Stanley J.

Caterbone, Appellant

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

:
Superior Court 1915 MDA 2015
MD-1108-2015

vs.

KIETH SADLER, Chief, Lancaster City Police Department

LANCASTER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
DETECTIVE CLARK BEARINGER, Lancaster City Police Department
OFFICER WILLIAMS
OFFICER BINDERUP

BRIEF

On this 12th day of February, 2016, I, Stanley J. Caterbone, Appellant, appearing Pro Se, do
hereby submit the following Brief in the above captioned case.

Date: February 12, 2016

_________/S/ ______________
Stanley J. Caterbone, Appellant
Pro Se
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717-669-2163
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

CONCISE STATEMENT OF MATTERS COMPLAINED

The Court had filed an ORDER on the 28th day of September, 2015, the ORDER states the
following: AND NOW, this 28th day of September, 2015, the Court has examined the
Petition for Review of Private Criminal Complaint. The Court finds no basis which to
overturn the decision disapproving the filing of criminal charges.
The Petitioner cites the ORDER dated 27th day of November, 2007 by then President Judge
Louis J. Farina which states the following: AND NOW, this 27th day of November, 2007,
upon consideration of the Petition for Review of Private Criminal Complaint and Brief in
Support thereof, and it appearing that the District Attorney's refusal to approve the
private complaint due to "insufficient evidence"', obligates the Court to conduct a "de
novo" review to determine whether the complaint establishes a prima facie case,
see,Michaels v. Barrasse, 681 A.2d 1362 (Pa. Super. 1996), and In re Private Criminal
Compl. Of Wilson 11, 879 A.2d 199 (Pa. Super. 2005), the Commonwealth is therefore
directed to file an answer to the Petition with sufficient specificity to identify the
information relied upon and lo explain the Commonwealth's decision to disapprove the
filing of Petitioner's private criminal complaint.

BRIEF
The PETITIONER alleges that the Court did not conduct a de novo review, and thus the
Petition for Review was never properly adjudicated in the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas. In fact, the PETITIONER believes that if such a de novo review was conducted, then the
PLAINTIFF would have built a sufficient case for prosecution.

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, CRIMINAL

COURT, Case No. MD 379-2007 STANLEY J. CATERBONE v. TONY FREEMAN, NOBLE REAL ESTATE,
GREG MILLAN, SHELBY SHEPRO, CENTRAL PENN SERVICES The Honorable Judge LOUIS J.
FARINA, President Judge wrote
ORDER - AND NOW, this 27th day of November, 2007, upon consideration of the Petition
for Review of Private Criminal Complaint and Brief in Support thereof, and it appearing that
the District Attorney's refusal to approve the private complaint due to "insufficient
evidence"', obligates the Court to conduct a "de novo" review to determine whether the
complaint establishes a prima facie case, see, Michaels v. Barrasse, 681 A.2d 1362 (Pa.
Super. 1996), and In re Private Criminal Compl. Of Wilson 11, 879 A.2d 199 (Pa. Super.

2005), the Commonwealth is therefore directed to file an answer to the Petition with
sufficient specificity to identify the information relied upon and lo explain the
Commonwealth's decision to disapprove the filing of Petitioner's private criminal complaint.
In furtherance of the Private Criminal Complaint, the Appellant, Stanley J. Caterbone
requests the Court to consider the Mental Health Act of Pennsylvania and the following statute:
_______________________________________
MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT
5100.84. Persons who may be subject to involuntary emergency examination and
treatment.
(a) Persons 14 through 17 years of age may be subject to involuntary emergency examination
and treatment only in an approved mental health facility capable of providing a treatment
program appropriate to the person. Persons 5 through 13 years of age may be subject to
involuntary emergency examination and treatment only in an approved mental health facility
capable of providing a treatment program appropriate to the child. Persons from birth through 4
years of age may be subject to involuntary emergency examination and treatment only in a
mental health facility capable of providing a treatment program appropriate to the child. Should
no such facility exist within the county of residence, the nearest appropriate facility shall be
designated by the county administrator. Longer term involuntary treatment for the age groups
listed in this section, must be conducted by agencies with age appropriate programs which are
approved by the Department and designated by the county administrator when public monies are
utilized for treatment.
(b) Persons 18 years of age and older may be subject to involuntary emergency examination at an
approved facility designated for such purpose by the administrator. Involuntary emergency
treatment may be provided at the examining facility or any other designated and approved facility
appropriate to the persons needs. Travel arrangements between the examining facility and the
treating facility shall be arranged as needed as soon as possible to permit transportation
appropriate to the persons needs.
(c) The determination of whether the standards of clear and present danger are met should
always include a consideration of the persons probable behavior if adequate treatment is not
provided on either an emergency or subsequent basis.
(d) The standards of clear and present danger may be met when a person has made a threat of
harm to self or others; has made a threat to commit suicide; or has made a threat to commit an
act of mutilation and has committed acts in furtherance of any such threats.

