Plaintiffs' Statement For The Record and Request To Take Judcial Notice

8/14/2019 Plaintiffs' Statement For The Record and Request To Take Judcial Notice

1/14


2/14

1 7 1

_2_

and Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3, prohibits ex parte communications

" c o n c e r n i n g a p e n d i n g o r i m p e n d i n g p r o c e e d i n g . "

"judges must scrupulously avoid ex pane communication s whethe r

o r n o t t h e y c o n s i d e r t h e m . J u d g e s s h o u l d a v o i d t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f

impropriety when they carry out their duties . Taylor v. Public

Convalescent Sv c - , 245 Ga . 8 0 5 , 806 (267 SE2d 242) (1980) .

S e e a l s o :

Ivey v. IveyS94AO264 . (264 Ga. 435) (445 SE2d 258)LAWSKI.LLS (1994)"The Code of Judicia l Conduct and the Uniform Super ior Court

Rules could not be more plain in t he condemnation of ex pa rte

communications by judges . " J u d ge s s h a l l n o t i n i t i a t e o r c o n s i d e r e x

parte communicat ions, or consider other communications made to

t h e m o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e p a r t i e s c o n c e r n i n g a p e n d i n g o r

impendin g proceeding," Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 (B)

( 7 ) , . . , d e f i n e d i n t h e c a n o n . I d . a t ( a - e ) . S e e , t o t h e s a m e e f f e c t ,

Uniform Superior Court Rule 4 . 1 ( " [ e ] x c e p t a s a u t h o r i z e d b y l a w

or by rule, judges shall neither initiate nor consider ex pane

communications by i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s o r t h e i r a t t o r n e y s c o n c e r n i n g

a p e n d i n g o r i m p e n d i n g p r o c e e d i n g " ) . "

A t t h i s p o i n t , P l a i n t i f f s must q u e s t i o n t h i s a c t i o n a n d t h e i m p a r t i a l i t y o f t h e f u d g e .

F u r t h e r , P l a i n t i f f s h a v e b e e n t r e a t e d w i t h d i s p a r i t y a n d s u b j e c t e d t o i n j u s t i c e s b y

o p p o s i n g l e g a l c o u n s e l a n d t h e C l e r k s o f t h i s C o u r t , w h i c h a g a i n l e a d s t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f

w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e i m p a r t i a l i t y o f t h e J u d g e , t h e C o u r t , a n d P l a i n t i f f s R i g h t s t o e q u a l i t y

a n d d u e p r o c e s s o f l a w s h o u l d b e q u e s t i o n e d .

P l a i n t i f f s s h o w t h i s H o n o r a b l e C o u r t t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t s :

A. Plaintiff St e eeman' s Di s a b i l i t i e s . 2Plaintiffs' Verified Complaint sta ted the following concerning Plaintiff

S t e g e m a n ' s d i s a b i l i t i e s :

I st pa g e 2 : " P l a i n t i f f S t e g e m a n i s 1 0 0 % F e d e r a l l y y d i s a b l e d a n d

r e c e i v e s S u p p l e m e n t a l S e c u r i t y I n c o m e o f 6 2 3 .00 monthly .

Z P l a i n t i f f S t e g e m a n ' s d i s a b i l i t i e s a n d i l l n e s s e s a r e a t t a c h e d h e r e t o a s "Exhibit I "

3 P l a i n t i ff S t e g e m a n ' s S ST h a s h a d t h e y e a r l y i n c r e a s e t o $ 6 3 4 . 0 0 m o n t h l y a t p r e s e n t .

Case 1:08-cv-01971-WSD Document 9-10 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 2 of 14


3/14


4/14

0

-4-

l e g a l a i d a n d P r o B o n o a t t o r n e y s , c o up l e d w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t a t t o r n e y s r e f u s e t o p e r f o r m

o n a f u l l c o n t i n g e n c y b a s i s , P l a i n t i f f i h a d n o a l t e r n a t i v e . T h e v i o l a t i o n s t o P l a i n t i f f s ,

t h e i r R i g h t s , p r o p e r t y a n d p r i v a c y m u s t s t o p . I n o r de r t o co n t in u e t he v i ol a t i ons , Georgia

P o w e r r e s o r t e d t o l i b e l o u s c l a i m s t o P o l i c e O f f i c e r s a n d T r o o p e r s t h a t P l a i n t i f f s a r e g o i n g

