After considering the parties proposals, the Court will limit the scope of jurisdictional discovery in this matter as follows: (1) The names and dates during which any persons were Insiders (as the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”) defines that term) of both Citizens and First Preference, between December 2002 and August 28, 2006; (2) The names and dates during which any entities were Affiliates (as the UFTA defines that term) of both Citizens and First Preference between December 2002 and August 28, 2006; (3) The names and dates during which any persons were employees or shareholders (or held other ownership interests) of both Citizens and First Preference, between December 2002 and August 28, 2006; (4) The identity and value of any assets Citizens and First Preference transferred to each other or to their common Affiliates, between January 1, 2005 and August 28, 2006; (5) The identity and value of any of First Preference’s assets Citizens, First Preference or their common Affiliates, transferred to any Insiders between January 1, 2005 and August 28, PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com 2006; (6) What consideration Citizens or its Affiliates provided First Preference in exchange for the transfer of First Preference’s assets to Citizens or one of its Affiliates; (7) What consideration those entities, or their Affiliates, of which David Mann is or was an Insider provided First Preference in exchange for the transfer of First Preference’s assets; (8) The due diligence Citizens or its Affiliates, conducted for the purchase of First Preference’s assets;

(9) Agreements between First Preference and Citizens State Bank under which Citizens State Bank provided funding or shared business to support First Preference’s lending activities; (10) Agreements between First Preference and other entities of which David Mann is or was an insider under which those entities provided funding or shared business to support First Preference’s lending activities; (11) Information regarding First Preference’s solvency from January 1, 2005 to August 28, 2006, including but not limited to, tax returns, financial statements and any applications First Preference made to borrow money or act as a correspondent lender; (12) Documents exchanged between Citizens and First Preference’s entities or any of their Insiders relating to First Preference’s ability to pay CitiMortgage, per the terms of the parties’ agreements; (13) Information of Citizens’ commencement of operations and lending activities; (14) The dates, topics discussed and participants in (in what capacity and on which entity’s behalf they participated) any meetings, telephone conversations, correspondence or electronic messaging with CitiMortgage involving any of the agreements involved in this case.

Mr. Mann and Mr. LaCombe shall be available for oral depositions within TEN (10) days of production of written discovery, or no later than April 12, 2007.

Depositions shall be conducted at a time and location, by agreement of the parties, under the scope ruled by the Court.

The parties shall submit briefs, on the jurisdictional issue in this matter, within THIRTY (30) days, after Mr. Mann and Mr. LaCombe are deposed, or no later than May 14, 2007, unless that date is extended by the Court.

In accordance with the conference held today, regarding the jurisdictional issue in this matter, the Court will issue the following Order: 1) The parties shall submit, no later than February 23, 2007, individual proposals for the scope of written discovery and the scope of the subject matter of the depositions of Mr. Charles D. “Bud” LaCombe and Mr. David Mann.

5) The parties have discussed preservation of all electronic materials that may be the PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com proper subject of discovery, will preserve all electronically stored materials, and have agreed that no order in that regard is indicated, at this time.

6) Mr. Mann and Mr. LaCombe shall be available for oral depositions within TEN (10) days of production of written discovery, or no later than April 2, 2007, unless that date is extended by the Court.

Depositions shall be conducted at a time and location, by agreement of the parties, under the scope ruled by the Court.

7) The parties shall submit briefs, on the jurisdictional issue in this matter, within THIRTY (30) days, after Mr. Mann and Mr. LaCombe are deposed, or no later than May 2, 2007, unless that date is extended by the Court.

The undersigned having determined that she should disqualify herself from this proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case shall be returned to the Clerk of the Court for reassignment to another district judge.

Dated this 16th day of January, 2007.

Plaintiff requests that the Court allow limited discovery on the jurisdictional issue prior to ruling on the motions to dismiss.

Plaintiff believes that jurisdiction is proper because Citizens is simply an alter ego of First Preference, and that both are effectively controlled by defendant Mann.

Plaintiff argues that limited discovery is proper because many of the facts surrounding the alleged alter ego relationship are uniquely within the defendants’ knowledge.

Indeed, “[i]n order to be entitled to discovery, plaintiff is required to have alleged facts in the petition, which, if true, establish jurisdiction.” Mello v. Giliberto, 73 S.W.3d 669, 673 (Mo.

If those relationships and transactions are, as plaintiff claims, designed to facilitate fraud, or are otherwise relevant to the contracts at dispute in this matter, then personal jurisdiction over defendants Citizens Mortgage and David Mann may be appropriate.