anonymous said...

Roger, is there anyone you have dealt with in the past 24 months who you would consider to be trustworthy and honest? I'm thinking of a lawyer, judge, public servant, care-giver, family member, doctor... anyone of any importance in your life that has exhibited honesty and appears to be acting in good faith.

legalschnauzer said...

Oh, there are plenty of people. I don't know that any of them come in the categories you mention, but I've written many times that a blog like this is far from a one-man show. Many people have helped me with it in a variety of ways, especially sources (named and unnamed) who have helped break some of the most important stories in Alabama over the past 24 months. I don't want to name those people here -- and most of them don't want to be named at all -- but they absolutely have exhibited honesty and good faith.

(I've said this before, but it bears repeating: While I've written a lot of negative stuff about lawyers, some of the truly honest people I've encountered in writing this blog are lawyers. Most lawyers know their profession is a wreck, and a few of them actually want to do something about it.)

A whole bunch of readers have supported the blog financially and emotionally, and many of them "have no horse in the race." They just like what we do and support efforts to expose corruption. My wife, Carol, has been unfailingly honest despite an ordeal of epic proportions. She has a knack of calling things correctly before they even become apparent to me. This blog doesn't happen without her help and support.

I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

Would you please answer a question for me: What does your query have to do with my brother's ex parte letter to a judge?

Anonymous said...

I'll be blunt: Your brother might be the biggest sack of shit I've ever read about. If I were a parent, and one of my kids pulled such a stunt on another, I'd say, "Lord, where did I go wrong? What kind of monster have I raised?" Disgusting.

Anonymous said...

You've referenced this letter from your brother before, but I had no idea it would be this bad. God, he's a dreadful human being, an arrogant, ignorant POS. Horrible!

Anonymous said...

I agree that your brother is a disgusting piece of feces. But I have a second opinion for him: "You're ugly, too, dude!"

legalschnauzer said...

Don't know why I would try to show any fairness toward David, but he's really not that ugly. That's a dreadful picture of him, and I enjoy using it. But he really doesn't look that bad. It's his lack of a soul and a moral compass that is the problem, not his looks.

Anonymous said...

@8:04 -- Do you think Roger's brother is exhibiting honesty and good faith with that letter? How would you feel if someone, relative or not, wrote a letter like that about you -- to a judge?!?

Anonymous said...

--- Would you please answer a question for me: What does your query have to do with my brother's ex parte letter to a judge?

Well my reading of the letter and your posts about your family indicate to me a relative who maybe has tried to help you over the years, but has been met with hostility. This is quite common when dealing with someone with certain mental illnesses. You try to help but you get burnt out because the person you are trying to assist really believes the relative is out to get them. I only share this because my grandfather had bipolar disorder. It was one of the worst situations of my life. My granddad treated my father and I horribly even though we were fighting to keep him safe. Little petty differences were blown into excuses for why we were trying to rip him off and hurt him, even though by this point he was destitute and nearly homeless.

Anonymous said...

---- Do you think Roger's brother is exhibiting honesty and good faith with that letter? How would you feel if someone, relative or not, wrote a letter like that about you -- to a judge?!?

All I see is someone stuck in a tough situation. I don't know the depths of the conflict within the family. But we've all seen families have the most bloody fights about the worst things. I expect Roger's brother is worried about their mother.

Anonymous said...

Roger, your brother is a POS (piece of shit) and a manipulator. You see...he is the one who long ago poisoned your elderly mother's view of you and Carol...maybe a little for the purpose of political difference...but really moreso to begin the foundation to "disinherit" you. This happens even when there are modest or no assets. I have a sister like this...and a sister-in-law who is her twin and enabler. They have done terrible things to try and damage my reputation with family and friends and strangers...telling untruths and casting themselves and the "good ones" and me as the unworthy one who has taken advantage of. The judge should have rejected the letter or recused herself. The landlord broke the law and the law enforcement and court system acted with extreme impunity. I hope, with all my heart, you and Carol are able to find justice one day and be made financially whole...but I know the wounds and scars will never fully heal. You both are very brave and I am a champion of your battles and hope you one day prevail.

