Notice of Deposition: 20190104.1205.notice.of.deposition.pdf
Subpoena for Notice of Deposition: 20190104.1207.subpoena.pdf
Statcounter - visit to the page
Pages visited
times.
Friday, January 04, 2019
court document: Affidavit of Andrzej Grodner in Response to Jeffrey L. Miller's Objection; Motion to Quash; Motion for Attorney Fees; Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions
20190104.1205.affidavit.pdf
=================
=================
STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE
GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
COUNTY
OF PITT DISTRICT
COURT DIVISION
FILE
NO.: 13 CVD 398
HUNTER
F. GRODNER, )
(now Hunter Summerlin) )
Plaintiff, ) AFFIDAVIT
OF ANDRZEJ GRODNER
) IN RESPONSE TO
vs. ) JEFFREY
L. MILLER'S OBJECTION;
) MOTION TO QUASH;
ANDRZEJ
GRODNER, ) MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES;
(now Andrew Grodner) ) MOTION
FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
Defendant, )
________________________________)
ANDRZEJ
(Andrew) GRODNER, Defendant in his action, states the following under oath:
- On 3 January 2019, I was informed by Jeffrey L. Miller's about his OBJECTION; MOTION TO QUASH; MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES; MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS ("Objection") in this action which he filed on 2 January 2019. Upon going to the Courthouse and after reading said Objection I realized that in it he made various false statements regarding me and my actions, and to which I can credibly attest.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that I, the Defendant in this action, have issued the Subpoenas on "27 December 2018 seeking to require Eric Summlerin, Hunter Summerlin, and the undersigned [Jeffrey L. Miller] to appear and testify (...) concerning the issue created by the [me] of whether or not the Honorable G. Galen Braddy, Chief District Court Judge, should be recused in this case." That statement is false because:
- I have issued all subpoenas for properly filed and noticed Verified Rule 59 Motion with which Jeffrey L. Miller was properly served and to which he did not object to. Jeffrey L. Miller was also served with and not objected to the Notice of Hearing regarding Verified Rule 59 Motion. Jeffrey L. Miller was aware of all the above-mentioned documents at the time he filed his Objection;
- On 27 December 2018 I have also asked for issuance of Subpoena for Honorable Judge Braddy to testify at 7 January 2019 hearing, but again, it was only on Verified Rule 59 Motion. To the best of my knowledge Jeffrey L. Miller was aware of that fact at the time he filed his Objection.
- At any moment I did not intend to and I have not "created [the issue] (...) of whether or not Honorable G. Galen Braddy, Chief District Court Judge, should be recused" because 4 December 2018 document, which Jeffrey L. Miller is referring to, has been prepared and filed by Kay Brown without my knowledge or without my request, but upon explicit direction from Honorable Judge Braddy, which Kay Brown confirmed in her email on 5 December 2018 at 9:29am: "I did what Judge Braddy told me to do." Jeffrey L. Miller has been aware of these facts and was copied on cited communication at the time he filed his Objection.
