Allegation notice. Case descriptions are allegations from the cited record; outcomes are noted where adjudicated.
back to the report the litigation · chronological
Follow the Cases

The Litigation

The same entities, seen through the courts — the bankruptcies engineered to extinguish outside shareholders, the defrauded investors, the concealed offshore-nominee placements, and, later, the retaliatory suits used to bury the record. The key complaints and sworn depositions are inline below — with the §341 creditor examinations and the FBI Title III wiretap intercepts of Cane’s line — and the full record follows as a colour-coded chronological timeline.

Key complaints — by entity, read inline
RICO ENTERPRISEDiScalaDynamic / LATIMW MedicalDavi SkinSDI / GalaxyTarapaskiHearnWallace (personal)MOD / PHILLIPS

The core civil complaints of the enterprise, in the order of the entity chain — Dynamic → MW Medical → Davi Skin → SDI — each viewable here without leaving the page.

Westminster v. Dynamic Associates · 9 Apr 2001

The earliest civil action naming the public shell at the top of the chain — Dynamic Associates, the entity Cane and Wallace controlled and reverse-merged into Legal Access Technologies. It puts the enterprise's control of the vehicle on the record before the later placements began.

Westminster v. Dynamic Associates 1 / —
loading page…
  1. Top of the chain. The earliest civil action naming Dynamic Associates — the public shell Cane and Wallace controlled before its reverse-merger into Legal Access Technologies.
  2. A creditor action. The pleading is a debt claim on the shell's promissory note (later a $276,955 judgment), not a securities count — its value is timing and control, not the cause of action.
  3. Control on the record. It fixes who commanded the vehicle in the court file, on the eve of the placements that produced the offshore dump.
more in the full record ↓
Burwell v. Wallace · 25 May 2000

The complaint that pursued Wallace into MW Medical. It documents the conduct that the manufactured Chapter 11 — with Wallace installed as the sole secured creditor — was later used to extinguish.

Burwell v. Wallace 1 / —
loading page…
  1. Wallace into MW Medical. The action that pursued Wallace at the second shell in the chain, documenting the conduct the later bankruptcy was used to bury.
  2. Predates the Chapter 11. Filed before the 2002 reorganization, it records the dispute the insiders converted into a case that wiped the outside holders.
  3. The recurring defendant. Wallace named again — the same operator sued at entity after entity across the chain.
more in the full record ↓
Medley v. Wallace · 21 Apr 2006

The complaint that first exposed the Davi Skin certificate placements — Parrish Medley’s fraud and control claims against Wallace over the concealed promissory note and the offshore nominee structure positioned to seize the company. This matter also produced the Cane and Wallace depositions below.

Medley v. Wallace 1 / —
loading page…
  1. Exposed the Davi placements. The pleading that first surfaced the Davi Skin certificate placements and the concealed $200k promissory note behind the offshore conversion.
  2. Founder vs. operator. Brought by Parrish Medley, the public-face CEO, against Jan Wallace — pleading she used the note and a nominee structure to seize the company after the board authorized the offshore issuance.
  3. Fraud & control claims. Alleges fraud and breach over the concealed instrument; the matter produced the Cane and Wallace depositions shown below.
more in the full record ↓
Strand v. Wallace & SDI · 4 May 2006

The investor complaint naming Wallace and SDI, the shell-trafficking vehicle, tying the same operators to the SDI / Galaxy Gaming permutations and the §341 bankruptcy testimony.

Strand v. Wallace & SDI 1 / —
loading page…
  1. The SDI vehicle. The investor complaint naming Wallace and Secured Diversified Investment — the shell behind the SDI / Galaxy Gaming permutations.
  2. Salary-against-entity. It records insiders drawing salary and accruing claims against SDI while it was hollowed — the enterprise-member signature.
  3. Steered into bankruptcy. The dispute was converted into the §341 Chapter 11 with Wallace as the sole secured creditor she controlled.
more in the full record ↓
Cane v. Dhillon — Complaint · 16 Sep 2011

Cane, as plaintiff, sues the lawyer and firm that represented the parties exposing the enterprise. The complaint names Harmeet K. Dhillon and Dhillon & Smith LLP alongside the relator, Dennis Mandel, and Charles O'Kelley; it was involuntarily dismissed on October 18, 2012.

Cane v. Dhillon — Complaint 1 / —
loading page…
  1. Cane on offense. The securities lawyer becomes the plaintiff — a retaliatory defamation suit against the counsel (Harmeet K. Dhillon; Dhillon & Smith LLP) representing those who surfaced the fraud.
  2. The litigation-as-intimidation pattern. First of two Nevada civil actions Cane filed against parties connected to the investigation (the second: Cane v. Phillips, 2016).
  3. Dismissed. Involuntarily dismissed on October 18, 2012 — filed to burden and silence, not to prevail.
more in the full record ↓
Depositions — Cane & Wallace under oath

The sworn testimony taken in the Medley action — the architect and the operator, in their own words.

Cane deposition — Medley · 18 Dec 2006

Cane, the securities lawyer, examined under oath in the Medley action — her own account of the entity structuring and the promissory-note mechanics used to move value offshore.

Cane deposition — Medley 1 / —
loading page…
  1. The lawyer, under oath. Cane — securities counsel, beneficial owner and EDGAR filer — examined on the entity structuring and the note transactions.
  2. Her own account. First-person testimony on the structure the filings work to conceal, including the promissory-note mechanics at the center of the offshore conversion.
more in the full record ↓
Wallace deposition — Medley · 20 Dec 2006

Medley v. Wallace, No. CV 06-3370 (C.D. Cal.). Wallace, the operator, deposed two days after Cane — the CEO's sworn testimony on the same transactions.

Wallace deposition — Medley 1 / —
loading page…
  1. The operator, under oath. Wallace — installed CEO and manufactured secured creditor — deposed two days after Cane on the same transactions.
  2. Two voices, one scheme. Read beside Cane's testimony: the architect and the instrument describing the same conduct.
more in the full record ↓
Sworn testimony & trial record — Cane & Wallace under oath

The depositions, trial transcripts, creditors' examinations and §341 meetings where Cane or Wallace testified under oath — the enterprise's own words, on the record. The full Thomas & Wong four-day trial record (Feb 2008) and the SDI §341 testimony are laid out day-by-day on their scheme pages.

FBI wiretap intercepts — United States v. DiScala

Title III recordings of Cane's line (914-255-7892) captured in May 2014 during the $300M CodeSmart / Cubed pump-and-dump — the enterprise's operator caught in real time, in her own voice, on the government's tap. Each plays with a word-synced transcript, labelled turn by turn between Cane and DiScala.

The fraud record, chronological — 116 matters, 1983–2025

Every complaint, bankruptcy, indictment, hearing transcript and record-only event in the enterprise's litigation trail, in date order. The colour rail on each card flags the entity it touches. Preview opens the document inline; open loads the IPFS-hosted original in a new tab. (13 reprisal suits naming Phillips, Dhillon or Seyler as the target are omitted to keep the focus on the fraud.)

RICO ENTERPRISEDiScalaDynamic / LATIMW MedicalDavi SkinSDI / GalaxyTarapaskiHearnWallace (personal)MOD / PHILLIPS× clear