Tag Archives: Discovery

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
Reply

One of the ways that Brett Kimberlin’s campaign of pro se lawfare backfired was the problems he had with the discovery phase of the LOLsuits. The TKPOTD for seven years ago today dealt with some of the discovery questions he tried to evade.

* * * * *

Here are some other intriguing answers provided by The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to my Requests for Admissions in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit.Admissions 40_43There’s computer forensic information linking TDPK to both the Breitbart Unmasked accounts. He was photographed outside of Bobby McKey’s on 14 March, 2013. There is eyewitness testimony placing him at CPAC this year.

Notice that he doesn’t deny any of these as he should if they weren’t true. Objecting because of irrelevance is a tacit admission that the statements are true.

* * * * *

It was fortunate for Kimberlin that the judge granted the defendants a direct verdict in our favor after Kimberlin rested his case. Otherwise, he would have had to deal with the defense we had prepared.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
Reply

One of the reasons that Brett Kimberlin has done so poorly with his pro se lawfare is that he’s screwed up the discovery process in all of cases he’s been involved in. The TKPOTD for four years ago today dealt with one of his failed motions seeking a protective order in one of his attempts to get out of providing evidence to an opposing party.

* * * * *

The Kimberlins have filed a motion for a protective order in the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. They aren’t seeking protection of documents that are turned over as a part of discovery. They want to be completely excused from having to provide any discovery.

Their basic argument boil down to: We are special snowflakes and should not have to produce evidence of the allegations we make. The court should trust us, and we should be allowed to blindside the plaintiff with surprise evidence if this case ever makes it to trial.

popcorn4bkOf course, that’s legal rubbish, but I’ll leave it to Aaron Walker to demolish their motion when he files an opposition.

Meanwhile, it looks as if Aaron has asked some probing questions in the discovery he served on the Kimberlins. It will be interesting to see what might come out in a motion for summary judgment—if one is needed. If the court enforces the Kimberlins’ default, …

* * * * *

While the Kimberlins didn’t wind up in default, their antics would up result in the court sanctioning Tetyana Kimberlin for failure to be deposed during discovery.

BTW, every single discovery item that Kimberlin asserted was irrelevant related to an allegations in the false criminal charges that Brett or Tetyana Kimberlin had filed against Aaron Walker.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
28

The Kimberlins have also filed an opposition to my motion to compel proper answers to interrogatories from Tetyana Kimberlin in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.

The Gentle Reader will have to wait for the reply I’ll file with the court to see any public comment on this before the judge rules on my motion to compel.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
21

Judge Hecker issued this Order in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. case yesterday—

The Kimberlins’ frivolous motion to sanction me for my work as Aaron Walker’s paralegal was denied, as was their motion for a further delay in discovery.

My motions to compel compliance with discovery were denied based a technicality which is easily remedied. Stay tuned.

More Walker v. Kimberlin, et al.

Posted on by
43

This is the text of one of the court papers filed yesterday by Aaron Walker in the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit. I’ve not included the exhibit, because it’s a newspaper article available elsewhere on the Internet. I’ve redacted the name of a minor child and the names of third parties (other than myself).

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin screwed up back in 2012 when he leaked sealed discovery material to Breitbart Unmasked. That has put everyone he has sued since then on guard. We have all required him to dot every I and cross every T before giving him any information. We have also taken steps to seek protective orders—and enforce them.

If he thought that his lawfare would allow him to continue to use discovery to gather information to use against his perceived enemies, he was very, very wrong.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
46

A deposition of Tetyana Kimberlin had been scheduled for next week, but she has invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege—as is her right.

This particular filing deserves some commentary. IANAL, but I’ve been in communication with some, and I believe I am correctly reporting their analysis.

First, one doesn’t move to quash a deposition. A party seeking to limit or avoid a deposition files for a protective order. The Kimberlins did file for one, and it has not been granted. They are obliged to cooperate fully with discovery until a protective order is issued. A pending order that may never be granted does not stay discovery.

Second, Brett Kimberlin filed the motion along with Tetyana, but he has no standing in the matter.

Third, marital privilege is more limited that the Kimberlins appear to believe. It doesn’t allow one spouse to refuse to testify against everything about the other.

Fourth, pleading the Fifth prevents a deponent from having to answer questions which may tend to incriminate him or her, but dropping the nickel has other significant ramifications in a civil matter.

