claimallegation
Outstanding Judgment Debt
As of February 18, 2025, defendants owe $2,111,086.01 to plaintiffs including principal, attorney's fees, sanctions, costs, and post-judgment interest at 12% per annum
Read the anchor · page 3
As of 02/18/2025 $2,111,086.01 remains owed and due from the Debtors to the Plaintiff, and subject to the Receiver's actions.
claimallegation
Non-Exempt Assets Exist but Cannot Be Readily Attached
Court finds judgment creditors have good faith reasons to believe debtor owns non-exempt property that cannot be readily attached or levied by ordinary legal process, including real property, tangible and intangible assets, professional corporations with accounts receivable, and bank accounts easily moved
Read the anchor · page 3
Judgment Creditors have good faith reasons to believe that Debtor owns non-exempt rights to present or future property that cannot be readily attached or levied on by ordinary legal process as required by the standard set forth in Tanner. Such property includes, but is not limited to, real property, tangible and intangible assets, other property, professional corporations which have accounts receivable, bank accounts that are easily moved and constantly changing in balance, and community property held jointly.
claimallegation
Risk of Asset Concealment
Court believes non-exempt assets exist which judgment creditors are justified in believing debtor will hide, necessitating receiver appointment
Read the anchor · page 3
The appointment of a Receiver to locate, marshal, and administer assets is justified because the Court believes that non-exempt assets exist which Judgment Creditors are justified in believing Debtor willhide.
claimallegation
Receiver Necessity Finding
Court finds receiver is necessary to carry out prior court orders and to serve justice, not to harass, under Texas Turnover Statute and Fraudulent Transfer Act
Read the anchor · page 3
A Receiver is necessary to carry out this Court's prior orders, and that the Receivership is necessary not to harass, but to serve justice. A Receiver is necessary in this case pursuant to the Texas Turnover Statute, TEX. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 31.002 and the Texas Fraudulent Transfer Act §24.009
claimallegation
Unauthorized Transfers Are Void
Any transfer of debtor property after turnover order signing is void (not merely voidable), and any conveyance without court approval has no effect on receivership
Read the anchor · page 4
Any unauthorized transfer of property in the custody of a Receiver is not merely voidable, it is void. Thus, any attempt by a judgment debtor to transfer any of his nonexempt property after the turnover order has been signed is void, and any conveyance of property in the custody of a Receiver without approval by the court has no effect upon the Receivership and the accomplishment of its purposes.
claimallegation
Lien Holder Priority Superseded
No one, including lien holders with prior filed deed of trust, can sell property held in custodia legis without court approval in the receivership proceeding
Read the anchor · page 4
No one-not even a lien holder with a prior filed deed of trust-can sell property held in custodia legis by a duly appointed Receiver without first obtaining approval from the Court in which the Receivership is pending.
entityobservation
Cyberlux Corporation
Corporate defendant and judgment debtor, addresses in Durham and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
Read the anchor · page 2
CYBERLUX CORPORATION (CORPORATION) 4625 Creekstone Dr Durham, NC 27703-8478 800 Park Offices Dr Suite 3209 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
entityobservation
Robert W. Berleth
Court-appointed receiver with authority to seize and liquidate debtor assets. Described as agent of the court with derived judicial immunity.
Read the anchor · page 2
"Receiver" refers to: ROBERT W. BERLETH. Receiver is the agent of this Court (not the attorney for any party), and is to be treated with the same courtesy accorded to the Court.
entityobservation
Judge Michael Gomez
Presiding judge who signed the receivership order
Read the anchor · page 20
Signed: Michael Many 5/22/2025 Hon. Michael Gomez JUDGE PRESIDING
eventattribution
Judgment Domestication
Court domesticated a judgment on June 23, 2023 establishing debt owed by defendants to plaintiffs
Read the anchor · page 3
"Judgment" refers to the Order domesticated by this court dated June 23, 2023. Applicant is owed a judgment amount of $1,572,500, with attorney's fees of $177,126.19, plus sanctions of $3,895.00 and $6,842.50 plus court costs with post-judgment interest accruing at the rate of 12% per annum.
eventattribution
Receivership Order Signing
Judge Michael Gomez signed order appointing receiver on May 22, 2025
Read the anchor · page 20
Signed and Dated: Signed: Michael Many 5/22/2025 Hon. Michael Gomez JUDGE PRESIDING
eventattribution
Court Hearing on Receiver Appointment
Court held hearing and received evidence on propriety of appointing receiver, finding requirements for Chapter 31 turnover were met
Read the anchor · page 3
Upon evidence admitted to this court, during the hearing for appointment of Receiver the court finds the requirements for chapter 31 turnover have been met. The court takes judicial notice of the evidence and testimony presented during the appointment hearing.
eventattribution
Transfer of Custodial Control
All non-exempt property of judgment debtors placed in custodia legis under receiver's control as of order signing date
Read the anchor · page 4
Once a turnover order containing an appointment of a Receiver is signed, all of the judgment debtor's nonexempt property becomes property in custodia legis, or "in the custody of the law". In other words, the judgment debtor's property is considered to be in the constructive possession of the court.
observationobservation
Receiver Judicial Immunity Doctrine
Court cites precedent establishing that receiver, as agent of court, has derived judicial immunity covering all acts performed in that function
Read the anchor · page 2
"Once an individual is cloaked with derived judicial immunity because of a particular function being performed for a court, every action taken with regard to that function-whether good or bad, honest or dishonest, well-intentioned or not-is immune from suit. Once applied to the function, the cloak of immunity covers all acts, both good and bad." Davis v. Radoff, 317 S.W.3d 301, (Tex.App-Hou 1st 2009)
distillateobservation