January 2011

The following are a series of e mails addressed to several people

with the Bank of Hawaii (Al Landon former CEO, Peter Ho, Current
CEO with Bank of Hawaii, Michael O’Neill, Penelope “Penny”
Tong ) Cades Shutte attorneys Rhonda Griswold and James
Ashford, Richard Diehl attorney in Hawaii, Judy Lee and Jane
Peebles, attorneys for Bank of Hawaii, A Honolulu detective –
Erwin Okita, an attorney with the Hawaii Judiciary Chris Van
Marter, none of whom will address or answer our questions
regarding the mishandling of our father’s trust and probate.
From: NMeek48409@aol.com [mailto:NMeek48409@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 3:53 PM
To: rgriswold@cades.com; jashford@cades.com; NMeek48409@aol.com; Jane
Peebles; eokita@honolulu.gov; cvanmarter@honolulu.gov
Cc: rdiehl@hawaii.rr.com; alandon@boh.com; kbnypost@aol.com;
cades@cades.com; jlee@goodsill.com; Penelope.Tong@boh.com;
melvinmeek@yahoo.com; Michael J.A. Karlin
Subject: Re: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

January 7, 2011
Rhonda:
The Bank corp stock check cashed by Elizabeth Meek
was in the amount of $646,482. You cannot account for
the difference between the $646,482 and the $617,169
you state in the attached e mail were moved into TCD
566870?
That is the exact amount almost to the penny of
the buy in for the Pe Ji Ho Ta Indian Casino which
has Robert Grigger Jones as a 1/4 partner. The
money was invested in the spring of 2004. Just
after Elizabeth cashed those stocks. As you are
already aware I have handed copies of the check,
as well as every document related to the litigation
to the Santa Maria, California FBI field agent as well
as IRS representatives. No one wants to come
forward and say why it took 4 years for the tax
return to be filed, including your offices.
http://calcoastnews.com/2010/12/gearhart
%e2%80%99s-casino-%e2%80%93-the-final-
gamble/

Those stocks were performing quite well

considering the value in three months October
2003 to February 2004 increased almost $30,000.
With a stock that lucrative one would question why
Elizabeth meek would cash it out? Doesn't sound
like a prudent move for someone who is
designated by an attorney as the Trustee of his
estate.
You know the Bank corp stock was previously
entitled Bank of San Bernardino and was definitely
included in the 1996 trust (the Trust where Dad
had named myself as the trustee?) Which of
course leads to my next question, if the stock was
in the 1996 trust why didn't Grigger Jones advise
Elizabeth meek to bring a copy of the trust to the
Bank when she cashed out the stocks? Instead he
created the Trust Certification for the 1992 trust.
Also, if the Bank of Hawaii never had money placed
into the bank for the QDOT and now they are
saying they were never an active co-trustee, then
why did the estate pay for the attorney's fees
to Bingham McCutcheon as well as Goodsill
Anderson?
I have attached a page from the Goodsill
Anderson billing statement reflecting discussions
were taking place referring to the two 1st
Amendments (the one supposedly signed in Hawaii
and the one with the admitted forged signatures)
Who provided the copies of the 1st Amendments
to Goodsill Anderson (Judy Lee, Esq was the
attorney of record for the Bank of Hawaii)? We
have been asking Judy Lee this question for the last
three months. She refuses to clarify this crucial
question.
Finally, did Elizabeth pay off part of the balance on
the Arkansas judgment against the estate? The
Judgment as a result of Elizabeth and Grigger Jones
selling property in Arkansas that did not belong to
the estate? The same property that had been our
family (the Meek's that is) for close to 100 years?
I await your reply.
Thank you
Nanci Meek
(760) 413-5660
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jane Peebles" <jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com>

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:28:29 -0800
To: <NMeek48409@aol.com>; <rgriswold@cades.com>; <jashford@cades.com>;
<eokita@honolulu.gov>; <cvanmarter@honolulu.gov>
Cc: <rdiehl@hawaii.rr.com>; <alandon@boh.com>; <kbnypost@aol.com>;
<cades@cades.com>; <jlee@goodsill.com>; <Penelope.Tong@boh.com>;
<melvinmeek@yahoo.com>; Michael J.A. Karlin<mkarlin@karlinpeebles.com>
Subject: RE: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Dear Ms. Meek:

I am no longer involved in this matter in any way.

