In a last nail in the coffin scenario James Damiano's movie "Eleven Years" draws the straw that breaks the camel's back, rivets Bob Dylan to his secret past of plagiarism and rewrites musical history"......Virtue Films

Trailer Preview



Bob Dylan fooled the world for decades claiming to have written many of the melodies to his hit songs when in fact most of the melodies were from preexisting songs that he did not write, including Blowin In The Wind.










"In barely over a year, a young plagiarist had been reborn as a songwriter of substance, and his first album of fully realized original material got the 1960s off their musical starting block" 


 Send this website to someone



Preview Trailer


Eleven Years

 Bob Dylan's Stealing of James Damiano's Songs 


Now on Dvd




Cardozo in Favor of Damiano



Quoted from Cardozo Law Journal

 Additionally, ruling that a qualified reporter’s privilege existed regarding an interview Dylan gave where he claimed he had writer’s block demonstrates the willingness of courts to protect the big name musician instead of the original composer, thereby endorsing a minor form of plagiarism.

However, protecting Bob Dylan in this one instance may differ in a case where the musician is not well known or does not have a reputation of borrowing from other musicians since the beginning of his career.

Indeed, Bob Dylan disclaiming he has writer’s block can give rise to an inference for a reasonable jury to believe that it is more likely that he copied Damiano’s song if the jury heard that he had writer’s block, as compared to the jury not hearing that he had writer’s block.

Therefore, by deeming the requested evidence in the motion to compel irrelevant, it is not clear whether or not Bob Dylan did in fact plagiarize James Damiano’s song or was merely influenced by his music.

Hence, if Damiano’s musicologist’s theory had been presented to the court and was believed as true, it is very possible that Bob Dylan plagiarized James Damiano’s song.

On the other hand, if a contrary theory was presented, one that does not involve the Schenker analysis, it is possible that Bob Dylan was only influenced by Damiano’s song and used that influence to write Dignity, not to copy Steel Guitars as his own.

Nevertheless, it is still unclear whether the court endorsed Bob Dylan’s potential plagiarism because of whom he was or if the court was willing to turn a blind eye to the alleged plagiarism.

This court’s behavior further demonstrates how a court tolerating the use of another’s song may give an incentive to plagiarize. If a court is willing to dismiss a motion to compel discovery that could prove plagiarism, a court may very well do the same for another musician, even if he or she is not as well known as Bob Dylan.


Contact us at






Trailer to Eleven Years

Bob Dylan's Stealing of James Damiano's Songs



What bob dylan did and even admitted to in a April 04, 2004 interview with Robert Hilburn of the L.A. Times was to simply change the words to existing melodies then credited his name to the entire song. Dylan even admitted that he wrote 'Blowin' in the Wind' in 10 minutes by simply changing the words to the old spirtual song 'No More Auction Block"

The movie "Eleven Years" cites by comparison Dylan's complicity in these blatant thefts. The viewer will be stunned shocked and even appalled by how long Dylan was able to execute this devious process not to mention the stunning and revealing similarities of the songs.

In an article written by Alexander T. Deley titled To Catch a Master Thief Mr. Deley writes;

Dylan is also no stranger to controversy regarding his work. An 11-year, still-unresolved lawsuit filed against him by songwriter James Damiano is particularly telling.

Damiano alleges that Dylan, quite ironically given the title, plagiarized the song “Dignity” from Damiano. Damiano had repeatedly met Dylan and submitted songs to Dylan’s parent label CBS.

This is especially telling as “Dignity” was Dylan’s only ‘hit’ record of the 1990s and seems quite different from much of Dylan’s earlier work or other work that he was producing during that period.