Fifth, the Kimberlins whining that it is unfair for them to be held to the Rules is getting to be a boringly common refrain. It is not unfair for Aaron Walker to fail to attend a deposition when he was not properly served with notice, and it is would not be unfair to require Tetyana Kimberlin to be deposed when she was given proper notice.

Finally, Tetyana Kimberlin is within her rights to refuse to be deposed because her testimony might incriminate her. The facts alleged against her establish the elements of several crimes as well as the civil tort of malicious prosecution.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
3

Last week, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin filed a motion in the RICO 2: Electric Boogaloo LOLsuit seeking to use confidential material provided in discovery in the RICO Remnant LOLsuit in RICO 2. This is improper on several grounds—as I address in this motion I filed yesterday.

My motion speaks for itself, and I do not plan to have any further public comment on the matter until the court rules.

 

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
11

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has filed yet another motion attempting to breach the confidentiality of the discovery material provide by Patterico in the Kimberlin v. Frey RICO Remnant LOLsuit. The most recent bit of nonsense was filed in the Kimberlin v. Team Themis, et al. RICO 2: Electric Boogaloo LOLsuit.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
10

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin wants to engage in early discovery in his LOLsuits. He appears to hope that if he can get lucky with his snooping, he’ll find something that he can make stick against someone. Here’s the sort of thing he’s told the court in the Kimberlin v. Team Themis, et al. RICO 2: Electric Boogaloo LOLsuit. (I fixed the second sentence for him.)ECF 74-p14I’m reasonably certain that TDPK will get around to asking about all my emails and other communications with the other defendants in the RICO 2 LOLsuit. In order to save time, I’ve decided to publish the complete log of everything—email, letter, or other communication—with Hunton & Williams, the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Team Themis members named in the lawsuit. Here it is:blankThat’s every last one of ’em.

UPDATE—I should make it clear that the list above represents communications prior to TDPK’s filing of the RICO 2 LOLsuit. Since the suit was filed, I have been required to communicate with my codefendants for such reasons as service of court papers.

More “Discovery”

Posted on by
18

As part of discovery in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin lost this week, I sought discovery of documents.

You can see from TDPK’s answers beginning with number 13 that he thought that he would control what evidence would be introduced. He wound up being correct only because the case folded before we put on our defense.

I’m sticking by my theory that TDPK didn’t testify because he wanted to avoid being trapped between perjury and the Fifth Amendment when confronted with some of the issues raised in my request for documents.

popcorn4bkHe still has time to drop his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness before things really hit the fan in that case. Is he smart enough?

We shall see.

Stay tuned.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
10

Here are some other intriguing answers provided by The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to my Requests for Admissions in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit.Admissions 40_43There’s computer forensic information linking TDPK to both the Breitbart Unmasked accounts. He was photographed outside of Bobby McKey’s on 14 March, 2013. There is eyewitness testimony placing him at CPAC this year.

Notice that he doesn’t deny any of these as he should if they weren’t true. Objecting because of irrelevance is a tacit admission that the statements are true.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
11

There are now seven motions to dismiss filed against The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s second amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.

His response to the motion from Erick Erickson, RedState, James O’Keefe III, and Simon & Schuster is due by close of business on 25 July.

His responses to the motions from Glenn Beck, Mercury Radio Arts, and The Blaze; Michelle Malkin and Twitchy; DB Capitol Strategies; and me are all four due on 28 July.

His response to Aaron Walker is due on 31 July.

His response to The Franklin Center is due on 4 August.

TDPK sent a request to Judge Hazel asking for a delay until 15 October on filing his responses. Of course, he didn’t submit his request in the manner required by the case management order, so it will be interesting to see if the judge even considers it.

popcorn4bkMeanwhile, there is a hearing scheduled on 7 August in the parallel Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit. The hearing will consider additional motions from Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me for summary judgment based on the contents of the discovery provided by TDPK.

Stay tuned.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
11

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin responded to my requests for admissions as a part of discovery in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit. Some of his responses are … shall we say … interesting. The format a request for admissions is such that the response to each statement should be either “admit” or “deny.” Any other response must have a detailed explanation of why a simple answer can’t be given.