" t o k i l l" Georg i a Power p e r s o n n e l -

2. Contrary to remarks made by Defe ndant's legal counsel that Plain tiffs expect

" p r e f e r e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t " , P l a i n t i f f s h a v e o n l y a s ke d t o b e t r e a t e d f a i r l y a n d e q u a l l y b y

o p p o s i n g c o u n s e l , t h i s C o u r t , a n d t h e C l e r k s o f t h i s C o u r t . P l a i n t i f f s s h o w t h e f o l l o w i n g

i n s u p p o r t o f P r o S e l i t i g a n t s :

" Pic king v . Pen n syl vania Ra ilw ay , (151 F2d. 2 4 0 T h i r d C i r c u i tCourt of Appeals . I n P i c k i n g , t h e p l a i n t i f f s c i v i l r i g h t s w a s 1 5 0

p a g e s a n d d e s c r i b e d b y a f e d e r a l j u d g e a s " i n e p t . " N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t

was held : " w h e r e a P l a i n t i f f p l e a d s p r o - s e i n a s u i t f o r p r o t e c t i o n

o f c i v i l r i g h t s , t h e c o u r t s h o u l d e n d e a v o r t o c o n s t r u e p l a i n t i f f s

p l e a d i n g w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o t e c h n i c a l i t i e s . "

I n Walter Process Equ ipment v .Food M a c h i n e 382 U .S . 1 ' 7 2(1965) it was held that in a "motion to dismiss, the material

allegations of the complaint are taken a s admitted . " " F r o m t h i s

v a n t a g e p o i n t , c o u r t s a r e r e l u c t a n t t o d i s m i s s c o m pl a i n t s u n l e s s i t

a p p e a r s t h e p l a i n t i f f c a n p r o v e n o s e t o f f a c t s i n s u p p o r t o f h i s

c l a i m w h i c h w o u l d e n t i t l e h i m t o r e l i e f ( S e e Con l e y v s . Gibson,355 U .S . (1957) ;

I n Pucketl v C o x , i t w a s h e l d t h a t a p r o - s e c o m p l a i n t r e q u i re s l e s s

stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer ( 456 F2d. 2 3 3 )

( 1 9 7 2 S i x t h C i r c u it U S C .A . ) s a i d J u s t i c e Black in Conley v .Gibson, 355 U.S . 41 at 48 1957 "The Federal Rules re jects thea p p r o a c h t h a t p l e a d i n g i s a g a m e o f s k i l l i n w h i c h o n e m i s s t e p b y

counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept t he principle

t h a t t h e p u r p o s e o f p l e a d i n g i s t o f a c i l i t a t e a p r o p e r d e c i s i o n t h e

m e r i t s . "

A c c o r d in g t o r u l e 8 ( f ) F R C P " a l l p l e a d i n g s s h a l l b e c o n s t r u e d t o d o

s u b s t a n t i a l j u s t i c e . " The Court also c i t e d R u l e $ ( # ) FRCP , whi chholds that "all pleadings shall be construed to do s u b s t a n t i a l

j u s t i c e . "

" I t c o u l d a l s o b e a r g u e d t h a t t o d i s m i s s a C i v i l R i g h t s a c t i o n o r

o t h e r l a w s u i t i n w h i c h a s e r i o u s f a c t u a l p a t t e r n o r a l l e g a t i o n o f a



5/14

-5-

cause of action has been made would itself be violative of

p r o c e d u r a l d u e p r o c e s s a s i t w o u l d d e p r i v e a p r o s e l i t i g a n t o f e q u a l

p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e l a w w v i s a v i s a p a r t y w h o i s r e p r e s e n t e d b y c o u n s e l

. I n a f a i r s y s t e m , v i c t o r y s h o u l d g o t o a p a r t y w h o h a s t h e b e t t e r

c a s e , n o t b e t t e r r e p r e s e nt a t i o n . " '

C P l a i n t i f f s ' Ma r i t a l S t a t u s1. Plaint i f f s r e q u e s t t h a t t h e C o u r t t a k e n o t i c e o f t h e f a c t o f a n d e x p r e s s l y t o l d t oDefendant ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l i n t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n t h a t P l a i n t i f f s a r e n e i t h e r l e g a l l y , n o r

common law m a r r i e d t o e a c h o t h e r o r a n y o n e e l s e ; co-own p r o p e r t y t o g e t h e r where theyb o t h l i v e . P l a i n t i f f M c D v n a t d i s c a r e g i v e r o f P l a i n t i f f S t e g e m a n , d o e s a l l t h e d r i v i n g ,

c o m p ut e r u s e , e t c .

