Below are personal sentiments at the given moment in time
Springfield Ohio Clark County Municipal Court Sham(e) 5
If you should follow the link to Dailymotion, notice the alias I had used. That was God or luck because who would have guessed that Springfield Government could order pulling all videos associated with my real name on the Internet? Upon my resubmitting the videos to Youtube were followed by suspensions and the loss of all the work to compile and upload the videos? The videos uploaded to Youtube were important because the 18 motions submitted to the court contained links to the videos that CLEARLY show the damages were not of the Defendant.
Springfield missed one of the videos that I just recently found remaining on the Internet, the video is dated with the original description to the video.
Submitted 6 years ago to DailyMotion while the ongoing lower court case was brewing (Dailymotion was the only video site that did not alter or pull my videos because I submitted it using an alias! Kudos to me!)
See www.dailymotion.com/video/x3pa7jo title="Crow collusion with Clark County Court"
The following video Title and Description were posted before the case went to Trial. The time-stamp is clearly indicated by going to dailymotion (where the video was uploaded) directly.
Rough Draft 1335 North Limestone
DISCLAIMER: Please note, the description to this video was written in haste to Daily Motion during a time when I may not have been thinking so clearly (or something because that is a stupid description in parts, huh?). Sorry. It should be obvious that the videos were made prior to 2016 since my move-out was 2014. Luckily I retained those videos so many years later, huh? What if I didn't though? That's a scarier thought to me.
Original Dated and Time-stamped Description to the DailyMotion Video
"This is how to kill a scammer. Remember kids...when moving into a new place and renting from the rich...DOCUMENT EVERYTHING BEFORE YOU MOVE YOUR STUFF IN (luckily I did ... and will be editing this video frequently today (this is my first draft as of this date 1/29/2016). The case went up for arraignment yesterday....the landlords have made a side-line business of suing their tenants.....I'm about to ruin their day. They already "stole" $600 deposit and $600 last month's unused rent...now almost 2 years after I moved out they are suing!!!!!!!!! LOL....God told me to make daily videos of my move-in and guess what you see in the pre-movein videos? That's right, cracks, splintered wood, broken window, trash in the basement, water stains on the ceilings and carpet and more!!!! Stop back because this little turkey is just getting to his first gobble!"
TOPIC:
Disgraceful Judiciary in Springfield Ohio
Where robbing the elderly is respectable?
Page 5
Sorry to dump and Run, but this page is getting too confusing to diffuse right now....the following are considered notes and nothing more at this time.
The folowing are notes that are so in disarray that all my alter egos are perplexed as to where to start.
I'll clean it up someday...maybe
My claim to you is that I am:
1.) A First-Person Witness of the very damages that the Landlord(s) were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case,
My claim to you is that I am:
2.) In possession of Video and Audio evidence that would refute the Landlord's Claim, my claim to you is that I am:
3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case,
The video shows that the Crow Claim is fraudulent. Yet the Clark County Municipal court "finds" that the Crow Claim holds merit (that there are 6 ceiling tiles missing in the front room). By sheer luck, I just so happened to have made a video showing that very same ceiling as I did the walk-out video! The only ceiling tiles missing in that building were the three in the kitchen witnessed by this video.
Video shows the ceiling tiles in the front room as I was moving out. I took the videos of every wall, every ceiling, every door, to document the state-of-affairs of the building when I vacated. I even made a pre-move in video (not to mention all the other videos I made while in that building.
My claim to you is that I was:
4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring and that the ongoing Case was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder).
Fed R Civ Rule 24.
(a) Intervention of Right.
On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/title_IV TITLE IV. PARTIES )
or
(2)claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
(b) Permissive Intervention.
(1) In General. On timely motion, the court may permit anyone to intervene who:
(A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute
(see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/title_IV TITLE IV. PARTIES)
or
(B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of lawor fact.
Fed R Civ Rule 18.
Joinder of Claims
(a) In General.
A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim may join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party.
(b) Joinder of Contingent Claims. A party may join two claims even though one of them is contingent on the disposition of the other; but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the parties relative substantive rights. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment for the money.
(see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_19 Rule 19; Required Joinder of Parties
Apparently someone, or some entity, doesn't like the Judicial portion of my multifaceted website. This is my third attempt at keeping the following law posted here, words obtained from:
www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_19
Cornell University, who merely have law available to the public on their site, is where I chose to copy (the copy) of the Law.
However, someone, or some entity, bothered to hack this site only to alter the following law. This portion of my website is the only portion that seems to receive an excessive amount of questionable entries in my server's logs. The solar site is fine, the Computer Repair site is fine, my "personal" site is fine, even the political site is fine. Apparently the hacker (or employee) could not think of anything more profitable than to change the following law twice (leaving it barely substantive).
This perversion of the intent to have the myriad of laws (that the "lawmakers" conjured up for themselves to use) is manipulative, coercive, and is the antithesis of any hopes in the evolution of a civil mankind (in my opinion, we can do better than these who prey upon others and create such a law that allows them to exploit the fact that each and every one of us have been coralled to one choice of two internet providers so they can monitor and MUCH MUCH worse than you would expect from even a hoodlum or bored kid with nothing better to do). The attacks are organized.
Here's the Real Version, pasted for the third time:
"New subdivision (a) defines the persons whose joinder in the action is desirable. Clause (1) stresses the desirability of joining those persons in whose absence the court would be obliged to grant partial or “hollow” rather than complete relief to the parties before the court.The interests that are being furthered here are not only those of the parties, but also that of the public in avoiding repeated lawsuits on the same essential subject matter. Clause (2)(i) recognizes the importance of protecting the person whose joinder is in question against the practical prejudice to him which may arise through a disposition of the action in his absence. Clause (2)(ii) recognizes the need for considering whether a party may be left, after the adjudication, in a position where a person not joined can subject him to a double or otherwise inconsistent liability. See Reed, supra, 55 Mich.L.Rev. at 330, 338; Note, supra, 65 Harv.L.Rev. at 1052–57; Developments in the Law, supra, 71 Harv.L.Rev. at 881–85."
The 3rd Party (me) Claims that the Lower Court erred in allowing a completely wrong party to be Tried by the Plaintiff and the Municipal Court.
Below You will find actual documents that were presented to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL.
Presented, are One of the Two Motions that the 3rd Party submitted to the Lower Court, PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL.
Notice that the law does not specify that one must even pre-prove him or herself to be included in an ongoing case.
Their Law merely states that:
Fed R Civ Rule 24.
(a) Intervention of Right.
On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute
(see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/title_IV" TITLE IV. PARTIES
or
(2)claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
The Lower Court Judge made the ruling to deny the 3rd Party's Motion for the reason as shown below:
Although a slew of exhibits and evidences were entered into the Municipal Court Record, everyone of them were denied
(including videos of the live damages as they were occurring, audio recordings of live narration, relevant documents, witness Testimonies (others), my tesitmony, etc.). Denied.
There were a couple of Motions filed to the Lower Municipal Court Record prior to Pre-Trial, which alleged:
1.) The Wrong party was being sued.
2.) Evidence was NOT permitted in the Municipal Court.
3.) That the Claim was fraudulent in the first place, and knowingly filed against the wrong party.
4.)That the Lower Court did not wait for the Court of Appeals' Decision (YOUR DECISION, AND YOU ARE THE HIGHER COURT JUDGE, DENIED) as to decide upon my right to stand within the Municipal Court Case to show and tell why I am an element of considerable necessity.
As it stands now, the Muncipal Court manipulated a 70+ year old woman to come all the way to Ohio to be told that she's the cause of the damages.
Shamefully, the Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio found She was found guilty (while I was denied Court Access to present ANY evidences, even those that were on the Court Record). Denied.
Eric Crow, the (now) Municipal Court winner, was not a signer (or signor) on any Lease Agreement, yet seems to have the approval of the Lower Municipal Court concerning standing... in a Lease Agreement in which he's not even named. The Court gave; see clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/Judgments?ReadForm&CATYPE=Civil&CASENUM=1502981&COUNTNUM=
My contention as the 3rd Party is that if Eric can make a claim against Margaret Baldino in a Lease Agreement dispute that he's not even a party to, then why can I not make a Claim against either of the Crows when I have expressed to the Municipal Court Record to be:
1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case
2.) I am in possession of Video/Audio evidence that would refute the Landlord's Claim
3.) In my possession are documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case
4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring (so the Case was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder).
Yet, regardless of who was the tenant or which of the Leases the Court was willing to see, Eric Crow is oddly enough shown on the Court Record as being the recipient of the Court award and champion winner of the Theresa Crow / Margaret Baldino Lease (dis)Agreement. In fact, Eric Crow was permitted to be present in the Court Room throughout the entirety of his wife's Contractual Trial; whereas Margaret Baldino's witnesses were told to stay in the hallway until called.
My mother and I even went and filed a Counter-Suit against the Crows ($50+ dollars). You guessed it.
Read the short Sequence of events below, if you feel this case has unlawfully left the Tenant out of the Tenant/ Landlord Dispute
OR
If you feel that at very least I should have been a party that is Free to present evidence, ***The courts removed the following page that was at one time a working link: https://www.mcohio.org/SecondDistrictAppeals/ and leave a message concerning your opinion of this tragedy of Justice. Appellate Case Number: 2016-CA-56
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS AS PER THE COURT RECORD with notes and exhibits
My Closing Statement to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Body (Not seen here is the 1st page which is the stamped coverpage to the Clark County Court Record)
Instructed by the Second Appellate Division to complete a "Brief">
Luckily the google monopoly hasn't censored the template out of the public's reach, allowing me to comply.
Notice the date in which this form was submitted, September 29, 2016 (the Municipal County Court disregarded the issue presented to the Appellate Division altogether and progressed on to Trial without waiting for the Second Appellate Court Decision in this matter (as to whether or not it is lawful to deny evidence and a 3rd Party that has obvious INTEREST.
Its outcome with Margaret Baldino as the guilty party by judgment of the Municipal County Court of Springfield Ohio's (see www.lawyers.com/springfield/ohio/thomas-edward-trempe-1468459-a/ Judge Thomas Trempe< ought to be considered null and void.
9/22/2016
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header was carried over from the Municipal Court Case, as instructed from the Appellate Court Clerk
The original header, however, appears to be confusing the fluidity of the Appeal's intent insofar that the parties' places within the Case itself confounds the legal issue (for instance, perhaps the names of the Crows and Baldino ought to be removed from the appeal of an issue that is between the Municipal Court Judge decision, the Law that the Judge is to uphold, and myself).
1.) Although the Lower Municipal Court Judge was verifiably cognitive of the Appeal to the Higher Court soon after Pre-Trial, The Municipal Court Judge decided to keep the appointment and have the Trial anyway (not waiting on the Appellate Court to Rule on whether or not I have legal standing in the damages claim in the Municipal Court Case. The Appeal was right after Pre-Trial so there can be no misunderstanding of what is being appealed at this stage, even without reading the Appeal):
2.) Denied evidence in mom's defense which was/is already entered into the Muncipal Court Record well prior to Trial
see (https) images.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/CISWeb/Search.aspx?caseNumber=15CVF02981
My version does not hide the exhibits/evidences. But I'm not entirely done with that page yet so there's more (however what IS complete OUGHT to be enough)
3.) Denied Court access when that person is with evidence that should have been inter-pleaded, adjoined, intervened, or as an interested party to the Case that is FREE to present evidence to the Case.
4.) Rather, there is bias in that an entirely different party, MR. CROW, as the winner of Mrs. Crow's Contractual Lease Agreement Complaint.
Mr. Crow is a witness at best. How is it legal to give credit to a witness, a person that doesn't have standing and wasn't part of the Lease which was being heard before the Municipal Court, and in dispute?
5.) Again, bias toward Eric Crow, to not be sequestered during Trial.
Whereas the Defense's witnesses were left in the hallway, unlike Eric Crow, in a lease he's not even a signer (signor) nor was he present at the signing of the Lease Agreement (However, the 3rd party Intervenor was present during Margaret Baldino and Theresa's Lease signing).
Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/title_IV TITLE IV. PARTIES
and/or
any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head)
In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny
see www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process Due Process
The Appeal is being heard within see www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_60 60(b)motion at Springfield Ohio's Second Appellate Court of Appeals.
Note: The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System.
The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2nd District Appellate Court of Appeals itself.
Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences).
Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:
1.) Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial.
The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an ex parte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge as seen here
2.) The good name be given back to my mother. My mother has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.) Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible, the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows.
This shame and embarrassment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce.
3.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs, an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs, electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc., including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs, etc.).
What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated. It's the right thing to do now.
I'm the 3rd Party Claimant attempting to "Correct the Record", stating that:
1.) The wrong party is being sued.
2.) The Plaintiff hasn't any ground to sue.
3.) The Plaintiff entered into the Court Record fraudulent Documents.
4.) That there are videos and witnesses that are able to prove the aforementioned claims made by the 3rd Party.
Presented to you are two verifiably received letters which my mother sent over 3 years ago.
Luckily she kept the tracking/shipping information.
NOTES:
Although a slew of exhibits and evidences were entered into the Municipal Court Record, everyone of them were denied
(including videos of the live damages as they were occurring, audio recordings of live narration, relevant documents, witness Testimonies (others), my tesitmony, etc.). Denied.
There were a couple of Motions filed to the Lower Municipal Court Record prior to Pre-Trial, which alleged:
1.) The Wrong party was being sued.
2.) Evidence was NOT permitted in the Municipal Court.
3.) That the Claim was fraudulent in the first place, and knowingly filed against the wrong party.
4.)That the Lower Court did not wait for the Court of Appeals' Decision (YOUR DECISION, AND YOU ARE THE HIGHER COURT JUDGE, DENIED) as to decide upon my right to stand within the Municipal Court Case to show and tell why I am an element of considerable necessity.
As it stands now, the Muncipal Court manipulated a 70+ year old woman to come all the way to Ohio to be told that she's the cause of the damages.
Shamefully, the Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio found She was found guilty (while I was denied Court Access to present ANY evidences, even those that were on the Court Record). Denied.
Eric Crow, the (now) Municipal Court winner, was not a signer (or signor) on any Lease Agreement, yet seems to have the approval of the Lower Municipal Court concerning standing... in a Lease Agreement in which he's not even named. The Court gave (see https www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/Judgments?ReadForm&CATYPE=Civil&CASENUM=1502981&COUNTNUM= the award to Eric Crow
My contention as the 3rd Party is that if Eric can make a claim against Margaret Baldino in a Lease Agreement dispute that he's not even a party to, then why can I not make a Claim against either of the Crows when I have expressed to the Municipal Court Record to be:
1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case,
2.) In possession of Video/Audio evidence that would refute the Landlord's Claim,
3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case,
Read the short Sequence of events below, if you feel this case has unlawfully left the Tenant out of the Tenant/ Landlord Dispute
OR
if you feel that at very least I should have been a party that is Free to present evidence, ***Please note that the following link has been terminated by the court system so my link no longer works: www.mcohio.org/SecondDistrictAppeals/
and leave a message concerning your opinion of this tragedy of Justice. Appellate Case Number: 2016-CA-56
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS AS PER THE COURT RECORD with notes and exhibits
My Closing Statement to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Instructed by the Second Appellate Division to complete a "Brief">
Luckily the google monopoly hasn't censored the template out of the public's reach, allowing me to comply.
Notice the date in which this form was submitted, September 29, 2016 (the Municipal County Court disregarded the issue presented to the Appellate Division altogether and progressed on to Trial without waiting for the Second Appellate Court Decision in this matter (as to whether or not it is lawful to deny evidence and a 3rd Party that has obvious INTEREST.
Its outcome with Margaret Baldino as the guilty party by judgment of the Municipal County Court of Springfield Ohio's Judge Thomas Trempe ought to be considered null and void.
9/22/2016
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header was carried over from the Municipal Court Case, as instructed from the Appellate Court Clerk
The original header, however, appears to be confusing the fluidity of the Appeal's intent insofar that the parties' places within the Case itself confounds the legal issue (for instance, perhaps the names of the Crows and Baldino ought to be removed from the appeal of an issue that is between the Municipal Court Judge decision, the Law that the Judge is to uphold, and myself).
1.) Although the Lower Municipal Court Judge was verifiably cognitive of the Appeal to the Higher Court soon after Pre-Trial, The Municipal Court Judge decided to keep the appointment and have the Trial anyway (not waiting on the Appellate Court to Rule on whether or not I have legal standing in the damages claim in the Municipal Court Case. The Appeal was right after Pre-Trial so there can be no misunderstanding of what is being appealed at this stage, even without reading the Appeal):
My version does not hide the exhibits/evidences. But I'm not entirely done with that page yet so there's more (however what IS complete OUGHT to be enough)
3.) Denied Court access when that person is with evidence that should have been inter-pleaded, adjoined, intervened, or as an interested party to the Case that is FREE to present evidence to the Case.
4.) Rather, there is bias in that an entirely different party, MR. CROW, as the winner of Mrs. Crow's Contractual Lease Agreement Complaint.
Mr. Crow is a witness at best. How is it legal to give credit to a witness, a person that doesn't have standing and wasn't part of the Lease which was being heard before the Municipal Court, and in dispute?
5.) Again, bias toward Eric Crow, to not be sequestered during Trial.
Whereas the Defense's witnesses were left in the hallway, unlike Eric Crow, in a lease he's not even a signer (signor) nor was he present at the signing of the Lease Agreement (However, the 3rd party Intervenor was present during Margaret Baldino and Theresa's Lease signing).
Narrated by Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure TITLE IV. PARTIES
and/or
any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head),
In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny
60(b)motion at Springfield Ohio's Second Appellate Court of Appeals.
That I question the Lawful Judgment of the Springfield Ohio Municipal Court's Judge Trempe to restrict my evidence and access to a (then) ongoing case. To do so is clearly bias and therefore a criminal outfit.
Note: The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System.
The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2nd District Appellate Court of Appeals itself.
Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences).
Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:
1.) Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial.
The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an ex parte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge as seen here
2.) The good name be given back to my mother. My mother has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.) Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible, the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows.
4.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs, an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs, electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc., including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs, etc.).
What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated. It's the right thing to do now.
The following is a true case that was "heard" within the Second Appellate Court ***Link was terminated by the Court System and no longer works: https://www.mcohio.org/SecondDistrictAppeals/
The 3rd Party applicant submitted physical DVD's of videos and motions to the Court (Attempting to "Correct The Record" and "Intervene" in the ongoing matter).
The 3rd Party (not a "named" Defendant, nor a Plaintiff) claimed to have evidence that only a Plaintiff or a Defendant in a Case can properly introduce into a Court of Law (of one's own free will).
The 3rd Party informed the Lower Court Judge, Plaintiff, and
Court Record that they have a case before them in which the wrong party was being Sued.
But regardless of which party is being sued, the 3rd Party stated that he has evidence to refute any Claim made by the Landlord of the Lease, Mrs. Crow
(which is the wife of the husband that won this case, but that's not important right now).
Now let's step up to yet another level.
Fed R Civ Rule 24.
(a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see TITLE IV. PARTIES <;
OR
(2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
(b) Permissive Intervention.
(1) In General. On timely motion, the court may permit anyone to intervene who:
(A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute(see TITLE IV. PARTIES <; or (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.
Fed R Civ Rule 18. Joinder of Claims
(a) In General. A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, cross claim, or third-party claim may join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party.
(b) Joinder of Contingent Claims. A party may join two claims even though one of them is contingent on the disposition of the other; but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the parties™ relative substantive rights. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment for the money.
Counter Suit Deniedyet the money required to file the Counter-Suit was kept by the Court and the Party was not recompensed despite the denial of Service.
New subdivision (a) defines the persons whose joinder in the action is desirable. Clause (1) stresses the desirability of joining those persons in whose absence the court would be obliged to grant partial or hollow rather than complete relief to the parties before the court.The interests that are being furthered here are not only those of the parties, but also that of the public in avoiding repeated lawsuits on the same essential subject matter. Clause (2)(i) recognizes the importance of protecting the person whose joinder is in question against the practical prejudice to him which may arise through a disposition of the action in his absence. Clause (2)(ii)recognizes the need for considering whether a party may be left,after the adjudication, in a position where a person not joined can subject him to a double or otherwise inconsistent liability. See Reed, supra, 55 Mich.L.Rev. at 330, 338; Note, supra, 65Harv.L.Rev. at 1052“57; Developments in the Law,supra, 71 Harv.L.Rev. at881“85.
Response tothe Crow Attorneystating that "interest" has not been shown and thatthere is no "standing". Perhapsif the judiciary wereto use the samedefinitions that therest of thenon-judiciary has.
My Brief to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals
Instructed by the SecondAppellate Division tocomplete a "Brief">
Notice the date in whichthis form was submitted,September 29, 2016 (theMunicipal County Courtdisregarded the issuepresented to the AppellateDivision altogether andprogressed on to Trialwithout waiting for theSecond Appellate CourtDecision in this matter(as to whether or not itis lawful to deny evidenceand a 3rd Party that hasobvious INTEREST).
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header wascarried over from theMunicipal Court Case, asinstructed from theAppellate Court Clerk
The original header,however, appears to beconfusing the fluidity ofthe Appeal's intentinsofar that the parties'places within the Caseitself confounds the legalissue (for instance,perhaps the names of theCrows and Baldino ought tobe removed from the appealof an issue that isbetween the MunicipalCourt Judge decision, theLaw that the Judge is touphold, and myself).
