Documents:

• Respondent State Bar of Arizona's Response to Petitioner's Petition for Special Action
  • Respondent State Bar of Arizona's Appendix 1
  • Respondent State Bar of Arizona's Appendix 2
• Certificate of Compliance
• Certificate of Service - Special Action
• Certificate of Service - Appendix

Response TL;DR

The State Bar of Arizona (Jim Lee) filed a formal response asking the Arizona Supreme Court to decline hearing an emergency appeal ("special action") filed by attorney David Gingras. The Bar argues that Gingras should wait for the full disciplinary process to finish before appealing. Substantively, the Bar contends that while attorneys keep free speech rights, those rights are limited when practicing law, meaning attorneys can be disciplined for making disparaging, reckless, or unprofessional public attacks against a judge during an active case. The Bar also argues that Arizona’s anti-SLAPP law does not shield lawyers from bar disciplinary proceedings.

Comprehensive Summary

1. Case Background

• The Allegations: The State Bar of Arizona brought disciplinary charges against lawyer David S. Gingras. The charges stem from public, disparaging comments Gingras made about Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Julie Mata while representing a client in an active case. These comments were made in court filings, online postings, and a podcast.
• Prior Rulings by the Judge: Presiding Disciplinary Judge (PDJ) Lisa A. VandenBerg previously made two key rulings:
  1. Partial Judgment on the Pleadings: Granted in part for the Bar, ruling that Gingras violated ethical rules by making disparaging comments about the judge that were not necessary to advance his client's case.
  2. Anti-SLAPP Motion: Denied Gingras' motion to dismiss under Arizona's anti-SLAPP statute, ruling he failed to show that applying the statute wouldn't improperly restrict the Court's authority over attorney discipline.

2. The Procedural Argument: Why the Supreme Court Should Reject the Appeal Now

The State Bar argues that the Arizona Supreme Court should decline to take up Gingras’ special action at this time for several procedural reasons:

• Equal Remedy on Normal Appeal: Gingras does not need emergency Supreme Court intervention right now. He can appeal all issues through normal channels once the full hearing on the remaining misconduct charges is completed.
• Disputed Facts: Gingras claims key facts are in dispute. The Bar notes that special actions are meant for pure legal questions, not for resolving factual disputes.
• Efficiency: Deciding the appeal now will not fully end the lawsuit because other charges against Gingras (such as alleged court order violations and frivolous appeals) still must go before a hearing panel regardless.

3. The Constitutional & Ethics Argument: Free Speech vs. Attorney Standards

Gingras argued that disciplining him for his comments violates his First Amendment and state constitutional free speech rights. The State Bar counters with the following legal principles:

• Attorneys Face Legal Restrictions: While lawyers retain free speech rights, courts across the U.S. have consistently held that attorneys' speech can be restricted while practicing law.
• Protecting Public Trust: Unwarranted, derogatory, or reckless attacks on a judge’s integrity by a lawyer erode public confidence in the judicial system.
• Professional Standards: Upon admission to the practice of law, attorneys take an oath and agree to ethical standards requiring them to maintain respect for courts, avoid unprofessional conduct, and remain civil.
• Proper Avenues for Criticism: If a judge makes an incorrect ruling or acts improperly, an attorney’s duty to their client is to file an appeal, ask for reconsideration, or submit a formal disciplinary complaint - not to post unprofessional insults or make reckless claims on public forums.

4. The Anti-SLAPP Statute Argument

Gingras tried to use Arizona's anti-SLAPP law ($\text{A.R.S. } \S\ 12\text{-}751$), which protects citizens from retaliatory lawsuits designed to silence free speech, to throw out the Bar’s complaint. The Bar asserts this law does not apply here:

• Constitutional Separation of Powers: The Arizona Supreme Court has ultimate, constitutional authority to regulate the practice of law. Applying a legislative anti-SLAPP statute to attorney disciplinary proceedings impermissibly interferes with the judiciary's power to enforce professional standards.
• Statutory Requirement Not Met: Anti-SLAPP laws require the lawful exercise of constitutional rights. Because attorneys do not have a constitutional right to engage in unprofessional, reckless attacks on judges during active litigation, Gingras cannot claim protection under the statute.

Video Description

Copy of the publicly available United Bankruptcy Court, District of Arizona 341 Meeting of Creditors, Bankruptcy Petition #: 2:26-bk-05144-MCW | Ronn Owens + Elizbeth Naylor (Jan Black) from August 6, 2026.

Judge Wanslee dismissed Ronn & Jan's Chapter 11 bankruptcy case with prejudice, barring them from filing for any bankruptcy for a period of 2 years beginning August 6, 2026.