Anonymous said...

So, @10:07, you think LS is bipolar? What makes you think this, what qualifications do you have to make such a claim? Why do you think LS is bipolar, as opposed to, say, his brother?

Here's what I think about you: You don't even believe your own BS. Why would someone take the time to follow a blog that he thought was written by someone with bipolar disease? Would such a blog even be readable? How does someone with bipolar write a blog that has been recognized as one of the top 50 law blogs in North America?

You are lying to us, and you are lying to yourself.

legalschnauzer said...

10:09 -- I think you are right on target on a number of things. These family problems started at about the time my brother became a lawyer. Sadly, my mother probably is not able to see what he has done to our family. She raised one dishonest child (out of four), and she chose him as her "trustee" because of his "status" as a lawyer. As the youngest, David was around to poison my parents' mind while I was in Alabama trying to make a legit living. David has some sort of deep-seated resentment toward me, and it's not based in reality. I've already seen evidence of the disinheriting process you mention, which was no surprise.

Thanks for an insightful comment.

legalschnauzer said...

@10:07 -- You need to do a little better job of reading this letter and other items about my family -- if, in fact, you've read them at all.

This is not the letter of someone who is "burnt out" from trying to help a relative. This is the letter of a backstabber. Also, you have no evidence that I've ever reacted to David with hostility -- and that's because I haven't.

I've seen a number of health-care professionals over the past two years, and not one has even hinted that I have bipolar disease -- no one ever has raised the issue.

You are completely out of touch with reality, but I suspect you know that already.

Anonymous said...

I seem to recall a post or two you wrote where your brother had written things to you that proved to be untrue. Am I right about that? If so, I guess @10:07 must have missed them.

legalschnauzer said...

Oh, you are absolutely right, @12:05. One example came when he told me it was commonplace for landlords to turn off utilities in an effort to force tenants out of property. In fact, it's unlawful in all 50 states. Why is that important? He clearly was lying in an effort to help scare us out of our house in Birmingham. Here is URL to post about that:

He also wrote me an e-mail on Sept. 2, 2015, where he claimed he was "doing his best" to stay out of my business. Compare that to the letter in today's post where he clearly was trying to be right in the middle of our business, vowing that he was going to work against us. His is URL to post about that:

Bottom line? He's a proven liar, and evidence strongly suggests he never was actually trying to help us. Even on the surface, he didn't do much to "help" us anyway. And beneath the surface, his own words, indicate he was conning us all along.

Those are just two of the lies I know about for sure. I have no idea how much other stuff he has lied to me and Carol about -- or how many times he's lied to others about us.

Anonymous said...

Let's see . . . your brother wrote the letter to the judge on Aug. 21, saying he was going to work to benefit the landlord, then he wrote e-mail to you on Sept. 2 that he was "trying his best" to stay out of your business?

Good God, this guy is almost Trumpian in his ability and willingness to lie. What a creep!

I wonder how many times he lies to his divorce clients. I bet it's a lot.

legalschnauzer said...

I bet it's a lot, too, @12:21. I know he told me that, once he takes a divorce case, he pretty quickly starts trying to pressure his client to settle, telling them they risk losing if the case goes to trial.

That sounds a lot like the scare tactics he used on us regarding utilities.

I don't know exactly how David deals with divorce clients, but his own words gave me the impression that he takes the case and a nice chunk of cash up front and then pressures the client to engage in the difficult work of reaching a settlement. In that scenario, it sounds like he takes the cash and really doesn't do much work. And if the client gets a bad settlement . . . well, I guess that's just too bad.

I wouldn't hire him to handle a parking ticket for me.

Anonymous said...

David Shuler is lucky I'm not his brother. I would have cold-cocked him a long time ago. He would be drowning in a little lake of his own blood and drool.

Anonymous said...

Sorry to say this, but your mother sounds just as bad as your brother. No wonder you want to get away from them.

legalschnauzer said...

You make an interesting point, @1:59. I'm not sure where he ends and she begins. It's like he's the puppet master, but she should be able to think for herself. I tend to cut her slack because of her age, but I'm not sure she deserves it.