2. Neither Plaintiff can represen t or speak for the other ; P l a i n t i f f s a r e w i l l i n g t o

accept Service of only one of e ach document filed, an d will file and serve upon

D e f e n d a n t s o n l y o n e c o p y o f e a c h f i l i n g w i t h b o t h P l a i n t i f f s s i g n i n g e a c h f i l i n g ; f o r t h e

s o l e p u r p o s e o f e c o l o g i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c a l c o n s e r v a t i o n , b u t t h e r e i s n o e x c u s e f o r M r .

W a t t t o i g n o r e t h a t t h e r e a r e t w o s e p a r a t e P l a i n t i f f s t o a n a c t i o n . P l a i n t i f f s l e g a l l y c a n n o t

a n d w o u l d n o t r e p r e s e n t f o r t h e o t h e r , s e e :

Dyer v Dyer v. Sp ectru m Engi neeri ng , Ins, 245 Ga . A p p . 30, 24 5Ga. App . 3 0 , 5 3 7 S . E . 2 d 1 7 5 , 5 3 7 S .E .2d 175 VERSUSLAW (G a .App. 0 7 1 1 1 / 2 0 0 0 ) :[ 1 5 ] : " H e r h u s b a n d S t e v e n f i l e d a p r o s e r e s p o n s e . . . , b u t a s a n o n -

a t t o r n e y h e c o u l d n ot r e p r e s e n t M a r y i n t h i s a c t i o n . " " * f i a . 1 0

[ 3 1 ) " * f n l 0 Se e G a m b le v . Damond "D" Au to Sa l e s , 2 2 1Ga. App . 688, 689 (3) (472 SE2d 446) (1996) ; s e e g e n e r a l l yOCGA 15-19-51 (a) (1) . "

3. Mr W a t t h a s n e v e r r e q u e s t e d d t h a t b o t h P l a i n t i f f s b e p r e s e n t w h e n n e g o t i a t i o n s a r ed i s c u s s e d , o r a n y o t h e r m a t t e r

. 8

P l a i n t i f f s h a d d i s c o v e r e d t h a t o p p o s i n g c o u n s e l h a d a

U&Law Books : fro Se Federal De cisions8 Plainti ff Stegeman was listen ing to every call when McDonald was conversing and McDonald

was listening w hen Stegeman was conversing, Mr . W a t t , h a d n e v e r b e e n a d v i s e d o f t h e f a c t , a n d

n e v e r a c k n o w l e d g e d t h e o t h e r p a r t y .



6/14


7/14

-7-

00showed noth i ng filed by Defen dants . Inqu i ry was made about Defendant 's respons i ve

p l e a d i n g s , P l a i n t i f f s w e r e t o l d n o t h i n g h a d ye t b e e n f i l e d . P l a i n t i f f s r e c e i v e d t h e V e r i f i e d

Answer Decembe r 6, 2007 . L e t t e r t o P l a i n t i f f s " t h a t w a s f i l e d w t h t h e C o u r t t o d a y " ,when Answers showed up on - l i n e , t h e d a t e s h o w e d D e c e m b e r 3 , 2 0 0 7 .

2. Pla i n t i ff's Mot i on to S t rike Defendant ' s Verified Answers,19 addressed t o :"C a l e n d a r C l e r k f o r t h e H o n o r a b l e J u d g e B e c k e r " , d e l i v e r e dd t o t h e C o u r t M a r c h 8 , 2008,

d e l i very confirmed by USPS , h e l d b y t h e Clerk un f i l ed . March 12, 2008, han d-stampe d

"F i l e d " b y L i n d a C a r t e r .

3 . P l a i n t i f f s sent with Mot i o n t o S t r i k e , t h e i r copy and postage prepa i d e n v e l o p e t o

m a i l b a c k t o t h e m a f t e r b e i n g s t a m p e d " F i l e d " , P l a i n t i f f s r e c e i ved empty envelope .

4. Mot on to Stay and Rule N i s i March 20, 2 0 0 8 l i hand d e l i v e r e d b y P l a i n t i f f s whoa t t e m p t e d t o h a v e R u l e Ni s i h e a r i n g d a t e s e t b y H o n o r a b l e J u d g e B e c k e r ' s c a l e n d a r c l e r k .F l o o r r e c e pt i on is t c a l l e d C l e r k , c l e r k r e f u s e d t o a p p e a r , P l a i n t i f f s who w e r e t o l d t o l e a v eRule N i s i , i t would be mailed back to them i n a c o u p l e o f d a y s .