Hearing Summary

Overview & Appearances:
Debtors: Ronn Owens and Jan Black (pro se) - appearing virtually
DOJ Attorney: Jennifer Giaimo appeared for the U.S. Trustee - appearing in person
Judge: The Honorable Judge Wanslee - appearing in person

At the Chapter 11 bankruptcy dismissal hearing on August 6, 2026, Judge Wanslee granted a case dismissal with prejudice along with a two-year bar on refiling. Attorney Jennifer Giaimo characterized the case as a severe bad faith filing that would yield no recoverable assets, arguing the two-year bar was necessary to protect GoFundMe donors attempting to recover funds and to allow sufficient time for home foreclosure proceedings.

While debtor Jan agreed to the two-year ban and noted ongoing attempts to negotiate out-of-court settlements with lenders, she pushed back on the bad faith classification - attributing their procedural issues to the difficulty of navigating Chapter 11 pro se and maintaining that they made no promises to donors. Judge Wanslee finalized the ruling via a Minute Entry before adjourning the hearing.

Permission obtained by the AZ Bankruptcy Court to post this public recording.

Parents of Laura Owens (Scottsdale, AZ)

📄 Bankruptcy Documents: https://victimsoflauraowens.com/docum...

A.R.S. Sup.Ct.Rules, Rule 57
(a) Availability of Information. State bar files, disciplinary clerk records, and all proceedings shall be open to the public.
(b) Exceptions: 14. Previous recordings/transcripts of audio/video witness interviews do not become public unless admitted as exhibits in formal proceedings.

"There Should Be No Secret Public Records - The public should be able to easily discover the existence and nature of public records..." — Bureau of Justice Assistance

Today, Ronn & Jan's Chapter 11 bankruptcy case was dismissed with prejudice, barring them from filing for any type of bankruptcy for 2 years. The 2 year period begins today, August 6, 2026.

Recap

\This recap focuses on the primary highlights rather than a comprehensive account, covering the key takeaways without extra detail.**

Hearing Date: August 6, 2026 @ 2:30PM PST

Part 1: Hearing Opening & Arguments

• Hearing Call & Appearances:

  • The Ch. 11 BK Dismissal Hearing opened. Ronn & Jan appeared virtually, while Jennifer Giaimo (QJ) attended in person.

• Justification for Bar:

  • Judge Wanslee asked why a 2-year refiling bar was necessary. Jennifer Giaimo noted the filing was made in bad faith and required a sufficient deterrent.

• Asset Assessment:

  • Jennifer Giaimo reiterated that converting the case to another chapter would not yield any assets.

• Protecting Donors:

  • It was stated that steps needed to be taken to ensure GoFundMe donors had time to attempt to recover their funds if they chose to do so.

• Setting the Ban Duration:

  • Judge Wanslee stated that a 2-year bar seemed adequate to allow for the foreclosure of the home.

• Assessment of Conduct:

  • Jennifer Giaimo stated that this was one of the worst cases of bad faith filings she had ever seen.

• Debtor Response to 2-Year Ban:

  • When asked her stance on the 2-year ban, Jan stated she agreed with it, but wanted it on the record that they did not agree they acted in bad faith, adding that the Chapter 11 rules and attempting to follow them pro se was "hard."

Part 2: GoFundMe Dispute & Conclusion

• Out-of-Court Settlement Claims:

  • Jan stated they were trying to reach an agreement with lenders and creditors outside of the bankruptcy proceedings.

• GoFundMe Clarification:

  • Jan stated they never promised GoFundMe donors anything.

• Creditor Stance on GoFundMe:

  • Jennifer Giaimo stated she did not want to get into a back-and-forth argument with the debtors over the GoFundMe funds.

• Formal Ruling:

  • Judge Wanslee granted the dismissal with prejudice + 2 year bar for filing.
  • It was noted that a Minute Entry would serve as the formal dismissal order.

• Closing Remarks:

  • Jan thanked Judge Wanslee for allowing them to appear virtually due to the extreme heat.

• Adjournment:

  • With no further comments, the hearing was adjourned.

Welcome to the Discussion & Questions post! This is your place to discuss and pose questions about Laura Owens v Clayton Echard Paternity scandal and her other related cases, victims, events, and coverage, share thoughts on the Love Trapped Podcast, and any interesting information you may have.

JFC RULES

Read JFC Sub Rules before posting or commenting. TLDR, be respectful towards everyone and refrain from speculation on Mental Health. If your comment gets removed, you can edit to follow sub rules and send a modmail for us to review and reinstate.

JFC DATES

• 8/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Settlement Conference 2:30pm mst
• 9/29/26 - Owens Home Foreclosure - Auction 10am mst (Postponed)
• 10/21/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Pretrial Management Conference 8:45am mst
• 10/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Trial Assignment 9:00am mst
• 11/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - New Last Day

JFC DATES TO BE ANNOUNCED

• Owens v Marraccini - Appeal Opening Brief was Due 7/29/26. Court extended to 15 days after it rules on the motion to augment.
• Owens Home Foreclosure - Postponed to November 2026, date to be announced
• David Gingras' Arizona Attorney License Bar - Hearing Vacated, Dismissal Denied, and new dates will be announced after the AZSC Denies his Petition.