In an article titled Folk Lies Jonny Whiteside wrote:

Just type “Bob Dylan plagiarism” into your friendly search engine, and a plethora of questionable circumstances pop up, enrobing the singer almost as completely as his years of reflexive media fawning have. Documented from his teenage start, when he submitted a hand written, thinly revised version of country star Hank Snow’s “Little Buddy” for publication as an original poem, to his 1963 pilferage of Irish poet Dominic Behan’s “Patriot Game”‘s melody for the similarly slanted Dylan tune “With God on Our Side” to songwriter James Damiano’s ongoing multimillion dollar copyright infringement suit (alleging Dylan’s Grammy-nominated “Dignity” is nothing but an altered version of Damiano’s “Steel Guitars”) to the naked “Red Sails in the Sunset” melody heist for the song “Beyond The Horizon” on his Modern Times album, up through the recent Confessions of a Yakuza–Love & Theft plagiarism charges (Love & Theft? Calling Dr. Freud!), the Timrod controversy, even the numerous passages of Proust and Jack London that (re) appear in the text of Dylan’s autobiography, it’s a deep, dark thicket of thoroughly damning and apparently chronic bootlegging. Naturally, Dylan has said nothing publicly about any of these, but he already spent over three million dollars defending himself against one-time affiliate Damiano–the classic delay-to-destroy court room technique.








For those of you who know Dignity" This the original version of Dignity recorded by James Damiano, Big Danny Gallagher and Mario Phillipps was recorded in 1986



For Sale:  

The film rights to Eleven Years are for sale . All inquiries are to be mailed to

To be sure we do not miss your inquiry please type Film Rights in the subject line.

Please keep in mind that "Eleven Years" is the biggest story in the history of rock and roll about the most revered songwriter ever to live.


Eleven Years Trailer



For the last nineteen years (19) as of March 15, 1996 Bob Dylan has utilized a "Gag Order" against James Damiano which designate all discovery materials produced in the lawsuit confidential. All of these discovery  materials incriminate and implicate Bob Dylan in his plagiarisms against James Damiano.



Christine Boutsikaris



About something else

I might have lied

Something personal

I might deny

Another time

I might have tried

About something else

I might have lied

I have faith

I can do without

Be the fool

Find cause to doubt

If I didn't believe

I wouldn't try

To live the truth

I'd live a lie


 Eleven Years Bob Dylan Discussion




Bob Dylan





Eleven Years

Bob Dylan's Stealing of James Damiano's  Songs

@ link below


I was sitting in a downtown

Village coffeehouse

Listening to the  musician

Strummin the strings

Just wandering somewhere

In a daze of thoughts

Among a million other things

He took a break

Put down the guitar

Came down off the stage

Walked over to my table

Sat down to talk

Said hello  through the haze

Lost days and forgotten years

Washed away from tears

Spoke just ten words

And I knew him well

And everyone of his fears

He claimed to be a Christian

With fierce certainty

believed for sure

He'd be saved through


Made me read the Bible

Wanted me to see

Dragged me into his home

To pray over me

Lost days and forgotten years

Washed away by tears

Spoke just ten words

And I Knew him well

And everyone of his fears

His religion turned to superstition

And he thought he understood

All the wrong there is In this world to understand

And all there is that's good"

  Lyrics by James Damiano



The following link is an article about Joni Mitchell labeling Bob Dylan as a plagiarist 


"Eleven Years"

It is published knowledge that it is judicially uncontested by Bob Dylan and or Bob Dylan's law firms, all five,  that Bob Dylan and people in Bob Dylan's entourage have solicited James Damiano's songs lyrics and music for over ten years and ten months.


Obviously Bob Dylan is part of the ruling elite He has no respect for the constitution of the United States. For the last nineteen years (19) as of March 15, 1996 Bob Dylan has utilized a "Gag Order" against James Damiano which designate all discovery materials which incriminate and implicate Bob Dylan in his plagiarisms against James Damiano.

He has illegally done everything possible he could do to cover up this site except to file a counter claim against Damiano. Dylan knows the preponderance of the evidence in this law suit could never withstand the scrutiny of the court.

It is no different than Dylan publically admitting "I stole James Damiano's songs" and Judge Simandle ruling to dismiss the case in favor of Bob dylan.

If you as a citizen believe that this is the quality of justice that you deserve then do not send this website to a friend but if you believe you deserve a better quality of justice then send this link to a friend. Someday you will wish you had.  


