posted September 19, 2004 23:07            

Date: 19991221

Action No. 9903-13251, 9903-13252and 9903, 07003

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON

ACTION #9903-13251

BETWEEN:

TEAM TRADING ENTERPRISES LTD.

Plaintiff

- and -

JOHN BERGEN

Defendant

AND ACTION # 9903-13252

BETWEEN:

URBAN CASAVANT

Plaintiff

- and -

JOHN BERGEN

Defendant

AND ACTION #9903-07003

BETWEEN:

TEAM TRADING ENTERPRISES LTD., ERIC REID, CAROLY CASAVANT AND ALLAN MOEN

Plaintiffs

- and -

JOHN BERGEN

Defendant

APPEARANCES:

Greg Leia

Wolff Leia Huckell

for the plaintiffs

Barry King

for the defendant

_______________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

of

W. BREITKREUZ, Master in Chambers

_______________________________________________________

[1] This is an application by the various plaintiffs to consolidate the three actions. I will refer to the various actions in the order listed in the style of cause in this memorandum as action number 1, 2, and 3.

[2] I have compared the three actions in all the permutations and combinations possible. To be more precise, I compared the pleadings in number 1 with the pleadings in numbers 2 and 3, and compared pleadings in number 2 with number 3.

[3] It is apparent from the styles of cause that there is a common defendant but that the plaintiffs in each case are different. In actions number 1 and 2 there is only one plaintiff, one of whom is also a plaintiff in action number 3 but is not a plaintiff in action number 2, and the plaintiff in action number 2 is not a plaintiff in either actions number 1 and 3.

[4] Action number 1 is an action for specific performance of the sale of shares of Radar Acquisitions Corp., and alternatively judgment in the amount of the trading value of the shares.

[5] Action number 2 also involves shares of the same company but it does not involve the purchase by the plaintiff of any of the defendant’s shares in that company; it is an action by the plaintiff for the payment by the defendant for services provided by the plaintiff to the defendant for “investor relations services to increase the price of the common shares of Radar Acquisitions Corp.”. The payment for these services was to be in the form of the transfer of a certain motor home alleged by the plaintiff to have a value of $300,000.00.

[6] It is apparent that apart from the defendant being the same person as in the first action, and the subject-matter of the law suit being broadly related to the shares of Radar Acquisitions Corp., there is no other similarity that would warrant consolidating these two actions.

[7] Action number 3 is a much more complex action than either actions number 1 and number 2.

[8] The statement of claim consists of 26 numbered paragraphs plus the prayer which consists of 17 sub-items. I will set out some of the paragraphs to demonstrate how prejudicial it would be to the parties in the other two actions to consolidate their actions with action number 3:

7. The shares to be delivered to Ken Hodgson were delivered to Ken Hodgson when Pan Pacific Gem Industry (Tiajin) Co. Ltd. paid for 100,000 common share of Radar Acquisitions Corp. in December 1998 and Ken Hodgson received delivery of such shares and as such any shares which were designated to be delivered to Ken Hodgson have been assigned to Allan Moen pursuant to collateral agreements with Pan Pacific Gem Industry (Tiajin) Co. Ltd. The Defendant has no obligations to Ken Hodgson and Plaintiffs have no obligation as a result of the agreements referred to in Paragraph 5.

. . . . .

9. Pursuant to an agreement dated November 9, 1994, amongst Scorpio Investments Ltd., Bellis Securities (BVI) Ltd., Radar Acquisitions Corp. and Montreal Trust Company of Canada (“Founders Escrow Agreement”), Scorpio Investments Ltd. and Bellis Securities (BVI) Ltd. agreed to deposit with Montreal Trust Company of Canada 750,000 shares (“Founders Escrow Shares”) which were to be released as follows:

(i) 250,000 on November 15, 1996;

(ii) 250,000 on November 15, 1997; and

(iii) 250,000 on November 25, 1998

10. Pursuant to an agreement between Scorpio Investments Ltd., Bellis Securites (BVI) Ltd. and John Bergen, the Founders Escrow Shares were assigned to John Bergen by Scorpio Investments Ltd. and Bellis Securites (BVI) Ltd.