(e) Examining physicans should consider the probability that the person would be unable without
care,
supervision, and the continued assistance of others, to satisfy his need for nourishment, personal
or medical care, shelter or self-protection, and safety in accordance with section 301(b)(2)(i) of
the act (50 P. S. 7301(b) (2)(i)).
(f) When the petition for commitment filed under section 301(b)(2)(i) alleges that a person poses
a clear and present danger to himself, clinical or other testimony may be considered which
demonstrates that the persons judgment and insight is so severely impaired that he or she is
engaging in uncontrollable behavior which is so grossly irrational or grossly inappropriate to the
situation that such behavior prevents him from satisfying his need for reasonable nourishment,
personal care, medical care, shelter or self-protection and safety, and that serious physical
debilitation, serious bodily injury or death may occur within 30 days unless adequate treatment is
provided on an involuntary basis.
(g) An attempt under sections 301(b)(2)(ii) and (iii) of the act (50 P. S. 7301(b)(2)(ii) and (iii)),
occurs:
(1) When a person clearly articulates or demonstrates an intention to commit suicide or
mutilate himself and has committed an overt action in furtherance of the intended
action; or
(2) When the person has actually performed such acts.
_________________________________________
In the 302 Petition it was indicated that the following was the reason for the involuntary
examination :

(i) the person has acted in such manner as to evidence that he would be unable, without
care, supervision and the continued assistance of others, to satisfy his need for
nourishment, personal or medical care, shelter. or self-protection and safety, and that
there is a reasonable probability that death, serious bodily injury or serious physical
debilitation would ensue within 30 days unless adequate treatment were afforded under
this act; or
(ii) the person has attempted suicide and that there is a reasonable probability of
suicide unless adequate treatment is afforded under this act.

302 Petition Statement by Lancaster City Police Detective Clark Bearinger, Badge 501,
Lancaster Bureau of Police, 39 West Chestnut Street, Lancaster, PA, 17603, dated July
9, 2015
________________________________________
Stanley J. Caterbone petition statement (page 1 of 5) from page 3 of this document.
Stanley J. Caterbone has a long history of serious mental illness.

He as apparently stopped

treatment for Schizophrenia, paranoid type, and is exhibiting a dramatic increase in paranoid and
persecutory delusions.
Over the years Mr. Caterbone as seen me sometimes as an ally and resource, and sometimes as
an enemy. Since 16 June, 2015, I have received well over 100 emails from Mr. Caterbone. Some
are addressed only to me and others have been sent to multiple recipients including other
Lancaster City Police officers.
The tone of these emails is growing steadily more antagonistic and accusatory. I am now being
accused of stealing a particular communications file to justify putting [Stanley] on a terrorist list
so that you can justify using COINTELPRO on [him].

This was in reference to Mr. Caterbone's

belief that he had been followed around Lancaster by 'middle eastern people and that I was in
some way supporting their activity.

The email containing this accusation dated 24 June, 2015,

was titled WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO KILL ME? (Attached p.4)
Over the past two weeks Mr. Caterbone has demanded, then either canceled or simply not kept, a
number of face-to-face meetings with me. At the same time he has solicited my agreement to be
added to his LINKEDIN group while also sending mass emails to multiple agencies accusing
Lancaster City Police, and me in particular of ignoring attacks in his computer system.
On 09 July, 2015, I was alerted to a solicitation placed by Mr. Caterbone on Craiglist.