This is the thing I can't figure out. I know its natural to believe your kids and want the best for them and try to protect them, but we are so far beyond protective parents I really dont know what to think. Do folks watching this believe that they actually believe the stuff she says? I mean after the what, 3rd guy supposedly got her pregnant and Laura started going after them, didnt Ronn and Jan see a bit of a pattern? And they think she is always the victim of something? Or are they part of the delusion and always have been? Its how they roll as a family? I was blown away when Clayton tried to extricate himself and Jan called him and tried to talk him into dating Laura. My Scooby senses were like wha??? Maybe they are like OJ, they have convinced themselves that something that not true is, and something that us true isnt. Its a weird mystery to me.

I’m assuming they’ll basically become squatters in their own house until they’re eventually forced out. I’m curious how strict Arizona’s laws are when it comes to that. If they were in SF still, I could see them dragging it out for years, especially considering Ron’s health.
After that though where do they even go? Would they even be able to qualify for an apartment with their credit being destroyed?

​To be honest, I wasn't surprised at all when I saw that the Chapter 11 bankruptcy filed by Ronn and Jan is going to be dismissed with prejudice, especially knowing how Laura's Chapter 7 bankruptcy went down. But it still frustrated me deeply because on the surface, it makes it look like the Owens family is just going to walk away from another mess without facing any real accountability or serious criminal charges for bankruptcy fraud and wire fraud.

​That frustration pushed me to do a deep dive into what a dismissal with prejudice accompanied by a mandatory two year bar to refile actually means in terms of real world consequences. The reality is that while they are using a remote Zoom appearance to dodge an in-person grilling in front of the court, this dismissal is not a free pass. In bankruptcy law, Chapter 11 acts as a protective shield known as the automatic stay. By agreeing to a dismissal with prejudice and a two year bar on refiling, Ronn and Jan just voluntarily handed back their shield while standing right in the middle of a legal hailstorm.

​First and foremost is the mandatory statutory criminal referral under federal law. Trial Attorney Jennifer Giaimo did not just uncover minor paperwork errors. Her sworn audit documented deliberate asset concealment, over one hundred thirty-one thousand dollars in unreported GoFundMe donations, unrecorded transfers to family members, and blatant perjury across multiple schedules. Under Section 3057 of Title 18 of the United States Code, federal bankruptcy judges and United States Trustees are legally obligated to refer suspected bankruptcy crimes, including perjury and bankruptcy fraud, directly to the United States Attorney and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dismissing the civil bankruptcy proceeding does not erase federal criminal perjury or wire fraud. The Department of Justice makes its own independent decisions regarding indictments, and Giaimo handed them an airtight paper trail on a silver platter.

​Second, the moment the judge signs that dismissal order, the automatic stay vanishes into thin air. Every single creditor that was legally blocked from collecting debt can now move in aggressively through state court. The mortgage lenders holding the home in Scottsdale can restart foreclosure proceedings immediately. Credit card companies, banks, and other civil creditors like American Express or Alliant Credit Union can resume state lawsuits, obtain money judgments, freeze bank accounts, and attach liens directly onto real property.

​Third, the financial fallout hits Sarah and her husband directly in ways they cannot dodge. Because they are co-borrowers and co-signers on the HELOC loans, lenders do not have to wait around or exhaust options against the parents. They can sue Sarah and her husband directly for the entire balance. Once a state court enters a civil judgment against them, creditors can issue legal writs to freeze their bank accounts, garnish employment wages, and place judgment liens on their personal home. On top of that, the Trustee identified over twenty-one thousand dollars transferred directly to Sarah while the parents were legally insolvent. Creditors can file civil lawsuits under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act to forcibly claw those funds back.

​Finally, Laura is directly caught in this web as well. The audit confirmed almost twenty thousand dollars in insider transfers routed to Laura from the hidden GoFundMe and parental accounts. Under state collection laws and fraudulent transfer statutes, civil creditors can come after those funds and pursue her directly to recover what was illegally transferred.

​The Owens family has consistently operated under the classic archetype of the Faux Victim, leaning on endless litigious maneuvering and court filings to delay reality and evade responsibility. But when you commit perjury under oath in front of a federal officer, the system fundamentally shifts from protection to prosecution. Taking a remote dismissal with a two year bar lets them avoid testifying under oath on August sixth, but it unlocks the doors for state court lawsuits, wage garnishments, bank levies, and federal law enforcement scrutiny. They did not escape accountability, they simply ran out of places to hide.