If you disagree with theJudgment, please do botherto put your two-cents inby calling the Court andtelling them so...thisisn't going to go awayunless Justice returns toour Judiciary.
AppellateCase Number:2016-CA-56Anyone with access toYouTube can watch thevideos that show beyond ashadow of doubt thatMargaret Baldino did notcause any of the claimeddamages.
5.) Censored
6.) Censored
The following is the original Municipal Clark County Court Case.
ClarkCounty MunicipalCourt
05/14/2017: 02:15AM
Guy A. Ferguson, Clerk
Case No. 15CVF02981
Address:2803 Road Springfield Ohio45504 Product of Ohio Product of USA
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. Title I, 101, Oct 19, 1976, 90 Stat 2546)
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
With notes and exhibits
The new censorship laws give law enforcement the right to censor sites from the Internet at will. If anything is found to be helpful or important here, copy it before it's gone (It's what they do to manipulate Public Consideration and Opinion, for their own profit).
Closing Statement to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Response to the Crow Attorney stating that "interest" has not been shown and that there is no "standing". Perhaps if the judiciary were to use the same definitions that the rest of the non-judiciary has.
Instructed by the Second Appellate Division to complete a "Brief".
My first submission is contained below and was somehow denied, stating I needed more formality and nomenclature.
Notice the date in which this form was submitted, September 29, 2016 (the Municipal County Court disregarded the issue presented to the Appellate Division altogether and progressed on to Trial without waiting for the Second Appellate Court Decision in this matter (as to whether or not it is lawful to deny evidence and a 3rd Party that has obvious INTEREST).
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header was carried over from the Municipal Court Case, as instructed from the Appellate Court Clerk
The original header, however, appears to be confusing the fluidity
of the Appeal's intent insofar that the parties' places within the
Case itself confounds the legal issue (for instance, perhaps the
names of the Crows and Baldino ought to be removed from the appeal
of an issue that is between the Municipal Court Judge decision, the
Law that the Judge is to uphold, and myself).
1.) You'll notice that the Court of Appeals did not even mention how Mr. Crow was awarded a sum when he's not even on any Lease Agreement. The Lease was between A and B but C wins as seen on the Clark County Muncipal Court's Website here
2.) You'll notice how the Court of Appeals did not even touch on the matter of the multitude of video evidences that showed the damages as a result of the upstairs tenant's plumbing.
Remember, the suit claimed that Margaret Baldino, a 70++ year old woman "caused damages" so it doesn't matter who the tenant is if the evidence shows she couldn't have caused the damages (unless her name is Running Water or Bursting Pipes).
3.) You'll notice that the determination parrots that of the Municipal Court Judgment and that the Court is relying on the squabble about who was the tenant at the time of the damages but ignoring the irrefutable video evidence that has made its way to the Municipal Court Record contained further down this page. The Plaintiffs Claim clearly names Margaret Baldino as the cause for damage of property.
Who profits by denying evidence and interested parties from a case?
4.) You'll notice not one iota of photo evidence was necessary for the Crow's (the Plaintiff's) to win a "claim" for leaving "trash and debris" on the property (but I ...not my mom...have videos and a half dozen witnesses and documents, and even the movers that helped me move out and my own testimony that NEEDS to be considered in the Case, it clearly ought to have some affect on the adverse determination they've made here).
There's video evidence that the claim simply is not authentic.
5.) Censored
6.) Censored
7.) You'll notice that the Second Appellate Court of Appeals changed the wording of the original Clark County Municipal Claim. The original Claim states that Margaret Baldino "Caused the damage"....now it's evolved to "...damages that occurred during Margaret's Lease". Supposedly we've been led to believe that practicing law from the bench is unlawful.
Family ties (i.e. the upstairs tenant and the plaintiff) can no longer be found on the Internet as Nicole's Facebook and Twitter Accounts have been closed (luckily for me I have a video on the Internet that was made before that desperate delete action, CENSORED video. ALL the videos that were uploaded to YouTube were either censored with more than a dozen claims to copyright infringement when in fact the videos were entirely made by me (obviously since I'm talking in the video and the destruction is live in the video). Fed up with the antics by whomever was complaining about each and every one of the uploaded videos, I dropped YouTube altogether.
8.) You'll notice that the Court of Appeals apparently are feeling okay to address ONLY the two motions of the more than SEVENTEEN made to the Court Record.
9.) You'll notice that the Appellate determination mentions that my mom (the former lease holder) never remained at the property in question, but failed to mention the fact that I not only supplied rental receipts but also stated that I HAD THE SUBSEQUENT LEASE.....no mention of how it was determined to be a lie in that "Final" determination by the Appellate though.
10.) Censored
11.) You'll notice that on page two of the Judge's best Judgment that it is stated by the Judge "...For the reasons outlined below, the judgment of the trial court will be affirmed." Now I challenge anyone to find reasons why the Second Appellate Court of Appeals would affirm the Lower Court's Decision to bar my ability to present my own witnesses and my own evidences to refute the ill-aimed Claim. If you review the initial case you'll invariably find that it was Judge Trempe that first introduced the Law that is now deemed incorrect (i.e. 24(a)(b)
12.) Interestingly you'll notice on page 6 that the Court of Appeals Judge speaks much of Civ.R. 24(A),(B),and (C) so we must conclude that either the Court of Appeals has noticed that I never brought up anything of Civ.R. 24 (that was introduced by the Municipal Court Judge) and apparently reiterated by the Court of Appeals to keep Justice from where it's due when all Judges are surely aware of Rule 18 Joinder/Non-Joinder and yet in my Brief TO THE COURT OF APPEALS ON PAGE 5 IS STATED JOINDER, a Federal Law that does apply). As for my personal statements referencing Civ.R. 24(a)(b), et. al. it was due to following the Judge's lead in introducing the cited law in the first place (see denial .
The paid Attorney for my mom did not tell her about subject matter Jurisdiction. He submitted onto the court record before pre-trial that my mom was in florida.
I also stated on the court record My mother is not of the jurisdiction of the Clark County Municipal Court of Ohio.
The following is the original Municipal Clark County Court Case.
The Judge slandered the facts to reflect that it was Theresa AND Eric Crow that entered into a Lease Agreement with my mother.
This is untrue. It was I, My mother, and Theresa who were the only persons in the rental during the Lease Signing. Eric never was present. If the Court rules Judgment for someone wouldn't it be ethical and wildly orthodox to award a Judgment between the two signors of the Lease?
And yet the Judgment goes to somebody whom isn't even on the Lease (that in of itself shows thuggish behavior and no semblance of a proper Judicial System).
Where did the Judge get the idea Eric was involved in my mother's lease? The only Lease that Eric was involved in was one with me, and I was barred from the case, the very issue in which I'm the only person on the planet recording the disasters as they happened.
One can have no respect for a racket when in respect to those that enjoy their privileged lifestyles and lord over us taking , always taking and giving nothing of community value in return.
Before I die I'd like to see our military come home and clean house. One country, one set of laws that cover the entirety of our nation void of all the profiteering middle-men that rake us clean. They have failed us (i.e. https://usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html ).
Our Nation is lost because of these types and at very LEAST, we can no longer afford them.
Court Opinion: "A statement that is prepared by a judge or court announcing the decision after a case is tried; includes a summary of the facts, a recitation of the applicable law and how it relates to the facts, the rationale supporting the decision, and a judgment; and is usually presented in writing."
Address: 2803Troy Road Springfield Ohio 45504 Product of Ohio Product of USA
notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. Title I, 101, Oct 19, 1976, 90 Stat 2546)
Clark County Municipal Court Sham(e) Springfield Ohio, where robbing the elderly is respectable?
At about Pre-Trial, my motions were finally replied to, Denied. However the Springfield Ohio Court DID go to great efforts to allow a fictitious Lease into the Court Record, submitted by the Crows. Notice their Lease which they submitted to the Courts doesn't mention a word about the Security Deposit which my mother's Lease does. Notice also that the Lease shows my mother and Theresa Crow are the only signors on the Lease (yet the Court would award the bounty to someone who wasn't even on her Lease), Notice later down this page that all parties agree that there indeed was a security deposit and that although it was withheld beyond the legal time-frame, that's A-Okay with the JUSTus system.. Notice below also that there is the matter of a fictitious company name that nobody on planet earth will find as a valid entity is none-other than the Crows themselves, that was also allowed in a Court of "Law">
Although the Landlord unlawfully kept the deposit beyond the legal time-frame, the Court would award even the unlawfully withheld Deposit to the Landlord's Husband (You heard right, a guy who was not even on my mother's lease).
Mr. Crow was however the orchestrator of the SUBSEQUENT LEASE with me, but according to the Court's best judgment I have "no standing" and Eric Crow somehow does.
Mr. Crow is the winner according to the court, But why?
The Husband clearly wasn't on the lease.
The only people present the day of my mother's Lease was I, my mother, and the landlord (Theresa Crow) only. Mr. Crow's signature is nowhere to be found because he wasn't there which gives HIM no standing.In fact, I have more standing than Mr. Crow (concerning my mother's lease).
So irregardless of who the Court wishes to believe was the tenant is immaterial when the Court has willingly allowed a fictitious Lease, from a fictitious Company (Tec Rentals), neither of which exists in the real world.
8.) Evidences on the Court Record and witnesses were Denied by Judge Thomas Trempe of Springfield Ohio's Clark County Municipal Court, given were the following reasons:
9. Having been denied twice by the Clark County Municipal Court prior to Pre-Trial, I appealed to the Appellate Division
The thing is, if you visit their Court Records Recordyou will invariably find more than enough evidences ALREADY submitted to the Court. I wasn't aware that I was supposed to produce every shred of evidence and reveal my whole hand, thereby prejudicing any case I had against the fraudulent claim against the wrong person (my expectation was to see the look on everybody's faces when the true liar in the Court was exposed).
Further, if physical live videos sent to the court and obviously accepted and stamped into the record are already in the Court's possession, one might think that it gives a hint to some plausible need for my being required to be in that Case for the claim of damages. The Court also accepted and stamped into Court Record the copy of my rental receipts and much more, this is not (to quote the Appellate Decision), "unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.">
Instead they wait till there can be no appeal on my mother's case to finally respond with this:
"we cannot reverse unless the trial court's decision was unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable."
It seems the Court was guilty of all those things it alleges. Is it not unconscionable to deny evidence and an obviously concerned party within the community that is the ONLY person on the planet most intimate with the details of the claim and the property in question?
Just to be clear, I appealed the decision made by a lower court judge that mandated that evidence and the actual tenant should not be allowed in the tenant / landlord dispute.
The appeal was for a 60(b) motion and was accepted in the Appellate Court on September 22, 2016.
However the Appellate Court did not perform a 60(b) motion, and instead allowed the lower court to progress to trial many months later.
In case you're missing the hypocrisy in all this, If I appeal that I ought to be a party to the case and offer video evidence and rental receipts (and more) along with that appeal (look at their Court Record to see for yourself), then what good is the Appellate Court if it's going to not even consider my pleading by waiting 5 months AFTER the municipal court went ahead and held the illegal trial anyway?
With a hush of non-participation by the Appellate Branch of the Judiciary, there was not to be a response by the Appellate until an additional 5 months AFTER the lower court disregarded waiting for the Appellate to come back with an answer to determine whether it was lawful to deny evidence in an ongoing case in which the third party was the only person on the planet that could be proven to be the tenant regarding the exact case being heard in the Court, and furthermore is narrating the actual videos as the disasters were occurring.
As if it were an appeal to the future verdict of the lower Court's illegal Trial, in effect stopping all Appeals to the lower Court Trial altogether; five months later stating the appellate's decision is unappealable. Shameful waste of space and money, we could get more justice and do better with bums running the Clark County Municipal Court (in my arguably substantiated opinion).
10.) The Second Appellate Court did not bother to intervene or answer until 5 months A F T E R the lower Court went ahead with Trial disregarding the motion to the appellate appealing to them to judge between the judgment and the Motioneer (me), holding my mother un-represented and un-assisted in a fraudulent Claim and Trial. I would NOT be allowed to present evidences to a case in which I am the obvious correct party to.
It was asked of me, for the 5 minutes I was permitted into the court room,
Q: " Do you have evidence to show the cause for damages ? "
Me: "Why yes, it's right in the back there", as I pointed to the back of the courtroom.
The judge was not even remotely curious enough to want to see the evidences that answer my mother's question of whether or not I had evidence to show her as innocent of the claims against her. The judge wasn't interested (smug thuggish behavior). When the Appellate did respond, it was to this disregard:
To bring the Court to some semblance of reality, I took the videos which I made as the disasters were occurring and copied some of them to DVD and attached them to the motions I made to the Court.
Being aware of what I had heard from various community members concerning the impropriety of the Springfield Courts, I also included links in the motions to the videos which were also uploaded to the Internet.
However, Judge Trempe would go on to deny all evidences including the real actual tenant from being legally able to produce the evidences. By denying the only person on the planet most-intimate with the very damages that were the subject of the very claim being heard in "his" court room, lies would become reality.
A few months after I vacated the Crow rental, a notice came in the mail at my new residence that I was being threatened by the Crows for a property damage claim.
I replied to the Crows that they were barking up the wrong tree and that they were made aware of each and every disaster that occurred at their property.
Once, while still a resident at the decrepit rental, I even called the Crows at 2am to inform them of a busted water pipe caused by the frost, a.k.a the Crow's lack of insulating their plumbing from the cold, and inquired as to what I ought to do to stop the water flow which resulted in damage to my personal property.
never once did I attempt to get him to reimburse for the damages.
Videos show where damages came from. It was the upstairs tenant's plumbing and/or the landlord/plumber's shortcomings in electrical and plumbing skills, and later an upstairs fire which occurred during my last month there (after the walk-through inspection).
The landlord and his agents must go through my downstairs rental in order to get to plumbing, electrical, air conditioners, etc. which are all housed in the basement. This is how the landlord's carpets partially were made to become damaged as shown in the videos that werenot permitted in a court of justus.
numerous attempts were made to bring the Court to reality as seen also on the court record
I was arbitrarily denied to:
A. Become THE (obvious) pertinent party to the case
and
B. ALL evidences were denied at Trial despite already being included into the Court Record.
Regardless of whether the mud came from the muddy basement or the muddy upstairs fireit should not be either the liability of the downstairs tenant, or the former tenant. It shouldn't require a bunch of Judges to figure this one out, but they actually failed in every respect here.
The "judge" rules that the downstairs PREVIOUS tenant is liable for the actions derived from the upstairs.
The plot thickens.
6.) Yet a year after I vacated, the Crows sued my Mother instead of me I'm over 50 years on this planet and am not prone to lying.
Here's some of my references pertaining to character. Compare my character references to that of the Clark County Municipal Court that have to censor and delete hundreds of those in the Public that are voicing their claims against them. The Court has been in existence for umpteen years but only shows 5 or 7 comments from the Public. Shameful.).
7.) The Courts denied my two written requests to become a party to the case.
Both of my initial requests were submitted and are on Court Record prior to Pre-Trial.
Yet when Pre-Trial did arrive, my mom's paid attorney James E. Heath of Ronemous and Heath Bailed. James E. Heath is the head guy at the Bar Association(if that's not laughable enough). What did James Heath accomplish? Well after first convincing her to leave the State of Florida to address a property damage claim that Ohio hasn't even any Jurisdiction to do, then at Pre-Trial the paid Attorney, slithered from the judge's chambers to inform her that he would not be able to represent her.
Then the judge emerged to inform her to find another attorney and, oh by the way, the trial is set for a couple of months later (despite the fact that I already appealed his prior decision to deny evidence and my person to become a RIGHTFUL party to the case appealed to the Appellate Division, submitted promptly after my motions were denied (yet are on the court record just as the physical and URL versions of the videos, photos, etc.).
The motion was submitted to the Appellate Division, stamped as entered, and then I received notice that they wanted a more professional Brief (like the one's that a James Heath can write up for a $1,000.00 or more. The professional brief had to be something like 15 pages long.
But I did it.
I resubmitted a professional brief, though the expectations seemed a bit alienating as we can't all be fluent in the Legal Nomenclature and time-frames and fees and stipulations as to how and when and to whom something should be submitted to the "Honorable" Courts.
Instead the Appellate would not respond until 5 months after my mom was held unrepresented and without legal assistance in the lower Municipal Court Trial which claimed she must defend herself against a claim she was clueless about (if it were not for me she'd no nothing at all of the damages).
She is over 70 years of age (and also not an Attorney).
At trial, with my mother left unrepresented, the Court allowed her no assistance and I and a witness were forced to remain out in the hallway during the proceedings.
Then when the judge declares his best judgment, referencing the previous lease, my mother's, stating,
"The written lease was for a term of 12 months, and provided that the tenancy would continue on a month to month basis ", there was no month to month following my mother's one year lease and the Crows know this because they wrote me the rental receipts.
Now had a real judge of good character been unswayed from his lofty over-paid position and allowed the evidence into the courtroom, he'd invariably discover that MY RENTAL RECEIPTS SHOW THAT I paid QUARTERLY (for one) and that I was the subsequent tenant (hint: rental receipts come with dates on them),
and that I gave my 30 day notice a year beyond my mother's lease.
He'd also discover a letter written by the crows themselves in which they state "...DAMAGES WHICH OCCURRED DURING
KENNY'S TENANCY". (I'm Kenny, my mother is not)
The fact is, this was a malicious show of local government gone awry, and surely not worth financing. It is my hopes that the Federal Government will alleviate all the states of their wasteful middle-man facades and make this nation a model nation for the world to emulate (as opposed to the disgust most nations now have toward our crookedness of those that ought to have a bit more couth about themselves).
I'm not an attorney. I've not even graduated high school. I should be sorry I don't speak the neo-court's nomenclature? The perversion of our common colloquial and nationally-known vocabulary is evidenced by the Court's manipulation of the word "intervene" to mean something totally different. How the heebeejeebies was that supposed to jump into my drop of the hat experience in "Civil" Court's Jargon?
If they are not a court for the citizens then what have the citizens to do with such a scourge?
Okay, I got ahead of myself again....back up, here's the sequence of what was submitted to the Court. I was clueless that one ought to expose his entire hand of evidences just to break into Court so the motions were reserved at first. Here's the first two motions, not much evidence is attached to these two (of the more than 17 which did include videos, rental receipts, letters written by the landlord herself, witnesses which I could produce (easily), my first-person witness account, photos, what more could the Courts possibly need to see not only an "interest" in the proceedings, but also the need for the only person that could possibly be a necessary party to the case?
As a final note, I had to become a party to the case or else I would not be able to submit evidence in a court of my own accord. If my mother's attorney didn't quit a few months earlier at Pre-Trial, maybe he'd know the magic words to get the judge to allow evidence in his dungeon of doom.
107: Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair Use
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone record or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of upper-class copyright protections. Title I, 101, Oct 19, 1976, 90 Stat 2546)
I am waiting for yet another modem / router from the only choice of Internet here. The attacks are organized and appear to be predominantly the 3rd shift that cause the most damage. Making this website has shown clearly the one-ness of the neo-corpo-politico-econo arena.
Our Nation CAN do Better
Springfield Ohio
3rd Party to the case, first-person and subject to the matter, Kenny
Hendrick replies to opposing counsel's Brief
5 months
After the Municipal Court went ahead and held trial disregarding the Appellate Division to respond on a 60(b) motion that was filed prior to pre-trial, with the elderly woman left un-represented in the court room, the Appellate simply decided against evidence being permitted and Kenny Hendrick's ability to become a (the) Defendant (the only person on the planet intimate with the damages which were the basis and interest of the case).
3rd Party attempts to become a party to the case after being denied by the
Clark County Municipal Court Judge Trempe. Appealed to the Second
Appellate Court of Appeals of Ohio.
The Second Appellate demands a Brief of formal legal format.
3rd Party Appellant that hadn't graduated High School complys as possible.
Opposing Party Attorney Submits Brief
Example Scholastic Study Version, for the Appeal example (used to demonstrate the need for judicial replacement.
When all the world determines one thing, yet a ruling interest offers a strict other, be all you can be to change for the better that which you can.
1
2
3
4
5
Example Scholastic Study Version, for the Appeal example (used to demonstrate the need for judicial replacement is)
When all the world determines one thing, yet a ruling interest offers a strict other, be all you can be to change for the better that which you can.
Then when it was taking so long for an answer from the lower court judge
of my mother's case, Judge Thomas Trempe, I then submitted another motion
and creatively titled this one:
At about Pre-Trial, my motions were denied. However the Springfield Ohio
Court DID go to great efforts to allow a fictitious Lease into the Court
Record, submitted by the Crows. Notice their Lease which they submitted to the Courts doesn't mention a word about the Security Deposit which my mother's Lease does. Notice also that the Lease shows my mother and Theresa Crow are the only signors on the Lease (yet the Court would award the bounty to someone who wasn't even on her Lease), Notice later down this page that all parties agree that there indeed was a security deposit and that although it was withheld beyond the legal time-frame, that's A-Okay with the JUSTus system.. Notice below also that there is the matter of a fictitious company name that nobody on planet earth will find as a valid entity is none-other than the Crows themselves, that was also allowed in a Court of "Law">
There's more, hang in there, I'm just getting started here.
Although the Landlord unlawfully kept the deposit beyond the legal time-frame, the Court would award even the unlawfully withheld Deposit to the Landlord's Husband (You heard right, a guy who was not even on my mother's lease).