I know I'm thankful that we chose not to have children. If having children turns you into someone like her, and produces people like my brother, I want no part of it.

Anonymous said...

--- So, @10:07, you think LS is bipolar? What makes you think this, what qualifications do you have to make such a claim? Why do you think LS is bipolar, as opposed to, say, his brother?

I was talking about MY experience with MY family. I don'y know if Roger is bipolar or his brother is or anything else. The point was more about families fighting over scraps. The rest is pure speculation.

--- You are completely out of touch with reality, but I suspect you know that already.

Well thank you Roger. You don't know me from Eve so I'm not too concerned about your assessment! Hard to be sympathetic for a man who always takes the low road, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

With all honesty its really hard to determine who is at fault since each side has a story. Family problems are always the worst. In any case, i do wish you peace Roger, and hope that you keep on doing what makes you as happy as possible, and enjoy the good in your life!

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute! All these people slagging off Rogers brother seem to be missing one important fact. Roger apparently didn't pay his rent leaving his poor 88 year old mother to pick up the tab. It seems like David Shuler is just trying to help her extricate herself from that mess.

Anonymous said...

Tell that cunt who called you bipoler to go fuck herself. Seriously ask her who is paying her to come here and make trouble. Southern justice is all about lynching anyone who gets out of line. Roger you stay strong brother.

legalschnauzer said...

I appreciate the tone of your comment, @4:19, but I hope you will ponder this: The tone of my post is not about determining who is at fault. It's about a stunningly inappropriate act a lawyer took in a case that really did not involve him. And the lawyer just happens to be my brother. In the letter, David Shuler admits that he has no place in the legal matter. He says he is representing our mother, Gondy Shuler, but she was neither the tenant nor the landlord. and her time as cosigner on a 13-month lease was up. David could have had a legit purpose in the case by countersuing Trent Cowherd for filing a bogus lawsuit against our mother. But he didn't do that; his sole purpose, in his own words, was to hurt Carol and me.

I've told a few people that I got the sense, at the time, David was working more for the landlord than out of any concern for us. This letter proves that was true -- in spades.

Again, the post makes no claim about who is at fault. It's about a wildly inappropriate letter, which did in fact hurt us, and there is no doubt who wrote it. And to show just how low people can go, David never once has shown any concern about what was done to Carol and me, never asked about her broken arm, about me having an assault weapon pointed at my head, nothing. Of course, that would be a human thing to do, and he's more of a lawyer than a human.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to get David's side of this story is welcome to contact him and ask. Here is his Web site:

The number is (417) 288-4433.

legalschnauzer said...

@2:37 -- It appears you refuse to read the letter in question, or even the post, so I have no idea what you are trying to accomplish. A few thoughts:

(1) You say I don't know you from Eve, and I don't, but you had already pulled the same stunt on me, calling me bipolar without knowing me at all. BTW, I used the term "out of touch with reality" not as a clinical term, but simply because your comments are not based on the reality presented in the post.

(2) You reference families "fighting over scraps." But there is nothing in this post or any other post about my family that shows this is about "fighting over scraps." I don't want anyone's scraps, I just want justice for all of the things that have been stolen from us. Again, I see no sign you've read the post or the ex parte letter.

(3) Your comments apparently grow out of your bias toward me, not anything based in law or fact. You seem to claiming I "always take the low road," but you present not one example of me ever taking the low road. You called me bipolar without knowing me, so I would say you don't always ride on the high road yourself.

You seem to be an "expert" at noticing the speck in someone else's eye without recognizing the log in your own. In other words, you are a very shallow, self-centered person, and there is just no substance to your comments.

legalschnauzer said...

@4:52 -- You think the bipolar comment was made by a woman? If you don't mind me asking, why do you think so? That had never occurred to me. I just assumed it was a man.

Anonymous said...

Hang on this story seems to be:

1. Mother helps out son who has lost his home due to losing multiple defamation suits by cosigning lease for rental property.

2. Son fails to pay rent leading to landlord trying to evict him whilst also leaving mother on the hook for the rent.

3. Brother (David) intervenes to help his mother extricate herself from financial burden placed on her by son (Roger).

What exactly is David Shuler supposed to have done wrong here? Am I missing something?