This

solicitation is attached (p.3), but the gist is that he accuses Lancaster City Police, PA Atty.
General's office, FBI (Harrisburg) Lancaster County DA's office and Manheim Township PD of
hacking his computer and cell phone by the use of COINTELPRO. The posting solicits help to
hack [the accused] back of necessary. Such a solicitation to commit a crime like hacking into a
police and or other government agency would normally be dealt with through criminal law, bu in
this case I believe this to be a result of Mr. Caterbone's current decompensated state of mind due
to mental illness.

Stanley J. Caterbone petition statement (page 2 of 5)

Mr. Caterbone has been involuntarily committed for mental health treatment at least
twice to my knowledge, both times for substantial threats to kill people.

In April of

2010 ... CHIEF SADLER AND THELANCASTER COUNTY DETECTIVES SHOULD BE TEAT TO
DEATH, and FUCK YOU FUCKING ASSHOLES...KILL A COP TIME!!!!

(a reproduced

document or online webpage has never been introduced at any legal proceeding,
including the 303 hearing in April of 2010).
While Mr. Caterbone has not yet reached this pitch, I am alarmed at the spike in his
paranoid/persecutory and grandiose delusions, to include the recent posting on Craiglist to solict
help to commit a crime that would have significant serious ramifications for the safety of the
public, that without urgent, inpatient mental health treatment, Mr. Caterbone will quickly become
a threat to the public.
___________________________________________
This, (302 Mental Health Warrant of July 9, 2015) can, without equivocation, be seen as
retaliatory for the Amicus filing in the Lisa Michelle Lambert Habeus case, which I, Appellant, am
still litigating in both the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
As for the computer hacking issues, I request the Court to cosider the following OPED
letter to the editor:
_______________________________________
The following is a letter to the editor which I wish to be published on your site.
January 22, 2016
Re: Good Old Boys Network and the Kathleen Kane Coup
I have been the victim of a widespread civil and criminal conspiracy that dates back to
1987, made up of the very same actors that Kathleen Kane is up against, the "good old boys". In
1987 I blew the whistle on a local company, International Signal & Control, or ISC, that was
indicted for selling arms and weapons to Iraq via South Africa with the aid and support of the CIA
and the NSA. It was the 3rd largest white collar crime at that time, valued at $1 Billion Dollars. I
was the victim of a widespread wholesale cover-up through an elaborate slander campaign that
included 29 false arrests, multiple false imprisonments, and a fabricated mental illness record that
to this day is still resonating.
Kathleen Kane must be commended for her courage and her determination for taking on

this culture of arrogance and total disregard for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law that they
so emphatically espouse to uphold. They believe and conduct their affairs in a manner that
suggests they are above the law and we, the Pennsylvania taxpayers, are beneath the law. The
sad fact that it reaches into the judiciary and law enforcement agencies is undeniably the most
outrageous and deplorable truth to this scandal. Case in point, until yesterday I was the
APPELLANT in a case before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals that involves the Habeus
Corpus for convicted and imprisoned Lisa Michelle Lambert. A murder case in the early 1990's that
was made famous when in 1997 U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell found her actually innocent
due to "one of the worst cases of prosecutorial misconduct in the English speaking language" and
released her from prison. The case drew nationwide attention when then Pennsylvania Attorney
General, then Mike Fischer, enlisted the help of 9 other state attorney generals to curtail the
reach of the federal bench in state matters concerning Habeus Corpus cases. To make matters
worst, 38,000 Lancastrians signed petitions to remove the Honorable Stewart Dalzell from the
federal bench.
Mike Fisher and company won and Lisa Michelle Lambert was back in prison within 9
months while the case went back to the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. The Honorable
Judge Lawrence Stengel held a bench hearing where she was again found guilty and sentenced to
life in prison. The case was covered by the LA Times in a multi-part Sunday series, A&E producer
Bill Curtis did a 48 Hours special, and Lifetime Movies made it into a prime time movie.
This year, these "Good Old Boys" made it so difficult for me to litigate my efforts to free
Lisa Michelle Lambert, that I had to dismiss my appeal and effectively withdraw as her MOVANT
and Advocate. I was trying to persuade the courts that my own demise was the result of the same
type of wholesale prosecutorial misconduct by some of the very same principals that Lisa Michelle
Lambert fell victim to. My efforts were so distasteful to the powers to be that her court appointed
attorney threatened me with criminal prosecution for no other reason than I might actually be
successful in helping her win the Habeus Corpus she filed in May of 2014. I allege the U.S. District
Judge was trying in vain to invalidate and derail my own federal court cases that seek to restore
me to whole from a life of ruin, misery, torture, and financial collapse.
For the record, I founded a financial firm in the 1980's that reached 5 states and raised
some 90 million dollars in a matter of 9 months. In the late 1980's and early 1990's I was one of
5 domestic companies that had the capabilities of manufacturing CDROM's that included a client
list that reached across the globe and included government agencies and fortune 500 companies.
And in 1987, myself and a genius recording engineer named Tony Bongiovi and his famous
recording studio, Power Station Studios of New York, were developing and producing the first
"digital movie". The intellectual property rights and the RICO statutes that apply to my legal
claims in federal courts were too much for the "Good Old Boys" to handle.

