On April 17, 2025, I filed a Petition for Discretionary Review with the North Carolina Supreme Court under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-31, asking them to review multiple rulings by the Court of Appeals that denied my Writ of Prohibition, Motion for Sanctions, and Motion for En Banc Rehearing. The petition outlined how the Court…
On March 5, I properly served the Proposed Record on Appeal through the Wake County Superior Court’s Odyssey eFile and eServe system. Under Rule 26(c) and Rule 11(b), that triggered the 30-day clock for objections, making opposing counsel’s deadline April 4. I never heard from him, so on Monday, April 7, around noon, I served…
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…
The defendants filed an opposition to my Writ of Prohibition, mischaracterizing the facts, minimizing my appeal as nothing more than dissatisfaction with “routine orders,” and falsely claiming I filed an amended complaint without leave of court—despite the fact that the court had already denied their motion to strike it. Their response was riddled with misleading…
On March 5, I completed the Proposed Record on Appeal and served it to opposing counsel. For context, the Record on Appeal is a highly structured document that includes every relevant filing, order, and transcript from the trial court, organized in a very specific way so the Court of Appeals can understand the full context…
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…
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…
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…
On January 27, 2025, I filed an Emergency Motion to address the procedural disorder created by the defendants’ overlapping filings, failure to respond to discovery, and repeated violations of court rules.
With less than 30 days left before trial, the court had granted orders—like the extension to answer and the continuance of my Motion…
Frank decided to file another motion to continue on only my motions, but of course want to move forward with his. This is what the cover sheet looks like when you correctly file with it, but unfortunately the motion was procedurally flawed, lacked good cause under Rule 6(b), and failed to explain the…