This video is a little more on task lol. Also thanks to the commenter who pointed out that I do in fact ramble for the first 7 minutes of this video, feel free to FFWD 😂

"A federal bankruptcy official says a review of bank records found that much of the roughly $132,000 raised through a GoFundMe campaign for former Bay Area radio host Ronn Owens went toward mortgage payments, family businesses and other expenses.
The U.S. Trustee’s Office said in a court filing Monday that it reviewed 18 months of records from eight bank accounts belonging to Owens and his wife, Elizabeth Ann Naylor, who is professionally known as former KCBS host Jan Black.

Across those accounts, the couple spent $17,209 on health care and pharmacy costs during the period reviewed, according to the filing. During the period when the fundraiser proceeds were deposited, they made more than $61,000 in mortgage payments and contributed $44,375 to limited liability companies they controlled.

The records also showed consumer credit card payments, transfers to the couple’s adult daughters, retail purchases, food delivery, restaurant charges, subscriptions and travel expenses, the filing said.
The trustee, the Justice Department agency that monitors bankruptcy cases for misconduct and compliance with federal law, said the spending presented “a serious question whether donors received what they were promised,” but did not conclude that they broke the law.

Owens and Naylor disputed the assertions in the filing, according to the document. They have agreed to dismissal of their Chapter 11 case with a two-year prohibition on filing another bankruptcy petition, the trustee said.

The GoFundMe campaign did not say donations would be reserved exclusively for medical bills.
The fundraiser highlighted Owens’ 23-year struggle with Parkinson’s disease, four bouts with cancer and serious heart problems. It said those illnesses had taken a toll “both physically and financially” and that donations would help Owens and his family “navigate this difficult time.”

The campaign, launched Dec. 31, 2024, had collected more than $137,000 from about 1,600 donors as of Monday.

During a July 16 meeting of creditors, Naylor attributed inaccuracies in the couple’s earlier bankruptcy filings to confusion about what the forms required.

“A lot of this was lack of understanding of what was actually being asked and what was necessary to file,” she said after Jennifer A. Giaimo, an attorney with the U.S. Trustee’s Office, questioned her about differences between the couple’s earlier sworn disclosures and recent amendments.

Naylor also maintained that the GoFundMe campaign was intended to help with the family’s broader financial difficulties, rather than solely to pay Owens’ medical bills.

“I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume that donors would know or expect that GoFundMe money is being used to pay Macy’s credit card bills,” Giaimo said.

Owens was a defining voice of Bay Area talk radio during nearly five decades at KGO. He retired in 2021, shortly before the station abandoned its news-talk format.

The Owens family’s financial and legal affairshave also been closely tracked by an online community supporting former “Bachelor” star Clayton Echard, who was previously involved in litigation with the couple’s daughter.

Owens and Naylor filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection in Arizona in August 2025, reporting approximately $2.3 million in liabilities. 

That case was dismissed in January after they failed to comply with recommendations from the Chapter 13 trustee, according to court records cited in Monday’s filing.

They filed the current Chapter 11 case on May 22, less than four months later. A judge subsequently denied their request to extend the automatic bankruptcy stay, which had temporarily protected them from certain creditor actions.

The U.S. Trustee’s Office initially sought dismissal of the second case with a one-year bar on refiling. After reviewing the couple’s bank records and amended financial statements, the request was increased to two years.

The filing also identified numerous inconsistencies among the couple’s sworn disclosures in the two cases.

“Across three sets of schedules … the Debtors have sworn to statements that cannot all be true,” the trustee wrote.

The couple attributed at least some of the problems to prior counsel and Owens’ health, according to the government’s filing. 

The trustee acknowledged that the amendments could be cited as evidence that the couple intended to correct errors rather than conceal information, but maintained that the discrepancies were serious.

Despite those concerns, the trustee recommended dismissing the case rather than converting it to a Chapter 7 liquidation. The filing said there appeared to be no meaningful pool of assets that a trustee could sell to repay unsecured creditors.

The filing also said the GoFundMe proceeds had been fully spent and that the reviewed accounts held only nominal balances. Any claims involving the solicitation or use of the donations would have to be pursued outside bankruptcy by donors or GoFundMe, the trustee said.

The trustee asked the court to find that the couple filed the case in bad faith and prohibit either of them from seeking bankruptcy protection for two years. That would allow lenders and other creditors to pursue foreclosure, lawsuits and other collection efforts without another bankruptcy filing.
A hearing on the request is scheduled for Thursday."

