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…
The day after opposing counsel submitted his misrepresentation-filled response to the Supreme Court, I had no choice but to act. On May 2, I filed three motions—one in the trial court, one in the Court of Appeals, and one in the Supreme Court. Each was necessary for a different reason, but together they told the…
On the same day I filed my federal complaint, I received an email from Mr. Yopp stating that he intended to file a motion to continue the trial and asking what date I preferred. I responded by reiterating that under the automatic stay, it wasn’t my responsibility to propose dates—it was the court’s obligation to…
On April 16, 2025, the defendants filed a Request for Judicial Settlement of the Record on Appeal under Rule 11(c), but their request went far beyond what the rule permits. Rule 11(c) allows the trial court to resolve disputes over the narrative of the record—factual disagreements or clarifications about what happened procedurally—not to decide what…
After I filed a detailed Motion for Sanctions and a Motion for Leave to Reply in the Court of Appeals, opposing counsel doubled down by responding in a hostile, condescending tone—continuing to misrepresent both the procedural record and the law. Their response to my Motion for Sanctions accused me of filing premature appeals for the…
On March 14, 2025—despite the automatic stay being in effect—opposing counsel filed a new Motion to Dismiss and an Answer with Counterclaims, all while fully aware that jurisdiction had shifted to the Court of Appeals. This was not only improper under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-294, but procedurally abusive.
The motion to dismiss was…
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…
Despite the case being under interlocutory appeal and discovery already being implicated in the review, opposing counsel served discovery responses that were riddled with boilerplate objections, irrelevant denials, and evasive answers. Nearly every interrogatory was met with blanket claims of irrelevance, undue burden, or privilege—without a proper privilege log—and in some cases, they objected and…
After the Court of Appeals denied my Motion to Stay and Writ of Supersedeas, I was frustrated because it didn’t make sense—why wouldn’t they protect my rights? But after doing more research, I learned that this is common when an automatic stay is already in effect under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-294, because the appellate…
After I was told by the court to appear at a Webex hearing on February 14 following the previous day's proceeding, I emailed the trial court administrator to confirm the hearing and explain that I had filed both an Objection to the Improperly Noticed Hearing and a Writ of Supersedeas and Motion to Stay with…