Eric Crow was however the orchestrator of the SUBSEQUENT LEASE with me but according to the Court's best judgment I have "no standing">
Mr. Crow is the winner according to the court, But why?
The Husband clearly wasn't on the lease but later down this page you will see the judges (yes, plural) lie and state that the case is against my mother and both Crows.
The only people present the day of my mother's Lease having been signed is I, my mother, and the landlord (Theresa Crow) only (which is why Mr. Crow's signature is nowhere to be found even though the court's elude to the exact opposite of the documented factual scenario).
However the Crows do
admit (and even make demand for) the deposit which they've already held beyond the legal allowable time-frame (no worries, the judge apparently plays a biased blind when it's convenient).
So irregardless of who the Court wishes to believe was the tenant is immaterial when the Court has willingly allowed a fictitious Lease, from a fictitious Company (Tec Rentals), neither of which exists in the real world.
8.) Evidences on the Court Record and witnesses were Denied by Judge Thomas Trempe of Springfield Ohio's Clark County Municipal Court, given were the following reasons:
9. Having been denied twice by the Clark County Municipal Court prior to
Pre-Trial, and having been denied what I though was a basic right to
present evidences (plural), I appealed to the Appellate Division.
The thing is, if you visit their Court Records Record you will invariably find more than enough evidences ALREADY submitted to the Court. I wasn't aware that I was supposed to produce every shred of evidence and reveal my whole hand, thereby prejudicing any case I had against the fraudulent claim against the wrong person (my expectation was to see the look on everybody's faces when the true liar in the Court was exposed.).
Further, if live videos sent to the court and obviously accepted and stamped into the record are already in the Court's possession, one might think that it gives a hint to some plausible need for my being required to be in that Case for damages. The Court also accepted and stamped into Court Record the copy of my rental receipts and much more, this is not (to quote the Appellate Decision), "unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.">
Instead they wait till there can be no appeal on my mother's case to finally respond with this crack:
"we cannot reverse unless the trial court's decision was unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable. Merrill at ¶ 41."
It seems the Court was guilty of all those by denying evidence and an obviously concerned party within the community that is the ONLY person on the planet more intimate with the details of the claim and the property in question.
Just to be clear, I appealed the decision made by a lower court judge that mandated that evidence and T H E tenant out of the tenant / landlord dispute. I appealed to request that the decision by the municipal court judge denying my becoming a party to the case be overturned and to allow me to present evidences to show that the allegations are fraudulent and knowingly directed toward the wrong party (both actions being unlawful in every state of our beloved nation).
The appeal was for a 60(b) motion and was accepted in the Appellate Court
on September 22, 2016.
However the Appellate Court did not perform a 60(b) motion, and instead allowed the lower court to progress to trial many months later.
In case you're missing the hypocrisy in all this, If I appeal that I ought to be a party to the case and offer video evidence and rental receipts and more along with that appeal (look at their Court
Record to see for yourself), then what good is the Appellate Court if it's going to not even consider my pleading? They did not respond till months and months later AFTER the trial (so even if they said "whoops" yes, Kenny is the obvious party that needs to be included here, it was too late 5 months after they responded (not counting the months from which I submitted the appeal to them.).
With a hush of non-participation by the Appellate Branch of the Judiciary, there was not to be a response by the Appellate until an additional 5 months AFTER the lower court disregarded waiting for the Appellate to come back with an answer to determine whether it was lawful to deny evidence in an ongoing case in which the third party was the only person on the planet that could be proven to be the tenant regarding the exact case being heard in the Court, and furthermore is narrating the actual videos as the disasters were occurring.
We need more educated people in our Courts maybe, less thuggish and more for the people (because if they aren't for us we need to plead with the Federal Government to get rid of the middle men profiteers that serve no good purpose thereby allowing more profit to go to the Federal Government in the fashion of ONE Government, ONE universal law throughout the States and without the leaches).
As if it were an appeal to the future verdict of the lower Court's illegal Trial, in effect stopping all Appeals to the lower Court Trial altogether; five months later stating the appellate's decision is unappealable. Shameful waste of space and money, we could get more justice and do better with bums running the Clark County Municipal Court (in my arguably substantiated opinion).
It was asked of me, for the 5 minutes I was permitted into the court room,
Q: " Do you have evidence to show the cause for damages ? "
Me: "Why yes, it's right in the back there", as I pointed to the back of the courtroom.
The judge was not even remotely curious enough to want to see the evidences that answer my mother's question of whether or not I had evidence to show her as innocent of the claims against her. The judge wasn't interested (smug thuggish behavior). When the Appellate did respond, it was to this disregard:
My mom was the CAUSE for damages?
Are you kidding me?
I challenge anybody to find how she could possibly be the "Cause" For Damages when she wasn't the tenant at the time of the damages and was over 700 miles away when the damage occurred
Topic: Correction
Clark County Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio Municipal Court Case
"Defendant failed to leave the premises in good condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted, have CAUSED THE destruction of fixtures and of the premises and excessive trash and filth on the premises"
The Clark County Municipal Court "found" my mother guilty?
There's just a few problems with that Judicial "finding">
All of our eyes, ears, and minds would have to be liars for my mom to be construed as the "cause" for damages...
I took videos and photos while the damages were occurring, it should be an open and shut case, right?
When it was noticed that the Appellate Court was not acting how we expected (with a reply maybe?), I contacted THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of Attorneys. DON'T underestimate the plural in thousands. No attorney would get even remotely involved stating either they didn't "practice" in the area of law concerning the case, or that their work load was full, or that they did not work in the area in which the court resides, but most of them did not respond whether the call was made voice or email. I literally scoured all of google's results and even became a member on three online attorney agencies. It was surreal. No attorney was interested.
And now the court would be permitted to hold her to a Trial,
1.) Unrepresented
2.) Without assistance
3.) Without a shred of evidence of her guilt
3.) The Court ruled her guilty of being the cause for damages despite not one solitary piece of evidence by the Plaintiff's attorney (there was none, an allegation, a questionable receipt, and a complicit court....seems clear, she simply MUST be guilty (??))
All of the videos, photos, witnesses, signed documents, first-person testimony (and more) was kept out of the Court Room, but who would do this and why? It wasn't the Plaintiff, so we can't blame her (him? The court award went to the husband of the signor of the lease with my mother), so if it wasn't the Plaintiff that kept the evidence and my person and witnesses from the court room, then who?
It wasn't even the Plaintiff's Attorney that kept the evidence and my person and witnesses from the case, so who would do this.
So if the action, the ruling, the practicing law from the bench, was not being influenced by the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff's Attorney, then who?
Below you will see how an innocent elderly person was preyed upon not by a street gang member, but by a Court.
now a word from the Landlord herself, who clearly indictate that the damages occurred during the tenancy of the subsequent Tenant, the son (and not Margaret, the ill-treated victim "Defendant"). Notice the date of the Landlord's Letter,
much prior to filing suit against the elderly Defendant that was neither the Tenant, nor was she in the State of Ohio where the damages occurred:
One of many documents kept out of the Trial by the Clark County Municipal Court Judge. But what GOOD reason would a Justice System prefer to
NOT allow so many evidences (as seen on the court record) that disprove the Claim? The Plaintiff acknowledges me (the Court will not) Sound incredible?
Read on, it gets more ludicrous; you don't have to take my word for it, much of this is already on the Court Record
Here's some exhibits that would have come out in Court if I were not denied a basic Civil Right to address and redress within the Courts, requests that were timely submitted of a relevant (then) on-going Case.
notice that my Lease was paid quarterly following my mother's one-year Lease (whereas hers, the prior lease, was paid monthly).Yet the Court concluded that my mom's one year monthly lease somehow morphed when the receipts clearly show that I never had a monthly and that it was a quarterly Lease....Justice really is blind
Void of any such indication that there was ever a monthly receipt following my mom's one year lease, the Clark County Municipal Court simply didn't want to hear it and denied more than 17 motions made thereafter several months prior to the court having ushered the Defendant through the system. (unrepresented at a Trial held a couple of months after Pre-Trial. At pre-trial my mother's PAID attorney met with the judge and emerged to state he would no longer be representing her, WITHOUT CAUSE). My mom was told to wait in the hallway during whatever was discussed when, if the attorney wasn't representing her then who was? She SHOULD have been allowed to enter that back room meeting.
To make matters worse, on March 27, 2018, the Appellate Court sends to me, a "third party", letter addressed as a "final" notice (big bold letters).
However, I have not noticed any loss of command of my mail,and would bank my mother's life on the fact that the Courts cannot show/prove they've ever sent any previous notices, although their letter claims they've sent "numerous notices">
Fraud will not pull our nation out of this $21 (already it's now $22+) TRILLION dollar debt (https://usdebtclock.org
leaders with creativity and courage will pull this nation out of it's dire unpublished present position of debt.Stealing from old women will not accomplish a thing, aside from more ill-will for the mis-managers.
Yet, over a year after the disrepute by the Judicial System, the Appellate bothers to claim the new mail as a "Final Notice", a demand for more unearned money, a testament of their profiteering racket.
It is well established that a paymentMUST be made at the time of filing an appeal to the appellate court.
OR
Must include an affidavit of indigencebefore an appeal can be accepted into the court.
The fact that the belabored court clearly failed to respond and enforce some semblance of having a need for an Appellate court to intervene in a 60(b) motion, is one base of the affidavit's legitimacy.
As seen on the Court's own website, the affidavit was accepted in their office on 9/22/16 (TAGCPM.PA.PublicPortal).
Here are notes for those with more ambition than I:
The basis of your lawsuit against a judge will probably be that you were deprived of your civil rights. These suits are called section 1983 cases, which is the section of a federal statute that authorizes them.
If oppressed, argue that the alleged conduct was not judicial in nature and that the lawsuit should proceed.
Show prayers for relief, in the form of:
Wherefore plaintiff prays that this Court issue equitable relief as follows:
1. Issue injunctive relief commanding defendant to . . .
2. Issue declaratory relief as this Court deems appropriate and just.
3. Issue other relief as this Court deems appropriate and just.
4. Award plaintiff his costs of litigation.
Respectfully submitted,
(signature)
Deprivation of property without due process are violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 reads as follows:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
Definition Of Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Their Law On Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
What type of Court would refuse to allow:
1.) Video Evidence that proves beyond a shadow of doubt, that the damages were not caused by the 70year old woman being scammed. Denied? Seriously?
2.) Rental receipts that prove there was a subsequent rental agreement with another party (that just happens to coincide with the damage is that were being preyed upon by the Plaintiff and the Clark County Municipal Court). Something nefarious is in a group when collectively they allow this INjustice. Denied.
3.) Signed Documents from all parties, including the Plaintiff that acknowledges me, and further states that the damages occurred during my tenancy. Denied?
4.) Photo Evidence that shows the state of the building during move-in
and departure. Denied.
Having my many attempts to bring the Courts back to reality, I appealed to the shame of the appellate. See that lengthy timeframe shown below? The appellate did not get involved throughout all of what follows. In fact, the appellate did not return an answer to my plea to correct the record and make me a party to the issue/case until 5 months after a 70 + year old woman that was a resident of Florida and could not possibly have caused any damages to be found guilty. Does that sound good to you? Undignified thuggish judiciary/government is no longer affordable to any of us.
ENACT THE PROTECTIONS OF OUR NATION'S CONSTITUTION
All evidences and witnesses were denied by a malicious, inhumane, of
no good social value, Court (which we can no longer afford to have,
ie.https://usdebtclock.org
).
A bum off the streets could have availed a better semblance of
Justice far more cheaper
Guy A. Ferguson, Clerk
15CVF02981
Your job as the Higher Court Judge is to decide whether or not the Lower Court acted appropriately in keeping the 3rd Party from presenting a case that might refute the Plaintiffs' Claim.
The 3rd Party (me) Claims that the Lower Court erred in allowing a completely wrong party to be Tried by the Plaintiff. Let's get you up to speed.
As a Higher Court Judge, You must review the Court Record of the Lower Court.
Below You will find actual documents that were presented to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL.
I'm only going to present One of the Two Motions that I, as the 3rd Party, submitted to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL. My timely filed MOTION TO INTERVENE (2 months prior to Pre-Trial)
The law does not specify that one must prove him or herself to be included in an ongoing case.
Their Law merely states that: Fed R Civ Rule 24. (a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see TITLE IV. PARTIES
Or
(2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
The Lower Court Judge made the ruling to deny the 3rd Party's Motion for the reason as shown below:Click here to see the Judge's ruling.
As formerly stated, there were TWO Motions I submitted to the Lower Court Prior to Pre-Trial.
Below is the Second Motion which is on Public Court Record.
Review the Motion, consider the matter, and answer accordingly below.
THERE WAS A VIDEO SUBMITTED TO THE COURT RECORD PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL, DID THE VIDEO AFFECT YOUR Judgment ? The video has my voice in it but nowhere is there a 70++ year old woman. The Lower Court Judge "found" that the woman was guilty of causing damage to ceiling tiles and carpets. The Lower Court Judge made the ruling to deny the 3rd Party's Motion for the reason as shown below:Click here to see the Judge's ruling
Presented to you are two verifiably received letters which my mother sent over 3 years ago.
Luckily she kept the tracking/shipping information.
Read the Letters.
Consider the dates of the letters. Consider the date that the damages Claim was filed in the Municipal Court.
Although a slew of exhibits and evidences were entered into the Municipal Court Record, everyone of them were denied
(including videos of the live damages as they were occurring, audio recordings of live narration, relevant documents, witness Testimonies (others), my testimony, etc.). Denied.
that there were a couple of Motions filed to the Lower Municipal Court Record prior to Pre-Trial, which alleged:
1.) The Wrong party was being sued.
2.) Evidence was NOT permitted in the Municipal Court.
3.) That the Claim was fraudulent in the first place, and knowingly filed against the wrong party.
4.) That the Lower Court did not wait for the Court of Appeals' Decision (YOUR DECISION, because YOU ARE THE HIGHER COURT JUDGE, DENIED You too?) as to decide
upon my right to stand within the Municipal Court Case to show and tell why I am an element of considerable necessity.
As it stands now, the Municipal Court manipulated a 70+ year old woman to come all the way to Ohio to be told that she's the cause of the damages.
Shamefully, the Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio found She was found guilty (while I was denied Court Access to present ANY evidences, even those that were on the Court Record). Denied.
Eric Crow, the (now) Municipal Court winner, was not a signer (or signor)
on any Lease Agreement, yet seems to have the approval of the Lower
Municipal Court concerning standing... in a Lease Agreement in which he's
not even named. The Court gave the award to Eric Crow My contention as the 3rd Party is that if Eric can make a claim against Margaret Baldino in a Lease Agreement dispute that he's not even a party to, then why can I not make a Claim against either of the Crows when I have expressed to the Municipal Court Record to be:
1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case, 2.) In possession of Video/Audio evidence that would refute the Landlord's Claim, 3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case, 4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring (so the Case was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder). Yet, regardless of who was the tenant or which of the Leases the Court was willing to see, Eric Crow is oddly enough shown on the Court Record as being the recipient of the Court award and champion winner of the Theresa Crow / Margaret Baldino Lease (dis)Agreement. In fact, Eric Crow was permitted to be present in the Court Room throughout the entirety of his wife's Contractual Trial; whereas Margaret Baldino's witnesses were told to stay in the hallway until called. My mother and I even went and filed a Counter-Suit against the Crows ($50+ dollars). You guessed it.
Denied (but the Municipal Court kept the money). Lucky Crows? Or something else?
Instructed by the Second Appellate Division to complete a "Brief". Luckily the google monopoly hasn't censored the template out of the public's reach, allowing me to comply. Notice the date in which this form was submitted, September 29, 2016 (the Municipal County Court disregarded the issue presented to the Appellate Division altogether and progressed on to Trial without waiting for the Second Appellate Court Decision in this matter (as to whether or not it is lawful to deny evidence and a 3rd Party that has obvious INTEREST. Its outcome with Margaret Baldino as the guilty party by judgment of the Municipal County Court of Springfield Ohio's Judge Thomas Trempe ought to be considered null and void.
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header was carried over from the Municipal Court Case, as instructed from the Appellate Court Clerk
The original header, however, appears to be confusing the fluidity of the Appeal's intent insofar that the parties' places within the Case itself confounds the legal issue (for instance, perhaps the names of the Crows and Baldino ought to be removed from the appeal of an issue that is between the Municipal Court Judge decision, the Law that the Judge is to uphold, and myself).
1.) Although the Lower Municipal Court Judge was verifiably cognitive of the Appeal to the Higher Court soon after Pre-Trial, The Municipal Court Judge decided to keep the appointment and have the Trial anyway (not waiting on the Appellate Court to Rule on whether or not I have legal standing in the damages claim in the Municipal Court Case. The Appeal was right after Pre-Trial so there can be no misunderstanding of what is being appealed at this stage, even without reading the Appeal):
My version does not hide the exhibits/evidences. But I'm not entirely done with that page yet so there's more (however what IS complete OUGHT to be enough)
3.) Denied Court access when that person is with evidence that should have been inter-pleaded, adjoined, intervened, or as an interested party to the Case that is FREE to present evidence to the Case.
4.) Rather, there is bias in that an entirely different party, MR. CROW, as the winner of Mrs. Crow's Contractual Lease Agreement Complaint.
Mr. Crow is a witness at best. How is it legal to give credit to a witness, a person that doesn't have standing and wasn't part of the Lease which was being heard before the Municipal Court, and in dispute?
5.) Again, bias toward Eric Crow, to not be sequestered during Trial.
Whereas the Defense's witnesses were left in the hallway, unlike Eric Crow, in a lease he's not even a signer (signor) nor was he present at the signing of the Lease Agreement (However, the 3rd party Intervenor was present during Margaret Baldino and Theresa's Lease signing).
Narrated by Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure TITLE IV. PARTIES
and/or
any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head),
In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny Due Process
The Appeal is being heard within a 60(b) motion at Springfield Ohio's Second Appellate Court of Appeals.
The Municipal Court version (which does NOT show exhibits to the Public) can be seen on their website Here
Note: The Appellate Court appears to be re-directing this issue to reflect Kenneth Hendrick (myself) vs. Eric Crow, et al., including my own mother. Yet, expressed in my original motion to the Appellate Court in which is stated: That I question the Lawful Judgment of the Springfield Ohio Municipal Court's Judge Trempe to restrict my access to a (then) ongoing case.
The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System. The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2nd District Appellate Court of Appeals itself. Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences).
Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:
1.) Recompense/Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial.
The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an ex parte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge here
2.) The good name be given back to my mother.
My mother has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.) Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible, the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows.
This shame and embarrassment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce.
3.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs, an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs, electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc., including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite,
arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs, etc.).
What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated. It's the right thing to do now.
Please note that I am in receipt of a letter received from your office stating that it was my “Final Notice”, and that an amount is “extremely overdue”, and that I have “received previous notices” from the Court in demand for money.
There must be some mistake at your end. I haven't seen a pattern of not getting my mail and yet your letter states that numerous letters of demand were sent. In a day and age where virtually everything of importance is sent either by certified, registered, or able to be tracked in some fashion, can you verify the mailing of the previous letters that are claimed to have been sent to me?
In regards to money for services, as shown on the TAG governmental website, the case number which you are demanding money for was already permitted under the indigence clause.
Also, your court did not perform the action anyway. The issue was sent to your court to review the lower court's decision to keep witnesses, audio and video recordings, signed documents, rental receipts, first person testimony AND MORE out of the court. However the lower court did not wait for your decision.
I submitted the appeal to your office at the pre-trial stage of the lower court's issue.
Trial progressed in the lower court a few months later finding an innocent old lady living in Florida guilty of damaging ceiling tiles of which I recorded thoroughly as water fell from the ceiling caused by the tenants above me.
However, the lower court found that the downstairs should be somehow liable for the upstairs actions, furthermore the court found that the PREVIOUS lease-holder ought to be liable for the “damages”.
To make matters worse, your court didn't respond to the 60(b) motion until 5 months AFTER the lower court already concluded “trial”.
If this letter has clarified or rectified any error on your end, then fine. However If there's some other unanswered question, feel free to contact me at your convenience. If the U.S. Mail isn't quite working out for your department, there's always email or phone (your court has both of my other forms of contact).
nO PRIOR communications from the court in this matter was ever received in my mailbox, only the one, your final notice.
I challenge anybody to find how she could possibly be the "Cause" For Damages when she wasn't the tenant at the time of the damages and was over 700 miles away when the damage occurred
The following show that both parties, INCLUDING THE PLAINTIFF and the Defendant, indicate that I am at very minimum worthy of first-person testimony with the ability to show the evidences and bring my own witnesses that will prove that:
1.) I was the tenant during the period in which damages occurred This is not a monthly receipt as indicated by the version of Lease the Court Record allowed from the Plaintiff. If the Lease shown on the Court's own Record, https://images.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/CISWeb/Search.aspx?caseNumber=15CVF02981, is clearly not authentic then perhaps we need to redefine what "our" courts really represent here.
The following video, and other videos, were submitted to the Court Record months before the Clark County's rush for Trial. Without bothering to wait to see if the appellate finds me worthy of presenting the case in which I'm the only person on the planet that was present and recording virtually every disaster from an un-related tenant's space above, my mom must be the guilty party ( All it took was an allegation and a receipt of dubious origins; nothing more).