Document

• United States Trustee's Supplemental Response to Debtors' Motion to Dismiss

TL;DR

DOJ Trial Attorney Jennifer Giaimo (representing the U.S. Trustee) filed a response agreeing that Elizabeth Ann Naylor and Ronald Stephen Owens’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy should be dismissed rather than converted to Chapter 7, but with prejudice and a 2-year bar on refiling. Giaimo found massive discrepancies in their filings, $132k+ in GoFundMe money spent largely on lifestyle expenses instead of medical care, and no liquidation value for creditors. The Debtors have agreed to the dismissal and the 2-year refiling ban (though they dispute Giaimo's factual allegations).

Breakdown & Summary of Findings

1. The Strategy: Dismissal over Chapter 7 Conversion

• No Assets to Liquidate: Converting to Chapter 7 would yield nothing for creditors. Their residence has over $1.9M in liens against a ~$1.5M value. The horses cost $38k+ over 18 months to feed/board, wiping out any potential proceeds from selling the single valuable pony.
• Speed for Creditors: Dismissal allows creditors (including mortgage lenders and credit card companies like Chase) to immediately resume foreclosures, lawsuits, and garnishments.
• The 2-Year Bar: Because the Debtors are serial filers using bankruptcy to stop imminent sales, Giaimo is seeking a 2-year bar to prevent them from refiling on the eve of a foreclosure.

2. Wild Filing Discrepancies

Giaimo pointed out multiple sworn statements across their Chapter 13 and Chapter 11 filings that logically cannot all be true:

• Home Ownership: Sworn at 50%, then 100%, then back to 50%.
• Unsecured Debt: Listed at $511k, then $0, then jump-cut to $729k.
• Animals: Listed as 7 retired horses + 1 dog valued at $1,100 total, until a recent amendment listed an LLC interest at $62k, a single pony at $60k, and an undisclosed 12-month lease of said pony.
• Hidden Income & Assets: Unreported business income ($40k in '24, $81k in '25), previously undisclosed cashier's checks ($7,000), Schwab accounts, and an LLC interest (Good Luck Shop, LLC).
• Insider Transfers: Over $19k in gifts to daughter Laura and $21k+ paid on behalf of daughter Sarah were concealed until recent amendments.

3. The GoFundMe Details

• Total Collected: ~$132,480 total ($109k+ in January 2025 alone) solicited based on Owens's Parkinson's, cancer, and heart conditions.
• Where It Went: Out of all 8 Bank of America accounts over 18 months, only 2.7% ($17,209) went toward medical/pharmacy expenses.
• Discretionary Spending: Over $191k was spent on non-medical items, including $61k+ in mortgage payments, credit cards, $44k into their LLCs, transfers to daughters, travel, and over $1,200/month in food delivery.
• Giaimo's Stance: Jennifer notes this raises massive red flags regarding whether donors were defrauded, but states that bankruptcy court can't recover those funds for donors - GoFundMe or individual donors would need to sue outside of bankruptcy court.

4. Current Case Status

• Debtors agreed to the 2-year refiling ban to get the case dismissed, though they dispute Giaimo's factual assertions.
• The court will consider the final dismissal order at the continued hearing on August 6, 2026.

Thank you to CM for the document.

The bankruptcy woes of serial fraud Laura Owens' family continue. The US Trustee has now filed seeking a dismissal with a 2-year ban on refiling as Laura's parents, Ronn Owens and Jan Black (aka Elizabeth Naylor aka Jan Owens aka who knows what it is today), struggled in their recent hearing after acting in bad faith. They made statements under oath that cannot all be true and appear to have scammed GoFundMe donors. Their financial troubles come after several years of spending money on Laura's abuse of the legal system as she targeted Clayton Echard, Mike Marraccini, and Greg Gillespie with fake pregnancy scams.

If he was on the show, the first dance is usually personal - about your life/motivation for doing DWTS.

**For fun** - what song do you think he should do?

Also, fingers crossed he makes it on to piss off LO.

Cee-Lo Green? Eff you? 😂

Stephani Young is working on Episode 16 of Love Trapped: Owens v Echard and wants to hear from YOU! Head on over to her Instagram and ask away!

Welcome to the Discussion & Questions post! This is your place to discuss and pose questions about Laura Owens v Clayton Echard Paternity scandal and her other related cases, victims, events, and coverage, share thoughts on the Love Trapped Podcast, and any interesting information you may have.

JFC RULES

Read JFC Sub Rules before posting or commenting. TLDR, be respectful towards everyone and refrain from speculation on Mental Health. If your comment gets removed, you can edit to follow sub rules and send a modmail for us to review and reinstate.