_____________/S/___________
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
Advanced Media Group
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
ACTIVE COURT CASES
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-1149;15-3400; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 15-03984; 14-02559; 05-2288; 06-4650
Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1561 MDA 2015; 1519 MDA 2015
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349
__________________________________________________The following is Case No. 08-02892 filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP (Plaintiffs) v. LANCASTER
CITY BUREAU OF POLICE, et. al., (Defendants) which clearly addresses and contradicts
most of the STATEMENT by Detective Clark Bearinger that was used in the kidnapping
and burgary of July 10, 2015, which lead directly to the Private Criminal Complaint of
July 27, 2015. As we now know, these issues, by virtue of the fact that they have not
been addressed or remedied, in and of itself is evidence of COINTELPRO activities.
____________________________________________________
October 10, 2008 - ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS GRANTED;
THISCASE SHALL REMAIND CLOSED STATISTICALLY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MARY A.MCLAUGHLIN ON
10/10/2008.10/10/2008 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE.(ap, )(Entered: 10/10/2008)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CATERBONE and ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP (Plaintiffs)
v.
LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE, et. al., (Defendants)
Case No. 08-cv-02982
DEFENDANTS
CITY OF LANCASTER
CITY OF LANCASTER MAYOR RICK GRAY
SECTOR 9 OF THE LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE
LANCASTER CITY POLICE CHIEF KEITH SADDLER
LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE

CIVIL COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION
1. Stanley J. Caterbone (CATERBONE) and Advanced Media Group were located at 220 Stone Hill
Road, Conestoga, Pennsylvania (Conestoga Township) until August 30, 2006 when CATERBONE
temporarily moved into a family residence at 1250 Fremont Street, Lancaster, Pennsylvania (City
of Lancaster).
2. The PLAINTIFF, Stanley J. Caterbone (CATERBONE), alleges that the City of Lancaster and the
Lancaster City Bureau of Police and others colluded to deliberately ignore CATERBONES
complaints, an abuse of process, in an effort to retaliate, subvert, interrupt and deter current and
ongoing litigation and civil complaints against several major businesses and government agencies
with headquarters in the City of Lancaster and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Those would
include the Lancaster General Hospital; High Industries (not Penn Square Partners and the
Lancaster County Convention Center); Fulton Bank and Fulton Financial Corporation; a Wachovia
Bank branch (pending); Lancaster Newspapers; the County of Lancaster; the Lancaster County
Prison; the Hotel Brunswick (pending); James Street Investment District (pending); Aurora Films;
Haverstick Films (pending); and the Lancaster City Bureau of Police. The City of Lancaster and the
Lancaster City Bureau of Police are derelict in their duties in forcing CATERBONE to litigate for
duties and services due CATERBONE that are mandated in the bylaws of the City of Lancaster.
3. CATERBONE also alleges that the Lancaster City Bureau of Police were used to retaliate,
subvert, interrupt and deter other litigation and civil complaints against other police departments,
namely the Southern Regional Police Department, the Manheim Township Police Department, the
East Lampeter Police Department, the Millersville Boro Police, the Avalon Police Department and
the Stone Harbor Police Department. CATERBONE alleges that Southern Regional Police Chief John
Fiorill used is official capacity as President of the Red Rose Chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police
to help accomplish these civil torts.
4. CATERBONE alleges that by ignoring his complaints the Lancaster City Police Bureau of Police
gave the green light, or approval, for others to continue a long and successful period of
harassment,