James Damiano

 L. Peter Parcher

 L. Peter ParcherEsq.

 The man who ruined Bob Dylan's Reputation by miscalculating the growth  of the Internet


Steel Wrapped in Velvet

When Bruce Springsteen, Bob Dylan or the Rolling Stones have a date in court, they call on Peter Parcher When singer Luther Vandross Luther Vandross was charged with manslaughter after his best friend died in a car accident with Vandross driving, lawyer-to-the-stars L. Peter Parcher devised a decidedly slick defense:

An olive tree had dropped its slippery nuggets precisely where the crash occurred on Laurel Canyon Boulevard. “It might as well have been ice and snow,” Parcher says slyly. Vandross walked.

It was classic Parcher handiwork. In three decades he has repeatedly rescued a rogues’ gallery of trouble-prone or troublesome stars: the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and Paul Simon, as well as boxer-thug Mike Tyson, author Frank McCourt, the estate of Andy Warhol and titans such as Sony and Time Warner.

Parcher and his key partners, Steven Hayes and Orin Snyder, have gotten star clients out of many a jam—drug arrests, murder charges, sexual harassment allegations and that particularly pernicious evil, copyright infringement.

He has whipped John Lennon’s widow, Yoko Ono, who tried unsuccessfully to reduce the 5%-of-sales fee his client, record producer Jack Douglas, had arranged with Lennon before the ex-Beatle was assassinated in 1980.

In another case Parcher prevented the Boston Celtics from using Yugoslavia’s star hoops player because he was under contract in his native land for $11,000. Parcher likens his courtroom style to his training in Tai Chi, an eastern martial arts discipline that his instructor describes as “steel wrapped in velvet.”

Made up of equal parts Clarence Darrow, Sam Spade and Swifty Lazar, Parcher is known for a doggedness that a rival lawyer once likened to “trying to pull a rottweiler off your [private parts].” Says Parcher, ego intact: “I seem to have the uncanny ability to get to where the light is at the end of the tunnel.”

Parcher usually wins on rigorous research and courtroom dramatics. “Put down the law book. Go and meet a witness. Find the housekeeper. Act like a public defender, not a Wall Street lawyer,” he says.

Of course he says that: Parcher, 63, who grew up poor and still holds the street smarts of his native Brooklyn, graduated from St. John’s University Law School and started out as a public defender in New York.

He believes celebrities are easy targets for malicious and opportunistic litigation and says they should fight like hell in court rather than shell out hush money. With a secret payoff, “more often than not it comes back to bite them in later cases.”

But even when his clients screw up, Parcher feels no compunction about getting them off the hook. “It’s not about innocence or guilt, right or wrong. 


Article on L. Peter Parcher by Forbes Magazine



Bob Dylan's "Gag Order" on James Damiano has been in effect for nineteen years

As intelligent as Dylan is suppose to be, could it be that he doesn't realize that by utilizing the "Gag" order against Damiano he is angering his fans by preventing them from reviewing the true facts of the case? 

The letter below was sent to James Damiano on March 15th 2015 by Bob Dylan and signed by Bob Dylan's lead attorney Orin Snyder. This letter proves to the world that Bob Dylan condones communistic practices and beliefs.

Please keep in mind that Bob Dylan was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom Award by President Obama while utilizing a "Gag Order" on James Damiano that designated all discovery materials including videotaped depositions that incriminated Dylan.












 Read Eleven Years at link below


Read Plaintiff James Damiano's Motion for Default Against Bob Dylan

Anyone reading the following excerpt will understand that Bob Dylan has lost this lawsuit and that Judge Simandle's decision regarding this suit is one hundred percent inconsistent with the evidence in this case.




RULE 56 (c) FRCP


Rule 56(c) of the federal rules of civil procedure states as folows:

56 aSummary Judgment (a) Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment. A party may move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense — or the part of each claim or defense — on which summary judgment is sought.

The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court should state on the record the reasons for granting or denying the motion.