11. Pursuant to an agreement in writing dated November 15, 1995 (“Sundial Escrow Agreement”) amongst Sundian Ammonite Corp., Radar Acquisitions Corp. and the Montreal Trust Company of Canada, 2,1000,000 shares (Sundial Escrow Shares”) were deposited with Montreal Trust Company of Canada by Sundial Ammonite Corp. to be released as follows:

(a) as to 228,000 shares (“Sundial Time Escrow Shares”), 76,000 were to be released on November 15, 1996, 76,000 to be released on November 15, 1997 and 76,000 to be released on November 15, 1998;

(b) as to the 1,872,000 shares (“Sundial Performance Escrow Shares”) these shares were to be released on the basis of 1 share for each $0.30 spent on exploration and development on the Sundial Ammonite Properties and/or $0.30 gross revenue from sales arising from the Sundial Ammonite Properties.

[9] The prejudice arising from the proposed consolidation relates to both the time consumption and the expense to the parties of being involved in discoveries and trial in matters that cannot possibly be related. In addition there is the potential prejudice to the defendant of being tainted with something akin to similar fact evidence, in spite of my earlier indication that there is no connection between the three actions. Nor is there any danger of different judges coming to different conclusions. The simple answer to that is that the facts are so different that different conclusions don’t even need justification.

[10] The principles and cases are discussed in the Civil Procedure Guide, Stevenson and Côté. I think the pleadings in the actions before me are so distantly or remotely connected to each other that a discussion of the principles or authorities is unnecessary.

[11] I think the application should be dismissed with costs to the defendant in any event of the cause. There should be one set of costs only and taxation should be adjourned to the end of the proceedings.

HEARD on November 12th, 1999.

DATED at Edmonton, Alberta this 21 day of December, 1999.

__________________________

W. BREITKREUZ

M.C. C.Q.B.A.

..............................

posted September 20, 2004 01:24            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tradingpennys:
last 2 ....
4. Team Trading Enterprises Ltd. v. Bergen (with hits)
Alberta : Court of Queen's Bench
Relevance: 52%, Size: 28 KB, Date: 19th December, 2000
--------------
5. Income Tax Regulations, [C.R.C., c. 945] >> SCHEDULE VII (with hits)
Canada: Consolidated Regulations of Canada
Relevance: 50%, Size: 951 KB

---

Pennys, was the case ever brought to trial? Any judgements rendered? Was Urban or family ever found liable for any of the complaint?

[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 20, 2004).]

posted September 20, 2004 04:05            

quote:

---

Originally posted by noahltl:
Pennys, was the case ever brought to trial? Any judgements rendered? Was Urban or family ever found liable for any of the complaint?

[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 20, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by noahltl (edited September 20, 2004).]

---

posted September 20, 2004 04:08            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tradingpennys:
last 2 ....
4. Team Trading Enterprises Ltd. v. Bergen (with hits)
Alberta : Court of Queen's Bench
Relevance: 52%, Size: 28 KB, Date: 19th December, 2000 http://www.canlii.org/ab/cas/abqb/2000/2000abqb963.html

--------------
5. Income Tax Regulations, [C.R.C., c. 945] >> SCHEDULE VII (with hits)
Canada: Consolidated Regulations of Canada
Relevance: 50%, Size: 951 KB

---

posted September 20, 2004 09:50            

5) The Casavant Family consists of 22 members who are related to Urban Casavant. Their respective share holdings are reported separately from Urban Casavant. As a Group, the Casavant Family holds 10.7% of the Company's shares. Of this amount 100% are Rule 144 shares. There is no Casavant Family share pooling agreement, voting trust and/or other agreements relating to the shares in effect at this time. The Casavant Family includes: Albert Casavant (3,000,000); Brandy Casavant (2,000,000); Brad Casavant (500,000); Chantelle Casavant (2,000,000); Craig Casavant (2,000,000); Dale Casavant (50,000,000);Denise Casavant (30,000,000); Felix & Marlene Casavant (1,000,000); Gerry & Betty Casavant (300,000); Harvey & Gloria Casavant (1,000,000); Justin Casavant (2,000,000); Kyle Casavant (500,000); Marina Casavant (500,000); Max Casavant (10,000,000); Ray Casavant (3,000,000); Ron Casavant (30,000,000); Ryan Casavant (500,000); Trevor Casavant (2,000,000); and Vic Casavant (30,000,000).

posted September 20, 2004 10:31            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TradingWizard:
Noah what happen to byrd?
Send him all my best too. Thanks.