thievery, property

damage,

computer

and electronic

hacking,

deletion and

manipulation of court related documents, records and evidence, mail fraud, eaves dropping,
invasion of privacy, criminal trespass, and the like. These activities are so intense that they have
taken on the characteristics of a hate crime.
5. CATERBONE alleges that the gross abuse and gross negligence defamed his name and that of
his company, ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, which discredited his reputation in an effort to diminish
credibility in the courts; to thwart any reprimands by oversight agencies; and to disrupt and
thwart any possible business relations and operations of ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP. This has

resulted in direct and immediate financial loss, loss of time, and loss of income.
6. Chief Keith Sadler and the Lancaster City Police Bureau rejected and refused to resolve these
disputes through mediation when CATERBONE opened a case with the Lancaster Center for
Mediation in May of 2008. Keith Sadler communicated to the Lancaster Mediation Center on May
8, 2008 that he would not cooperate and mediate with CATERBONE.
7. On several occasions in 2007 several police officers of the Lancaster City Bureau of Police
instructed CATERBONE, in person upon responding to complaints, not to call 911 or the Lancaster
City Police Department and that the Lancaster City Bureau of Police would not respond or take
complaints.
8. The Lancaster City Bureau of Police only took one (1) incident of gas siphoned and stolen from
CATERBONEs 1991 Dodge pickup truck, and refused to take the over 50 (from December 20,
2007 to present), or so other incidents as a complaint, regardless of the efforts to have Lancaster
City Mayor Rick Grey and the Lancaster City Solicitor to look into the allegations and complaints.
CATERBONE had meticulously documented the incidents in a journal and a log of gas receipts,
photographs, and odometer miles for all of the incidents. CATERBONE also made a thorough and
documented calibration of his 1991 Dodge Dakota Pick-Up truck with logs of mileage and times
and dates of gas purchases in a report to prove the gas was stolen. Lancaster City Police Bureau
Officer Cosmore returned the report with such words as counterfeit, fake, written on it and had
the audacity to ask CATERBONE if he had a certification of the gas pumps that were listed on
gas receipts. There were some days when the gas was stolen 2 or more times. CATERBONE
alleges that perpetrators were using a kerosene battery operated siphon, or like kind, to siphon
the gas from the gas tank.
9. The Lancaster City Bureau of Police had responded to approximately 10 or so 911 calls in the
last eighteen (18) months to 1250 Fremont Street, residence of CATERBONE, for complaints of
property damage; stolen property, missing legal and business files and evidence for litigation;
computer and electronic hacking with deleted electronic files; harassment; terrorist threats,
stalking, stolen mail, etc.,.
10. CATERBONE had complained of abuse of process to state and federal law enforcement
regarding the situation, including U.S. Senator Arlen Specters office. CATERBONE had also visited
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in both Harrisburg and Philadelphia for help and
intervention.
11. CATERBONE also had personal meetings with Lancaster City Mayor Rick Gray in Lancaster City
Hall on at least 4 occasions to find a solution to the problems and for help to mediate the
problems and or resolve the conflicts. The resulting pain and suffering, as well as loss and
destruction of property and financial loss that CATERBONE was undergoing was unprecedented.

