Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Judicial Misconduct Alleged

Judicial Stonewalling – Current (SC)

The more my case moves along in state court, and every time something happens, I have to ask myself, is this real life? Am I living in some kind of water down version of John Grisham novel where the actions being taken are so ridiculous and strange that it goes beyond normal life? Because every…

Read more

Denial of Clarity – Current (SC)

The trial court has not ruled on my ex parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order under Rule 65(b), filed May 3, despite its emergency nature and the constitutional violations detailed in the filing. Meanwhile, the Court of Appeals denied my Emergency Motion for Clarification and Protection of the Appellate Record, reinforcing concerns that the appellate…

Read more

Motion to Compel or Recuse – Current (OAH)

Today, I filed a Motion to Compel Entry of Order before the NC Office of Administrative Hearings, requesting a prompt ruling on my pending Motion for Summary Judgment (filed April 15, 2025). Under state law and OAH rules, the motion should have been decided without a hearing, yet no action has been taken—despite prior motions…

Read more

Dept of Unjustice

DOJ filed their formal Response in Opposition to my Motion to Disqualify on April 1, 2025. That filing deliberately misrepresented both my position and the legal conflict I raised. The DOJ claimed Rule 1.7 didn’t apply because I wasn’t their client, completely ignoring that my argument was about an institutional conflict of interest—namely, that they…

Read more

Deem of Admissions

As I was preparing the record on appeal, I was reminded that the admissions were still unresolved—opposing counsel’s motion for extension of time had never been ruled on. Judge Davidian refused to rule on my motion to strike the extension or deem the admissions admitted. But under Rule 36(a), it didn’t matter—the admissions were already…

Read more

Amended Rule 2.1 Order

On January 30, 2025, Chief District Court Judge Eagles denied my motion to have the case designated as an exceptional civil case under Rule 2.1, stating that the claims weren’t complex and there weren’t enough parties to warrant the designation—even though this was the very same case where defendants were allowed to delay proceedings to…

Read more

Motion Hearing Leads to Misconduct & Appeal

This hearing was meant to address my emergency motion and clarify procedural issues caused by defendants' delays and inconsistent court orders. Despite Judge Walczyk being lead civil judge, I was pushed to the end of the docket, repeatedly talked over, and mischaracterized. She blamed me for case delays due to my appeal, ignoring that these…

Read more