In other words, if water is coming down from the ceiling thereby causing the ceiling tiles to fall would it seem anything but antagonistic that one would deduce and state that the downstairs is responsible for the damages which occurred from the upstairs tenant? The videos show that this IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
These judges are NOT worth that ridiculous $200,000.00 per year by no means Our nation is $20Trillion july update: OVER $21 Trillion dollars in debt, and can no longer afford this kind of "justice" (or whatever purpose it serves here).
Https://usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html
2.) The damages were a result of upstairs plumbing as seen in Videos made by myself. Due to the extreme amount of threats and censorship in keeping the videos hosted online, you'll have to pardon that it's true, almost every video I submitted were stamped as infringing copyright protections since whenever I recorded video there was usually a radio playing in at least one of the rooms. Censored. So I appealed THAT (to youtube...I appealed to youtube to desist to their censoring my videos that were part of an ongoing case in Clark County Municipal Court). The videos were pulled. So I moved my arsenal to Dailymotion.com and posted the videos there instead (but all the documents on the court record contain the youtube links and now they would not work. HOWEVER, as it is written into the court record by myself and stamped as accepted by the court, they WERE ALSO availed a DVD with each of my and my mother's motions to the court).
July 12, 2018 "Law" is "passed" by the lawmakers against Net Neutrality. It is my opinion that my scenario is the showing of the true intents.
Controlling our communications "legal"y". But I am getting off-topic.
Due to YouTube's outrageous censorship tactics which allow law enforcement (the whole cabal from the courts to the police, of which the crow son-in-law is a sheriff), giving them the freedom to take down sites and posts at will.
The following is all I can do to ensure that a video stay online these days apparently. Crow scam 12:45
Do you see my mother in this video compilation?
To rub it in and show who's Boss in these parts, the Appellate didn't intervene and even went so far as to not come to a decision until 5 months AFTER my mom was left un-represented at Trial.
Denied with the words that my mom failed to Appeal her Trial determination in time.
In case you missed that, there is a timeframe that one may appeal a Court's determination; however the Appellate did not come back with a decision of whether I ought to be a party to the case until FIVE months after the Municipal Court went ahead and went to trial anyway.
The outcome of the trial was NOT EVEN WRITTEN AS THE INTENT NOR IMPLIED by me in my appeal to them. The appeal was pretty much straight forward (the court is disallowing evidence and all other witnesses and evidences in which are pertinent to the semblance of justice). It begged a Yes or NO only from the appellate (and maybe a reason why I should not be a/the party to the case).
Denied with the words that my mom failed to Appeal her lower court Trial determination in time. If that isn't a money-scheme then tell me how it's not please (I'm all for learning).
So not a stitch of the evidences shown below and the evidences I have yet to post here....for instance, I recorded my mom's attorney as we spoke in his office. I think it needful for something to come out, such as the fact that he stated he failed to return any of my calls or emails pertaining to the case and more importantly the irrefutable evidences I have....his overly vocal reply is shocking so stay tuned
As a side note: Initially my mom (the previous lessee) had a paid attorney who lured my mother to Ohio from Florida and then promptly bailed out of representation at pre-trial, the Judge allows this after a meeting where my mom was left out in the hallway. But isn't there a Code of Ethics and doesn't it clearly specify certain dictates of Attorney behavior right on the:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/ professional_responsibility /publications /model_rules_of_professional_conduct /rule_1_16_declining_or_terminating_representation.html
Remove the trailing spaces from behind the backslashes for the link above to work
The paid attorney my mom had obtained at the onset of this court's "legal" proceeding was the head of the Bar Association (what a joke, he bails at freaking pre-trial, what part of the game do you suppose that was? We can't call it what it is, racketeering and profiteering).
Without notice, and no known reason given, he quit; imagine if Doctors and others were as negligent.
Either way, if the attorney had approached the Pre-Trial private meeting with the Knowledge that he wasn't any longer going to represent my mom THEN MY MOM SHOULD HAVE ALSO BEEN PRESENT IN THAT BACK ROOM CONVERSATION; But let's say the attorney didn't know he wasn't going to represent my mom until conversing with the Judge; AGAIN, What is ex parte? This type of operation isn't legal. My mom had no pre-trial. If the Attorney wasn't going to be representing her, then let her in so she can tell about me (seeing as her paid attorney may have forgotten to mention it to the Judge).
I'm not done with this website by no means so stop back as this matter will become clearer and clearer as time goes on.
As for that paid attorney, of all the messages and emails I communicated to James Heath, not one solitary correspondence was returned. Also, the attorney apparently failed to inform the judge of the communications that I made referencing evidence(s), or of the links I sent him that pointed to the youtube videos (since he wasn't answering my communications, I was sure that if I uploaded a few video compilations he'd grasp the situation with open arms). If someone is claiming to be the tenant during the period in which damages occurred at the Plaintiff's rental, wouldn't someone find it needful to at least review my proof so that a matter can be justly acted upon?
Before I show more of the videos, please familiarize yourself with the Plaintiff's Youtube video made years before me, or my mom ever met the Plaintiff... In the event that someone is questioning the authenticity of the location in which my compilation videos are derived, here is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD3cgH3jhxg
The PLAINTIFF'S video which their realtor uploaded to Youtube before I or my mother ever met the Plaintiffs.
So, The Crow Realtor's video corraborates that the videos below are authentic and derived from the same exact property.
This same allegation of damages are the issue that was before the Municipal County Court in Springfield Ohio which boldy (outlandishly) found that their best brains deduced that my mom was the cause for damages.
This is just one video that should have been permitted into the Trial but denied. When I gave my notice to vacate to the Crows, only one issue was expected of me to remedy, it was a hole:
Due to YouTube's outrageous censorship tactics which allow law enforcement (the whole cabal from the courts to the police, of which the crow son-in-law is a sheriff), giving them the freedom to take down sites and posts at will.
The following is all I can do to ensure that a video stay online these days apparently.
But now that the Court has mandated that evidence is not allowed, nor the actual tenant in a capacity to be able to show the evidence, the landlord skated right through the court claiming to fix my hole that I video taped myself doing (and many more videos of my fixing stuff that hadn't even been requested by the landlord). Notice in this next video the fraudulent photos that the Crows submitted to the court, notice the repair as shown in the above video does not look anything remotely like what the Crows submitted (but with nobody able to contest the fraud, anything goes with Clark County Municipal Court's Judges).
The landlord would be awarded an amount exceeding $4,000.00 for the repair of that hole and for fallen ceiling tiles (damage caused by the faulty plumbing from the UPSTAIRS tenant
18 motions; 18 denials
How does one deny actual video evidence that shows that my mom is not the cause for ceiling tiles when I recorded the water coming down from the upstairs tenant's space (for starters)
The Justice System omit public viewing of some of the exhibits on their website, for whatever reason;
and although we took the initiative to not only submit actual phsyical DVD's to the Court's record but also uploaded to Youtube those same submissions AND made sure to write out the URL's in the motions we made to the Clark County Municipal Court and Court Record (I'm not saying we didn't totally trust them but...
1.) The bill that the Crow's created is showing a retro-date to 2013.
2.) I (not my mom) moved out 9/9/2014. So the bill is a fraud. I submitted the notice to vacate (a NON-Tenant cannot accomplish that...imagine if a non-tenant could terminate YOUR lease)
.) The Crows file a Claim against my mother in 2015 even though her lease was terminated properly and fully in 2013.
4.) The Crow bill is written on a fictitious letterhead with a company that does not legally exist.
5.) The same bill makes claim on a security deposit that the landlord illegally withheld (over a year beyond the lawful time frame).
6.)The Court Record accepted a Lease that wasn't even the correct Lease for my mom, shows NO INDICATION of a security deposit (the authentic lease however, the one that WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE COURT RECORD Does indicate a deposit); we still have the correct lease here, and although we attempted to submit my mom's authentic lease for my mom prior to trial, it was denied (so if they were going to go through the effort to usher the wrong person through the court it shouldn't be any surprise that it would be no big deal for them to accept a fraudulent lease which wasn't EVER in effect).
So, the WRONG lease was the landlord's exhibit A, and the bill shown below was the Crow Exhibit B....apparently that's all it took for the Court to find my mother guilty of being the "cause for damages". Next time it might be your mom.
The impossible is possible in Springfield Ohio's Judiciary:
What kind of Justice would rule that the downstairs should pay for the upstairs tenant's space?
How many of these errors must we show before the Court will undo it's wrongful decision (against the wrong party)?
(By the way, the (link disappeared from the internet, sorry) property appraiser's office has this property listed
as RESIDENTIAL, yet the Plaintiff is apparently rushing to sell it as commercial...and for that matter, how was it leased to me as commercial if he's only been paying Residential taxes on the property? Is there no end to the scamming here in Springfield Ohio?).
When all the world determines one thing, yet a ruling interest offers a strict other, be all you can be to change for the better that which you can, trusting this form of polity/judiciary monopoly appears to only promise this for our future:
Who else can place me IN the Crow rental at the time in which the damages occurred? 1.) THE SPRINGFIELD OHIO POLICE DEPARTMENT, 2.) The TRAFFIC LADY (that scoots around in that little motor jeep-like thing, looking for parking violations), 3.) The SPRINGFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT, 4.) THE UPSTAIRS NEIGHBOR, 5.) THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR SOUTH of the rental, 6.) THE CODES DEPARTMENT,
7.) And more (such as the electrician which Eric Crow hired through me to fix his electric connection to the house, and the handyman that cut the opening to make way for the electicity to come into the building, and the 100 or so customers which I have phone numbers and names of, one of which is the owner of one of the Newpapers offered to the Springfield area, and more
(THE WRONG LEASE)
2.)Exhibit B
(A bill with a letterhead of a Company that does not legally exist, using a completely impossible date).
hand-written words "typo" next to erroneous date. i, for one, would like magic know whether the penciled word was written before, during, or after municipal court went to trial. either way though, surely it wasn't possible for the landlord to do repairs a year before i vacated.The court accepts this, however.
The Defendant, Margaret Baldino, has never been permitted to see all of the 8 pages filed by the Plaintiff against her.
The Defendant went so far as to make a special trip just for the purpose of seeing the 8 pages against her. The Clerks of the Court could not produce anything contained in the file stating the file was upstairs in the Judge's Chambers.
The Defendant went upstairs to be told by the Judge's aidthat seeing the Judge was not proper and that she would check with the Judge for the file. When the File was permitted access under the supervision of the Clerks, the Plaintiffs' pages were missing. When request was made by the Defendant to one of the Clerks as to why the pages were missing, the answer was that they were just doing their jobs and did not know of the whereabouts of the Plaitiffs'pages.
The entire initial Filing is Stated to be comprised of 8 pages. The Lease alone was 10 pages but also was not contained within the file. The Lease was purportedly Plaintiff's "Exhibit A" and had the Defendant been permitted to see the "evidence" against her, she would have noticed the incorrect Lease much sooner if she was permitted to her lawful right.
Alias Precipe
The Defendant, Margaret Baldino, domiciled in the State of Florida returns to Ohio under the threat of a Default Judment against her for not complying with the Court to address this issue before the Court.
Margaret Baldino complies by leaving her State of Choice to return to Ohio to address the Claim against her. Defendant's $1, 000.00 Attorney quits the Case at the beginning of a CRITICAL step in the legal process, at Pre-Trial following a closed-door session between both Attorneys and the Judge; Margaret Baldino left to wait out in the hallway during that meeting. Which begs the question whether ex parte communications occurred without anybody standing for the Defendant while her fate was being discussed leaves one to wonder what could have been so ill-discussed as to result as such.
Here was a pretty good clue to the courts that lack of personal subject matter jurisdiction existed. Notice how the attorney placed the words"...temporary resident of florida..." as opposed to "a resident of florida".... this is the Bait and Bail (at pre-trial) Attorney James Heath.
First, the Plaintiff sues the girl upstairs for the damages. After a stunning win, the Plaintiff sues the downstairs tenant also (the wrong one). Sound incredible? Read on.
Plaintiffs profit from the upstairs Tenant approximately $5,000.00, though less than $1,000 in damages are stated within Exhibit 5 (Fire Department Report). Upstairs Tenant Court Case awarded to the Crows by unknown Judge
Without the Intervenor/3rd party/interested party, whatever you want to call me, (in English Intervenor is defined as intervening), void of my being permitted to produce evidence that would refute the Plaintiffs' claims unjustly leaves the Defendant without an ability to defend herself and her interest altogether.DENIED
Ex parte is a Latin phrase meaning on one side only; by or for one party. An ex parte communication occurs when a party to a case, or someone involved with a party, talks or writes to or otherwise communicates directly with the judge about the issues in the case without the other party. It's worth stating here that on the eve of the Trial a woman was seen consulting with the Crows whom was not the Crows' Attorney. Following the meeting, the woman departed to the Judge's Office unassisted. Can we be made privy to that meeting's content?
The Judge, Plaintiff's attorney, along with the Defendant's $1,000.00 attorney, meet behind closed doors at Pre-Trial leaving Margaret Baldino in the Hallway. The Defendant's Attorney quits following the meeting without written notice and seemingly without reason or in accordance with the rules which stipulate the manner in which an Attorney can quit a case (Pre-Trial is a critical function to have erased from our Legal System). What happened behind those closed doors while mom was left outside in the hall to wait? Judge emerges to instruct the Defendant that Trial will ensue in 10 weeks and 2 days and advises her to (spend more money ) to find another Attorney to represent her.
The law is supposed to prevent the judge from talking to one party if the other party is not present. This one-sided conversation is called an ex parte communication and is purportedly not allowed. If the Defendant's attorney hadn't intended to represent the Defendant, and wasn't representing her at Pre-Trial, then a gross injustice has occurred in that the Defendant should have been allowed to be present and privy to whatever was happening behind those closed doors.
7 Days later, I timely file an appeal to the 2nd Appellate Court of Appeals My initial Appeal:
September 2016, my appeal of the Municipal Court Judge's Determination that I was not allowed to be present is entered into the Second Appellate Division Court of Appeals. However, the Municipal Court apparently doesn't regard the Court of Appeals as a valid venue and continued to Trial a few months later anyway. Trial was December 1 and the Decision against the Defendant was made on December 5 of 2016. The following are pages sent by the Municipal Court to the Second Appellate showing only communications up to that present date and time (much more was submitted to the Court Record (following the transmittal).
Defendant submits for the Court's consideration that there is another person that is involved in the Plaintiffs' property and that furthermore there is a Waiver of Claims which is written into the Plaintiffs' Lease which seems to have been disregarded by the Plaintiff.
After the 3rd Party (Kenny Hendrick) having vacated the Plaintiff Crow property on 9/9/2014, seven months later Plaintiff submitted a Demand for Payment dated April 6, 2015 for damages TO THE 3RD Party (Kenny Hendrick). Six more months later Plaintiff changes mind and files Suit against the Defendant, Margaret Baldino (previous Lease Holder).
In this Motion, Defendant makes mention of the Tenant/Landlord Security Deposit which was already unjustly withheld beyond the legal allowable time and months prior to the Plaintiff having submitted this Claim to the Court. Defendant submitts a copy of the cancelled check which states the amount of the Security Deposit. Defendant submitts the AUTHENTIC Lease Agreement which shows the handwriting belonging to the Plaintiff. The version that was submitted by the Plaintiff to the Court excludes all mention of the Security Deposit (which was wrongfully withheld months beyond that which is lawful and months prior to the Claim having been submitted to the Court against the Defendant).
DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM TO ADDRESS PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATION OF UNAUTHORIZED USE OF PLAINTIFFS' FIREPLACE With Exhibits
Nowhere within the Plaintiffs' Lease was there any mention of the Plaintiffs' fireplace as being Non-Functional. However, evidence has been submitted to the Court showing that the Plaintiff in fact alleged within a Disclosure Form that the Fireplace was in proper working order.
Plaintiff's verifiably inapplicable receipt from Lowes (2016 materials purchase for repairs claimed to have been done in 2014; time machine? Not to mention the fact that the receipt appears to belong to someone else. Look at the receipt, call Lowes, it's that easy to verify).
Anyone can verify by calling Lowes that the receipt is fraudulently submitted and is not applicable to this case. Along with some blackened paper is all that the Plaintiffs would accord for the Defendant's repeated requests for Discovery (since the Court wasn't releasing anything to the Defendant of the Plaintiffs' material submitted to the Court File). As mentioned in a past Motion to the Court, Defendant made it clear that along with phone calls to the Plaintiffs' Attorney for Discovery were also a personal visit made to the Plaintiff's attorney's Office requesting the additional documents, receipts, etc. DENIED.
This Statement fairly well sums up the situation. For the record, in the last paragraph of page 3 a mention was made of a counter-suit. That's all it was, a mention. Yet that paragraph delayed this document from being logged to the Court RecordThis motion remained in the Court Clerk's Office until the fee for the Counter-Suit was Paid to the Court....LUCKILY, we returned on 11/18/2016 to submit other paperwork and after inquiring of the missing log in the Court Recordwere told that we owed $50.00 to file a Counter Suit....so we did)....The counter suit was summarily dismissed without a refund of the money received or any hearing of issues to be presented. (What Country are we in here?)
PLAINTIFF'S
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
Although we had been in constant communications with my mother's insurance company (we have full records of all dates and times, duration, dates of all incoming and outgoing calls to the insurance company = more than 20 calls out not including the dozen or more calls to us), however AFTER the case was concluded and my mother found guilty, suddenly the insurance Racket stated that we waited too long to file a claim I started another website documenting all the recorded conversations of that little sham, and posted all the logs to the issue of the scandalous insurance decision. Everything was hunky-dory until the Muncipal Court Decision was made against my mother...magically her coverage became null and void. I merely state this here as an after-the-fact note since the lower Municipal Court never waited for the Appellate Court to decide on whether or not I deserved "standing" in the lower Court.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING DISCOVERY AND NOTICE OF COUNTER CLAIM
Defendant tenders two exhibits, both of which show the state of disrepair of the Plaintiff's property PRIOR TO EITHER OF US having Leased from the Plaintiff, which could not possibly be reproduced by any tenant in the last decade or more (i.e. cracking and peeling paint, rotting wood, etc. leave one at odds at how to match such decay in any repair better than what the 3rd party tenant had repaired out of his own pocket already). EXHIBITS WILL BE ADDED HERE LATER
note: On page 4, which was a copy of a Waiver drawn up by the Plaintiff's Attorney, my mom (the Defendant) inadvertently signed the wrong page of this packet (in otherwords she inadvertently signed the Waiver exhibit as opposed to the actual last page of the Defendant's Submission to the Court).
DEFENDANT'S MEMO TO ADDRESS PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATION OF EXCESSIVE TRASH AND FILTH.
In this Motion, Defendant reminds the Court that although Plaintiff's have alleged that excessive filth was left by the Defendant, that no such proof exists (in fact, none was offered at the Trial either....but...the Judge found in favor or the Plaintiff....just because. To the contrary, 3rd party possesses videos to show otherwise. In other words, weeks of cleaning and progress report videos were taken upon my mother having first Leased from the Plaintiff....dead birds and other rodents, previous tenant property all of the place, stains on the carpet, peeling paint, etc. The Judge would go on to take the word of the Plaintiff despite the fact that Defendant already produced videos showing the fine state of the property upon Defendant having vacated.
https://youtu.be/9-xEfwixkz4 Defendant's Exhibit Video *Video has been removed by political structure or Youtube.
Video shows trash was already present when moving into the Plaintiff's property. Later videos will show that the Defendant left the Plaintiff's property in better condition when vacating.
It is in this "motion" to the Court that details the Defendant's Pre-Trial, the questionable legality of whether or not the paid Attorney Heath, for the Defendant, was in a capacity of paid representation and whether or not Margaret Baldino had a Right to be present in that room with the Judge. Verification of whether the Attorney quit prior to Pre-Trial and didn't tell anybody else, or did it occur during the closed-door session with the Impartial Fair and Just Judge? Either way, the Defendant had every right and expectation to be in that critical meeting with the judge, instead, she was left out in the Hall pending her fate. Request is made for a new Pre-Trial, Defendant is Denied two days later on 11/30/2016.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS EVIDENCE OF MATERIAL DEFECT
This is the Defendant's Exhibit H Lease (which has the Plaintiffs' handwriting) Compare to: The Plaintiffs Exhibit A and version of the Lease - If we're going after the Defendant that had prior Lease to the same property as the subsequent Son's Lease, then let's at least have the correct Lease in the Court please.
Exhibit P Letter from Plaintiff states 3rd Party as person at fault.
The Defendant in this motion refutes the photos submitted by the Crows. A photo of a door knob on a door is the focus. The photo has computer-generated words which the Crows placed within the photo that state: "Damage to back door/Unable to open or close". The door in question is a door which can be shown to be in the same like state it was when rented, if videos were permitted (The Crows' own realtor also has a video on youtube that shows the same door with the same damage prior to the Defendant ever having met the Crows). The fact that the Crows added the words "...unable to open or close" is an impossibility. The door is one or the other but cannot be both. Judge rules that the impossible is possible.
Defendant's Exhibit T-45 (Crow's photo of a door knob suggests a door neither opens or closes)
Defendant's Exhibit https://youtu.be/Gj63ZVw8LQg DVD Video showing the door open, and closed. *This video has been removed by the political structure or Youtube.
Defendant not permitted to show any evidence whatsoever. Witnesses were sequestered (not permitted to help the 70+ year old Defendant along).