Consider these—Admissions 30_33Objection because of irrelevance is not an allowable response. Irrelevance is an reason why one doesn’t want to answer not a reason why one can’t.

It’s also a stupid answer to each of those questions. TDPK’s parole status is a matter of public record obtainable by a Freedom of Information Act Request to the U. S. Parole Commission. The status of the judgment due to Mrs. DeLong is a matter of public record. So is the matter of his parole revocation and the reasons for it.

Clearly, if any of the statements were false, TDPK would be expected to deny them. What does he think dodging statements of easily verifiable facts will do to his credibility in front of a jury?

#StupidIsAsStupidDoes

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
19

On 28 April, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin responded to my request for admission in discovery for the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit. You can read his responses as Exhibit D-2 of my motion to dismiss his second amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness. His responses are shot full of provable lies. For example—Admissions 3Admissions 4Here’s what the judge had to say about the Kimberlin v. Allen lawsuit when he made his ruling at the end of the hearing.BK v SA p109That’s from page 109 of the transcript.

Here’s how TDPK responded to the next request for admission.Admissions 5

Object? Well, I guess TDPK is disappointed—and perhaps a bit embarrassed—that his suit for defamation suit seeking $2,250,000 in damages was found to be worth a hundred bucks. (Say, does that mean that his $1,000,000 suit would get discounted to $44.44?)

Brett Kimberlin isn’t a very smart liar.

UPDATE—My codefendants and I in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit are not commenting on discovery received from TDPK. The only exception is TDPK’s admission to me. Since those have been used an exhibit in my motion to dismiss in the RICO Madness, they are in a public document and fair game. We don’t intend to have anything to say the rest of the discovery provided until the court has ruled on any further pretrial motions or, perhaps, until after the trial.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
9

It will take several days to completely catalog all of the documents provided by The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin in response to Interrogatories from Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me and my Request for Production of Documents. It may take a bit longer to analyze some of them.

However, it seems clear from our initial scan that TDPK does not have the evidence to prove what little remains of his case. For all intents and purposes, the case is now a legal zombie, and we should be able to put it out of its misery fairly soon.

popcorn4bkAs to what’s in the discovery, please be patient, Gentle Reader. It will have to come out as part of some final court paperwork. The trial is set for one month from today, and we may not get that far. In any event, it would be unwise for Aaron, Stacy, or me to say anymore until certain points of law are dealt with, so for now, expect radio silence on this subject.

The RICO Madness will be the hot topic for the next few days.

Stay tuned.

In Re Discovery for Kimberlin v. Walker, et al.

Posted on by
72

Just before noon this morning, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin delivered what he has proffered as his responses to the Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents from Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me. Our lawyer and I are reviewing the material. Aaron and Stacy will begin reviewing the submissions tomorrow.

Based on our initial survey of the answers and documentation provided, we feel that our case has been significantly strengthened. However, good legal strategy requires that we keep our findings to ourselves until either further motions are filed or the case comes to trial.

It’s Thursday Afternoon

Posted on by
27

During the 1 July hearing on motions in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit, Judge McGann ordered The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin to deliver all of the discovery items originally due to Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me to our lawyer not later than noon today. The sanctions imposed at the hearing included TDPK being barred from introducing any evidence related to unproduced discovery during the coming trial.

I’ll be in touch with our lawyer later this afternoon to find out to what extent TDPK complied with the judge’s order. If the legal situation permits, I’ll post further information probably beginning late this evening.

Stay tuned.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
36

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has filed for a protective order in hope that it will permit him to avoid having to answer the discovery interrogatories that I sent him through counsel in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance law suit. However, he filed it after responding to my interrogatories. He should have filed it before answering. This is from page 335 of Discovery Problems and Their Solution by Paul W. Grimm, Charles S. Fax, and Paul Mark Sandler—

[T]he defendant filed timely answers and noted its objections but did not seek a motion for protective order beforehand. If the court follows Brittain, defendant will be deemed to have waived its objections …

BTW, the lead author for Discovery Problems and Their Solutions is the judge in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.

Grimm, et al. are writing in the context of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but I am told that the Maryland Rules are essentially the same.

