There is one bright spot in the otherwise shameful opinion of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in the Walker v. Maryland, et al. case—the Kimberlins’ counterclaim with respect to sanctions was denied as well. Tetyana Kimberlin is still obligated to pay.
In an opinion worthy of the 9th Circuit, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals has dodged having to rule on the constitutionality of the state’s online harassment of of a minor statute by deciding that Aaron Walker did not have standing to bring his case against the state. The court also denied the appeal of the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. portion of the case.
Here’s the opinion:
I’ll have more to say about this opinion after I’ve gone over it more thoroughly. For now, I’ll simply note that I’m not surprised that the court has tried (perhaps successfully) to avoid having to enforce the Bill of Rights.
There are still a couple of Kimberlin-related appeals pending.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals still has the Kimberlin v. Frey RICO Remnant LOLsuit under consideration. All the briefs have been filed, and we’re waiting for the court to rule. This is the remnant of the original RICO Madness LOLsuit. It deals with Kimberlin’s frivolous civil rights claim against Patrick Frey.
The Walker v. Maryland, et al. appeal has been fully briefed, and we’re waiting for the Maryland Court of Special Appeals to rule in that case. This is a two-fold case. One part is an appeal of the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. suit seeking a new trial in malicious prosecution case against Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin. The other part is seeks to have the Maryland laws that were used to charge Aaron Walker declared unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
When there’s more news, I’ll report it.
Stay tuned.
Yesterday and the day before, I wrote about Aaron Walker’s appeal of the Walker v Maryland, et al. lawsuit that is before the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. Two days ago, I summarized the background of the case. Yesterday, I dealt with Aaron’s appeal of the constitutionality of the Maryland laws used by the Kimberlins to bring the false criminal charges underlying the civil suit. Today, I’ll take a look at the case as it relates to the Kimberlins.
I’m not going to go into much detail about Aaron’s appeal. It’s based on errors Aaron says were made by the Circuit Court during the trail; he’s seeking a new trial.
However, I am going to present an overview of the Kimberlins’ cross appeal. Yes, they are appealing their victory. Here are the main points they make in their cross appeal.
First, they argue that the Maryland statutes Aaron was charged under are constitutional. So what? Even if they had standing to argue on behalf to the State, the constitutionality of a law has nothing to do with whether it was used to maliciously prosecute someone.
Second, the Kimberlins argue that they should be immune from suit because of “victim’s litigation privilege.” As Judge Mason told them when they brought up that bogus defense during a hearing in the Circuit Court, if that if such a defense were proper, the tort of malicious prosecution could not exist. Even if it did, litigation privilege applies to the parties in a court action, and the Kimberlins were not parties in either of the State v. Walker cases.
Third, they argue that the Circuit court erred by not granting summary judgment in their favor. So what? They won at trial, so any such error is moot. Further, Judge Mason found that there were material facts in dispute which need to be presented to a jury, so summary judgment would have been improper.
Fourth, the Kimberlins argue that the Circuit Court erred when it sealed certain documents the they filed. Those documents made false and salacious claims about a third party who was not involved in the case. Sealing them was proper. Indeed, if the Court erred with respect to those documents, it was by failing to sanction the Kimberlins for filing them in violation of the Maryland Rules.
Fifth, they argue that the Circuit Court erred “by denying costs to the Kimberlins while granting costs to Walker.” That claim is, quite simply, a lie. The Circuit Court denied costs to both parties. Period. It did sanction Tetyana Kimberlin for failing to be deposed, and she has not yet paid that sanction.
Sixth, they argue that the Circuit Court erred by failing to correct the judgment to reflect the jury’s verdict sheet. The judgement states: “Specifically, Mr. Walker represented Tetyana Kimberlin as a lawyer on a pro bono basis and a legal defense fund was established originally with her consent.” The jury found that: “Kimberlin withheld that his wife was offered a defense fund and pro bono legal help.” So, The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin wants the judgment to be amended to point out how he lied by omission on one of the Applications for Statement of Charges. OK, maybe he should get that one.
Seventh, they claim that the Circuit Court erred by prohibiting them “from introducing evidence during the trial to establish motive and present a robust defense.” So what? They won. Any such error, if it happened (and it didn’t), is moot.