The Judge didn't even get the date in which I ended tenancy correct. He states it happened in late August, whereas the Plaintiff, Defendant, and the 3rd Party have stated it to be September 9, 2014
Not a solitary video, photo, document, receipt, audio...nothing was able to be heard at Trial in the Defense of the Defendant. Decision rendered by Judge Thomas Trempe for the Plaintiffs and against the wrong Defendant, all that was required to win were:
1.) An allegation
2.) Photos of dubious origins (ie. Rainbow of 12 colors of the same carpet, cut/copy/paste and photo-shopped pictures, etc.)
3.) A bill placed upon a company letter-head that does not exist with an impossible date. That's it. So in essence, if one found a broken vase, took some pictures of the broken vase, created a bill for the repair of the broken vase, and allege you broke the vase, you lose in the Clark County Municipal Court of (Law?). The Judge conveniently separated the Defendant from the third-party Intervenor, the subsequent Lease holder. The third-party Intervenor in the hallway cannot show the evidences unless either the plaintiff, defendant, or Judge allows, ensuring the Defendant is defenseless. The 3rd party intervenor had videos that would completely demolish the Crows' one witness, a contractor that states he had to repair the holes (which I luckily made videos of my having completed the repairs perfectly already, all that was required was paint). The Crow's witness also stated in his bill to the Crows that: This is the worst case of damage I have ever seen (or something to that effect).....my videos don't lie, the Crow witness would have been cross-examined with a video showing of the state of the rental upon my departure.
Springfield Ohio
During the final month following my notice to vacate came one disaster after the other.
There would be three sizable leaks from the upstairs tenant and an upstairs fire which was rented out to a Crow relative.
I called the fire department which is on record and their public records clearly name me in their reports as having been the person that extinguished the fire and also names the upstairs tenant as the cause of the fire
After being scolded by Theresa Crow for calling the fire Department, I remember feeling glad to be soon leaving the Crow rental.
Following many of the upstairs disasters, and the subsequent repairs mostly made by the landlord himself, there were repeated needs to enter my rental to go down to the basement with his plumbers, then his electrician, etc.
At first I did my best to clean any shoe prints from their dirty shoes, but it became too much for me to be concerned about their messes, and I focused rather on the packing and the hole repair.
I bothered to make videos showing the true cause of damages as they were occurring.
However, in a less-than-upright court, no amount of evidence will save us. As seen on the Court's own Public Recordthe Judge denied all evidences, and even denied the actual tenant/occupant from presenting the Case and from presenting the evidences within the Court.
But why would the Clark County Municipal Court of Ohio utilize the Bar Association's James Heath, who accepted cash and did lure my mother up from Florida, intent on finding HER as the cause for damages (she's well over 70 years old and was hundreds of miles away from the Crow Rental)?
The Courts have copies of the videos which I submitted to them, but after first allowing them on the Court Record, the Judge would later deny them at the Trial in the Court.
neither my mom, nor I, could possibly have been the "cause" for damages to the Springfield Ohio Property owned by Eric and Theresa Crow.
The court would go on to state that my mother was the tenant during the time of the damages and find her guilty of causing the damages and demand that she pay $4,000.00+ to the Crows. And not just any Crow, but Eric Crow who wasn't even on her lease The court would award the money to Eric and not Theresa Crow.
This isn't a sham?
The Crows also obtained ANOTHER $4,000.00 from even the upstairs tenant which appears to be an insurance scam (check the paperwork and see for yourself).
I began to upload the videos to YouTube and was repeatedly shocked to find the videos were pulled due to "complaints" having been made against my videos which merely showed water coming down from the ceiling, and an upstairs fire, then I read the law where the Police can take down videos and Facebook accounts without a judicial process, the Crow son-in-law is a Sheriff and lives with Mr. and Mrs. Crow.
To counteract the censoring of my harmless videos that were being censored off of Youtube, I appealed to YouTube (about 20 times or so, conservatively), and then decided to move the videos to other sites including Daily Motion, Vimeo, Yandex, and others....still most of the sites would remove the videos due to claims of copyright infringement or complaints having been made against them.
The videos, made by my own phone, simply showed the damages as they were occurring and nothing more.
To find out how a Court finds the previous downstairs tenant at fault to pay for the damages caused by the upstairs tenant, click next.
Thanks to F.E.M.A.
With all the bad rap the F.E.M.A. guys are getting these days, I just thought I'd throw my two-cents worth down on paper.
In 2012 (if my memory serves correctly) my store and living quarters were beyond my repair from a storm. The storm made a whole roof (and ceiling) fall into the one-story business/home and much property was ruined by the water flowing in through all the doors around the building. I, to this day, still have the videos of the live damages; sad enough that I don't often look at them anymore. Black and other molds set in, mildew began to affect my health, (mostly) hacking.
The means to survival and my mainstay completely destroyed and much was in irreparable state.
Before I relate what the government did, let me first paint the picture for you in a few words: I've not shown myself as a proponent for this neo-corporate/polity in quite some time (for reasons that not be delved into right now).
now for the heart-felt news. That same government that I was increasingly becoming outspoken against, did something that blew me away (I MIGHT have shed a tear). I never would have applied but by the urging of a friend I completed the simple form for help.
Forgetting soon afterward that I had asked for help, while sleeping on a bus in the florida heat and melting away unsure as to my next move...I mean it's not like you are prepared for the unexpected to happen, along came a somewhat well-dressed guy with a clip-board. The man said he was an inspector with F.E.M.A. (in my mind I was thinking "yeah right, whatever...go through the motions", he didn't stay long at all and I presumed that surely nothing would come of the inspection.
What really broke me was when I opened the mail to find a check.
There's more to this story...but right now I think it's enough said.
Thanks to our polity for this saving grace. And if they should come and take for recompense that amount from my personal affects this day, I'd have no hard feelings whatsoever....it's the least I can offer in repayment. And if our polity should decide to take more than what is owed, then all the more for the next bloke that should be caught unawares by a freak storm that changes entire existences.
This is, to me, the good side of the polity that we ought to build upon while we're actively dismantling the ugly parts.
Their Law merely states that:
Fed R Civ Rule 24.
(a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute(see TITLE IV. PARTIES ;
Or (2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action,and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.
The Lower Court Judge, which you delayed reviewing for months, allowing the case to go through trial, and even delaying a decision until FIVE MONTHS AFTER the lower Court had kept the evidence and 3rd Party Claimant from presenting anything in Court, found that the woman was guilty of causing damage to ceiling tiles and carpets. These are slippery liars and should not be ruling us or deciding our fates.
The green slip proves they've received the acknowledgements and shows the date in which the document was signed for.
Continue below to familiarize yourself with the original Case.
As it stands now, the Municipal Court manipulated a 70+ year old woman to come all the way to Ohio to be told that she's the cause of the damages.
Eric Crow, the (now) Municipal Court winner, was not a signer (or signor) on any Lease Agreement, yet seems to have the approval of the Lower Municipal Court concerning standing... in a Lease Agreement in which he's not even named. The Court gave the award to Eric Crow. My contention as the 3rd Party is that if Eric can make a claim against Margaret Baldino in a Lease Agreement dispute that he's not even a party to, then why can I not make a Claim against either of the Crows when I have expressed to the Municipal Court Record to be:
1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case, 2.) In possession of Video/Audio evidence that would refute the Landlord's Claim, 3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case, 4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring (so the Case was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder). Yet,regardless of who was the tenant or which of the Leases the Court was willing to see, Eric Crow is oddly enough shown on the Court Record as being the recipient of the Court award and champion winner of the Theresa Crow /Margaret Baldino Lease (dis)Agreement. In fact, Eric Crow was permitted to be present in the Court Room throughout the entirety of his wife's Contractual Trial; whereas Margaret Baldino's witnesses were told to stay in the hallway until called.
My mother and I even went and filed a Counter-Suit against the Crows ($50+ dollars). You guessed it.
Denied (but the Municipal Court kept the money).
The Following link was terminated by the Second Appellate Court and no longer works: https://www.mcohio.org/SecondDistrictAppeals/
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS AS PER THE COURT RECORD with notes and exhibits Date Form notes 2/4/2017 MyClosing Statement to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Instructed by the Second Appellate Division to complete a"Brief">
Luckily the google monopoly hasn't censored the template out of the public's reach, allowing me to comply.
Notice the date in which this form was submitted, September 29, 2016 (the Municipal County Court disregarded the issue presented to the Appellate Division altogether and progressed on to Trial without waiting for the Second Appellate Court Decision in this matter (as to whether or not it is lawful to deny evidence and a 3rd Party that has obvious INTEREST.
Its outcome with Margaret Baldino as the guilty party by judgment of the Municipal County Court of Springfield Ohio's Judge Thomas Trempe
9/22/2016
My original Appeal to the Second Appellate District Court of Appeals.
Original header was carried over from the Municipal Court Case,
As instructed from the Appellate Court Clerk
The original header, however, appears to be confusing the fluidity of the Appeal's intent insofar that the parties' places within the Case itself confounds the legal issue(for instance, perhaps the names of the Crows and Baldino ought to be removed from the appeal of an issue that is between the Municipal Court Judge decision, the Law that the Judge is to uphold, and myself).
1.)Although the Lower Municipal Court Judge was verifiably cognitive of the Appeal to the Higher Court soon after Pre-Trial, The Municipal Court Judge decided to keep the appointment and have the Trial anyway (not waiting on the Appellate Court to Rule on whether or not I have legal standing in the damages claim in the Municipal Court Case. The Appeal was right after Pre-Trial so there can be no misunderstanding of what is being appealed at this stage, even without reading the Appeal):
My version does not hide the exhibits/evidences. But I'm not entirely done with that page yet so there's more (however what IS complete OUGHT to be enough)
3.) Denied Court access when that person is with evidence that should have been inter-pleaded, adjoined, intervened, or as an interested party to the Case that is FREE to present evidence to the Case.
4.) Rather, there is bias in that an entirely different party, MR.CROW, as the winner of Mrs. Crow's Contractual Lease Agreement Complaint.
Mr. Crow is a witness at best. How is it legal to give credit to a witness, a person that doesn't have standing and wasn't part of the Lease which was being heard before the Municipal Court, and in dispute?
5.) Again, bias toward Eric Crow, to not be sequestered during Trial.
Whereas the Defense's witnesses were left in the hallway, unlike Eric Crow, in a lease he's not even a signer (signor)nor was he present at the signing of the Lease Agreement (However, the 3rd party Intervenor was present during Margaret Baldino and Theresa's Lease signing ).
narrated by Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure TITLE IV. PARTIES and/or any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head), In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny Due Process.
The Appeal is being heard within a 60(b) motion at Springfield Ohio's Second Appellate Court of Appeals. FOLLOW THE CASE:
The original Clark County Municipal Court Case, from which this Appeal is derived, can be seen Here.
The Municipal Court version(which does NOT show exhibits to the Public) can be seen on their website Here.
note:The Appellate Court appears to be re-directing this issue to reflect Kenneth Hendrick (myself) vs. Eric Crow, et al., including my own mother.Yet,expressed in my original motion to the Appellate Court in which is stated: That I question the Lawful Judgment of the Springfield Ohio Municipal Court's Judge Trempe to restrict my access to a(then) on going case.
Note:The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System.
The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2ndDistrictAppellate Court of Appeals itself.
Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences). Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:
1.) Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial. The same attorney suddenly is found to be the Head of the Attorneys Bar Association here (??).The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an exparte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge as seen here.
2.) The good name be given back to my mother. My mother has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.) Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible,the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows. This shame and embarrassment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce.
4.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs,an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs,electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc.,including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs,etc.). What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated.It's the right thing to do now.
Narrated by Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure TITLE IV. PARTIES
and/or
any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head),
In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny Due Process
The Municipal Court version(which does NOT show exhibits to the Public) can be seen on their website:
Note:The Appellate Court appears to be re-directing this issue to reflect Kenneth Hendrick (myself) vs. Eric Crow, et al., including my own mother.Yet,expressed in my original motion to the Appellate Court in which is stated: That I question the Lawful Judgment of the Springfield Ohio Municipal Court's Judge Trempe to restrict my access to a(then) on going case.
Note:The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System.
The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2ndDistrictAppellate Court of Appeals itself.
Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences). Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:
1.) Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial. The same attorney suddenly is found to be the Head of the Attorneys Bar (??). The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an exparte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge as seen here.
The good name be given back to my mother. My mother has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.) Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible,the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows.
This shame and embarrassment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce.
4.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs,an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs,electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc.,including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs,etc.). What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated.It's the right thing to do now.
Misc. Letters From The Court :
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
and the Second Appellate Court of Appeals located in Springfield Ohio In re: Case # 2016ca56
I posed the question to the attorneys on a particular lawyer referrel site:
Can an ohio plaintiff file in an ohio municipal court to demand a florida-domiciled person to come to ohio to address the plaintiff suit for $4k+ claiming damage to property? Also, If she was duped into coming all the way to ohio under the threat of a default judgment against her, and went to trial, does she have recourse since she can prove her place of domicile before the case was filed (over a year before) and has verification that she went back the day following her trial?
Here's the answers I received from ATTORNEYS:
"That sounds like a small claims case."
"If it is, a FL resident would be foolish to respond to a small claims lawsuit in any other state BUT Florida. It'll also be a rare day that a small claims judgment can be enforced in Florida. Florida doesn't allow wage levies for small claims lawsuits."
"In personam....Moreover, you could have avoided the entire series of events by simply ignoring the attempts to serve you. You had the absolute right to challenge an Ohio court's ability to obtain "in personam" jurisdiction over you, a resident of Florida for a minor civil dispute.
"From the looks of things, you lost the impenetrable shelter of the "in personam" defense by voluntarily appearing in Ohio to defend something that was unable to harm you, until you submitted to the court's jurisdiction voluntarily, my friend."
"The answer largely depends on whether the judge was made aware of the jurisdictional issue before trial. If not, then it is almost impossible to secure relief. But if the judge was informed of the issue in the form of a motion to dismiss the case, and went forward, then depending upon the proof offered of the lack of jurisdiction it should be possible to secure a reversal."
"Jurisdiction is something that must be challenged before the Court issues a ruling. You should consult with a local lawyer to determine what has happened and whether any challenge can be made."
"Depending on the facts there may be subject matter jurisdiction then there is the question of personal jurisdiction which is also fact based."
"By going to trial, she probably waived any objection she had to jurisdiction."
Now there were dozens (seriously) of attorneys all saying basically the same thing.
But wait, remember the "Jurisdiction" the Attorneys were speaking of? Jurisdiction.
Again, you'll notice my original question to these particular attorneys did not even mention Jurisdiction.
Again, the question was:
Can an ohio plaintiff file in an ohio municipal court to demand a florida-domiciled person to come to ohio to address the plaintiff suit for $4k+ claiming damage to property? If she was duped into coming all the way to ohio under the threat of a default judgment against her, and went to trial, does she have recourse since she can prove her place of domicile before the case was filed (over a year before) and has verification of where she went back to the day following her trial? The main thread (with maybe 3 dissenting opinions), was....that of Jurisdiction (and to stay away from the state that is slandering or burdening you).
Is this seriously the best we can offer before we die? What I mean is, for crying out loud ....
What the attorneys did not know is, that we had already raised the issue of the Court's Lack of Personal Subject Matter Jurisdiction in our very first motion (of 18) to the Clark County Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio Prior to Pre-Trial, which is seen below.
Every one of the 18 Motions, denied by Judge Trempe.
First Page, First Motion
The Clark County Municipal Court ignored the Jurisdictional issue, as did the Second Appellate Court of Appeals, also located in Springfield Ohio. Sadly, the attorneys are right (sadly for the human race). The Bible says it's better to die with a good name, our attorneys state .... evade, and not confront, or solve.
Now the Law states they must address the issue within the Courts. When I told that same group of attorneys that I already brought up Personal Subject Matter Jurisidction to the Courts, the attorneys backpedaled, suddenly there were noticeably less responses from the Attorneys.
As for how this elderly woman from Florida was duped into coming to Ohio?
When virtually every attorney contacted had said to stay away from Ohio's Jurisdiction; my mom's attorney, James Heath....this paid Springfield Attorney (who ended up being the head of the Bar Association (if you can believe that one), was telling my mom....to come to Ohio. James Heath chose to do the exact opposite, in which he appears to have Lured the elderly, and Bailed at Pre-Trial. (a critical pivotal point in a civil proceeding).
I posed the question to the attorneys on the lawyer referral site.
My question was:
Can an ohio plaintiff file in an ohio municipal court to demand a florida-domiciled person to come to ohio to address the plaintiff suit for $4k+ claiming damage to property? Also, If she was duped into coming all the way to ohio under the threat of a default judgment against her, and went to trial, does she have recourse since she can prove her place of domicile before the case was filed (over a year before) and has verification that she went back the day following her trial?
Here's the answers I received from ATTORNEYS, notice that each of them state JUST THE OPPOSITE of what my mother's attorney, James (lure and bail) Heath chose to do:
"That sounds like a small claims case.
If it is, a FL resident would be foolish to respond to a small claims lawsuit in any other state BUT Florida.
It'll also be a rare day that a small claims judgment can be enforced in Florida.
Florida doesn't allow wage levies for small claims lawsuits."
"In personam....Moreover, you could have avoided the entire series of events by simply ignoring the attempts to serve you.
You had the absolute right to challenge an Ohio court's ability to obtain "in personam" jurisdiction over you, a resident of Florida for a minor civil dispute."
"From the looks of things, you lost the impenetrable shelter of the "in personam" defense by voluntarily appearing in Ohio to defend something that was unable to harm you, until you submitted to the court's jurisdiction voluntarily, my friend."
Side Note: Not "voluntarily", Lured by a paid attorney that bailed at Pre-Trial. That attorney is oddly enough head of the Clark County Bar Association.
"The answer largely depends on whether the judge was made aware of the jurisdictional issue before trial. If not, then it is almost impossible to secure relief. But if the judge was informed of the issue in the form of a motion to dismiss the case, and went forward, then depending upon the proof offered of the lack of jurisdiction it should be possible to secure a reversal."
"Jurisdiction is something that must be challenged before the Court issues a ruling. You should consult with a local lawyer to determine what has happened and whether any challenge can be made."
"Depending on the facts there may be subject matter jurisdiction then there is the question of personal jurisdiction which is also fact based."
"By going to trial, she probably waived any objection she had to jurisdiction."
Now there were dozens (seriously) of attorneys all saying the same thing.
But wait, remember the "Jurisdiction" the Attorneys were speaking of?
Jurisdiction.
Again, you'll notice my original question to these particular attorneys did not mention the word "Jurisdiction">
Yet a great majority of the attorneys stated "jurisdiction" is lacking.
Can an ohio plaintiff file in an ohio municipal court to demand a florida-domiciled person to come to ohio to address the plaintiff suit for $4k+ claiming damage to property?
How is it that my mom's Attorney, (https://www.jamesheathlawyer.net) James Heath gave faulty representation? The main thread is that of Jurisdiction (and to stay away from the state that is slandering or burdensome).
What the attorneys did not know is that we had already raised the issue of the Court's Lack of Personal Subject Matter Jurisdiction in our very first motion (of the 18 motions we submitted to the court, all denied but remain on the court record for the world to see) to the Clark County Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio Prior to Pre-Trial, which is seen below.
Every one of the 18 Motions, denied by a Judge Trempe.
The Clark County Municipal Court ignored the Jurisdictional issue, as did the Second Appellate Court of Appeals, also located in Springfield Ohio within the across the hall from one another.
The Law states they must address the Jurisdiction issue within the Courts.
However, when I told the same group of attorneys that I already brought up Personal Subject Matter Jurisidction to the Courts, the attorneys backpedaled, suddenly there were noticeably less responses from the Attorneys.
As for how this elderly woman from Florida was duped into coming to Ohio when virtually every attorney that was contacted had stated to stay away from Ohio's Jurisdiction; my mom's attorney, James Heath was telling my elderly mother that she must come to Ohio.
James Heath, posing as an attorney, chose to do the exact opposite, in which he appears to have Lured the elderly, and Bailed at Pre-Trial. (a critical pivotal point in a proceeding).
When I made the motions to intervene to become a party to the case, prior to pre-trial, I appealed the Clark County Municipal Court's Denied Decision to the Second Appellate Court of Appeals; which the Clark County Municipal Court ignored - and went ahead to Trial without even waiting for the Appellate to come back with a decision as to whether or not I ought to be allowed to become a party that is able to present evidence in a Court of Law.
The Appellate Court made their Decision..... 5 months after the Clark County Municipal Court went ahead and had Trial leaving my mom un-represented.
Note: The courts have banned this website from being viewed when using the Court's "secure" System. They blocked this site after it was already mentioned within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2nd District Appellate Court of Appeals itself. Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual evidences).
Real Justice would Demand:
1.)Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" James Heath, that bailed at pre-trial after first luring my mother up to Ohio.
Real Justice would Demand:
2.) The good name be given back to my mother who has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
Real Justice would Demand:
3.) Since it is not possible to give back that which is not tangible, the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive. This shame and embarrasment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce. 2019 update, correction, divorced soon after I wrote this page
Real Justice would Demand:
3.) All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
The damages which appear to be caused by the Clark County Court moreso than the Plaintiff's Attorney has caused harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's.
Reimbursement of costs: an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans, paper costs, ink costs, electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub videos to the Court, etc., including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs, etc.