Acme Law at its finest.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
25

Here’s the answer that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin provided for the interrogatories I sent him through my counsel as a part of discovery in his Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit.Won'tAnswerBrett Kimberlin is convicted perjurer. Maryland is one of several states that does not permit anyone who has been convicted of perjury for testifying in court. (Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 9-104.) However, under the Maryland Rules relating to civil actions in the Circuit Court, Kimberlin is obligated to provide answers to my interrogatories under penalty of perjury unless he can convince a judge to issue a protective order relating to one or more particular questions.

While given under oath, answers to discovery interrogatories are not testimony. They are not covered by § 9-104 per se. Rule 2-421(d) says, “Answers to interrogatories may be used at the trial or a hearing to the extent permitted by the rules of evidence.” In the case of TDPK’s answers, § 9-104 would disallow any of his answers being used as testimony, but one of the uses of discovery is to develop information that will lead to useable evidence. It can show me and my codefendants which rocks to turn over.

TDPK’s vexatious lawsuits—Kimberlin v. Walker, et al.; Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club, et al; and Kimberlin v. Kimberlin Unmasked—are all exercises in anti-First-Amendment shutuppery. He’s afraid of the truth being told about him. He afraid that more truth will be known about him.

#StreisandEffect

UPDATE—Running Wolf clarifies TDPK’s statement.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
31

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin seems to believe that he’s a super special snowflake who shouldn’t have to answer those pesky and impertinent discovery interrogatories I’ve sent his way as part of discovery in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit. This is from his motion for a protective order to allow him to dodge answering.InterogPara86Here’s paragraph 86—BK v AW FAC-86

Now, let me get this straight. TDPK is suing me for a million bucks, and information that would tend to either verify or refute his allegations is irrelevant to the case.

Uh, huh.

Stock market tip: Conagra owns the Orville Redenbacher’s brand.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
16

Here’s a request for production of documents that the Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin doesn’t want to honor in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance suit.InterrogReBUOne of TDPK’s alleged causes of action against me is the fact that I have Applications for Statement of Charges and peace order petitions against him based on evidence that he is one of the users of the @Breitbartunmask Twitter account and the actual beneficial owner of the Breitbart Unmasked website. This from his amended complaint in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. suit.BKvAW2013 FAC-46If he has never had any communication with Breitbart Unmasked, all he would have to do is say so. Of course, that would then raise the question of how the picture TDPK took of Aaron Walker and his wife at the Howard County District Courthouse on 1 March, 2013, got published on Breitbart Unmasked that very afternoon.

I’m tempted to write that I wonder what TDPK is trying to hide, but that’s not completely true.

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
64

All discovery is supposed to be completed in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al. nuisance lawsuit by close of business today. The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin submitted interrogatories to Aaron Walker, Stacy McCain, and me which we answered, although we withheld some to the information he sought because it was privileged. TDPK sought to have the court compel our additional answers, but his motion was denied.

None of the answers we submitted to Kimberlin were submitted under seal. They are fair game for publication. The Gentle Reader may therefore be wondering why TDPK hasn’t leaked any of the information to a member of Team Kimberlin for publication on the Interwebz. The reason is simple. There’s nothing potentially embarrassing in any of our answers. Indeed, after the case is decided, I plan to publish mine to show how lamebrained Kimberlin’s questions were.

popcorn4bkAaron, Stacy, and I have submitted interrogatories, requests for admissions, and requests for documents to Kimberlin, and he has not been very cooperative. Our lawyer has filed a certification of our attempts to get TDPK to cooperate and motions to compel his answers and for other appropriate remedies. Since TDPK still has time to file his oppositions to those motions, I don’t wish to publicly discuss their substance until his time to respond has expired. I have no desire to say anything that might help him effectively oppose our motions.

Stay tuned.

Discovery is Coming

Posted on by
7

Fellows DS-3Of course, one of the dumbest things that a litigant can do is to begin destroying evidence in expectation of being served with discovery in a lawsuit. I don’t intend to do so, but I don’t have anything to hide. Others may be stupid and decide to start shredding.

I do have a shredder that I use routinely to dispose of sensitive documents that no longer need to be kept. I also use it on junk mail. The shedder I use is a Fellows DS-3.

  • Contemporary design complements any home or office décor
  • 5 gallon bin
  • Patented SafeSense Technology stops shredding when hands touch the paper opening
  • Shreds 10 sheets per pass into 5/32″; x 2″; cross-cut particles (Security Level 3)
  • Wide 9″; paper entry

Click here to buy one from Amazon.