---

Wiz, I have seen him posting over at p r o b o a r d s 32.

posted September 20, 2004 10:47            

quote:

---

Originally posted by glassman:
grasshopper, until there ARE daimonds, and I mean a LOT diamonds, this stock is nothing more than UC selling tickets to a show that may or may not actually have an opening night.....
anybody who says anything different is, to use your words, a MORON. at 483+ billion shares, you have to ignore a lot of DD to convince yourself this is a BUY......

---

Hey Glassman...the diamond statement is probably the only thing you've posted here that I've seen in the last couple of weeks that has made any sense. Until diamonds are found, we have nothing.

Could you clarify what amount of diamonds you believe we need in order to put a decent PPS on CMKX? Assuming you are right with the 483billion+ shares, what ratio of diamonds to tons of kimberlite would justify a play of the century?

The .5 carat / ton of kimberlite has been stated as an excellent ratio to warrant mining. Would that number be adequate, or maybe 1 carat/ton? The huge Ekati diamond find has come in at .9ct/ton with estimates rising to 1ct/ton. This is considered outstanding. Other minerals will enhance the find, for sure.
http://www.mining-technology.com/projects/ekati/

Although I wouldn't call people morons for having faith in this company, some posters may think otherwise. I'm betting on something big.

There is no reason for any on this board to get hostile. I read the posts and don't post much, but do get so frustrated when people criticize each other.

Until the diamond content is disclosed, we will be wandering around just in anticipation. It will take, in my opinion, another couple of months to get the core samples analyzed and the location of future research disclosed. Afterwards, it will be at least 2 years before we start mining. This will be an awesome stock play only if we find diamonds.

posted September 20, 2004 11:30            

Maybe this is how things get mixed up on this thread and things get started.

Re your post above to Glassman about "moron".
He was responding to the following post made by "Grasshopper":

Sorry folks, I just can't get enough of these jokers! I'll never claim to be any kind of trading wizard, but I feel that I can read into the intentions of the maroons that persistently post negativity on the board without backing it up with facts...
---------------------------------------------

It is important to read all the posts and references. Then, maybe, there will be some understanding of posts such as Glassman's.

No offense.

posted September 20, 2004 11:36            

quote:

---

Originally posted by WorkAHolic:

Hey Glassman...the diamond statement is probably the only thing you've posted here that I've seen in the last couple of weeks that has made any sense. Until diamonds are found, we have nothing.

Could you clarify what amount of diamonds you believe we need in order to put a decent PPS on CMKX? Assuming you are right with the 483billion+ shares, what ratio of diamonds to tons of kimberlite would justify a play of the century?

The .5 carat / ton of kimberlite has been stated as an excellent ratio to warrant mining. Would that number be adequate, or maybe 1 carat/ton? The huge Ekati diamond find has come in at .9ct/ton with estimates rising to 1ct/ton. This is considered outstanding. Other minerals will enhance the find, for sure.
http://www.mining-technology.com/projects/ekati/

Although I wouldn't call people morons for having faith in this company, some posters may think otherwise. I'm betting on something big.

There is no reason for any on this board to get hostile. I read the posts and don't post much, but do get so frustrated when people criticize each other.

Until the diamond content is disclosed, we will be wandering around just in anticipation. It will take, in my opinion, another couple of months to get the core samples analyzed and the location of future research disclosed. Afterwards, it will be at least 2 years before we start mining. This will be an awesome stock play only if we find diamonds.