2019 NOTE: Due to the new law that allows Law Enforcement and the Justus System to arbitrarily remove videos from Youtube, I'll be harrassed to now edit this page by adding the oh-so-dangerous video here. P.S. the Plaintiff's son-in-law is law enforcement.
nice group.
The Clark County Municipal Courts, then the Second Appellate Court of Appeals have made the expensive determination that since the former Lease Holder is my own mother, that she is somehow responsible for my Lease duration also.
YET REGARDLESS OF WHICH OF US WERE THE TENANT AT THE TIME OF THE DAMAGES I have videos, witnesses, signed documents, receipts, photos, and more WHICH WERE ALL DENIED IN THE MATTER BEFORE THE COURT by an expensive Judge
Imagine your neighbor murders someone.Now imagine YOU (as opposed to your neighbor) are found guilty of the homicide because the only eye-witness (that took videos of the murder as it was occurring) is told by the Courts that the evidence and witness are not allowed in the Court Case because they're not a "party to the case"....even after it is expressed to the Courts that evidence exists to show the Claim against you is false?
Then there's the countersuit $50.00 ++ paid then denied reciprocity of anything in return.
Yet numerous evidences were submitted to the Clark County Municipal Court Record
So I made this web page in the hopes that someone out there might see it worthy of adding this account to a history blurb for future Universities' Curriculum or earnest discussion toward the betterment of our Justice System.
The Judicial System has ruled that the downstairs tenant should pay for the damages which are clearly caught on camera coming from another person's upstairs apartment.
But of my own videos submitted to the Court, one of the first videos has my opinions, in case my edited version is not proper (those pesky words), Youtube also has the the unedited version of the videos: *This video has been removed by the political structure or Youtube.
The "good guys" pulled almost all of the online videos (that merely showed proof that the damages were occurring from the upstairs tenant.
I'll stop back to post a link as soon as time permits.
So, after watching the aforementioned video (and those that follow), either my mom is upstairs (and able to zap into the State of Ohio from Florida) to cause pipes to burst, electric to pop and smoke, or there is no indication she is at fault for these live damages.
However, the Municipal Court found that a 70+ year old woman that wasn't a tenant, nor in the State of Ohio during the time of the disasters, as the guilty party and the "cause" of the damages.
Synopsis
Late 2014
Ambush, with a suit for almost $5,000.00 in damages, Crows took to Court more than two years beyond my Mother's Lease Agreement had terminated, claiming property damage.
$5,000.00 may not seem so significant until you multiply that amount by two.
The amount the Crows were suing for is about the same amount as the Crows obtained from the same Court in their winning suit a few weeks prior against the upstairs tenant, Nicole Tessenneer.
$10,000.00 worth of damages to a property? Both un-related tenants causing equal amounts of damages to the Crow's property is possible...just not very probable.
Although I attempted to intervene in timely manner, Twice prior to Pre-Trial, the motions were denied by the Municipal Court Judge.
The woman the Crows were suing is my mom (I'm 52 years of age); and although we submitted a half-dozen videos, audio recordings, a slew of documentation and other evidences, as shown in the Court's own Record seen on their website
I am the Tenant that has evidence that would completely refute the Crows' Claim, DENIED
The Security Deposit which was unlawfully withheld by the Crows for many months beyond the lawful allowable time frame is with the Court's consent to the wrongdoing in violation of: codes.ohio.gov/orc/5321.16v1
(Procedures for Security Deposits).
Lucky Crows?
Promptly, I appealed the Judge Trempe decision denying my lawful right to access the Case in Court to the Second Appellate Division Court of Appeals in reference to Due Processand what's known to me as a 60b motion
Https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_60
However, the Municipal Court Trial went on its merry way without thought to the pending Higher Court Appeal. The Municipal Court failed to wait for the Decision of the Second Appellate to first test for legal standing. The Appeal filed September 27, 2016 which, five months after the December Municipal Court Trial was decided, the Appellate Court concurred (with the lower Court) stating that my mother never filed an appeal and that I have not shown interest and have no standing in the case. So more than 10 months to make the decision on May 14, 2017. The Decision mentions that my mom no longer has the ability to appeal (even if she was of the right state of mind and health).
Lucky Crows?
Just to be clear, the Plaintiff's Attorney knew aforehand that Margaret Baldino was the wrong target.
Below are a couple of documents that would have come out in Court if permitted.
Would my evidence have enlightened the matter in Court if it were permitted in Court?
Presented to you are two letters which my mother sent over 3 years ago. Luckily she kept the tracking/shipping information.
In Fact, here is a letter from the Plaintiffs themselves in which they acknowledge Margaret Baldino was NOT at fault and that the damages did NOT occur during her Lease
These letters (and more) were communications between the parties before a suit was ever filed (not against me)...my mother.
Many videos and documents to show other areas in which this local government has been attacking this family are available.
In a few weeks I'll attach a recorded conversation with Mr. James Heath while in his office (it's already available somewhere in the /vid folder of this website but will link to it when time permits.
There's more, much more, so if anyone is interested in those evidences in other areas, simply ask.
Follow me to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division
F.E.M.A. aids with a little over $1k to get me out of the building in Florida that was affected by a storm (roof and ceiling fell in, water from all sides through all doors and more).
I came to Springfield Ohio where my mother offered to help.
11/12/2012 Mom signs 1-year lease with the lessor, Mrs. Crow. (I was PRESENT)
11/11/2013 Mother's one year lease is up and I receive an agreement with MR. Crow to resume the rental. Mom becomes a resident of Florida. In fact, she only returns to Ohio under threat of default judgment. Now we can show Lack of subject matter jurisdiction via her credit card statement, etc. We can also show that following the illegal trial that she returned to Florida the very next day. The court knew they didn't have jurisdiction, it's on their court record as seen in our first motion to the court and another entry made by an attorney prior to pretrial (motion to vacate hearing).
9/9/2014 I vacate the Crow Property
7 months later
4/16/15 Letters threatening to sue me
6 months later
10/28/15 Wife (lessor) and husband jointly Filed against my mother instead of me. Deprivation of Rights starts when the my mom is threatened to be subjected to a default judgment if she does not return to Ohio to address an issue the court hasn't any Jurisdiction over my mom). You must sue in the state in which she is domiciled in.
7/26/16 Calls to the court clerk and both attorneys weren't working, so i filed motions to the court record and opposing attorney and the Plaintiff consisting of a "motion to intervene" and a "motion to correct the record", prior to pre-trial, requesting to be made a party to the case since I have all the evidences to refute the claim against my mother (and me) and cannot present the evidence without being made a party to the case. I also state that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction on page one of my three page motion to intervene.
8/29/16 Court denies my motions stating I'm "not a party to the case"
9/20/16 I appealed to the Second Appellate Court of Appeals for a review of the lower Court's determination to restrict my ability to present issues, and included at least one additional piece of evidence that was not submitted to the Lower Court hoping to show "standing">
9/20/16 Mother's paid attorney meets with the judge and opposing counsel emerging from the chambers to inform my mother that the attorney would no longer be able to represent her, oh and that trial was a little over 2 months away (and that she ought to find another attorney)
I made hundreds of emails to attorneys in the state of Ohio in an effort to secure counsel for her, no avail
We filed more than 17 motions to the court record and attached videos showing my mother was not the cause for damages as the initial filing stated.
All are denied yet remain on the court record. However, the Second Appellate Court of Appeals twists the initial Claim made by the Plaintiffs to the Court. Their filing stated my mother "is the cause for damages", the Appellate muddied the waters with their interpretation "damages that occurred during (her tenancy)">
Either way though, she cannot be liable for damages she has not control over (and neither do I, the true tenant that the court just doesn't want to see).
We do not own the building, we are not the upstairs tenant that the Plaintiff already won $4k+ from the same Clark County Municipal Court a few weeks prior.
11/18/16 My mother and I went to the Clark County Municipal Court to file a counter-suit. They accept money in exchange.
11/28/16 Judge Denies our Counter Suit without our ability to actually file it. Of course without refund, stating it to be "untimely" and "without leave of court" (but it was the court clerk that withheld our earlier 11/18/16 filing,without docketing the motion until we paid the fee to file a counter suit). So the 11/18/16 motion was held for ransom and not filed when placed in the care of the Court Clerk until 11/28/16 due to the words in the last paragraph stating "...the defendant moves the court to allow for a counter-suit... as seen on this page here.
12/1/16 Municipal court doesn't wait for a decision from the appellate and has trial anyway (with my mom unrepresented). That same Municipal Court holds a Judge's Determination that my mother is guilty of being the cause for damages. A Trial that denies my attempts to show evidence in the court (twice, including videos and a rental receipt), then I was ushered out of the Court again. All in all I suspect that I was in the Court Room for less than 20 minutes.
Court awards decision for the husband of the lessor of my mother's former one-year lease
In other words, if the Lessor (Mrs. Crow) is party A, and I am Party B (but not a party to the case), the Court found that party M (my mother) is guilty and ordered to pay over $4K to Party E (Eric Crow).
More than 5 months later
5/12/17
The Appellate Moves and concurs
Damages have occurred causing a split between my mother and her husband due to this court issue.
Other damages include loss of life
To live as one would prefer to Live. To utilize Life's moments on this planet toward whatever task is chosen, as opposed to redirecting one's LIFE into an area we cannot all be doing, The Law).
Other damages including loss of liberty
When the laws that every judge and attorney is learned of (Basic Rights) are skirted against the citizens that aren't judges or attorneys, are not the former as criminals?
Which begs the question, if my education system. barely touched on the Bill of Rights, and our educational mandated curriculum sets what is taught and not taught in the schools, are those that are in the know not criminal when they choose to not enforce them for the good of the citizenry (voluntarily doing so)?
I have more than 17 entries into the court record (all denied by the judge)
Some of my evidences are:
Rental receipts
Signed documents that were communicated between the parties prior to a case being filed against the wrong party (knowingly) Videos showing neither I nor my mother are at fault
Photos of the state of the property when I moved in and when I moved out
My own witnesses
My own first-person testimony
All evidence denied by the judge which can be seen on the timeline contained here (the Court's)
I am asking $1.5M + costs
YouTube search terms: 1335 north limestone Springfield Ohio
P.s. Not only did I attach some of my evidences to the court record in physical dvd's but also links to the videos so the fact that the court record hides the exhibits, the links are written into the documents submitted to the court record.
I hope you will consider my dilemma.
If you don't mind redacted exhibits, the court's record is here:
Imagine your neighbor is murdered and you are on trial for the murder as the only suspect. Imagine my having taken videos of the real murderer of your neighbor. How would you feel about my being told "NO evidence allowed" in your case because I'm not a "party to the case"? It's a different scenario now, isn't it? I'll tone it down for you: Imagine your child is in the morgue and you are not only mourning but are arrested for child abuse which you know you are innocent of. It goes to trial and you lose knowing the whole time that I was with evidences that would find you innocent. I'm on a roll, Imagine you are hit in the head and wake up to find you've also been robbed and stripped naked but that I have pretty solid evidence to show who the mugger was. How would it feel to you that your attacker is free because my evidence wasn't admissible (for failure to learn legalese in time to save you from the courts?).
One last one: Imagine YOUR mom is accused of being the "cause" of damages to a property. Imagine if YOU had Videos showing the old lady they found guilty wasn't the one damaging the crow property. Imagine YOU had rental receipts showing you were an integral part of the lawsuit and the actual tenant at the time of the disasters, imagine you possessed signed documents to and from the Crows (prior to any suit ever having been filed against your mother, in which both parties
within the documents acknowledge that you, and not your mom, were the tenant), imagine you had other witnesses that would have altered the outcome and fate of YOUR mom, imagine you being denied to be in a position to produce photos and videos showing what the condition of the crow property was like when you arrived, imagine you had Videos and photos taken of the Crow property during your tenancy, imagine you had videos and photos showing the condition of the crow property when YOU departed 1335 North Limestone Street in Springfield Ohio, imagine being stripped of your first-person testimony, imagine you had more evidence and were not allowed to present it in a court of law, not even to defend your own mother by order of a Judge.
Only a plaintiff, defendant, or judge can compel evidence in these courts. When I attempted to hold up evidence in court, Judge Thomas Trempe waved me down, when I stated that my video evidences were in the court room on that fateful day of December 1, 2016, the judge appeared to be disinterested in regards to evidence. Judge Trempe reprimanded me stating that my mother, who has never in her life ever received any summons for anything, was now left to fend for herself without the "benefit" of counsel, that it is up to HER to compel the evidence.
Early on in the Municipal Court Case against my mother, prior to Pre-Trial, I filed two motions to the court; a "motion to intervene" (naively assuming the english language was understandable to all of us....who knew the courts would change the word "intervene" to mean something else?), and a "motion to correct the record" (I'm not an attorney and so I don't know the magic words, and my mom on the firing block does not allow enough time to learn the volumes that an attorney studies years to be proficient in, so "Motion to Correct the Record" was the best I could do at the time allotted. Both Motions were denied by Judge Trempe.
I promptly filed an appeal to the second appellate court of appeals but then over 2 months after I filed with the appellate, the lower court Judge went ahead and had Trial anyway. My mother was left without counsel and was clueless as to what to say and do in there. Only my mom's witnesses were sequestered leaving my mom to go up against the Crow Attorney and Judge alone, the same judge that has Denied our over 17 motions to the Municipal Court Record (with exhibits, including this video and about 4 others, not including other evidences and sworn statements).
We even filed a Counter-Suit by the urging of the municipal court clerk, I was sure the Appellate was a standard above the lower court and took the bait....they took our money and then summarily denied the counter-suit. It's tough in Springfield Ohio to try to be able to obtain the justice we are told exists...the lower court denied my ability to become a party and disregarded the 5 times in my motion in which i state to be in possession of evidence (stated within my feeble Motion to Correct The Record, which I believe was 2 pages of actual content, so the mention of 5x stating to be in possession of evidence is not easily missed). I stated to the Judge, the opposing counsel, of course to the Crows, everybody was made aware that I have video evidence showing my mom did not cause the damage and here it is 2 years later, having to go to Federal Court to undo the bad unmistakable mis-judgment of the Clark County Municipal Court.
My evidence, if permitted may have refuted any claim made by the Crows. Clark County Municipal Court of Ohio went ahead and ushered the 70++ year old trembling woman into the Court room alone and had trial leaving her to fend for herself. Judge Trempe decided to disregard my appeal submitted to the Second Appellate and had the Trial a few months after pre-trial knowing my mother would be without counsel (since counsel quit after a meeting with the judge and opposing counsel
p.s. Note to all Springfield Citizens, if your attorney leaves you in the hall and walks into a back room with the judge and the opposing attorney, be very afraid, and have a backup plan My mom's paid attorney emerged to state he'd not be representing my mom anymore (not that he appeared interested in the case ...well, maybe at first, when that $1k hit his bank, but as for the numerous calls and emails I sent to him prior to pre-trial (none returned), it was a stone wall with that guy.
The municipal court went ahead and had trial without allowing evidence to be presented.
Five months later, after my innocent mother was told she is the cause for damages and must give the crow's $4k++ for being the "cause" for damages, five more months later the Appellate returned with a decision to concur. This is a total breakdown of trust, concurred by the Court of Appeals that an interested party (me) that has submitted over 17 motions to the court WITH EVIDENCES and EXHIBITS and has claimed over and over to have more evidences, all denied by the Clark County Municipal Court, and now the appellate concurs five months after the trial stating my mom "did not file an appeal". We should hope for better on the appeal? Really? Not allowed without the magic words that only a trained attorney would know. The appellate concurred, but do bother to read and understand the entire scope, see https://springfield-ohio.com , concurred 5 months after the lower court totally shirked the appellate division and went to trial anyway, to keep me without the ability to show any of my evidences, this is not good people.
Part of me is very disheartened to see the stark reality of the apparent crumbling system. that is in our midst right now. Nobody should have to go through this much trouble just to show evidence to save a loved one (or anyone) against what seems like a not-to-be-trusted system..
They found my 70++ year old mother guilty of damaging ceiling tiles and carpet. Do you see my mom doing any such thing in the video, taken while damages were occurring ?
Sorry about the rambling....I'm very frustrated and pessimistic right now (thinking about how your mom is next).
If you feel that at very least I should have been a party that is Free to present evidence, Call the Second Appellate's 800 number and leave a message concerning your opinion of this tragedy of Justice.
Appellate Case Number: 2016-CA-56 Party: Hendrick Or call Judge Trempe of the Clark County Municipal Court and let him know how you feel (937) 328-3768
Municipal Case Number:
id="_caseNumberLabel">15-CVF-02981 Party: Baldino
GOVERNMENT CODE: The sources of jurisdiction most often used to support a writ of mandamus to the supreme court or to a court of appeals appear in the Government Code.
II. VOID Orders/Judgments
A. The Elements of VOID Orders/Judgments:
1. Lacking jurisdiction of the subject matter, or parties, and violation of due process are the most important elements of a VOID Order or Judgment.
2. Judgment is a “void judgment” if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process. Klugh v. U.S., D.C.S.C., 610 F.Supp. 892, 901.
3. When attacking a void order by mandamus, it is not necessary to show no adequate remedy at law exists. See In re Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 43 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1007 WL 854253 (Tex. June 29, 2000)(per curiam).
4. Mandamus will lie to correct a void order, that is, an order the trial court had no power or jurisdiction to render. See Urbish v. 127th Judicial Dist. Court, 708 S.W.2d 429, 431 (Tex. 1986) (orig. proceeding). If an order is void, the relator need not show he lacks an adequate appellate remedy, and mandamus relief is appropriate. In re Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 35 S.W.3d 602, 605 (Tex. 2000) (orig. proceeding).
5. A judgment is void if it is shown that the court lacked jurisdiction 1) over a party or the property; 2) over the subject matter; 3) to enter a particular judgment; or 4) to act as a court. Jurisdiction could not be conferred by waiver or retroactively ELNA PFEFFER ET AL. v. ALVIN MEISSNER ET AL. (11/23/55) 286 S.W.2d 241.
C. CITING FACTS, LAW, STATUTES, CONSTITUTIONS, ETC. TO ATTACK THE VOID ORDERS/JUDGMENTS:
1. We must carefully cite sufficient facts to substantiate our claims, defenses, or counter-claims and search online focusing on the relevant case law in our respective state to strengthen our position.
2. Research relevant law, statutes, rules, the Constitutional Provisions of our respective state and those of the US Constitution, e.g., Texas Open Courts Doctrine, 1st and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution.
3. Refer to the samples of PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS.
4. Download our respective state’s Rules of Appellate Procedure, e.g., Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure – Supreme Court of Texas. Read the relevant rules with care to avoid making any procedural error, which will result in immediate dismissal.
5. Start drafting our own PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, and revise it as many times as possible before submitting it to the appropriate court.
6. Make a request to the state District Clerk, and designate the court record to be submitted to the Appellate Court.
7. If you encounter any procedural problems, ask the Appellate Court Clerk for help.
8. Send it to the Appellate Clerk by PRIORITY MAIL without return receipt because we can track the DELIVERY time and date online without extra cost.
9. Never forget to sign the PETITION and CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE before a Notary Public because a VERIFIED PETITION is essential.
It took me ten years to realize that MANDAMUS: VOID Orders/Judgments is my salvation after having suffered through my opponents’ fraud, and the opposing counsel’s fraud on the court in conspiracy with the corrupt judges who “are proud to be in their pockets,” quoting a certain judge’s own admission/statement. I believe the campaign contributions are to blame for the corruption of the officers of the court, including, but not limited to, lawyers and judges, e.g., David Roberts, Randall W. Hill, and Juergen “Skipper” Koetter
Thus, know your opponent. Look for his or her weaknesses.
For example, I was lucky enough to contact the office of Texas Secretary of State to inquire about Anita’s Resort Properties, Inc., which happened to be an ASSUMED NAME, and its CERTIFICATE expired on June 5, 1993 without any renewal. Consequently, it was factually, and legally non-existent, and it had no standing to sue. See Expiration of Assumed Name Certificate and Standing to Sue Posted on May 18, 2012. Besides, there are so many other fundamental defects in my opponents’ pleadings that I am sure of having justice served one of these days despite countless setbacks in the past ten years.
narrated by Kenny Hendrick, 3rd-Party Appellant, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, TITLE IV. PARTIES
And/or any known and unknown laws that exist and still avail the freedom to redress of grievances (off the top of my head),
In reference to the lower Court's Decision to Deny Due Process
The Municipal Court version (which does NOT show exhibits to the Public) can be seen on their website Here
note: The Appellate Court appears to be re-directing this issue to reflect Kenneth Hendrick (myself) vs. Eric Crow, et al., including my own mother.
Yet, expressed in my original motion to the Appellate Court in which is stated:
That I question the Lawful Judgment of the Springfield Ohio Municipal Court's Judge Trempe to restrict my access to a (then) ongoing case.
Note: The courts have banned this website from being viewed within the Court's "secure" Computer System.
The website you are presently viewing is blocked after it had already been named within the 3rd Party Appeal to the 2nd District Appellate Court of Appeals itself.
Videos and other evidences that were already submitted to the Municipal Court's Record prior, are now blocked from consideration to the higher Court (redacted so that the higher Court, as well as the general public, cannot view the actual exhibits and evidences).
Where do I stand?
Justice Demands:>
1.)Reimbursement for that $1,000.00 "attorney" that bailed at pre-trial.