5. March 31, 2008 " oppos i ng counsel Mr . W a t t , l e f t a v o i c e m a i l f o r P l a i n t i f f s w h od i d n ' t d i s c o v e r t h e m e s s a g e u n t i l t h e f o l l o w i n g d a y . Somet h i ng about Judge Becker ' s

C l e r k a s k e d h im t o c a l l a bo u t a t e l e p ho n e c o n f e r e n c e / h e a r i n g t o be h e l d A p ri l 1, 2 00 8 a t9 : 0 0 a . m , f o r a d i scovery d i s p u t e . Pla i n t i f f s w e r e n o t n o t i c e d t h a t t h e r e w a s a d i s c o ve r y

d i s p u t e , t h e r e h a d b e e n n o a t t e m p t t o c o n d u c t a d i s c o v e r y c o n f e r e n c e 1 3 w t h P l a i n t i f f swho knew noth i n g a b o u t i t .

6. P l a in t if fs ha ve c a l l e d t h e c a l e n d a r c l e r k m o r e t h a n o n c e , l e f t m e s s a g e t o c a l l t h e m

" ' March 4~' and S d ' P l a i n t i f f s s e n t F A X t o M r . Watt suggesting to call them about Motion To

S t r i k e w h i c h P l a i n t i f f s h e l d b e f o r e m a i l i n g l a t e i n t h e d a y o n M a r c h 7 , 2008, t h e i n v i t a t i o n t o

c o n f e r w a s i g n o r e d . "Exhibit 2"

~ ~ R e q u e s t e d t h e i r c o p y o f M o t i o n t o S t r i k e , n o t i c e d i t w a s h a n d - s t a m p e d

Xz Mr . W a t t k n e w f u l l w e l l t h a t P l a i n t i f f S t e g e m a n ' s d e a d l i n e f o r f i l i n g A p pe a l B r i e f t o U .S . 1 1 ' '

C i r c u i t C o u r t o f A pp e a l s w a s d u e t h e 3 0 a n d P l a i n t i f f s w o u l d b e u n a v a i l a b l e a l l t h a t d a y .

' 3 Mr . W a t t ' s C e r t i f i c a t i o n o f C o m p l i a n c e i s w i t h o u t m e r i t w h i c h P l a i n t i f f s w i l l a d d r e s s i n t h e i r

R e s p o n s e t o D e f e n d a n t ' s M o t i o n t o C o mp e l t o b e f i l e d t h e s a m e d a t e a s t h e c u r r e n t f i l i n g .



8/14

E 0

-8-

b a c k , t h e C l e r k h a s n e v e r r e t u r n e d a c a l l t o P l a i n t i f f s o n a n y m a t t e r .

7. April 1, 2008 no call came t o Plaint iffs . P l a i n t i f f s t r i e d c o n t a c t i n g t h e c a l e n d a r

C l e r k f o r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e h e a r i n g , c l e r k a p p a r e n t l y u n a v a i l a b l e , l e f t v o i c e m a i l

8 . A p r i l 2 , 2 0 0 8 P l a i n t i f f s r e c e i v e d a c a l l f r o m M r . H a s h , J u d g e B e c k e r ' s l a w c l e r k .

He claimed he had no information a bout a phone "hea ring" and appa rently did not

understa nd why he called Plaintiffs, who told Mr . Hash they had left a message for

c a l e n d a r c l e r k . P l a i n t i f f s a l s o d i s c u s s e d t h e R ul e N i s i t h a t w a s n e v e r m a i l e d t o t h e m , M r .

H a s h f o u n d i t i n t h e f i l e , s t a p l e d t o t h e b a c k o f M o t i o n t o S t r i k e. 1 4

9 . P l a i n t i f f s h a v e f o u n d t h a t e v e r y t h i n g f i l e d f o r D e f e n d a n t s i s f i l e d t h e s a m e d a y i t i s

signed and mailed by them . A l l f i l i n g s b y P l a i n t i f f s a r e h e l d , u n f il e d u n t i l a l a t e r d a t e

u n l e s s h a n d - d e l i ve r e d .

E . Mr W a t t ' s P r e i u d i c e B i a s Toward Pro Se and or D i sabled Pe r sons1 . P l a i n t i f f s ' f i r s t t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n wi t h o p p o s in g l e g a l c o u n s e l M r . W a t t , h e

t o l d t h e m t h a t h e " p l a n t o t r e a t y o u w i t h t h e s a m e r e s p e c t t h a t I w o u l d a n o t h e r a t t o r n e y " .

