of work by Parker Mechanical, blog post by John Hoff
Frequent political "also ran" Troy Parker, who is also a frequent flyer on Litigation Airlines (click here for previous story) was involved in a business entity called Parker Mechanical Inc and, it would appear, a business entity just called Parker Mechanical. (Parker Mechanical was just an assumed name, Parker Mechanical INCORPORATED was an actual corporation)
Those two business entities no longer exist but information exists on the "inactive" business portion of the Minnesota Secretary of State website.
Both businesses were registered at 4933 Penn Ave. N., the same as Troy Parker's campaign headquarters for world domination, starting with local offices.
If he could ever win.
Parker Mechanical INCORPORATED had Arylnn Parker as its chief executive officer, though the state website spells her name "Aelynn." Parker Mechanical INCORPORATED was created in 2000 but was...
...administratively dissolved in 2008. Parker Mechanical (no "incorporated") was the assumed name. Its duration was until 2010 so now it's inactive since, apparently, nothing was filed to keep it active, especially after the dissolution of Parker Mechanical INCORPORATED in 2008.
A commenter on this blog says there are "19 civil filings" involving Parker Mechanical but I can't confirm that info through MNCIS, though MNCIS is a rinky-dinky system on the best of days. I can, however, find documents in the federal PACER system about a lawsuit against Parker filed by The Trustees of Sheet Metal Local #10 Control Board Trust Fund v. Parker Mechanical, Inc.
The Sheet Metal union was suing for $4,609.12.
And you know what I always say in these circumstances...
I'm sure Troy Parker has the 12 cents.
The lawsuit was served April 13, 2004, click here for document. No answer came from Parker in 20 days so the Sheet Metal union moved for a default judgment.
The default judgment was granted.
(To the commenter who claimed there were 19 civil filings, get me the file numbers and I will dig into that when I can. I've hit a dead end with MNCIS even when doing "business search" under civil filings)
Sigh. Troy Parker. What else can I say right now?
This is a guy who wants (or, at one time, wanted) to hold public office and, among other things, make decisions that have an impact on business. Yet apparently Troy Parker didn't have enough sense to realize when your business is being sued, you have to file an answer or there will be a default judgment.
7 comments:
27-CO-02-0214163 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs FRED A LOSO 02/14/2002- Hennepin Civil
Conciliation Closed
27-CO-02-0214165 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs ROBERT THOMSON & COMPANY 02/14/2002
- Hennepin Civil Conciliation Closed
27-CO-02-0215072 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs MORCON CONSTRUCTION INC 02/15/2002
- Hennepin Civil Conciliation Closed
27-CO-02-0620061 WILLIAM O RUSSELL vs PARKER MECHANICAL INC 06/20/2002
- Hennepin Civil Conciliation Closed
27-CO-03-0722003 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs YVETTE STALLING 07/22/2003- Hennepin Civil
Conciliation Closed
27-CO-03-0722004 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs LARRY PLANK 07/22/2003 - Hennepin Civil
Conciliation Closed
02-SX-03-002188 PARKER MECHANICAL INC VS MASTER SERVICES & MOHAMAD AMRO C7042269
07/25/2003 Anoka Conciliation Converted Closed
27-CO-03-1029035 PAUL FORSLINE vs PARKER MECHANICAL INC 10/29/2003
- Hennepin Civil Conciliation Closed
27-CO-03-1126113 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs LARRY PLANK 11/26/2003- Hennepin Civil
Conciliation Closed
27-CO-03-1126114 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs BRAKINS HOMES INC, AKINYELE AKINSANA
11/26/2003- Hennepin Civil Conciliation
Closed
27-CO-03-1126115 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs BRAKINS HOMES INC, AKINYELE AKINSANA
11/26/2003- Hennepin Civil Conciliation
Closed
27-CO-04-0105017 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs PRATT MONTGOMERY 01/05/2004 - Hennepin Civil Conciliation Closed
27-CV-04-000540 PAUL FORSLINE PLAINTIFF VS PARKER MECHANICAL INC DEFENDANT 01/13/2004
- Hennepin Civil Transcript Judgment
Closed
27-CV-04-001942 PARKER MECHANICAL INC VS BRAKINS HOMES INC 02/13/2004 - Hennepin Civil leung, Tony N. Mechanics Lien
Closed
27-CV-04-002684 BRAKINS HOMES INC VS PARKER MECHANICAL INC 02/20/2004 Hennepin Civil
Leung, Tony N. Contract Closed
02-C7-04-002269 PARKER MECHANICAL INC VS MASTER SERVICES AND MOHAMAD AMRO 03/11/2004
Anoka Transcript Judgment Converted Closed
27-CV-04-004153 PARKER MECHANICAL INC VS PLANK,LARRY, 03/17/2004 - Hennepin Civil
Neville, Cara Lee Conciliation Appeal Closed
27-CO-04-0810052 PARKER MECHANICAL INC vs JON GOLDBLATT 08/10/2004 - Hennepin Civil
Conciliation Closed
27-CV-04-015635 SPS COMPANIES, INC., A MINNESOTA CORPORATION PLAINTIFF VS PARKER MECHANICAL INC. A MINNESOTA CORPORATION DEFENDANT 10/15/2004 - Hennepin Civil
Default Judgment Closed
Johnny Northside (heart symbol) helpful commenters, who are really better described as contributors.
I will be digging into that.
But why I can't get this stuff to appear on MNCIS when I search civil cases under the "business" section is a mystery to me. I even tried just searching "Parker" and that didn't work either.
The name searched has to be the exact name listed as the party in the case to find the case.
1. http://www.mncourts.gov/publicaccess and select "I ACCEPT"
2. Select "Civil Family and Probate Case Records"
3. At "Search By" box hit the drop down arrow and select "Party"
4. In the "Party Information" box that now shows put the blue dot on "Business" instead of "name" and enter the business name. (Parker Mechanical Inc) Click "Search".
"Parker Mechanical" without the Inc will not return results.
Arg. Name has to be EXACT.
Ok, gotcha. Thanks a ton. I know I will get plenty of use out of that guidance.
Even better, the name does not need to be exact. You can use an asterisk to truncate the company name, which can come in handy if you don't know if it's Inc. or Corp. or LLC or whatever.
For example, you can perform this search:
parker mech*
and you will also get the results.
I am learning so much here. This is great.
Thank you for this information. *? Who knew? There are is goofy punctuation in some of the business filings at the Secretary of State. I'm surprised that is allowed. Seems like punctuation doesn't belong as part of a corporate entity's name.
Post a Comment