Anonymous said...

Well given the fascination with tawdry tabloid topics on this blog I think its pretty clear which road Rogers on.

Anonymous said...

Is your mother legally liable for your missed rent? In that case it seems David Shuler has every right to step in and help his mother deal with the situation. If I was a lawyer and my mother was involved with an unexpected financial liability of course I would get involved to help, wouldn't it be weird for a son not to do that?

legalschnauzer said...

@4:41 -- Your comment is so ignorant of the facts that I should have deleted it. But I'll correct you instead, and you are welcome to research the pertinent posts if you want confirmation of what I say:

(1) I did not fail to pay the rent. Our rent always was timely paid, and that was going to continue to be the case, until the landlord informed me that we were being kicked out whether we paid the rent or not, citing a provision that was not in the lease.

(2) My mother was not on the hook for one penny beyond the 13-month lease for which she agreed to cosign, and that was an idea that did not come from Carol or me. I'm not sure who it came from.

(3) Read my brother's letter. Nowhere does he claim his client (our mother) was on the hook for anything. He simply says that she (and he) were determined to side with the landlord. A real lawyer would be sued for legal malpractice by my mother for failing to protect her interests against the landlord.

(4) There was no mess involving my mother, and David's own words show his purpose did not involve extricating her from anything. His sole interest was in hurting Carol and me. Again, his words, not mine.

(5) The only mess was one David helped create. My mother almost had to see a son buried, thanks to David's scheme that almost caused me to get my head blown off. She did see a daughter-in-law have her arm snapped in two. And like David, my mother never has voiced the first word of concern about that.

Don't know how I was raised among such a thoughtless, gutless, untrustworthy group of people. Thankfully, they weren't that way when I was growing up, but they are an embarrassment now. I'm ashamed to share the same last name with them.

Anonymous said...

What motivation does your brother have for conning you Roger? It sounds like you barely know each other.

Anonymous said...

The letter says that the rent was not paid. Is this true or false?

Anonymous said...

You should file a bar complaint against David Shuler. You probably have a low opinion of legal governing bodies, and I don't blame you. A lot of them are sorry. But this letter is one of the most over-the-top examples of improper ex parte communication I've ever seen. And it bears directly on the outcome of your case. I don't know if the Missouri Bar is worth a snot or not. But I see no way he can't be sanctioned for this. In some places, he would be disbarred. He certainly should be fined, suspended, admonished and . . . well, there might be other options in Missouri.

My point is this: The letter looks bad to you. It looks horrible to me, and the writer of it should be punished. I've practiced law for over 30 years, and I've never seen a communication to a judge anything like this.

In fact, it makes me question your brother's fitness for practicing law. I can't imagine what would prompt a semi-sane attorney to write a letter such as this one. People trying to defend him here simply have no idea how egregious this is. The judge who allowed this to happen must be a nincompoop, too.

Anonymous said...

Maybe your family just seemed nicer in the past because you weren't so paranoid then ...

legalschnauzer said...

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, @5:27. I'm going to give that some thought. You are right that I have a low opinion of legal governing bodies, and I suspect any of them in Missouri are about protecting rogue lawyers, not holding them accountable. But I might pursue a complaint anyway.

One thing that blows my mind about this is that he put it in writing. I would guess that many ex parte communication cases involve verbal statements. Not sure how he could defend this, when it's right there in black and white.

legalschnauzer said...

@5:28 -- Maybe your comments seemed more coherent in the past because you weren't so stupid then.

legalschnauzer said...

5:22 -- You are misquoting the letter. The letter says I had refused to pay the rent. That's not true and neither is any claim that we had failed to pay the rent.

The landlord said we were being kicked out regardless and did not ask for rent. The documents are in the court file and on this post. Here is a link to the Notice to Vacate that was attached to the door. You will notice that it makes no mention of rent not being paid, or any other violation of the lease on our part:

So to answer your question, the rent was paid.

legalschnauzer said...