The critical point in the case, Pre-Trial, and allowed by a Judge during an ex parte meeting where an Attorney emerged to bid farewell to the Aged Defendant, done with the blessing of the Judge here
2.)The good name be given back to my mother who has NEVER been brought to Court in her over Seventy Years on this planet (that's almost a Century).
3.)Since it is not possible to give back her good name, that which is not tangible, the exact amount the Crows sought is what my mother ought to receive from the Crows.
This shame and embarrassment upon my mother, Truth be told, has been the impetus behind her and her husband to now plan for a divorce.
3.)All Court Costs to be returned and reimbursed back to my mother.
Much harm to the otherwise peaceful lives of the Baldino's (and Myself) in court fees and costs, an amount for loss of time/life via altered personal plans to defend oneself against wrongful allegations, paper costs, ink costs, electricity for printers and computer costs, costs to submit various documents to the Court, costs incurred to dub and submit videos to the Court and Plaintiff's Attorney, etc., including an amount to compensate for the undue duress, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, arguments amongst family which were the direct result of this despicable matter at hand (the primary of which is the already mentioned plans for a Divorce, other costs such as postage costs, notary costs, fuel costs, etc.).
What is wrong is wrong and those that have been wronged ought to be compensated. It's the right thing to do now.
Springfield Ohio Letter
I have an issue that was taken against my florida-domiciled ailing elderly mother in a claim stating she was the "cause" for damages that occurred to an Ohio property.
She obtained a paid attorney that never informed her of Jurisdictional issues, and how Ohio has no Jurisdiction over a Person domiciled in Florida (especially when she can show being in Florida when the damages were being recorded by me in Ohio).
So after luring my mother into Ohio Jurisdiction, the attorney wanted her to settle by paying money.
I called repeatedly, I emailed...James Heath did not return any of my communications to him.
It would not be so offensive if James Heath had bailed prior to Pre-Trial, which is a critical juncture in any form of judicial proceedings, yet he did it at Pre-Trial (meeting with the opposing attorney and the Judge; leaving my mom in the hallway).
James Heath emerged to inform my mother that he'd no longer be able to "represent" her.
But who was representing her in that back room? If it were not James Heath than who? Ex-parte meetings are not lawful.
Both sides of the controversy should have been in that "Pre-Trial" meeting (my mother, not being permitted in that meeting exacts never having received common Due Process of a Pre-Trial meeting). If the attorney knew he'd be walking out on Margaret Baldino when he walked into that meeting, then he was not representing Margaret Baldino out in the hallway.
So, as opposed to the attorney Code of Professional Responsibility (as per Ohio Bar's Website), James Heath appears to have lured the elderly from the Jurisdiction of Florida to Ohio and then promptly jumped ship at a critical juncture in all proceedings, Pre-Trial.
The code of Professional Responsibility used words such as "attorneys are to conduct their business honestly, faithfully, competently, with professional responsibility.
The Bar's website says an attorney is not be with deceit, dishonesty, misrepresentation, conduct fraud, or moral turpitude.
I have contacted thousands of attorneys (mostly via email) in which I attempted to find another attorney for her (me).
The damages she was being sued for had occurred during a period in which I was the tenant
Since James Heath did not mention to the Judge the fact that I had videos and rental receipts and documents which the Plaintiffs wrote validating my claim ( verified), I was left just like my mother, misrepresented.
I filed two motions to Judge Trempe of the Clark County Muncipal Court stating the Personal Subject Matter Jurisdiction of Margaret Baldino and that I was ready to present the Case to refute the Claim made by the Plaintiffs.
Witnesses, Photos (before, during, and after), Video Evidence (made as the damages were occurring), my Rental Receipts, relevant pertienent Documents (with verification before the Claim was ever filed in the Court), my First-Person personal testimony to the acts as they were occurring, and that I wanted to be a party to the case.
My motions were denied stating I am not a plaintiff to the Case.
James Heath failed to represent his client to the best of his abilities if he failed to inform the judge that there was another party to the issue.
The Bar Associations Website uses words such as ethical, and that attorneys are expected to represent their clients to the best of their abilities....to achieve the client goals"
I appealed to the Appellate Court of Appeals in an attempt to get the Clark County Municipal Court's Ruling overturned; to be availed proper Due Process with the opportunity to present the issue claimed against (the wrong party).
The municipal Court did not even wait for the appellate to return with an answer from the Appellate Court of Appeals.
Two months after "Pre-Trial", Judge Trempe ensured the order for the Trial of an elderly woman without counsel and unrepresented, to continue on schedule.
My trembling mother, who has never in her (almost century of) life, been sued; not so much as even a traffic ticket, yet Judge Trempe expected her to know Law (something that takes attorneys years of learning to graduate of).
Her witnesses were left out in the hallway while Margaret Baldino was in a court room to defend herself against the opposing trained Attorney, and the Judge (who is also an Attorney).
When I tried to hold up a rental receipt in court I was waived down by Judge Trempe (in a hushed voice stating "your mother must conduct her own case". I informed the court that I have the videos and that they were in the Court Room, but my mother was expected to know the magic words to compel evidence (the Judge chose not to be unbiased via sheer disinterest).
My mother, who had left to Florida so many months before the damages occurred derived from the upstairs neighbor, was found guilty of being the "cause for damages". Common Credit Card, bills, her part-time employer's statement are verifiable but the Judge was fine with believing a 70+ year old woman could cause damages to ceiling tiles and water damage on carpet.
Five more months after Municipal Court went to trial and found my mother guilty of the damages, five months AFTER the Municipal Court Trial, the Appellate Court of Appeals of the Second District found that they upheld Due Process when they returned to the world with a decision to concur with the Clark County Court.
Videos (their all over youtube, simply search with the words " 1335 North Limestone St. Springfield Ohio ", you know what you don't see in those videos? My mom as being the "cause" for damages.
Rental Receipts (you'll find that I placed them with the Court of Appeals Motion that I submitted to them. Visit my timeling on this present page).
Verified correspondence in which the Plaintiffs state "damages that occurred during Kenny's occupancy" and nothing of my mother as being the cause for damages. Other correspondence between my mother to the Plaintiffs before this suit was ever filed, stating her lease was only one year and was terminated in 2013. The attorney also received that information and it correlates to the signed Lease (that it was a lease for only one year). There's also a letter in which my mother hears of the damages and states she will inform her son, Me. Then came the Claim for $4k++ against my mother in 2015 for being the cause for damages when the Plaintiffs had already made the claim that the damages occurred during Kenny's occupancy.
The Courts don't find that I ought to be a party? I'm over 18, what might be going on in Springfield's Courts?
no evidence was allowed in Court for the unrepresented Margaret Baldino.
Oh, don't presume the Court didn't HAVE the evidences already, they indeed did
I and my mom worked diligently and submitted over 17 motions consisting of DVD video Evidence, Photos, Signed Documents and other communications, and more.
But on May 14 2017, the appellate decision came back and concurred with the municipal court.
And the upstairs tenant? Oh the genuine cause for the damages was also sued by the Plaintiff for (hold your turkeys) $4k++ a year before my mother. The Plaintiff won, however the upstairs neighbor never showed which means that the Plaintiffs won by default. However the upstairs neighbor isn't going to pay. But that's okay because the Courts found it within Due Process Procedures to allow for a lure and bail intermediary to get someone that might have a dollar.
In other words, they found my mother guilty of damaging ceiling tiles and carpet when I have videos all over the internet (and more that have yet to be posted) that show it's impossible she could be guilty when the water and ceiling tiles on three separate days are falling out of the ceiling onto the carpet below and I'm recording as they fall.
The case is on court record, along with everything we submitted to the Court Record, and can be seen on their website here:
Don't think I did not try to get a replacement attorney following James Heath's Professional Conduct, although I don't have a regular income (nothing by the state or any agency and am unemployable without the ability to drive), all avenues for legal aid are full and cannot take any new cases or do not work in the area of law that covers Landlord/Tenant Disputes or are unable to work in the State of Ohio, or don't return a call or email....just like James Heath.
I've contacted thousands of attorneys via email, here and in other states also, here's a smidgin of the attorneys I've contacted during the course of over a year (there's thousands more, literally):
Bill.jonesbill.jones @ americanbar.org
Alistair McKenzieamckenzie @ mckenzielawfirm.com
Amos Jonesjones @ amosjoneslawfirm.com
Ashleykashleyk @ hbsslaw.com
Batts_dbatts_d @ prepaidlegal.com
Baughmannbaughmann @ gotofirm.com
Bblusteinbblustein @ lawmbg.com
Blaineblaine @ wnc-law.com
Bob.personsbob.persons @ smithmoorelaw.com
Bryanbryan @ bryansellslaw.com
Bwilsonbwilson @ bdlaw.com
Chip Mueslawdayton @ gmail.com
Cjetercjeter @ law.capital.edu
Clarissa Kimmeyclarissa @ civilrightscorps.org
Clayclay @ mccaslinfirm.com
Clientadvisorsclientadvisors @ gillware.com
Contactuscontactus @ thejacobslaw.com
Contactcontact @ civilrightscorps.org
Contactcontact @ iredalelaw.com
Contactcontact @ loewyfirm.com
Contactcontact @ acluohio.org
Customer.supportcustomer.support @ lexisnexis.com
Dana.jonusaitisdana.jonusaitis @ americanbar.org
Daniel A. Browndbrown @ brownlawdayton.com
Dandan @ nixalawfirm.com
Dbankdbank @ law.capital.edu
Dbergdberg @ bafirm.com
Dc.oagdc.oag @ dc.gov
Dc.outreachdc.outreach @ usdoj.gov
Dctriallawyersdctriallawyers @ tla-dc.org
Developmentdevelopment @ nita.org
Dfsdfs @ gsllaw.com
Dhaynesdhaynes @ cochranfirm.com
Dscott2dscott2 @ law.capital.edu
Dwallsdwalls @ law.capital.edu
Endjatouendjatou @ mnlawyerspllc.com
Findlaw.prfindlaw.pr @ thomsonreuters.com
Gorlawgorlaw @ f-glaw.com
Governor John Kasichintranet.quorum @ governor.ohio.gov
Greggreg @ gsplaw.net
Hartley Law Officehlo @ hartley-lawoffice.com
Helphelp @ ginsburg-law.com
Higginslawsechigginslawsec @ bizwoh.rr.com
Hwhw @ helenwallacelaw.com
Infoinfo @ mannandmannlaw.com
Infoinfo @ relmanlaw.com
Infoinfo @ millermasciola.com
Infoinfo @ hbadc.org
Infoinfo @ wclawyers.org
Infoinfo @ dcnlg.org
Infoinfo @ browngold.com
Infoinfo @ schr.org
Infoinfo @ proseniors.org
Infoinfo @ lccr.com
Infoinfo @ nod.org
Infoinfo @ nationalpartnership.org
Infoinfo @ legalmomentum.org
Infoinfo @ kirbylaw.com
Infoinfo @ kirkland.com
Infoinfo @ wbez.org
Jmulveyjmulvey @ cincylawyers.com
John.sturkjohn.sturk @ americanbar.org
Josephjorgensjosephjorgens @ jorgenslaw.com
Justicejustice @ dcejc.org
Jwomackjwomack @ slk-law.com
Kathykathy @ icje.law.uga.edu
Kmcastellinikmcastellini @ gmail.com
Kourtney R. Selogykrselogy @ ohioauditor.gov Law
Clerklawclerk @ mwblegal.com
Lawlaw @ latinojustice.org
Legalcliniclegalclinic @ law.northwestern.edu
Lhofkinlhofkin @ employeerightsadvocacy.org
Mlevengoodmlevengood @ levengoodlaw.com
Mmessmmess @ law.capital.edu
Mmillermmiller @ mwblegal.com
Moritzlawmoritzlaw @ osu.edu
nelahqnelahq @ nelahq.org
nljnlj @ thenljlawoffices.com
nlopeznlopez @ wclawyers.org
Ojp.ocomojp.ocom @ usdoj.gov
Opportunitiesopportunities @ clccrul.org
Patpat @ pcslaw.net
Ploplo @ peopleslawoffice.com
Rachaelrachael @ rasmlaw.com
Rjanutisrjanutis @ law.capital.edu
Robert.peckrobert.peck @ cclfirm.com
Ryan Searsrs @ gertsburglaw.com
Sbeemsbeem @ law.capital.edu
Studentlegalstudentlegal @ osu.edu
Terry.brooksterry.brooks @ americanbar.org
Tipstips @ abovethelaw.com
Tonytony @ grecoatlaw.com
Trainstrains @ slk-law.com
Waswas @ fbglaw.com
Wlcwlc @ washlaw.org
Ytwissytwiss @ law.capital.edu
The following is valid material for scholastic curriculum of an actual ongoing case being heard within the Springfield Ohio Court of Appeals
If you are here to see the actual Appellate Case, jump down to the SEQUENCE OF EVENTS which shows the Court Record.
(b) Joinder of Contingent Claims. A party may join two claims even though one of them is contingent on the disposition of the other; but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the parties’ relative substantive rights. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment for the money.
new subdivision (a) defines the persons whose joinder in the action is desirable.
Clause (1)
Stresses the desirability of joining those persons in whose absence the court would be obliged to grant partial or “hollow” rather than complete relief to the parties before the court.
The interests that are being furthered here are not only those of the parties, but also that of the public in avoiding repeated lawsuits on the same essential subject matter.
Clause (2)(i) recognizes the importance of protecting the person whose joinder is in question against the practical prejudice to him which may arise through a disposition of the action in his absence.
Clause (2)(ii) recognizes the need for considering whether a party may be left, after the adjudication, in a position where a person not joined can subject him to a double or otherwise inconsistent liability. See Reed, supra, 55 Mich.L.Rev. at 330, 338; Note, supra, 65 Harv.L.Rev. at 1052–57; Developments in the Law, supra, 71 Harv.L.Rev. at 881–85.
With nothing more to go on Do
YOU,
Below You will find actual documents that were presented to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL.
The law does not specify that one must prove him or herself to be included in an ongoing case.
Fed R Civ Rule 24.
(a)Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:
(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/title_IV" TITLE IV. PARTIES);
Or
(2)claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest. As formerly stated, there were TWO Motions I submitted to the Lower Court Prior to Pre-Trial.
Below is the Second Motion which is on Public Court Record.
Review the Motion, consider the matter accordingly.
What type of Court would refuse evidence concerning issues of the very case being heard within the Court?
1.) Video Evidence that proves beyond a shadow of doubt, that the damages were not caused by the 70-year old woman being scammed.
2.) Rental receipts that prove there was a subsequent rental agreement with another party during the time of the damages in question.
3.) Signed Documents from all parties, including the Plaintiff that acknowledges me, and further states that the damages occurred during my tenancy.
4.) Photo Evidence that shows the state of the building during move-in and departure.
And more evidence that the Case was a Sham, all Denied by a Court, why do you suppose that might be?
The appellate did not get involved throughout all of what follows, even though I appealed to the appellate during pre-trial of the lower court case.
In fact, the appellate did not return an answer to the issue/case until 5 months after a 70 + year old woman that was a resident of Florida and could not possibly have caused any damages to be found guilty by a local lower court.
Undignified, thuggish, judiciary/government which is no longer affordable.
A bum off the streets could have availed a better semblance of Justice far cheaper
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF CLARK COUNTY, OHIO CIVIL DIVISION
Eric and Theresa Crow
5335 Lehman Road
Springfield, Ohio 45502
Plaintiff's,
and
Andrew H. Elder,
Motion to Dismiss
Elder Elder,
Springfield, Ohio 45503
Lack of Personal Subject Matter Jurisdiction Exists
-v-
Margaret Baldino
1734 Yardley Circle
In re: Case No. 15CVF02981
Centerville, Ohio 45459
Defendant,
Margaret Baldino, Defendant in this case, state as follows:
Margaret Baldino is not domiciled in the State of Ohio.
Margaret Baldino is domiciled in the State of Florida.
Margaret Baldino no longer has a Centerville Ohio mailing address.
Margaret Baldino attaches a copy of her Credit Card Statement showing Florida as the State of domicile preceding the date of the claim filed against her.
The Court Record reflects the whereabouts of the Defendant prior to Pre-Trial (see Court Record Document linked here).
The Defendant's Credit Card Statement will also show the Defendant's direction promptly after the Clark County Municipal Court Trial.
It is therefore the Defendant's Motion to the Clark County Municipal Court to dismiss the above-captioned issue against her.
Respectfully,
Margaret Baldino
1734 Yardley Circle
Centerville, Ohio 45459
(727) 278-0954
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A Copy of this Notice was mailed to the Plaintiff and their Attorney on the 23 day of November 2016
Attached herein are:
Springfield Ohio, where robbing the elderly is respectable?
Clark County Municipal Court Sham(e) Springfield's Disgraceful Gang-land Judiciary
To counteract the censoring I appealed to YouTube (about 40 times or so) and then decided to move the videos to other sites (including Daily Motion, Vimeo, Yandex, and others....still most of the sites would remove the videos that simply show damages as they were occurring and nothing more).
So I created dvd's of the videos and entered the evidence on the court record even though Judge Trempe denied them in "his" court room.
I got ahead of myself, sorry.
6.) However, a few months after I vacated, a notice came in the mail at my new residence that I was being threatened by the Crows for a property damage claim I replied to the Crows that they were made aware of each and every disaster that occurred in their property (once I even called at 2am to inform them of a busted water pipe caused by the frost, a.k.a the Crow's lack of insulating their plumbing from the cold which resulted in causing damage to my personal property. Never once did I attempt to get him to reimburse for the damages).
Videos show where damages came from. It was the upstairs tenant's plumbing and/or the landlord/plumber's shortcomings in electrical and plumbing skills, and later an upstairs fire which occurred during my last month there (after the walk-through inspection).
The landlord and his agents must go through my downstairs rental in order to get to plumbing, electrical, air conditioners, etc. which are all housed in the basement. This is how the landlord's carpets partially were made to become damaged as shown in the videos that were not permitted in a court of justus.
Numerous attempts were made to bring the Court to reality as seen also on the court record
I was (without arbitration?) summarily denied to:
A. Become THE (obvious) pertinent party to the case, and ALL evidences were denied.
Regardless of whether the mud came from the muddy basement or the muddy upstairs fire, it should not be either the liability of the downstairs tenant, or the former tenant It shouldn't require a bunch of Judges to figure this one out, but they actually failed in every respect here.
The "judge" rules that the downstairs PREVIOUS tenant is liable for the actions derived from the upstairs
The plot thickens.
Here's where the very first real ceiling damage occurred...I cannot prove that the drugging and raping of the upstairs tenant was caused by Eric and Theresa Crow's son in law (a Champagne County Sheriff) but here's that story for anyone that wants to pursue the matter more: Meet Nicole Crowthe upstairs neighbor.
7.) The Courts denied my two written requests to become a party to the case.
Both of my initial requests were submitted and are on Court Record prior to Pre-Trial.
Yet when Pre-Trial did arrive, my mom's paid attorney James E. Heath of Ronemous and Heath Bailed James E. Heath is the head guy at the Bar Association, if that's not laughable enough). What did James Heath accomplish? Well after first convincing her to leave the State of Florida to address a property damage claim that Ohio hasn't even any Jurisdiction to do, then at Pre-Trial the paid Attorney, slithered from the judge's chambers to inform her that he would not be able to represent her.
Then the judge emerged to inform her to find another attorney and, oh by the way, the trial is set for a couple of months later (despite the fact that I already appealed his prior decision to deny evidence and my person to become a RIGHTFUL party to the case appealed to the Appellate Division, submitted promptly after my motions were denied (yet are on the court recordjust as the physical and URL versions of the videos, photos, etc.).
The motion was submitted to the Appellate Division, stamped as entered, and then I received notice that they wanted a more professional Brief (like the one's that a James Heath can write up for a $1,000.00 or more. The professional brief had to be something like 15 pages long.
But I did it.
I resubmitted a professional brief, though the expectations seemed a bit alienating as we can't all be fluent in the Legal Nomenclature and time-frames and fees and stipulations as to how and when and to whom something should be submitted to the "Honorable" Courts.
Instead the Appellate would not respond until 5 months after my mom was held unrepresented and without legal assistance in the lower Municipal Court Trial which claimed she must defend herself against a claim she was clueless about (if it were not for me she'd no nothing at all of the damages).
She is over 70 years of age (and also not an Attorney).
At trial, with my mother left unrepresented, the Court allowed her no assistance and I and a witness were forced to remain out in the hallway during the proceedings.
Then when the judge declares his best judgment, referencing the previous lease, my mother's, stating, "The written lease was for a term of 12 months, and provided that the tenancy would continue on a month to month basis ". (there was no month to month following my mother's one year lease and the Crows know this because they wrote me the rental receipts).
MY RENTAL RECEIPTS SHOW THAT I paid QUARTERLY (for one) and that I was the subsequent tenant (hint: rental receipts come with dates on them),that I gave my 30 day notice a year beyond my mother's lease.
He'd also discover a letter written by the crows themselves in which they state "...DAMAGES WHICH OCCURRED DURING KENNY'S TENANCY". (I'm Kenny, my mother is not)
The fact is, this was a malicious show of local government gone awry, and surely not worth financing. It is my hopes that the Federal Government will alleviate all the states of their wasteful middle-man facades and make this nation a model nation for the world to emulate (as opposed to the disgust most nations now have toward our crookedness of those that ought to have a bit more couth about themselves).