12. In November of 2007, CATERBONE and the Advanced Media Group went public with their
Downtown Lancaster investments and business plans that were culminated over the past 9 years.
The Advanced Media Group also formerly and publicly introduced their Downtown Lancaster Action
Plan via handouts, websites, and blogs; and began meetings and negotiations with major
stakeholders, City of Lancaster Public Officials, Developers, and investors.
13. In 1997 CATERBONE had solicited Attorney Christina Rainville of Philadelphia and pro bono
attorney for Lisa Michelle Lambert in the Laurie Show murder case. The murder trials and appeals
of the Lambert case demonized Ms. Christina Rainville and U.S. District Court Judge Stewart
Dalzell. After CATERBONE submitted documents and audio recordings, Ms. Christina Rainville had
communicated with CATERBONE that she was not able to take his case due to the fact that her
Philadelphia law firm had banned her from taking on any more Lancaster County residents,
despite the fact that many more sought her legal counsel. On December 31, 1997, CATERBONE
had also personally delivered a CD-ROM to the chambers of U.S. District Court Judge Stewart
Dalzell in an effort to bring attention to his case. In May of 1998 CATERBONE submitted an
AFFADAVIT to the law firm of Schneider and Harrison outlining the prosecutorial misconduct or
Finding of Facts of the 1987 cover-up for Ms. Christina Rainville. CATERBONE alleges that these
facts were part of the attitude and the motives for the law enforcement-at-large of Lancaster
County and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to ignore the rule of law and procedure in order to
bring these false arrests and malicious prosecutions. The Lancaster County community-at-large
had the same attitude toward CATERBONE. The Lambert case received national notoriety when
U.S. District Judge Stuart Dalzell freed Lambert on a Habeus Corpus appeal hearing citing she was
actually innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Judge Dalzell was quoted in chambers as saying,
"I can tell you, Mr. Madenspacher, that I've thought about nothing else but this case for over three
weeks, and in my experience, sir, and I invite you to disabuse me of this at oral argument, I want
you and I want the Schnader firm to look for any case in any jurisdiction in the English-speaking
world where there has been as much prosecutorial misconduct, because I haven't found it. The
case was covered by a 3 part series in the Los Angeles Times by writer Barry Seigel on November
10, 1997 and a television episode on the A&E Network American Justice Series. The Lancaster
community gathered over 10,000 signatures on a petition to impeach U.S. District Judge Stewart
Dalzell for his rulings. In the end, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania took control of the case and
appealed the ruling that freed Lambert sending her back to prison. The case went all the way to
the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005, after being denied any review. The case accentuated the rights
of Federal Law vs. State Law and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania solicited a team of attorney
generals from across the nation to help their cause. CATERBONE attended a hearing before former
Lancaster County Court Common Pleas Judge Larry Stengel in the Lancaster County Court of
Common Pleas. To this day, due to his knowledge and experience with the Lancaster County
Judicial System and Law Enforcement, and his own dire civil complaints, CATERBONE believes that

the over zealous prosecution proves that prosecutorial misconduct was never thoroughly
investigated or prosecuted in the Lambert case. CATERBONE will not let that happen in his cases.
CAUSES

OF

ACTION

14. On or about April 14, 2008 1999 HP Notebook n5150 laptop was rendered useless by an
intruder shorting the power cord. This was the third computer rendered useless since November of
2007, and the last computer available for use in the home and office. Other incidents were
happening while at 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, PA since 1997. The only computer available
for use was the public computer at the Lancaster County Library on North Duke Street in
downtown Lancaster.
15. On March 18, 2008 CATERBONE went to the Hotel Brunswick in Downtown Lancaster to
continue take measurements of the Movie Theater for his continued efforts of a business and
development plan. (The Brunswick Movie Theater, or Eric, had been closed since 1995.
CATERBONE and Advanced Media Group had an agreement with the Owner of the Brunswick,
Hamid Zahedi, to make a formal proposal and offer for leasing the site. CATERBONE had begun
discussions in 2006.) On March 18, 2008 CATERBONE noticed that the United States Department
of Justice Office of Trustee was conducting hearings for Chapter 11 petitioners in the Presidential
Room of the Hotel Brunswick. CATERBONE had not received ORDERS from his United States Third
Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 08-3054 for his appeal of an issue in his Chapter 11 Case No.
05-23059. CATERBONE alleged that the ORDERS were stolen or never mailed from the clerk of
courts. CATERBONE thought maybe Dave Adams, the trustee for the United States Department of
Justice Office of Trustee might be conducting the hearings. The following day CATERBONE received
a disturbing email from Mr. Barry A. Solodky, Esquire, of Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C., 28 Penn
Square, Lancaster, PA 17603. CATERBONE had known Mr. Solodky since the 1980s and had even
solicited him to review his bankruptcy matters before the Appllent filed his Chapter 11 case on
May 23, 2005. The following email exchanges detail the incident and the false reports and
allegations from a member of Blakinger, Byler & Thomas, P.C.:

Date: February 12, 2016

_________/S/ ______________
Stanley J. Caterbone, Appellant
Pro Se
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
717-669-2163
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com