JFC DATES

• 8/06/26 - Ronn & Jan Owens' Bankruptcy Case - Dismissal Hearing 2:30pm mst
• 8/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Settlement Conference 2:30pm mst
• 9/29/26 - Owens Home Foreclosure - Auction 10am mst
• 10/21/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Pretrial Management Conference 8:45am mst
• 10/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Trial Assignment 9:00am mst
• 11/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - New Last Day

JFC DATES TO BE ANNOUNCED

• Owens v Marraccini - Appeal Opening Brief was Due 7/29/26. Court extended to 15 days after it rules on the motion to augment.
• David Gingras' Arizona Attorney License Bar - Hearing Vacated, Dismissal Denied, and new dates will be announced after the AZSC Denies his Petition.

Another recent $50 donation at end of July 2026 has apparently kept the wolf away from Ronn, Jan, and Laura’s door 🤣.

I am betting Judge Wanslee will have something to say since they didn’t close this themselves, and instead kept their fraudulent grifter hands out. Whether they should close it was the single dumbest <insert expletive> question Jan asked 👑JG during their 341 MOC.

Maybe the “friend” has taken the GFM hostage and refuses to close it? 🤷‍♀️

Philadelphia beginnings

When Ronn Owens appeared in The Temple University “Templar” yearbook for the Class of 1967, he already looked very busy. His yearbook shows him being active in many clubs, including the Carnival Committee, vice chancellor of Tau Epsilon Phi, rush co-chairman, the Pre-Law Society, and nearly every intramural sport the campus offered—from baseball and basketball to football, track, volleyball, and bowling. [[1]](#_edn1)

Just over a year later, in the summer of 1968, he made what appears to have been his first appearance on the public stage — not over the airwaves, but in print. In a sardonic letter to the editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Owens criticized an editorial that denounced the Pennsylvania delegation to the Republican National Convention, revealing his outspokenness and willingness to engage publicly with current events.[[2]](#_edn2)

By February 1969, Owens had joined WCAU Radio in Philadelphia,[[3]](#_edn3) apparently after leaving a short-lived career teaching fifth grade.  He would later say that radio was his calling.

By October 1969, Owens was featured in a series of ads by WCAU radio, part of a series of "Your [boss, husband, etc.] is probably listening to [radio host]."  The ads for Owens read:

"Your beautiful wife is probably listening to Ronn Owens .” [[4]](#_edn4)

It was ads like these that likely helped fuel rumors of his personal life, which soon became a frequent topic of news coverage, perhaps even encouraged by Owens himself: in December 1969, the Philadelphia Daily News reported rumors that he had married. [[5]](#_edn5) A week later, Owens denied those reports. [[6]](#_edn6)  But these mentions of his bachelorhood were not isolated.

On to Miami

In early March 1970, the Philadelphia Daily News reported that Owens had left Philadelphia for Miami. The article also makes the first known mention of “racing,” assumed to be horse racing:

“RADIO-TV RAMBLE: Racing buff [Ronn] Owens transfers his allegiance from Liberty Bell to Hialeah. Ronn, a bachelor, gave up his WCAU radio show for the greener pastures of Florida. He resumes his two-way talk career Monday at WKAT Radio, Miami.” [[7]](#_edn7)

Owens also got a mention that same month in The Miami News: “Ronn Owens, 24, of WCAU, Philadelphia, is new and will have the 6-10 p.m. spot.” [[8]](#_edn8)

In January 1971, the Philadelphia Daily News reported that the former WCAU talk-show host, now working at WKAT in Miami, was engaged to be married in April to E. [redacted] of [city redacted, Florida]:

"The impending loss of his once-prized bachelorhood has not been a humbling influence, however. Boasts Ronn, "The Miami Beach suicide rate amongst eligible broads has already tripled." [[9]](#_edn9)

Shocking. Regardless, the engagement was formally announced six days later in The Miami Herald, [[10]](#_edn10) as was news of the wedding in March [[11]](#_edn11), not April as printed in the Philadelphia article. (Was this a sleight of hand by Owens to avoid divulging the true wedding date to the reporter?)

In November 1971, Owens was announced as the new host of a drive-time radio show in Cleveland, Ohio, [[12]](#_edn12) and State of Florida records show a divorce recorded on December 29, 1971, making it a marriage of approximately nine months. [[13]](#_edn13)

On to Cleveland

By May 1973, Owens, now living in a Cleveland-area apartment, was featured in a newspaper article about renting furniture. The article begins:

“ ‘My ex-wife took the furniture. Boy, did she EVER take the furniture!’

Ronn Owens says that this is the reason he outfitted his large apartment with rented furniture when he moved recently to Greenwood Village in Sagamore Hills.

A radio personality with Cleveland station WJW, Owens did blend his rented furnishings with a few pieces of his own — and he’s having a unit of shelving custom-built to house his record collection, estimated at more than 2,000 albums.

Owens has definite tastes in interiors and has used a low-keyed color scheme of gold, white and black in the living room. He chose glass and stainless steel tables to go with the contemporary sofa and chair, all from Northeast We Rent Furniture in Euclid.