Defendants have been aware of James Damiano's public internet statements made against Bob Dylan for over eighteen years years and have downloaded this website and produced it to Judge Simandle of the United States. Federal Court on three different occasions.

That information has been entered upon the record of the court by Bob Dylan's Attorney's Orin Snyder and Steven D. Johnson after they downloaded the website and produced it to Judge Simandle.

In other words Dylan's attorneys downloaded the crimes they committed and produced it to Judge Simandle.

Even though Dylan's attorneys made the fatal mistake of submitting the evidence which severely implicated Dylan to Judge Simandle, Judge Simandle still disregarded eleven years of material facts regarding Bob Dylan's solicitation of James Damiano's songs and has granted summary judgment dismissing all counts of this lawsuit to Defendant Bob Dylan in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) even after writing in his decision that "A court may grant summary judgment only when the materials of record 'show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact' "Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)." [Emphasis added] "no genuine issue as to any material fact."

Judge Simandle disregarded Thirty Five hours of video taped depositions which implicate Bob Dylan, blatant admissions of guilt by defendants, eleven years of documents between James Damiano and CBS Records and Dylan's organization and also expert testimony from a Harvard musicologist. Judge Simandle's behavior executed a "fraud upon the court" and diminishing the integrity of the United States Judicial System.

[Emphasis added] "no genuine issue as to any material fact." Bob Dylan's lead attorney Orin Snyder of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher has committed a massive amount of fraud upon the court along with L. Peter Parcher of Mannatt, Steven Hayes of Hanly Concoy and Steven D. Johnson of Gibbons.


Judge Simandle disregarded Thirty Five hours of video taped depositions which implicate Dylan, Blatant admissions of guilt by defendants, eleven years of documented documents between James Damiano and CBS records and Dylan diminishing the integrity of the United States Judicial System. A judge is an officer of the court, as well as are all attorneys.

A state judge is a state judicial officer, paid by the State to act impartially and lawfully. A federal judge is a federal judicial officer, paid by the federal government to act impartially and lawfully.

State and federal attorneys fall into the same general category and must meet the same requirements. A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980). Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in "fraud upon the court".

In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."

"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final." "Fraud upon the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court.

It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit "fraud upon the court" vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) ("It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935). Under Illinois and Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed "fraud upon the court", the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect. Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances. In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).

Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) "is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. §455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process."). That Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice." The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice. "Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that "We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is filed." Balistrieri, at 1202. Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves.

By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his "appearance of partiality" which, possibly, further disqualifies the judge. Should another judge not accept the disqualification of the judge, then the second judge has evidenced an "appearance of partiality" and has possibly disqualified himself/herself. None of the orders issued by any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect. Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) ("The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause."). Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may have been engaged in the Federal Crime of "interference with interstate commerce". The judge has acted in the judge's personal capacity and not in the judge's judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone's next-door neighbor (provided that he is not a judge).

However some judges may not follow the law. If you were a non-represented litigant, and should the court not follow the law as to non-represented litigants, then the judge has expressed an "appearance of partiality" and, under the law, it would seem that he/she has disqualified him/herself. However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law, and since not all judges follow the law, it is possible that a judge may not know the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and the other courts on this subject.

Notice that it states "disqualification is required" and that a judge "must be disqualified" under certain circumstances. The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting without jurisdiction, and that suggest that he is then engaging in criminal acts of treason, and may be engaged in extortion and the interference with interstate commerce. Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal acts. Since both treason and the interference with interstate commerce are criminal acts, no judge has immunity to engage in such acts.


In the last 20 years, in the Second and Ninth Circuits and the lower courts within those circuits, 48 copyright infringement cases against studios or networks were litigated to final judgment. In all 48 cases, the victors were the studio and network defendants. Most of the cases were determined by a grant of summary judgment.