I don't know, @5:18. You would have to ask him that. We had a good relationship the whole time we were growing up and well into early adulthood. I don't know when he turned against me for sure because he probably was taking regular digs behind my back.

legalschnauzer said...

@5:13 -- My mother was cosigner on a 13-month lease that was up -- everybody involved acknowledges the lease was up and was due to go month to month. I've published the lease here and there is nothing in it to suggest my mother was liable for anything beyond the 13-month period of the lease. My guess is that David wanted Cowherd to sue her, so he would have an excuse to be involved in the case and have a chance to screw us.

Short answer: my mother had zero liability. Here is the lease. Feel free to search it for any signs of liability beyond 13 months:

legalschnauzer said...

@5:11 -- Tawdry topics? Are you kidding me. Any point you might have, and I don't think you have one, gets weaker with each passing comment. Here's a suggestion: Give a rest if you can't make a point above a third-grade level.

legalschnauzer said...

@5:07 -- You are missing something because you apparently can't grasp facts:

(1) We didn't lose our home in Birmingham because of defamation lawsuits;

(2) I didn't fail to pay the rent, and I didn't leave my mother on the hook for anything;

(3) Brother didn't intervene to extricate mother from anything. His own letter shows that;

(4) You really have to ask what David Shuler has done wrong here? Have you read his letter? Do you even know what an ex parte communication is and that's it improper and prejudicial?

Again, you are missing the ability to comprehend facts and law. Seems to me that you are wasting your time even trying to comprehend something that appears to be beyond you.

Anonymous said...

Ever notice that the people defending David Shuler never mention the contents of his letter? That's because the letter, and the fact he wrote it to a judge, can't be defended.

LS apparently won't say it, but I will -- I think his brother is evil. And I think D. Shuler has a band of comment-writing scofflaws who are evil, too. I doubt there is an ounce of ethics among the whole nasty crowd (to borrow a phrase from Donald Trump).

Anonymous said...

Love it where you provide links to court documents that prove your brother is a lying piece of shit. I'm sure these commenters will be confused by the facts, but it's great to see you throw out the facts anyway.

Anonymous said...

I don't give a lick one way or the other about David Shuler. What I want to know is, was their mother any good as a mother? Because she sounds very easy to manipulate by BOTH of her sons!

Anonymous said...

Could David have hired a bunch of commenters? Seems absurd to me!

Anonymous said...

David is a lying piece of shit.

Anonymous said...

The most sickening part to me is where David S tells you he is trying to stay out of your business. Meanwhile, he's writing an ex parte letter to a judge in order to screw you in court case.

That is one sick puppy.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:35 --

I doubt David had to hire comment writers. But I wouldn't be surprised if word went out to come to his aid, even if you know nothing about the issues. If he did pay these folks, he was stupid because they are poor commenters and do a poor job of stating his case, whatever that might be.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:34 -- I can only speak for me, but she was a great mother until the time I got married, which correlated roughly with David becoming a lawyer.

Your reference to "manipulating" her is off point. I have little doubt David manipulates her, but I've lived more than 500 miles away, in Birmingham, for more than 30 years, and I've had little communication with her over past 25 years or so. Plus, I had nothing to manipulate her about. All I wanted was for her to respect my marriage, to treat Carol and me the way other siblings/spouses appeared to be treated. When it became obvious she wasn't going to do that, I backed away, and Carol and I were happy living our own lives in Alabama, free from family interference. We stopped making the 1,000-mile round trip to MO because it wasn't enjoyable and not worth the trouble.

The last thing we ever wanted was to wind up back in MO, and we hope like hell to get out of here ASAP. That, by the way, is not a knock on Springfield, MO, my hometown. It was a great place to grow up, and it's still a nice place, even though poverty clearly has skyrocketed since I was here last. But being near hateful family members and so-called "friends" is not healthy, and we want to escape it at the nearest opportunity.

Bottom line: My mother was a great mom, but a horrible mother-in-law. I truly don't even recognize her as the same person who raised me. Things come out of her mouth that I can't even begin to explain, that are 100 percent foreign to how I was raised.

Anonymous said...