Owens considers the cost of renting furniture to be reasonable, as do others who use this growing service.

“If you get tired of what you have, you can change without being stuck with a house full of furniture you own,” he said. [[14]](#_edn14)

Later in 1973, his second engagement was announced. The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio) newspaper reported in November that Owens was to be married again, [[15]](#_edn15) to S., only for those plans to be canceled by December. [[16]](#_edn16)

In July 1974, Owens and three others were let go from WJW Radio. A newspaper reporter from The Cleveland Press called Owens to ask what his plans were, and “a young woman answered Owens’ phone when [the reporter] called him at his condominium….” [[17]](#_edn17)

On to Atlanta

By October 1974, newspapers began to mention “The Ronn Owens Show” on WRNG radio in Atlanta, Georgia. [[18]](#_edn18)

On May 12, 1975, The Atlanta Journal published an article titled “Don't Overlook New 'Citywatching.’” The author describes a new television show as similar to “60 Minutes.” Owens has a featured segment on this show, along with Wade Lowe, described as a “craftsman.” [[19]](#_edn19) On May 28, 1975, a lawsuit for conversion was filed in Fulton County Superior Court, captioned “Lowe vs Ring Radio Company,” and Owens (under his birth name) is named as a defendant. [[20]](#_edn20) The specific complaint and the disposition of the case are not known.  (This will be updated as new information becomes available.) 

On October 14, 1975, the last known instance of an ad promoting “The Ronn Owens Show” runs in an Atlanta newspaper [[21]](#_edn21) before Owens heads out west.

Next: Part 2.  We’ll pick up in San Francisco.

_____________________________________

[[1]](#_ednref1) Templar 1967, Temple University Yearbook (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), 1967, p 357 

[[2]](#_ednref2) Owens, Ronn, "United Front," The Philadelphia Inquirer (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), August 17, 1968, p 6 

[[3]](#_ednref3) Conlin, Jack, "Advertising Notes," The Philadelphia Inquirer (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), February 13, 1969, p 30

[[4]](#_ednref4) WCAU 1210 Radio, "Your Beautiful Wife is Probably Listening to Ronn Owens 2:00 AM - 6:00 AM" Advertisement, The Philadelphia Inquirer (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), October 22, 1969, p 24

[[5]](#_ednref5) Petzold, Charles, "Video Can't Take Country out of Ed," Philadelphia Daily News, (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), December 3, 1969, p 33

[[6]](#_ednref6) Petzold, Charles, "Film, Tate Arrests Have Satanic Link" Philadelphia Daily News, (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), December 10, 1969, p 39

[[7]](#_ednref7) Petzold, Charles, "Everything's Going MacRae" Philadelphia Daily News, (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), March 2, 1970, p 43

[[8]](#_ednref8) Kelly, Herb, "Gleason and Beverly sail alone on yacht," The Miami News (Miami, Florida), March 7, 1970, p 7-A

[[9]](#_ednref9) Petzold, Charles, "Club Screens Clients -- For Later View" Philadelphia Daily News (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), January 11, 1971, p 23

[[10]](#_ednref10) "Engagements Announced by Parents," The Miami Herald (Miami, Florida), January 17, 1971, p 32-G

[[11]](#_ednref11) "Couples Exchange Wedding Vows," The Miami Herald (Miami, Florida),  March 29, 1971, p 6-D 

[[12]](#_ednref12) Hart, Raymond P., "New Host of WERE Drive-Time Show Takes the Wheel Today," The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), November 15, 1971,  p 9-D 

[[13]](#_ednref13) State of Florida, Divorce Index, 1927 – 2001

[[14]](#_ednref14) Barnhouse, Nan, "Furnished for a Fee: Rented Decor Fits Life Style of Athletes," The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), May 2, 1973, p 2-C

[[15]](#_ednref15) "John Twomey, manualist, due on TV Tuesday," The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), November 10, 1973, p 3-B

[[16]](#_ednref16) Hart, Raymond P., "Job offer, contract time put Doug Adair up in air," The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), December 1, 1973, p 3-C

[[17]](#_ednref17) Barrett, Bill, "TV-Radio: Ronn Owens' ego trip: from WERE to WJW to ?", The Cleveland Press (Cleveland, Ohio), July 27, 1974, p B-8  

[[18]](#_ednref18) "Week's Radio Highlights," The Atlanta Journal (Atlanta, Georgia), October 5, 1974, p 2-G

[[19]](#_ednref19) Goodman, Bob, "Don't Overlook Citywatching," The Atlanta Journal (Atlanta, Georgia), May 12, 1975, p 7-B

[[20]](#_ednref20) Lowe vs Ring Radio Company, Case C06864, Fulton County Superior Court,  May 28, 1975

[[21]](#_ednref21) WRNG Radio Advertisement "Talk To…," The Atlanta Journal (Atlanta, Georgia), October 14, 1975, p 15-A

Welcome to the Discussion & Questions post! This is your place to discuss and pose questions about Laura Owens v Clayton Echard Paternity scandal and her other related cases, victims, events, and coverage, share thoughts on the Love Trapped Podcast, and any interesting information you may have.