P l a i n t i f fs t r u l y d o no t b e l i e v e t h a t M r . W a t t t r e a t s o t h e r a t t o r n e y s t h e w a y h e h a s t r e a t e d

P l a i n t i f f s , i . e . : refusing to honor agreement s - e s p e c i a l l y v e r b a l a g r e e m e n t s ; making

f a l s e s t a t e m e n t s ; g i v i n g f l a t t e r y i n o r d e r t o g a i n t r u s t - s o t h a t h e c a n d o a s h e p l e a s e s a n d

P l a i n t if f s w il l n o t b e p r e p a r e d f or c o u n se l ' s a n t i c s ; t w i s t i n g t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n s s o

t h a t t h e c o n f i r m a t i o n l e t t e r s o m i t m o s t o f t h e a g r e e m e n t s t o b e a g r e e d u p o n c o n f i r m a t i o n ,

e t c .

2. The Supreme Court of Georgia has he ld that legal counsel should perform with

i n t e g r i t y , f a i r n e s s , a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l i s m e v e n w i t h P r o S e l i t i g a n t s i n o r d e r t o h a v e t h e

P u b l i c a s a w h o l e c o n t i n u e t o b e l i e v e i n o u r J u d i c i a l S y s t e m a n d t h a t t h e P u b l i c ' s R i g h t s

a r e p r o t e c t e d f r o m u n s c r u pu l o u s a t t o r n e y s .

14 The Rule Nisi was brought with P laintiffs Motion to Stay, they we re seeking ei ther an

e x p e d i t e d h e a r i n g o r P r ot e c t i v e O r d e r s o t h a t t h e a c t i o n w o u l d b e s t a y e d u n t i l a n O r d e r h a d b e e n

g i v e n c o n c e r n in g P l a i n t i f f s ' M o t i o n t o S t r i k e a n d P l a i n t i f f s w o u l d b e p r o t e c t e d f r o m D e f e n d a n t s

l e g a l c o u n s e l s m i s p l a c e d a t t e m p t s t o h a v e t h i s c a s e d i s m i s s e d f o r t h e f i c t e t i o u s c l a i m s o f r e f u s i n g

t o c o m p l y w i t h d i sc o v e r y r e q u e s t s t h a t o p p o s i n g l e g a l c o u n s e l c o n t i n u a l l y a l l e g e s .



9/14

_g _

iS e e Green v . G r e e n , ( S : E . 2 d 4 5 7 ) , (263 Ga . 437) 5511993 .GA. 2 4 0 4 < h t t p ://www . v e rs u sl a w . c o m > , ( 1 9 9 3 ) :" [ 1 0 ] ; B e n h am , Ju s t i c e . A l l t h e J u s t i c e s c o n c u r , e x c e p t S e a r s -

C o l l i n s , J . , w h o c o n c u r s s p e c i a l l y , a n d F l e t c h e r , J . , who concurs i n

the judgment only . "

" f 1 6 ] : 2 . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e p u r e l y l e g a l q u e s t i o n . . ., t he r o le

appellee's counsel played i n procuring the judgment must be

e x a m i ned . "

y ` [ I 7 ] : In recent years, on the federal an d state level, courts

throughout t h i s c o u n t r y h a v e s o u g h t t o e n c o u r a g e p r o f e s s i onalism

among lawyers . . . years ago this court est ablished the Chief

J u s t i c e ' s Comm i ssion on Professionalism . . . t o m a i n t a i n . . . ande s t a b l i s h . . ., a sense of c i v i l i t y and courtesy among lawyers .

, . .between profess i onalism and e t h i c s , Chi e f J u s t i ce Cla r ke haso f t e n s a i d t h a t " e t h i c s i s t h a t w h i ch i s r e q u i r e d a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l i smi s t h a t w h i c h i s e x p e c t e d . " "

" ( 1 8 ] On one hand , t h e p r a c t i ce of law is dependent . . . on

lawyers having r e spe c t f o r e a c h o t h e r , h o n o r i n g t h e i r p r o m i s e s ,

c o o p e r a t i ng w i t h o t h e r s , a n d a c c o r d i n g e a c h o t h e r a h i gh degree of

c i v i l i t y . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , l a y p e r s o n s s i n c e r e l y b e l i e v e t h a t w h e n

a j u s t i c a b l e i s s u e a r i s e s , . . . they w i ll be accorded their day i n

c o u rt . " T he s e e x p e c t a t i ons on t h e p a r t o f lawyers and l a y persons

a r e r e a s o n a b l e and are fully contemplat ed by our system of

j u r i s p r ud e n c e . T h e re f o r e , w h e n t h e s e e x p e c t a t i o n s a r e n o t f u l f i l l e d ,

t h e r e i s u n d e r s t a n d a b l e d i s c o n t e n t with o u r s y s t e m o f J u s t i c e . I f t h e

b a r i s t o m a i n t a i n t h e r e s p e c t o f t h e c o m m u n i t y , l a w y e r s mu s t b ew l l i n g t o a c t o u t o f a s p i r i t o f c o o p e r a t i o n and civi l i t y a n d n o tw h o l l y o u t o f a s e n s e o f b l i n d a n d u n b r i d l e d advocacy . "