Jane Peebles
Karlin & Peebles, LLP
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 708
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Office: (310) 274-5245
Cell: (310) 486-4430
jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
www.karlinpeebles.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

From: Nanci Meek [mailto:nmeek48409@aol.com]

Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:51 PM
To: Jane Peebles
Cc: Nanciemail
Subject: Re: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Dear jane. At one time yourself as well as your firm were entrenched in our fathers
probate and audit and are most certainly accountable I would therefore appreciate
your time and consideration regarding the attached questions. I have a case I am
investigating in beverly hills in two weeks perhaps we could both set aside a time
convenient to discuss my fathers probate and hopefully put this matter aside. I look
forward to meeting you in person. Thank you. Nanci meek 760 413 5660
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From: "Jane Peebles" <jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com>

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:04:15 -0800
To: <nmeek48409@aol.com>

Subject: RE: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Dear Ms. Meek:

All of my files on this are in storage and would have to be

retrieved. I do not recollect details as this all occurred several
years ago. I am undergoing some medical treatment that will
keep me out of the office for two to three weeks starting this
Wednesday. I will of course cooperate with any request from the
IRS or the FBI for data.

Jane Peebles
Karlin & Peebles, LLP
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 708
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Office: (310) 274-5245
Cell: (310) 486-4430
jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
www.karlinpeebles.com

From: Nanci Meek [mailto:nmeek48409@aol.com]

Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 1:14 PM
To: Jane Peebles
Cc: Nanciemail
Subject: Re: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Dear Jane. I am so sorry to hear about your health issues and certainly wish you a
speedy recovery. In thr meantime have someone from your offices retrieve the files
mentioned in your e mail and when we do meet after your recovery we will be a
few steps ahead as far as putting this behind us. Again I wish you a speedy
recovery. In the meantime is there anyone in your office who would be able to
meet with me next week and grant me access to your files? Since you were paid by
the trust I would assume you were working on behalf of the trust or were you
working on behalf of the Bank of Hawaii? Let me know Thank you Nanci Meek
original trustee of Elvin R Meek 1996 Family Trust. 760 413 5660
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

In a message dated 1/11/2011 1:44:23 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com writes:

I represented Bank of Hawaii and cannot let you see the files
without my ex-client’s express permission. I am therefore unable
to accommodate your request. The files are protected by
attorney-client privilege and you were never my client.

Jane Peebles
Karlin & Peebles, LLP
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 708
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Office: (310) 274-5245
Cell: (310) 486-4430
jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
www.karlinpeebles.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: NMeek48409@aol.com
To: jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
Sent: 1/11/2011 10:56:53 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
Subj: Re: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Thank you for the clarification I will pass this information along as we proceed to the
next level. having said that, since the Bank of Hawaii was as you say, your client, then
why did the estate have to pay your offices for legal services?

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

From: NMeek48409@aol.com [mailto:NMeek48409@aol.com]

Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 1:52 PM
To: Jane Peebles
Cc: jlee@goodsill.com; alan@mpi-hi.com; rdiehl@hawaii.rr.com;
rgriswold@cades.com; peter.ho@boh.com; dloui@boh.com;
Penelope.Tong@boh.com; kbnypost@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Hello Jane

Hope you are on the road to recovery.

Please see the attached and reply accordingly, Thank you

Nanci Meek

(760) 413-
5660

RE: Meek Stipulation Stock check $646,000

Date: 1/24/2011 11:31:06 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From: jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
To: NMeek48409@aol.com

Sent from the Internet (Details)

Dear Ms. Meek:

California Business and Professions Code Section 6068 poses a

very strict duty of confidentiality as to attorney-client
communications. California Evidence Code Sections 950-962
impose strict attorney-client privilege. Even if I were subpoenaed
to provide the data you have requested , I would have to assert
those privileges. Therefore, I am forbidden to provide you with
any off the information you have requested, nor will I be available
to meet with you.
Please remove me from your email list as to this matter and do
not call me as I will not be able to accept your calls.

Jane Peebles
Karlin & Peebles, LLP
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 708
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Office: (310) 274-5245
Cell: (310) 486-4430
jpeebles@karlinpeebles.com
www.karlinpeebles.com