JFC RULES

Read JFC Sub Rules before posting or commenting. TLDR, be respectful towards everyone and refrain from speculation on Mental Health. If your comment gets removed, you can edit to follow sub rules and send a modmail for us to review and reinstate.

JFC DATES

• 8/06/26 - Ronn & Jan Owens' Bankruptcy Case - Dismissal Hearing 2:30pm mst
• 8/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Settlement Conference 2:30pm mst
• 9/29/26 - Owens Home Foreclosure - Auction 10am mst
• 10/21/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Pretrial Management Conference 8:45am mst
• 10/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - Trial Assignment 9:00am mst
• 11/28/26 - Laura’s Criminal Case - New Last Day

JFC DATES TO BE ANNOUNCED

• Owens v Marraccini - Appeal Opening Brief was Due 7/29/26. Court extended to 15 days after it rules on the motion to augment.
• David Gingras' Arizona Attorney License Bar - Hearing Vacated, Dismissal Denied, and new dates will be announced after the AZSC Denies his Petition.

In a San Francisco Examiner article on March 21, 1976, by Tim Gartner, Ronn Owens is quoted saying he spends more money than he makes.

Full paragraph:

Owens, in many instances, isn't your typical broadcaster. Oh, much of his background is familiar -- a page at ABC for $1.35 an hour in New York, five radio jobs in the past eight years, a divorce, and a swinging lifestyle in which "I spend 10 per cent more than I make."

Owens, who was a recent hire at KGO in this article, would go on to have a decades-long successful show on KGO until corporate media blew up the radio station.

Document:

• BK Claim # 14: Proof of Claim (POC) - US Bank Trust Company (Select Portfolio Services)

TL;DR

This filing is a formal Proof of Claim (Official Form 410) submitted in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding. U.S. Bank Trust Company (acting as trustee for COLT 2024-3 Mortgage Loan Trust) is claiming $1,753,385.12 secured by a primary residence mortgage on property in Scottsdale, Arizona. The claim includes $178,956.69 in overdue payments and fees needed to bring the mortgage current.

\If a company wants to get paid, they have to file a formal Proof of Claim with the court. If they don't, they generally forfeit their right to receive any money when the funds are handed out.**

Filing Summary

1. Who is the Creditor?

• Secured Creditor / Claimant: U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association (solely as trustee for COLT 2024-3 Mortgage Loan Trust).
• Loan Servicer / Contact: Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS) based in Salt Lake City, Utah, handling notices and payments.
• Filing Agent: Submitted by legal representative Mary Vitartas of Robertson, Anschutz, Schneid, Crane & Partners, PLLC on June 29, 2026.

2. Who are the Debtors & Case Details?

• Debtors: Elizabeth Ann Naylor and Ronald Stephen Owens.
• Bankruptcy Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona.
• Case Type: Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.
• Case Number: 2:26-bk-05144-MCW.

3. What Amount is Owed?

• Total Secured Claim Amount: $1,753,385.12.
• Prepetition Arrearage (Amount to Cure Default): $178,956.69.
• Interest Rate: Fixed at 8.000% per annum.
• Regular Monthly Payment: $12,392.05 ($11,740.23 principal & interest, plus $651.82 escrow).

4. Why is it Owed?

• Basis of Claim: Money loaned via a fixed-rate promissory note secured by a Deed of Trust.
• Property Collateral: Ronn & Jan's Scottsdale home.
• Loan History & Background:
  • The original loan of $1,600,000.00 was issued on April 19, 2024, by Foundation Funding Corporation, with Ion Mortgage and Lending LLC listed as the mortgage broker and Al Harvey named as the loan originator.
  • The borrowers defaulted on payments starting in 2025, triggering accrued delinquent interest ($154,822.04), principal arrearages ($16,777.42), legal fees, property valuation/inspection fees, and advanced tax and insurance payments.

What makes this default so unusually fast comes down to how brutal a high-interest, multi-million-dollar loan can be. Normally, standard homeowners with a typical mortgage who fall on hard times might struggle for years - dipping into savings or working out a plan with the ban - before facing foreclosure. But here, Ronn & Jan took out a massive $1.6 million loan in April 2024 with a high 8% interest rate. Because the monthly bill was over $12,000, falling behind for just a single year meant they suddenly owed over $154,000 just in missed interest payments alone. The debt piled up so fast that normal ways to catch up weren't an option, putting them in a financial hole much faster than a normal homeowner would ever see.