" [20j : . . T h a t s p i r i t o f c o o p e r a t i o n a n d c i v i l i t y , w i t h t h e n o t i on s of

fundamental fa i r n e s s t h a t l i e a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f d u e

process of law , r e q u ir e s t h a t a t t o r n e y s , a s o f f i c e r s o f t h e c o u r t ,

make a good fa i t h e f f o r t t o e n s u r e t h a t a l l p a r t i e s * fn3 to a

c o n t r o v e r s y h a v e a f u l l a n d f a i r o p p o r t u n i t y t o b e h e a r d . * f n 4 . . . "

" [21] Gi ven a l l t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h i s c a s e , a n d e s p e c i a l l yt h e l e n g t h s t o w h i c h a p p e l l e e ' s c o u n s e l w e n t t o e n s u r e t h a t t h i s c a s e

was tried in the absence of appellant, we hold that the proper

e x e r c i s e o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s d i s c r e t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d i n Spyropoulos ,

supra, required that the judgment b e s e t a s i de . T h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s

d e n i a l o f a p p e l l a n t ' s m o t i o n t o s e t a s i d e w a s , t h e r e f o r e , an abuse of

t h a t d i s c r e t i o n . "

"[ 4 0 ] . . . "due process" is "'flexible and calls for such

procedural protections as the particular s i tuation demands , " '

M a t h e w s v . Eldr id g e , 424 U .S . 3 1 9 , 3 3 4 ( 9 6 S . C t . 893, 47 L . E d .



10/14

0 0

-10-

2 d 1 8 ) ( 1 9 7 6 ) , a n d d u e r e g a r d m u s t b e g i v e n t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r i t i e s

a n d p r a c t i c a l i t i e s o f e a c h c a s e a n d t o t h e e f f e c t t h e d i f f e r e n t t y p e s

o f n o t i c e m a y h a v e o n s t a t e i n t e r e s t s , s e e Mulan e , 339 U . S . a t314-315 ; Tulsa Profe s s ional Co l lect i o n Svcs . v . Pope , 4 85 U .S .4 7 8 , 4 8 9 ( 1 0 8 S . C t . 1 3 4 0 , 9 9 L . Ed . 2 d 5 6 5 ) ( 1 9 8 8 ) .

3. On several occasions, the first time being in February, Plaintiffs a pproached

D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l , M r . W a t t o n h a v i n g a D i s c o v e r y C o n f e r e n c e ; a c o nf e r e nc e o n

t h e s c o p e o f d i s c o v e r y t o b e o b t a i n e d a t d e p o s i t i o n s ; Discovery Planning Conference .

Mr. W a t t h a s o u t r i g h t r e f u s e d . Mr . W a t t c l a i m e d t h a t i t w o u l d b e u n e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r in gP l a i n t i f f s ' Pro Se s t a t u s .

4. Defen dant's legal counsel filed Affidavit of Brian P . W a t t , S e c o n d A f f i d a v i t o f

Brian P . W a t t , M o t i o n F o r C o n t i n u a n c e , a n d M o t i o n s t o C o m p e l de dolo malo . 1 5

CONCLUSIONDefendant ' s l eg al coun s e l , with knowledge of Un i form Superior Court Rule s ,

S t a t e o f G e o r g i a B a r R u l e s , a n d J u d i c i a l C a n o n s h a d h a n d d e l i v e r e d a l e t t e r d i r e c t l y t o t h e

J u d g e o f t h i s H o n o r a b l e C o u r t . N o t t o t h e C l e r k a s w o u l d b e p e r m i s si b l e , b u t d i r e c t l y t o

t h e f u d g e .

D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l , u n d e r s t a n d in g , a n d n o t c a r i n g t h a t i t m a y b e v i e w e d a s

i n a p p r o p r i a t e , h a s c o m m u n i c a t e d w i t h t h e C a l e n d a r C l e r k a n d L a w C l e r k o n i s s u e s t h a t

have been withheld from Plaintiffs . Further, without holding the mandat ory 6 . 4

C o n f e r e n c e w i t h P l a i n t i f f s , M r . W a t t c a l l s P l a i n t i f f s M a r c h 3 1 , 2 0 0 8 ( o n a d a y in w h i c h

he factually knew tha t Plaintiffs would be unavailable by telephone) to arrange a

telephon e hearin g or conference wit h the Court on a Motion To Compel filed without

P l a i n t i f f s k n o w l e d g e o f a d i s c o v e r y d i s p u t e . The messa ge left by Mr . W a t t f o r P l a i n t i f f s

w a s t h a t " t h e c l e r k w a n t e d m e t o c a l l " ; t h e h e a r i ng w a s t o b e a t 9 : 0 0 a .m . t h e f o l l o w i n g

morning .