Sounds to me like you married a woman who has soda crackers and grape juice for communion and your family just will not let it go. I have been dealing with the same problem 40 years.

Anonymous said...

You're not moving back to Bama are you? After all you've been through, I would think a blue state would be more to your liking.

legalschnauzer said...

Yes, we absolutely want to move back to Alabama. It's our home. It's where Carol was born and raised. I've lived there far more time than I've lived in MO. I just don't think whether a state is red or blue makes much difference in your day to day life.

If we can get back to Alabama, we might consider somewhere else to live someday. But I don't like being forced out of our home, via jail, a bogus foreclosure, etc. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth, and I want to make that bad taste go away by holding the appropriate people and entities accountable. I guess you could say we have unfinished business in Alabama, and I intend to make sure it is finished to our satisfaction.

If we leave Alabama again, I want it to be on our terms, not someone else's.

Anonymous said...

Have you shown this letter to your other siblings/family members? If so, how did they react. If they were anything other than appalled, it doesn't speak well of them.

legalschnauzer said...

No, I haven't shown it to any other family members. They can read it now on the blog if they are interested, but I doubt they care. And to put it bluntly, I don't care what they think. There's just not enough respect there at this point to worry about it.

S C said...

That pic of your brother is so wrong...i can't help but get tickled

e.a.f. said...

It is difficult to say why any one would write a letter like that to a judge regarding their sibling.

regarding your mother's comments regarding Carol, I have found that as people age they sometimes can be easily influenced and not see the world for what it is. They sometimes say strange things and some times it is simply better to put it down to a diminished capacity and get on with your own life.

Your brother, well he is a piece of work. Like they say, you can choose your friends but not your family. Some times in these cases its all about the money.

Anonymous said...

What is that thing on your brother's chin?

Did you photoshop something on there for some cheap lulz?

Anonymous said...

There's probably more to it than just money. Family members who are left behind to fester in their tiny, inbred boxes feel resentment toward the ones who got away. They are in church a few times a week hearing liberals demonized from the pulpit. I was a yellow dog dem who never made the switch when the Reagan revolution came about in the south. My family tolerated us with smirks and rolling eyes but when Obama came in, wow. I was told by my brother that anyone with attitudes like ours would have to move. My jaw dropped, of course, and then I reminded him that we did move away decades ago. We had a few fights about politics, our mother died, we decided not to talk politics anymore and we haven't. Your family situation seems a lot more toxic than mine and the best thing you can do is get away as fast as possible. Being three thousand miles away has made it possible to have a relationship with my family but I don't think it will help in your case.

legalschnauzer said...

Thanks for an insightful comment, @5:12. I'm guessing that my situation is more toxic than yours because there is a lawyer in the family. And you really nailed it, I think, with your comment regarding resentment because I was the one who left the nest. I've long sensed that might be an issue, even though our hometown is a perfectly nice place to live, and there is nothing to keep my siblings from leaving, if that's what they want. I guess it's easier to blame me for "something" than to actually have the courage to move away from home.

Anonymous said...

Aboard the Eliza Battle, the crew was discussing the movie "Three Days of the Condor".
Eliza Yancy remarked that Roger Shuler reminded her of Robert Redford. Mary Mac injected her opinion that after looking at the picture of David Shuler,there was no way Roger could resemble Redford. Eliza clarified her remark to say that she meant the situation in the movie for Redford reminds her of Shuler's situation. Both of them are trying to figure out who is after them and in the end it turns out to be the federal government.

Other David said...

I want as many people as possible to know that you have been under a full-bore, nonstop assault from David and his subordinates for quite some time. Most people don't realize that he has already revealed his plans. He revealed these plans in a letter bearing all of the hallmarks of having been written by a mischievous zob. Not only is his letter entirely lacking in logic, legally questionable, and utterly lacking in empathy, but his goal seems to be nothing less than to destroy a life.

legalschnauzer said...

"Other David" --

I have no way of knowing who you are, or if you have legitimate information. If you do have real information and are willing to share it, you are welcome to contact me via private e-mail ( or phone (205-381-5673). If you wish to have your ID protected, I would be happy to do that.

Anonymous said...