I'm not an attorney. I've not even graduated high school. I should be sorry I don't speak the neo-court's nomenclature? The perversion of our common colloquial and nationally-known vocabulary is evidenced by the Court's manipulation of the word "intervene" to mean something totally different. How the heebeejeebies was that supposed to jump into my drop of the hat experience in "Civil" Court's Jargon?
If they are not a court for the citizens then what have the citizens to do with such a scourge?
Okay, I got ahead of myself again....back up, here's the sequence of what was submitted to the Court. I was clueless that one ought to expose his entire hand of evidences just to break into Court so the motions were reserved at first. Here's the first two motions, not much evidence is attached to these two (of the more than 17 which did include videos, rental receipts, letters written by the landlord herself, witnesses which I could produce (easily), my first-person witness account, photos, what more could the Courts possibly need to see not only an "interest" in the proceedings, but also the need for the only person that could possibly be a necessary party to the case?
As a final note, I had to become a party to the case or else I would not be able to submit evidence in a court of my own accord. If my mother's attorney didn't quit a few months earlier at Pre-Trial, maybe he'd know the magic words to get the judge to allow evidence in his dungeon of doom.
Then when it was taking so long for an answer from the lower court judge of my mother's case, Judge Thomas Trempe, I then submitted another motion and creatively titled this one:
At about Pre-Trial, my motions were denied. However the Springfield Ohio Court DID go to great efforts to allow a fictitious Lease into the Court Record, submitted by the Crows. Notice their Lease which they submitted to the Courts doesn't mention a word about the Security Deposit which my mother's Lease does. Notice also that the Lease shows my mother and Theresa Crow are the only signors on the Lease (yet the Court would award the bounty to someone who wasn't even on her Lease), Notice later down this page that all parties agree that there indeed was a security deposit and that although it was withheld beyond the legal time-frame, that's A-Okay with the JUSTus system.. Notice below also that there is the matter of a fictitious company name that nobody on planet earth will find as a valid entity is none-other than the Crows themselves, that was also allowed in a Court of "Law">
he Court's Fraudulent Lease Page1 which was submitted to the Court by the Crows and permitted in the Court Record
Mom's Genuine Lease Page 1
Although the Landlord unlawfully kept the deposit beyond the legal time-frame, the Court would award even the unlawfully withheld Deposit to the Landlord's Husband (You heard right, a guy who was not even on my mother's lease).
Mr. Crow was however the orchestrator of the SUBSEQUENT LEASE with me but according to the Court's best judgment I have "no standing">
Mr. Crow is the winner according to the court, But why?
The Husband clearly wasn't on the lease but later down this page you will see the judges (yes, plural) lie and state that the case is against my mother and both Crows.
The only people present the day of my mother's Lease having been signed is I, my mother, and the landlord (Theresa Crow) only (which is why Mr. Crow's signature is nowhere to be found even though the court's elude to the exact opposite of the documented factual scenario).
However the Crows do admit (and even make demand for) the deposit which they've already held beyond the legal allowable time-frame (no worries, the judge apparently plays a biased blind when it's convenient).
So irregardless of who the Court wishes to believe was the tenant is immaterial when the Court has willingly allowed a fictitious Lease, from a fictitious Company (Tec Rentals), neither of which exists in the real world.
Instead they wait till there can be no
appeal on my mother's case to finally respond with this crack:
"we cannot reverse unless the trial court's
decision was
Unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable. Merrill at ¶ 41. "
Just to be clear, I appealed the decision
made by a lower court judge that mandated that evidence and T H
E tenant out of the tenant / landlord dispute.
I appealed to request that the decision by
the municipal court judge denying my becoming a party to the case be
overturned and to allow me to present evidences to show that the
allegations are fraudulent and knowingly directed toward the wrong party
(both actions being unlawful in every state of our beloved nation).
The appeal was for a 60(b) motion and was accepted in the Appellate Court
on September 22, 2016.
However the Appellate Court did not perform a 60(b) motion, and instead allowed the lower court to progress to trial many months later.
In case you're missing the hypocrisy in all this, If I appeal that I ought to be a party to the case and offer video evidence and rental receipts and more along with that appeal (look at their Court Record to see for yourself), then what good is the Appellate Court if it's going to not even consider my pleading? They did not respond till months and months later AFTER the trial (so even if they said "whoops" yes, Kenny is the obvious party that needs to be included here, it was too late 5 months after they responded (not counting the months from which I submitted the appeal to them).
With a hush of non-participation by the Appellate Branch of the Judiciary, there was not to be a response by the Appellate until an additional 5 months AFTER the lower court disregarded waiting for the Appellate to come back with an answer to determine whether it was lawful to deny evidence in an ongoing case in which the third party was the only person on the planet that could be proven to be the tenant regarding the exact case being heard in the Court, and furthermore is narrating the actual videos as the disasters were occurring.
We need more educated people in our Courts maybe, less thuggish and more for the people (because if they aren't for us we need to plead with the Federal Government to get rid of the middle men profiteers that serve no good purpose thereby allowing more profit to go to the Federal Government in the fashion of ONE Government, ONE universal law throughout the States and without the leaches).
as if it were an appeal to the future verdict of the lower Court's illegal Trial, in effect stopping all Appeals to the lower Court Trial altogether; five months later stating the appellate's decision is unappealable. Shameful waste of space and money, we could get more justice and do better with bums running the Clark County Municipal Court (in my arguably substantiated opinion).
It was asked of me, for the 5 minutes I was permitted into the court room.,/p>
Q: " Do you have evidence to show the cause for damages ? "
Me: "Why yes, it's right in the back there", as I pointed to the back of the courtroom. The judge was not even remotely curious enough to want to see the evidences that answer my mother's question of whether or not I had evidence to show her as innocent of the claims against her. The judge wasn't interested (smug thuggish behavior). When the Appellate did respond, it was to this disregard:
Note: The supreme (by their own lauding only) court has elimintated the ability to see the docs now. Below were links to those docs but I'll leave the non-existent skeletons to remind me what low-repute they really can be.
My name is Kenny Hendrick (a.k.a. Kenny Baldino, thanks to the Plaintiff).
I terminated a lease in 2014, obviously I must have been the lease holder.
I show quarterly dated rental receipts proving time frame, but the court prefers the preceding one-year leaseholder as their mark even though her lease was a monthly and not a quarterly, and the one-year lease she held had already been a year concluded.
I show video evidence of an occurrence within the property as damages were occurring proving the 70+ year old PREVIOUS lease holder could not possibly be the "cause" for damages.
The Claim was that the 70+ year old woman was the cause for damages.
Which is rather impossible, obviously I must have been a party to a particular rental to be in the building to make the videos, right?
As a parent to the child, so is a Government to the masses it lives off. Generous Innovative Government, Generous Innovative Citizens. Crooked Government, Despondent Crooked Citizens.
End Page 1
Due to the incessant censorship and removal of my web pages due to the new law allowing Police to take down websites without a judicial proceeding, please be patient with my efforts as the son-in-law of the plaintiff in this case is a Sheriff with the power to hinder truth to the public.
Springfield Ohio, where robbing the elderly is respectable?
Clark County Municipal Court Sham(e)
Springfield's Disgraceful Gang-land Judiciary
The true story starts out like this:
1.) In 2012, a storm in Florida occurred that caused the ceiling and roof to fall-in leaving me without a place to call home.
2.) The Federal Agency, F.E.M.A., gave me a check to help, but I was still left with nowhere to go for more than 3 months.
3.) My mother offered to help by signing a one-year lease with Theresa Crow for a rental located all the way in Ohio at 1335 North Limestone St. in Springfield Ohio.
Theresa Crow, My Mother, and I met on location and a lease was signed for one year. Theresa Crow was made fully aware that I would locate the required identification from the packed 40 foot bus and that the lease would resume in my name. Days later while unpacking the bus, the identification was located and it was agreed that the first year lease would resume as written, between my mother and Theresa Crow and that the subsequent lease would resume in my name (allowing me time to recoup losses from the Florida storm and get back on my feet).
4.) Following my mother's one-year MONTHLY lease, I and the husband of the Lessor, Eric Crow, came to an agreement that I would resume the new lease under new pay arrangements. Whereas my mother's one-year lease was a monthly lease, mine would be a quarterly lease.
5.) Due to electrical deficiencies and other problems with the rental, approximately one year later I gave notice to Eric Crow to vacate.
A "walk-through" inspection was conducted by Eric Crow and I. (emphasis on I; can another person terminate any other person's lease agreement? If so, we'd all be in trouble, obviously the Lease was in my name).
After the walk-through I was told to fix a hole that had been made to get electricity into the building and did so while making a video of the hole repair (and even repaired other areas which the landlord had not requested also on video).
During the final month of my notice to vacate came came one disaster after the other. There would be three sizable leaks from the upstairs tenant and a fire also by the upstairs tenant. Following many of the repairs the landlord had to enter my rental to go down to the basement with his plumbers, then the electrician, etc. He's not the type to wipe his shoes outside as I would recall once in the umpteen times he frequented the rental (not just for the rent obviously).
I bothered to make videos showing the true cause of damages as they were occurring. No amount of evidence will save us. As seen on the Court Record
The Judge denied all evidences, and even denied the actual tenant/occupant from presenting the Case and evidences within the Court
But why would the Clark County Municipal Court of Ohio lure my mother up from Florida to be intent on finding HER as the cause for damages (she's well over 70 years old and hundreds of miles away from the Crow Rental)? The Courts have the videos but after first allowing them on the Court Record denied them in the Court, have you ever heard of such a sham?
Do you see my mother in this video compilation causing the damages claimed?
neither my mom, nor I, could possibly have been the "cause" for damages to the Springfield Ohio Property owned by Eric and Theresa Crow.
I began to upload the videos to youtube (strangely enough, most of the videos were pulled due to "complaints" having been made against my videos (which merely showed water coming down from the ceiling and an upstairs fire
then I read the law where the Police can take down videos and facebook accounts without a judicial process, the Crow son-in-law is a Sheriff and lives with Mr. and Mrs. Crow (the Landlord and husband to the landlord).
To counteract the censoring I appealed to YouTube (about 40 times or so) and then decided to move the videos to other sites (including Daily Motion, Vimeo, Yandex, and others....still most of the sites would remove the videos that simply show damages as they were occurring and nothing more).
So I created dvd's of the videos, many of which are actually on the court record even though Judge Trempe denied them in "his" court room.
I got ahead of myself, sorry.
6.) However, a few months after I vacated, a notice came in the mail at my new residence that I was being threatened by the Crows for a property damage claim I replied to the Crows that they were made aware of each and every disaster that occurred in their property (once I even called at 2am to inform them of a busted water pipe caused by the frost, a.k.a the Crow's lack of insulating their plumbing from the cold which resulted in causing damage to my personal property. Never once did I attempt to get him to reimburse for the damages).
Videos show where damages came from. It was the upstairs tenant's plumbing and/or the landlord/plumber's shortcomings in electrical and plumbing skills, and later an upstairs fire which occurred during my last month there
(after the walk-through inspection).
The landlord and his agents must go through my downstairs rental in order to get to plumbing, electrical, air conditioners, etc. which are all housed in the basement. This is how the landlord's carpets partially were made to become damaged as shown in the videos that werenot permitted in a court of justus.
Numerous attempts were made to bring the Court to reality as seen also on the court record
I was arbitrarily denied to:
A. Become THE (obvious) pertinent party to the case
and
B. ALL evidences were denied.
Regardless of whether the mud came from the muddy basement or the muddy upstairs fire it should not be either the liability of the downstairs tenant,
Or the former tenant It shouldn't require a bunch of Judges to figure this one out, but they actually failed in every respect here.
The "judge" rules that the downstairs PREVIOUS tenant is liable for the actions derived from the upstairs
6.) Yet a year after I vacated, the Crows sued my Mother instead of me. I'm over 50 years on this planet and am not prone to lying. Compare my character references to that of the Clark County Municipal Court that have to censor
and delete hundreds of those in the Public that are voicing their claims against them. The Court has been in existence for umpteen years but only shows 5 or 7 comments from the Public. Shameful).
7.) The Courts denied my two written requests to become a party to the case.
Both of my initial requests were submitted and are on Court Record prior to Pre-Trial.
Yet when Pre-Trial did arrive, my mom's paid attorney James E. Heath of Ronemous and Heath Bailed James E. Heath is the head guy at the Bar Association, if that's not laughable enough). What did James Heath accomplish? Well after first convincing her to leave the State of Florida to address a property damage claim that Ohio hasn't even any Jurisdiction to do, then at Pre-Trial the paid Attorney, slithered from the judge's chambers to inform her that he would not be able to represent her.
Then the judge emerged to inform her to find another attorney and, oh by the way, the trial is set for a couple of months later (despite the fact that I already appealed his prior decision to deny evidence and my person to become a RIGHTFUL party to the case appealed to the Appellate Division, submitted promptly after my motions were denied (yet are on the court record just as the physical and URL versions of the videos, photos, etc.).
The motion was submitted to the Appellate Division, stamped as entered, and then I received notice that they wanted a more professional Brief (like the one's that a James Heath can write up for a $1,000.00 or more. The professional brief had to be something like 15 pages long.
But I did it.
I resubmitted a professional brief, though the expectations seemed a bit alienating as we can't all be fluent in the Legal Nomenclature and time-frames and fees and stipulations as to how and when and to whom something should be submitted to the "Honorable" Courts.
Instead the Appellate would not respond until 5 months after my mom was held unrepresented and without legal assistance in the lower Municipal Court Trial which claimed she must defend herself against a claim she was clueless about (if it were not for me she'd no nothing at all of the damages).
She is over 70 years of age (and also not an Attorney).
At trial, with my mother left unrepresented, the Court allowed her no assistance and I and a witness were forced to remain out in the hallway during the proceedings.
Then when the judge declares his best judgment, referencing the previous lease, my mother's, stating, "The written lease was for a term of 12 months, and provided that the tenancy would continue on a month to month basis ". There was no month to month following my mother's one year lease and the Crows know this because they wrote me the rental receipts
Now had a real judge of good character been unswayed from his lofty over-paid position and allowed the evidence into the courtroom, he'd invariably discover that MY RENTAL RECEIPTS SHOW THAT I paid QUARTERLY (for one) and that I was the subsequent tenant (hint: rental receipts come with dates on them), and that I gave my 30 day notice a year beyond my mother's lease.
He'd also discover a letter written by the crows themselves in which they state "...DAMAGES WHICH OCCURRED DURING KENNY'S TENANCY". (I'm Kenny, my mother is not)
The fact is, this was a malicious show of local government gone awry, and surely not worth financing. It is my hopes that the Federal Government will alleviate all the states of their wasteful middle-man facades and make this nation a model nation for the world to emulate (as opposed to the disgust most nations now have toward our crookedness of those that ought to have a bit more couth about themselves).
I'm not an attorney. I've not even graduated high school. I should be sorry I don't speak the neo-court's nomenclature? The perversion of our common colloquial and nationally-known vocabulary is evidenced by the Court's manipulation of the word "intervene" to mean something totally different. How the heebeejeebies was that supposed to jump into my drop of the hat experience in "Civil" Court's Jargon?
If they are not a court for the citizens then what have the citizens to do with such a scourge?
Okay, I got ahead of myself again....back up, here's the sequence of what was submitted to the Court. I was clueless that one ought to expose his entire hand of evidences just to break into Court so the motions were reserved at first. Here's the first two motions, not much evidence is attached to these two (of the more than 17 which did include videos, rental receipts, letters written by the landlord herself, witnesses which I could produce (easily), my first-person witness account, photos, what more could the Courts possibly need to see not only an "interest" in the proceedings, but also the need for the only person that could possibly be a necessary party to the case?
As a final note, I had to become a party to the case or else I would not be able to submit evidence in a court of my own accord. If my mother's attorney didn't quit a few months earlier at Pre-Trial, maybe he'd know the magic words to get the judge to allow evidence in his dungeon of doom.
Then when it was taking so long for an answer from the lower court judge of my mother's case, Judge Thomas Trempe, I then submitted another motion and creatively titled this one: Motion to Correct the Record
At about Pre-Trial, my motions were denied. However the Springfield Ohio Court DID go to great efforts to allow a fictitious Lease into the Court Record, submitted by the Crows. Notice their Lease which they submitted to the Courts doesn't mention a word about the Security Deposit which my mother's Lease does. Notice also that the Lease shows my mother and Theresa Crow are the only signors on the Lease (yet the Court would award the bounty to someone who wasn't even on her Lease), Notice later down this page that all parties agree that there indeed was a security deposit and that although it was withheld beyond the legal time-frame, that's A-Okay with the JUSTus system.. Notice below also that there is the matter of a fictitious company name that nobody on planet earth will find as a valid entity is none-other than the Crows themselves, that was also allowed in a Court of "Law">
There's more, hang in there, I'm just getting started here.
The Clark County Court accepts fraudulent lease as evidence for the agressors.
Although the Landlord unlawfully kept the deposit beyond the legal time-frame, the Court would award even the unlawfully withheld Deposit to the Landlord's Husband (You heard right, a guy who was not even on my mother's lease).
Eric Crow was however the orchestrator of the SUBSEQUENT LEASE with me. According to the Court's best judgment, I have "no standing">
Mr. Crow is the winner according to the court, But why?
The Husband clearly wasn't on my mother's lease, but later down this page you will see the judges (yes, plural) lie and state that the case is against my mother and both Crows.
The only people present the day of my mother's Lease having been signed is I, my mother, and the landlord (Theresa Crow) only (which is why Mr. Crow's signature is nowhere to be found even though the court's elude to the exact opposite of the documented factual scenario).
However the Crows do admit(and even make demand for) the deposit which they've already held beyond the legal allowable time-frame (no worries, the judge apparently plays a biased blind when it's convenient).
So irregardless of who the Court wishes to believe was the tenant is immaterial when the Court has willingly allowed a fictitious Lease, from a fictitious Company (Tec Rentals), neither of which exists in the real world.
8.) Evidences on the Court Record and witnesses were Denied by Judge Thomas Trempe of Springfield Ohio's Clark County Municipal Court, given were the following reasons:
9. Having been denied twice by the Clark County Municipal Court prior to Pre-Trial, and having been denied what I though was a basic right to present evidences (plural), I appealed to the Appellate Division in the hopes of remedy.
The thing is, if you go to their Court Record, you will find more than enough evidences ALREADY submitted to the Court (and then later denied to be permitted in the court during the trial of the wrong tenant). My expectation was to see the look on everybody's faces when the true liar in the Court was exposed.
However when the court we are supposed to address such issues is complicit, there's nothing left ...
Further, if live videos sent to the court and obviously accepted and stamped into the record are already in the Court's possession, one might think that it gives a hint to some plausible need for my being required to be in that Case for damages. The Court also accepted and stamped into Court Record the copy of my rental receipts and much more, this is not (to quote the Appellate Decision), "unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable."
Instead they wait till there can be no appeal on my mother's case to finally respond with this crack:
"we cannot reverse unless the trial court's decision was unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable. Merrill at ¶ 41. "
Just to be clear, I appealed the decision made by a lower court judge that mandated that evidence and T H E tenant out of the tenant / landlord dispute. I appealed to request that the decision by the municipal court judge denying my becoming a party to the case be overturned and to allow me to present evidences to show that the allegations are fraudulent and knowingly directed toward the wrong party (both actions being unlawful in every state of our beloved nation).
The appeal, to the best of my understanding is referred to a 60(b) motion was accepted in the Appellate Court on September 22, 2016.
In case you're missing the point in all this, If I appeal that I ought to be a party to the case and offer video evidence and rental receipts and more along with that appeal (look at their Court Record
What good is the Appellate Court if it's not going to perform as their own laws specify, to even consider the pleading? They did not respond till months and months later AFTER the trial (so even if they said "whoops" yes, Kenny is the obvious party that needs to be included here, it was too late 5 months after they responded (not counting the months from which I submitted the appeal to them).
With a hush of non-participation by the Appellate Branch of the Judiciary, there was not to be a response by the Appellate until an additional 5 months AFTER the lower court disregarded waiting for the Appellate to come back with an answer to determine whether it was lawful to deny evidence in an ongoing case in which the third party was the only person on the planet that could be proven to be the tenant regarding the exact case being heard in the Court, and furthermore is narrating the actual videos as the disasters were occurring
We need more educated people in our Courts maybe, less thuggish and more for the people (because if they aren't for us we need to plead with the Federal Government to get rid of the middle men profiteers that serve no good purpose thereby allowing more profit to go to the Federal Government in the fashion of ONE Government, ONE universal law throughout the States and without the leaches).
As if it were an appeal to the future verdict of the lower Court's illegal Trial, in effect stopping all Appeals to the lower Court Trial altogether; five months later stating the appellate's decision is unappealable. Shameful waste of space and money, we could get more justice and do better with bums running the Clark County Municipal Court (in my arguably substantiated opinion).
Are you feeling like you want to support this lonely website?
This Document was received by the Crows, signed for by their son-in-law, Sheriff Lyons, on November 25, 2014
This Document was recieved by the Crow Attorney stating similarly.
Page1
Page2
Page 3
2nd Request Page 1
2nd Request Page 2
2nd Request Page 3
Mom's
Genuine
Lease Page 1
Denied 1
Denied 2
Suit Claimed that my 70+ year old mother "caused" the damages
1
Profiteering?
This is not a monthly receipt
These and other receipts show a quarterly Lease and not a monthly
Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge
Mom's Genuine Lease Page 1