1 5" d e d o l e s m a l o (dee doh-Ioh mil-oh) . [ L a t i n ] O f o r b a s e d o n f r a u d . " Black's Law Dictiona ry,

Sevent h Edition, page 422 .



11/14

E

- 1 I -

D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l h a s c on t i n u a l l y l i e d t o P l a i n t i f f s ; m a d e r e q u e s t s w i t h o u t

g i v i n g a d a t e a n d o r t i m e i n w h i c h t h e y w e r e t o r e p l y ; s e t s c h e d u l e s w i t h f u l l k n o w l e d g e

t h a t P l a i n t i f f s w o u l d n o t b e a b l e t o c o m p l y ; r e s e t s c h e d u l e s w i t h o u t a g r e e m e n t t o d o s o

w i t h t h e i n t e n t o f e x t o r t i n g a n e x t e n s i o n i n w h i c h t o r e p l y t o P l a i n t i f f s ' M o t i o n s ; made

false represent ation to the Court that he had no idea of Plaintiffs' transportation

d i f f i cu l t i e s ; h a s f a i l e d t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h a t P l a i n t i f f S t e g e m a n i s d i s a b l e d w i t h m o b il i t y

i s s u e s , a l l b e c a u s e D e f e n d a n t s d o n ' t w a n t t o a d d r e s s t h e f a c t t h e y f i l e d a f r a u d u l e n t

d o c u m e n t t o p r o v e t h e y h a d a n e a s e m e n t a g r e e m e n t c o n c e r n i n g P l a i n t i f f s ' p r o p e r t y .

P l a i n t i f f s ' C i v i l a n d C o n s t i t u t i o n a l R i g h t s o f D u e P r o c e s s o f L a w , E q u a l i t y , a n d t o

be treate d with Impartiality have been compromised at the hand of Defendant 's legal

c o u n s e l d u e t o a d e s p e r a t e a t t e m p t t o h a v e t h i s c a s e d i s m i ss e d .

P l a i n t i f f s , t h r o u g h n o f a u l t o f t h e i r o w n , a r e f o r c e d i n t o h a n d d e l i v e r i n g e v e r y t h i n g

t h e y p l a n t o f i l e f r o m n o w o n . T h e y c a n n o t t r u s t t h a t w h a t i s m a i l e d t o t h e C l e r k w i l l

f i l e d a n d o r t h e i r " P l a i n t i f f s " c o p y , w h i ch i s t h e i r o n l y p r o o f t h a t t h e y i n f a c t f i l e d

something, will be mailed back to them . P l a i n t i f f s a l s o c a n n o t h a v e c o u r i e r d e l i v e r e d

a n y t h i n g t o b e f i l e d w i t h o u t h a v i n g t h e c o u r i e r s t a y w h i l e P l a i n t i f f s c o p y i s s t a m p e d

" F i l e d " t h e n b r i n g P l a i n t i f f s t h e i r c o p y , w h i c h a l s o c o s t s q u i t e a b i t m o r e t o h a v e d o n e

m a k i n g t h e a c t i o n u n a f f o r d a b l e .

This Court should not and must not condone such be havior . P l a i n t i f f s q u e s t i o n

w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e y w i l l c o n t i n u e t o b e t r e a t e d w i t h i n j u s t i c e , di s c r i m i n a t i o n a n d pa r t i a l i t y

b y t h e D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l , t h e C l e r k s o f t h i s C o u r t a n d w h a t s t a n c e t h e J u d g e w i l l

t a k e o n t h e m a t t e r . B y f i l i n g t h i s N o t i c e a n d s t a t i n g t h e p r o b l e m s t o t h e C o u r t , P l a i n t i f f s

h a v e p r e s e r v e d t h e i s s u e s i n c a s e a n d u n t i l s u c h t i m e P l a i n t i f f s m u s t A p p e a l J u d g m e n t s o f

t h i s H o n o r a b l e C o u r t .