Thanks for pointing that out. Everything else is somewhat elementary.

---

the only thing i've posted here that makes sense?????

sense to who?

you didn't read my posts PRIOR to the new OS where I TOLD YOU they were dumping shares on the market?

or that the NSS would NOT affect the PPS (if it even exists)

or that the dividends were just an elaborate form of even more dilution??

LOL......

posted September 20, 2004 11:48            

NSDM SELECTING J.V. PARTNERS FOR MANITOBA CLAIMS
BELLINGHAM , WA , September 15, 2004/PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/--

North Star Diamonds, Inc. (NQB Pink Sheets: NSDM) is reviewing proposals of potential joint venture partners for development of several Manitoba diamond claims.

While NSDM will be drilling several of its own claims this fall, the company is also considering joint venture partners to develop several additional claims. Presently, NSDM has over 110,000 acres of strategically claimed land and it will be physically and financially impossible to drill all the targets within the near future.

NSDM is acquiring additional land with the purpose of joint ventures in the future. Walter Stunder states “We expect this strategy to benefit NSDM shareholders since the land is acquired with the company’s newly developed Computer Assisted Geophysical System (CAGS).

Also, Walter Stunder is very pleased with the volume of diamond sales through the e-commerce website which has been operating successfully. NSDM is still on track to become profitable by the end of September.

NSDM is pleased to announce that the diamond inventory has been increased from $8,000,000 to $18,000,000. Further increases will be announced in the future.

For further information on NSDM, visit www.northstardiamonds.net

NOTE: Based on the above I contacted NSDM to see if they might give some info. (If you don't ask you don't receive.)

Dear XXXX

Yes, we are in contact with several companies, including UCAD and CMKS on several
joint ventures. An announcement will be made when a jv is concluded.

Regards,

Walter Stunder, President and CEO
North Star Diamonds, Inc.
***********************************************************

This speaks for itself, so I need not add to it.
This 'pulled' from Sterlings Board and speaks for itself. I am just posting it here.

BarTD67
****************************************

I cannot confirm nor deny that this person inquired with North Star about their JV inquiries. I, being the "proof is in the pudding-type" will email MY OWN inquiry to North Star and see if they give me the same answer. If they do, as yankdawg says, WHOOHOO! (I'm assuming CMKS is a typo).
DLil

_________________
Do you believe, or do you just say you believe? http://www.xenobuzz.com/

posted September 20, 2004 11:57            

CORPORATE ACTION NOTICE
September 9, 2004
Security Held: CMKM Diamonds Inc.
CUSIP: XXXXXX
Corporate Action Event: Stock Distribution
Record Date: August 31, 2004
Payable Date: October 1, 2004

posted September 20, 2004 11:57            

quote:

---

Originally posted by glassman:
the only thing i've posted here that makes sense?????

sense to who?

you didn't read my posts PRIOR to the new OS where I TOLD YOU they were dumping shares on the market?

or that the NSS would NOT affect the PPS (if it even exists)

or that the dividends were just an elaborate form of even more dilution??

LOL......

---

I stand by my statement. That's (finding diamonds) the only thing that makes sense to ME. I'm the only one I want to impress. Your statements are only elaborate forms of theory. You have no proof of dumping nor do you have any proof that the NSS will not affect this stock. Show it to all of us. Don't for one minute think that I don't have a grasp on this stock. You make statements as fact, yet they are not fact. Only assumptions. I've read your posts. I don't necessarily agree with all of them.

Why the defensive statements. You are laughing at what?

I'll give you a fact. Your posts have been so tainted that I believe most people don't even care to read them.

Hey Wallace...I don't think Glassman needs for you to defend him. What makes you think you can, anyway.

You guys have affectively made this board hard to come back to and read. I guess that's what you set out to do.

Congratulations...

posted September 20, 2004 13:27            

quote:

---

Originally posted by WorkAHolic:

I stand by my statement. That's (finding diamonds) the only thing that makes sense to ME. I'm the only one I want to impress. Your statements are only elaborate forms of theory. You have no proof of dumping nor do you have any proof that the NSS will not affect this stock. Show it to all of us. Don't for one minute think that I don't have a grasp on this stock. You make statements as fact, yet they are not fact. Only assumptions. I've read your posts. I don't necessarily agree with all of them.

