Manos continued to pressure me into finding an attorney to represent me.

Looking back, I find it easy to understand why Manos did this.

If I found an attorney that amended my third complaint and I had not yet settled the case with the defendants, Manos could rule against me and I would have to blame it on my attorney's efforts for that dismissal.

By finding an attorney, I would have to agree to pay the attorney "something" and the expenditures of cash to cover my attorney's fees would limit the cash I would have to spend on the depositions and transcripts I would need for trial.

As I would have to spend time explaining my case to an attorney, that time would not be spent on pursuing my case.

And once I did get an attorney, it was most likely that the attorney would not spend the time in pursuing my case as I had done.

I would now become a part of the "real legal mess" that covers the courtrooms and legal profession!

When I interviewed prospective attorneys, I got the same response time and time again.

Most of the attorneys like my case with the exception of suing all the lawyers. Each time the prospective attorney would say,

"Do we have to sue all the attorneys?"

I laugh now at these statements because there are many attorneys that do not want to make any enemies. If they sue an attorney, then the firm of that attorney might "someday" retaliate by suing that attorney.

It is interesting to note that I had filed a complaint with the Medina County Bar Association against Greg Happ for his unethical practice and the fact that Happ had perjured himself in federal bankruptcy court.

Five Medina County attorneys met to "review" my facts and voted three to two not to do anything to Happ.

This impartial group of civic-minded professionals was made up of an attorney running in the Democratic Party on the same ticket that Happ was running for re-election as County Prosecutor. This man was running for judge! Additionally, another attorney on the five-person panel had a brother running for a county office and his posters were right next to Happ's posters in every yard that displayed the election posters!

A scandal right before the election, which would have removed Happ as an attorney, would smear both the candidate for judge as well as the attorney's brother running with Happ on the same ticket for public office.

I later filed a complaint with the Ohio Bar Association and was told that I could not bring the charges up while there was a lawsuit pending. They said that there were no statutes of limitations regarding my claims against attorneys and that after the trial, I could pursue the disbarment of the attorneys.

I felt it necessary to write this book before starting on the next phase of disbarment since I wanted to have the details of their frauds fresh in my mind for publishing purposes. By the time you are reading this book, be assured that I will have filed formal complaints with the Ohio Bar and I will see if justice will prevail here.

I remember meeting James Davis over the telephone. He made me feel as if he had a genuine interest in seeing justice prevail and after about two hours on the telephone, we made an appointment to meet at his office and go over my case and the evidence that I had acquired.

Davis was the former law director of Cleveland and he had an independent practice taking cases that he felt had merit.

After several meetings in his downtown office, Jim had agreed to take my case providing that I paid all out of pocket expenses and his hourly fees.

Since I had expected money from my business from time to time, I agreed to pay Davis in "lump sums" as I obtained the money. I had a loss carry-forward of $400,000 from the money that I had loaned to Pro Arts. This represented not only part of my damages in the lawsuit, but it gave me a tax write-off that I could apply to my income as I earned money at the present and in the future.

Davis prepared my Third Amended Complaint incorporating all of the original conspirators of my first lawsuit except for Treffinger, Macon, Page and Rollins. Those conspirators had defrauded the estate out of the $500,000 pre-petitioned claim, but in reality, only received $5,000 of the first payout money distributed by Dietrich in his October 28, 1983 letter to the creditors.

This amount was small potatoes compared to the money the other defendants had stolen from the estate and me.

Davis and I had met with Manos in his chambers in order to obtain the "Leave To Plea" which would allow us to amend my lawsuit. It was at this time that Manos stated to Davis and me:

"I think I can get Ted a low six figure settlement on this case."

What Manos did not realize was the fact that I had been offered a $240,000 settlement from Stu Hastings with respect to my claims against Roetzel & Andress, Dietrich, Stevenson and Best!

The only thing that I thought was bad about their offer was the manner of payment. They wanted to pay me $8,000 per year for 30 years!

I really could not accept this offer for several reasons. Firstly, my brother, Mike, had yet to obtain an attorney to represent his interests in the lawsuit. Since Mike was very irrational and threatening each time he interviewed a prospective attorney, his manner immediately turned off the attorney. The potential attorney probably felt that if the case went against Mike through the attorney's efforts, Mike might become a potential future threat against that attorney. If I settled my lawsuits with the conspirators, Mike might never have found an attorney to represent him. I had the evidence to prove the case, and without me, the case would never be proven.

Secondly, I wanted all the money at time of settlement. I would not need any money when I was seventy years old. If I could not earn a few million dollars by myself by the time I was at least sixty, I would resign myself to living off my social security payments and Medicare.

Thirdly, I wanted the creditors and people in general to know the massive frauds that these conspirators had committed without being punished by the law. In essence, these people operated the bankruptcy fraudulently ABOVE THE LAW.

With all the suffering my family and I endured, I could not let this pass.

When Davis told Manos that the low six figure settlement was totally out of the question, Davis also stated that one defendant had offered $100,000 to settle while another had offered $240,000 to settle.

Manos sat back in his chair and looked quite surprised! All the time I had spent discussing my damages to Manos appeared to be in vain. Manos, up to this time, probably looked at my case as a small ant up against a giant. Now, it appeared that Manos was taking my claims a little more seriously. Yet, later I would be surprised by Manos' true feelings about the case.

Manos gave Davis the order affirming Davis' motion to amend and a few months later, Davis filed my Third Amended Complaint with the understanding that I could not amend my complaint again until Manos had addressed the Conspirators' Motions For Summary Judgment.

I assumed that Davis had pleaded my damages in the RICO fashion, which is absolutely necessary in order to have the RICO Complaint, established in Manos' Court.