12/14

PRAYERPlaintiffs P ray that t his Honorable Court will take Notice of what ha s been

p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o u r t a n d i f t h e H o n o r a b l e J u d g e c a n n o t d e c i d e i s s u e s s e t b e f o r e h e r

w i t h i m p a r t i a l i t y a n d f a i r n e s s t h a t t h e H o n o r a b l e J u d g e w i l l d i s q u a l i f y h e r s e l f .

P l a i n t i f f s P r a y t h a t t h e C o u r t p u t s a n d e n d t o P l a i n t i f f s b e i n g d i s c r i mi n a t e d a g a i n s t

a n d o r t r e a t e d " d i f f e r e n t l y " t h a n D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l .

P l a i n t i f f s p r a y t h a t t h i s H o n o r a b l e C o u r t f i n d t h a t D e f e n d a n t ' s l e g a l c o u n s e l h a s

behaved inappropriately and find him in contempt and or sanction him by striking

Defen dants' Verified Answers and Dismissing the Counterclaim against Plaintiffs and

w h a t e v e r o t h e r s a n c t i o n s t h a t t h i s H o n o r a b l e J u d g e f i n d s j u s t a n d s u i t a b l e f o r h i s a c t i o n s .

R e s p e c t f u l l y S u b mi t t e d , t h i s 2 8 ' h d a y o f A j ~ 4 , 2 0 0 $

By : D. MCDONALD, P r o S e821 Sheppard Rd

Mount ain , GA 30083

( 7 7 0) 879-8737

By :' ; STEG Pro Se821 d

Stone Mounta i n, GA 30083

(770) 879-8737

-12-



13/14

THE SUPERIORCOURT OF DEKALBCOUNTYSTATE OF GEORGI A

FILE NO: 07CV11398-6GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et , a 1 .DEFENDANTS

-13-

JANET D . MCDONALDJAMES B. STEGEMAN,PLAINTIFFS

VCIVI L ACTION

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICET h i s i s t o c e r t i f y t h a t I h a v e t h i s 2 8 ' h d a y o f A p r i l , 2 0 0 8 s e r v e d a t r u e a n d c o r r e c t

copy of the within an d foregoing P l a i n t i f f s ' Statements For The Record And . Pla i n t i f f s

Request For The Court To Take Jud i c i al Not i ce upon defendants through t h e i r a t t o r n e y

on f i l e by depos i t i o n i n the Un i ted States Ma i l , a deq u a t e p o s t a g e a f f i x e d t h e r e t o , a s

f o l l o w s:Tro u tm a n Sanders , LLP

C/o Brian P. Watt

5200 Bank of America P laza

600 Peachtree S t r e e t

Atlanta , GA 30308-2216

T DONALDPro Se821 Sheppa rd Rd

Stone Mounta i n, GA 30083

~ ; (10) 879-8737

BV, T V i E S B. STEGSe

821 Sheppard

Stone Mount ain , GA 30083

(770 ) 8 79-8737



14/14

0IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFORTHE NORTHERNDISTRICT OF GEORGIA,At l anta Di v i s io n

CI VIL ACTIONFILE NO : 1 : 08-CV- 1 97 1-WSD

SUPERIOR COURT , e t . , a l . ,De fe n da n t s

o f t h e f o r e g o i ng . Pla in t i f f s ' Brief In Response To Defendant s Georgia Power

Company, Brian P Wa tt, a nd Scott A Farrow's Mot ion To Dismiss upon

D e f e n d a n t s , t h r o u g h t h e i r a t t o r n e y o n f i l e b y c a u s i n g t o b e d e p o s i t e d w i t h U . S . P . S . ,

Fi r s t C l a s s M a i l , p r o p e r p o s t a g e a f f i x e d t h e r e t o , a d d r e s s e d a s f o l l o w s :

Se.

JAMESB. STEGEMAN,JANETD. MCDONALD,Pla i n t i f fs

vs .

CERTIFICATE OFSERVCEI C e r t i f y t h a t I h a v e t h i s 9 t h d a y o f J ul y , 2008, s e r v e d a t r u e a n d c o r r e c t c o p y

Dan iel S. Reinhardt

Troutman Sanders, LLP

Bank of America Plaza - S u i t e 5 2 006 0 0 P e a c h t r e e S t r e e t , N E

Atlant a, GA 30308-2216 /

Devon OrlandS t a t e o f G e o rg i a D e p t . o f L a w

4 0 C a p i t o l S q u a r e , S .WAtlan ta, GA 30334-1300

NET D. MCDONALD, Pro Se821 Sheppa rd Rd

Stone Mountain , G A 30083

(770) 879-8737

-27-


Documents

Plaintiffs' Statement For The Record and Request To Take Judcial Notice