Why the defensive statements. You are laughing at what?

I'll give you a fact. Your posts have been so tainted that I believe most people don't even care to read them.

Hey Wallace...I don't think Glassman needs for you to defend him. What makes you think you can, anyway.

You guys have affectively made this board hard to come back to and read. I guess that's what you set out to do.

Congratulations...

[This message has been edited by WorkAHolic (edited September 20, 2004).]

---

posted September 20, 2004 13:31            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TradingWizard:
I don't know if this is any good for you guys but I thought I share here. I received this notice from TDwaterhouse on Friday and here what it said:

CORPORATE ACTION NOTICE
September 9, 2004
Security Held: CMKM Diamonds Inc.
CUSIP: XXXXXX
Corporate Action Event: Stock Distribution
Record Date: August 31, 2004
Payable Date: October 1, 2004

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
We have received notification that the company has declared a stock distribution, which is effected by the issuance to shareholders as of record date, 0.0256 of restricted share of Casavant International Mining for each common share of CMKM Diamonds Inc. held. The status of fractional shares has yet to be determined.

---

posted September 20, 2004 13:36            

Posted by: zeninvestor32
In reply to: ACTX who wrote msg# 13434 Date:9/20/2004 11:10:08 AM
Post #of 13458

ACTX I AGREE

CMKX's visa card is another exercise in pathetic futility. The fees are outrageous and why do I want one when the stock is .0003. And why am I sounding acidic towards all this? Because I have NO PROBLEM if everyone calls and cancels their vegas plans and nobody signs up for the visa. Let that be a clear communication to management that in the future we would appreciate it if they stop all the BS marketing until there is a REASON for these things to exist. What's next? Setting up a charity for us to donate our as-of-yet-unrealized profits to?

Z
********
now...here is my email:
Subj: About UCAD/CMKX Party
Date: 9/20/04 12:12:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time
From: TheCWExperience
To: chris@uscanadianminerals.com
CC: TheCWExperience

hi...unfortunately due to the lack of progression of cmkx...the party of 6 for'c weekes' under the email of 'thecwexperience@hotmail.com' will be canceling registration....the expenses associated with attending the vegas party for the 6 members of our family is not feasible...the raffle for a kia or a debit card that can be obtained in conjunction with banking services IS NOT an incentive...however i will be watching the company and if changes are evident the trip will be up for reconsideration....hopefully in the future i can address the company in a more positive note..thanks for your time
**************

In conclusion...
Now maybe i'm pms'ing or it's too close to time & can't see the forest for the trees....i apologize if my post offends what the company is trying to accomplish...but i'd be a liar if i did not express some degree of dissatisfaction...note i said degree...please board do not banish me or anything *smile* ...i needed to get this off of my chest...thank you guys for listening.....

***BTW 6.8 MIL & HOLDING TIGHT!!****

------------------

posted September 20, 2004 13:47            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Upside:
Thanks right42day, I called the 775 area code # direct and that was the right #. I spoke with a woman named Diana. She told me that as of 8/18 the a/s was 800 billion. I asked her how current her information was and she said they're about a month behind in updating the files so if the a/s was changed again after 8/18, she probably would not have that information yet. I also asked her if there was any legal limit on the amount a company could authorize. She said no as Nevada is an unregulated state.

