Judge McGann threw out five of the seven claims for relief in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit on Tuesday morning. He also denied The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s motion for summary judgment against the defendants.
I have held off publishing either sides filings related to yesterday’s hearing until after the judge ruled. Now that TDPK’s motion for summary judgment has been denied, I’ll comment on it.
But first let me explain to those of you with your hands raised about what a summary judgment is.
A summary judgment is one entered by a court for one party and against another party without a full trial. It’s a determination on the merits based upon the court’s finding that there are no disputes of material fact requiring a trial to resolve and that in applying the law to the undisputed facts, one party is clearly entitled to judgment. In plain English that means that yesterday the judge found that there was no question that both the facts and the law were against Kimberlin’s claims for relief related to abuse of process and malicious prosecution, conspiracy to abuse process, intentional infliction of emotional distress, harassment, and stalking.
In order to establish the elements of malicious prosecution, TPDK needed to allege that the criminal complaints filed against him were without probable cause and were filed with malicious intent. He did not allege either with sufficient particularity for the judge or the defendants to know what acts the defendants might have committed that resulted in his claimed tort.
He had a similar problem with his allegation of conspiracy to abuse process. He also could not overcome the fact that conspiracy is not, itself, a tort.
He did not allege the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress with sufficient particularity for the court understand the nature of his distress or what damages he might have suffered. Pleading severe butthurt was a non-starter.
The claims for stalking and harassment were thrown out very early in the hearing after it was pointed out that there are no such torts and after TDPK admitted he could cite no case law supporting his claim.
The counts related to defamation and false light invasion of privacy still survive. For. Now. TDPK hasn’t provided any of the discovery related to those claims, and the sanctions imposed by the court will prohibit him from introducing any related evidence if he has not complied with discovery by 10 July.