The Producers Club 358 W 44th St, New York, NY 10036 (212) 315-4743

 This is the true story that your

Mainstream Media has hidden from you

Eleven Years

The Producers Club 

358 W 44th St, New York, NY 10036

(212) 315-4743








Eleven Years Trailer 1



It is uncontested by Bob Dylan and or Bob Dylan's law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, Parcher Hayes & Snyder, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Hecker Brown & Sherry including Mary Jo White, Steven hayes, Jonathan Liebman, and Sony House counsel that Bob Dylan and people in Bob Dylan's entourage have solicited James Damiano's songs and music for over ten years.

Few artists can lay claim to the controversy that has surrounded the career of songwriter James Damiano. Twenty-two years ago James Damiano began an odyssey that led him into a legal maelstrom with Bob Dylan that, to this day, fascinates the greatest of intellectual minds.

As the curtain rises on the stage of deceit we learn that CBS used songs and lyrics for international recording artist, Bob Dylan. Bob Dylan's name is credited to the songs. One of those songs is nominated for a Grammy as best rock song of the year. Ironically the title of that song is Dignity. 

Since auditioning for the legendary CBS Record producer John Hammond, Sr., who influenced the careers of music industry icons Billy Holiday, Bob Dylan, Pete Seger, Bruce Springsteen and Stevie Ray Vaughan, James has engaged in a multimillion dollar copyright infringement law-suit with Bob Dylan.

Eleven Years Trailer 2



 In the middle of midnight

She's coming around

I'm dressed in my best threads

Gonna take on this town

In the middle of midnight

I've got what it takes

To find out what the truth is

Make fools of all the fakes

In the middle of midnight

Her clothes caught my eye

I'd be willing to bet

I'd be willing to lie

In the middle of midnight

Could have sworn

I heard her cry

In the middle of midnight

This ain't no one last try  

jdamiano copyright 1988




 Movie Trailer To Bob Dylan's Stealing of James Damiano's Songs

Must See








Hard to see
The shadows
The Darkness of the night
Hard to see the truth
In the blindness of the light
Never thought i’d see
The Day
Where two wrongs
Make a right
Hard to see
The shadows
The Darkness

Of the night








Bob Dylan Admits Plagiarizing His Greatest Hits L.A Times

“Well you have to understand that I’m not a melodist. My songs are either based on old Protestant hymns or Carter Family songs.

 What happens is, I’ll take a song and simply start playing it in my head. That’s the way I meditate”. “I wrote ‘Blowin’ in the Wind’ in 10 minutes, just put words to an old spiritual, probably something I learned from Carter Family records.

'‘The Times They Are A-Changing’ is probably from an old Scottish folk Song.”….”I’ll be playing Bob Nolan’s ‘Tumbling Tumbleweeds,’ for instance, in my head constantly — while I’m driving a car or talking to a person or sitting around or whatever.

People will think they are talking to me and I’m talking back, but I’m not. I’m listening to the song in my head. At a certain point, some of the words will change and I’ll start writing a song.”…….Bob Dylan



A diversion of Reality

That the worst segregation

In the world today

Is not between

Yellow Red Black


White men

Muslims Jews or Christians

But between

The Rich and the poor

damiano copyright 1992



The Artist Never Stops Seeking For What He Knows He'll Never Find



Another mountain to climb

Another  bridge to cross

Midnight sky so endless

As the message comes across

One more word to speak

Another story to tell

Black as the darkest unknown

And yet

Still they wish you well

I studied their religion

Which made some sense to me

But I wasn't concerned with

How much faith they had

As much as to what degree

They believed

Some of them prayed

Standing up

Some knelt to their knees

Like I said

I wasn't concerned with

How much faith they had

As much as to what degree

They believed

So slight a hint

So slight a clue

Yet there could only be one


That must be seemingly



See Our New Production "The Frankels" at the link below












 Coming Soon

For release date email us at

I James Damiano posses documents signed by Orin Snyder that conclusively verify the fact that he has orchistrated the falsification of evidence in my lawsuit against Bob Dylan


Big News

On Bob Dylan's Lawyer'

Orin Snyder's Fraud Upon The Courts






google-site-verification: googleb630f516981df495.html