---

posted September 20, 2004 14:20            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tradingpennys:
---------
Unregulated state ... hmm.. that's probly why Urban selected Nevada. I think he is going to play this(/us) to the hilt. He obviously has had plenty of practice. And it appears his whole family knows how to WORK IT!
No wonder he hired Glenn. When Glenn was brought into the picture, that was a red flag. I have never thought of Glenn working for "us". In all actuality Glenn could be working against "us". In CYA'ing Urban and all his accumilated millions.
I doubt this company will be reporting EVER. Once someone lies to you they will do it again. Lies and deception are basically the same thing. We have experienced both from this company and then they ask "us" to trust "them". YEAH RIGHT! <gggggrrrrrrooowwwlllllll>

---

posted September 20, 2004 14:51            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tgrant:
I dont own this stock or realy follow the thread, but this past weekend I was in Reading pennsylvania for the Lucas oil Nationals. when I was walking through the pits i saw the CMKX extreme machine. i was very surpsrised to see it, they were running in the event. they also had a big rig and a hummer h2 all letered up with "casavant mining, got cmkx?" just thought I would let you all know, good luck

---

posted September 20, 2004 14:57            

quote:

---

Originally posted by HarryHar:
Can someone who understands all that was posted about the lawsuits summarize for us non-legal people what exactly Urban was being sued for, and what Urban later was suing for? Thanks in advance. I read over it but I'm still in the clouds...

---

Harry, it is very difficult to get this whole story, having only chapters 2,3 and 4 of a five or more chapter story.

Missing are the original complaint which would have spelled out the charges. Also missing is the last chapter, the courts final judgement. These are the two most important documents to have.

From chapter two (para 16), we get an idea of what occured:

****************************************

[16] The defendants allege that the transactions that give rise to the claim in these proceedings arose out of a decision in June 1998 to acquire the shares of Radar, basically a dormant shell that owned some ammonite properties in northern Saskatchewan, to use as a structure to develop a mining venture in northern Saskatchewan. A group of investors agreed to buy the control block of Radar from John Bergen. The agreements were that Bergen would transfer 2.5 million shares to 5 individuals, who did not include Urban Casavant, but did include Casavant’s wife, children, brother-in-law, and Ken Hodgson. The consideration paid for the shares at that time was 4 cents a share. According to the defendants, at the end of July 1998, the first payment on the Bergen block was made, and half the shares in the Bergen control block were delivered. The defendants allege that when the stock of Radar increased from 10 cents to 80 cents a share, all the new owners of the control block wanted to do a private placement in Colorado. They then allege that the relationship among the members of the control block broke down in late 1998. The defendants allege that there was an informal pooling arrangement in place pursuant to which all members of the group would wait for the stock to reach $10.00 per share before selling any. The defendants allege that not all parties respected the pooling agreement, some sold their shares into the market, and the allegations and counter allegations began.

*****************************************

From this it appears that a group of investors decided to acquire Radar Acquisition Corp. The defendant White Bear Construction and Logsdons are one of those investors. Other invevstors pay in dollars and or equipment and a puchase is made of Radar. There is an agreement between investors not to sell any shares until it reaches $10 per share. Some of those investors allegedly breach that agreement and the deal falls apart. White Bear sues, and Urban responds that nothing was done to offend White Bear, quite the contrary, it is implied that White Bear is one of those breaching the restrictions on selling.

Without the final judgement, we have no idea who is the offending party in this matter. I hope Pennys is able to find the rest, because it certainly isn't fair to UC and family to simpley put out half of an allegation without all of the facts.

posted September 20, 2004 15:28            

Plaintiff

- and -

JOHN BERGEN

Defendant

posted September 20, 2004 15:35            

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON

BETWEEN:

WHITE BEAR CONSTRUCTION LTD., KEN HODGSON

AND SHARON HODGSON

Plaintiffs

- and -

URBAN CASAVANT, ALLAN MOEN, MCM MINERALS INC.,

FULL TIME MANAGEMENT INC., AND PAN PACIFIC GEM

INDUSTRY (TIANJIN) CO., LTD.

Defendants

posted September 20, 2004 15:43            

I didn't bother going through the pasted info and I believed UC was a defendant.

(I still didn't read)

posted September 20, 2004 15:49            

No offense, but "try reading a little closer"? LMAO

Looks like the above one group sued and UC and others countersued.

posted September 20, 2004 15:51            

complaintiff

posted September 20, 2004 16:04            

No problem sdrobert, but do "try to read a little closer". LOL

posted September 20, 2004 16:05            

divy for casavant intl mining.