I’ve noted that the outcomes of this appeal and Schmalfeldt’s LOLsuit VIII would affect the next steps in my response to Team Kimberlin’s lawfare. Now, that the Cabin Boy’s™ frivolous suit is dead, we have only to wait for to see how the Court of Special Appeals rules before …
Stay tuned.
UPDATE—2018 JAN 05 05:12:00 UTC tag/brett-kimberlin
2018 JAN 05 05:25:00 UTC tag/walker-v-kimberlin-et-aal-appeal
The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has filed an improper reply to one of Aaron Walker’s filings in his appeal of Walker v. Maryland, et al. in the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. That’s the combined case against the State and the Kimberlins. The suit against the State seeks to have Maryland’s harassment laws declared unconstitutional as applied to the Internet on First Amendment and other grounds. The case against the Kimberlins seek damages for malicious prosecution using those laws.
Here’s the certificate of service filed with TDPK’s improper reply.
(Alexis Rohde is the lawyer representing the State.)
The Gentle Reader may notice that a word appears to be missing from Kimberlin’s last sentence. Actually, there appears to be a great deal more missing than just one word. The most glaring omission is the signature for Tetyana Kimberlin’s attorney who should be filing the reply on her behalf.
Meanwhile, we’re at T-minus 14 days and counting in Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al.
There’s a wildly inaccurate post over at Breitbart Unmasked Bunny Billy Boy Unread about the progress in Aaron Walker’s appeal of his cases against the State of Maryland and the Kimberlins. (No, I won’t link to it.) One of the bigger whoppers deals with the story behind an order denying on of one of Aaron’s motions.
Here’s what really happened—
Before the case went to trial in the Circuit Court, the Kimberlins filed material in publicly accessible documents that contained false and harassing information about Aaron’s wife. The material was also immaterial to the case. Judge Mason sealed the documents. Last April, the Kimberlins served a copy of a motion on Aaron which contained some of the same material. Because that was an improper breach of the seal ordered by Judge Mason, Aaron filed a motion to seal the Kimberlins’ improper motion breaching the lower court’s seal. (Note: I was considering posting a copy of what they served on Aaron, but I couldn’t complete the redactions in time for this scheduled blog post.)
However, in a reversal of their usual failures related to serve of court papers, the Kimberlins neglected to file the motion they had served on Aaron with the Court of Special Appeals. As can seen in the footnote in the order posted at Breitbart Unmasked Bunny Billy Boy Unread, the court found it had nothing to seal which is why it denied Aaron’s motion. That’s not a beatdown for Aaron or a victory for The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin. It’s a huge screw up on TDPK’s part.
#FakeNews
On Monday, I posted Michael Smith’s motion on behalf of Eugene Volokh seeking leave to file an amicus brief with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in the Walker v. Maryland, et al. case. The Gentle Reader will probably not be surprised to find out that the Kimberlins have strongly opposed Prof. Volokh’s motion.
Lt. Kaffee was unavailable for comment.
Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.
Meanwhile, it’s T-minus 7 days and counting in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.
This has been filed in the Walker v. State of Maryland, et al. appeal—
The amicus brief described in the motion that Prof. Volokh seeks to file appears to be identical to the one he filed in last year’s appeal of the case against the State of Maryland. That appeal was rejected because of a clerical error by the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County who failed to obey the judge’s instructions to sever the case against the State from the case against the Kimberlins. The combined case is now on appeal following the trial with the Kimberlins.
Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.
Meanwhile, it’s T-minus 9 days and counting in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.
Yesterday, I wrote about the fact that the Kimberlins have filed a cross-appeal in the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit, a case they won. Most of us would be satisfied to leave well enough alone when we win in court. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, but …
I spent yesterday evening reviewing their cross-appeal brief again. I’m glad I did. I found information they included which will help me make my case when we get to trial in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.
Everything is going better than I foresaw.
T-minus 14 days and counting.
I’ve been closely following Aaron Walker’s appeal in the Maryland Court of Special Appeals of the case he filed against the State of Maryland and Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin. (Some background: The case against the State seeks to have the laws Aaron was charged under found unconstitutional. The case against the Kimberlins is for malicious prosecution using those laws.) The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin believes Aaron’s case is so similar to mine that the results in that case affect my suit. Thus, I want to keep an eye on what he is saying about the Aaron’s appeal.
The Kimberlins have filed a cross-appeal.
Gentle Reader, think about what that means: they are appealing a lawsuit that they won.
The mind boggles.
I have to admit that I did not foreseen something this stupid.