- Even if there may have been any confusion regarding my position on 4 December 2018 document, I clarified it by explicitly stating under oath in my 21 December 2018 Response that "[I have] NOT FILED any Motion to Recuse Judge Braddy and that the attached emails (...) show that in fact NO SUCH MOTION HAS BEEN FILED" [original emphasis]. Jeffrey L. Miller has been aware of and properly served with my 21 December 2018 Response at the time he filed his Objection.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that "(4) in [my] November 16 document, [I] made (...) defamatory statements about Ms. Brown, the undersigned, the court, and Judge Braddy." That statement is false because I have not made any defamatory statements since none of my statements were false. It is my understanding, and I believe it is the understanding of Jeffrey L. Miller, that statements can only be defamatory if they are false. In one clear instance, within the thread of emails that Jeffrey L. Miller cites, I accused Ms. Brown of being a liar because she wrote that she cannot communicate my message to Judge Braddy and to prove that she was lying I provided providing her with evidence that of past email when she in fact communicated my message to Judge Braddy. Instead of denying being a liar or refuting my evidence she promptly communicated the message to and from Judge Braddy, effectively admitting that indeed she has lied to all of us and that I was correct in my statement when I called her a liar. Thus, that accusation, just like the others I made, were not false and thus they were not defamatory. To the best of my knowledge at the time of filing his Objection Jeffrey L. Miller was aware that everything I wrote in the emails on 16 November 2018, including statements regarding himself, were true statements and that I was in position to prove, and in some instances I did proved to him and the Court the truthfulness of my statements.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that "(4) in [my] November 16 document, [I] made disparaging (...) statements about Ms. Brown, the undersigned, the court, and Judge Braddy." That statement is false because my comments were taken very seriously and evaluated on their merit. Thus, they were not disrespectful but turned out rather helpful and informative for everyone who received them. In one clear instance I wrote in my 16 November 2018 email: "if Judge Braddy continues to recite lies that Mr. Miller is saying without thinking then there is no point of presenting a legal argument in front of him. For example, he repeated after Mr. Miller that somehow NC Bar can remove attorneys from the case even though NC Bar only deals with law licenses which they issue." Apparently Judge Braddy agreed with me that he has been reciting lies after Mr. Miller without thinking and decided to think for himself upon my helpful comment because in his filed 17 December 2018 Order he completely reversed his position from 14 November 2018 hearing and asserted full jurisdiction over the issue of removal of Mr. Miller from the case, not ever mentioning NC Bar. At the time of filing his Objection Jeffrey L. Miller has been very familiar with Judge Braddy's response to my morning comments from 16 November 2018 email because in the afternoon of the same day, 16 November 2018, he sent me proposed Order where my comments were indeed incorporated.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that "(4) [I] threatened to file a Contempt Motion against Ms. Brown." That statement is false because I simply reminded Ms. Brown that if she continues to lie to me then "I will have to file Contempt Motion against [her]." To the best of my knowledge she is aware that this is a proper way to compel court officials like herself to do her job properly, which I also reminded her of by writing that "this is apparently what even Judges must do." In response, she did her job as requested and relayed the communication between myself and Judge Braddy, thus confirming that she was well aware of her earlier improper behavior and that she was exposing herself to Contempt Motion. At no point Ms. Brown indicated to me that she felt threatened or that I have threatened her in any way. In fact, after I inquired about why she was no longer Family Court Coordinator, which she announced via mass email to many court officials on 2 January 2019 at 9:16am, she simply wrote: "Obviously Mr. Grodner you feel that I am not trustworthy" (2 January 2019 at 9:46am). At the time of filing his Objection Jeffrey L. Miller was aware of all my communication with Ms. Brown and even responded to some of them.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that "(7) this is the second subpoena issued by [me] to the undersigned without a proper factual or legal basis to support the issuance." [note correction assumed: "plaintiff" for "defendant"] This statement is false because in the 17 December 2018 Order, in paragraph (8), the Court found that 18 October 2018 subpoena had both proper legal basis (Motion to Remove Opposing Counsel) and factual basis (alleged false statements made by Jeffrey L. Miller about 13 December 2016 Order). Also, 27 December 2018 subpoenas had both legal basis (Verified Rule 59 Motion) and factual basis (alleged instances of false statements made by Jeffrey L. Miller during 14 November 2018 hearing). At the time of filing his Objection Jeffrey L. Miller has been served with all the listed documents and was familiar with them.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection hat "(9) [my] subpoenas (...) have been issued for an improper purpose to harass and to increase unnecessarily the costs of this litigation. (...) The Summerlins will be required to miss work (...) without any relevant or proper purpose." This statement is false because both subpoenas to the Summerlins have also been served with a copy of Verified Rule 59 Motion regarding which they were required to testify about, providing them with a valid purpose for their testimony. In particular, they were expected to provide critical evidence regarding paragraph 5(a) which alleges that Jeffrey L. Miller's almost exclusively refuses to communicate with me about his client's, Mrs. Hunter Summerlin, daily Court Order violations and that it harms the minor child. This false statement by Jeffrey L. Miller is particularly notable because I am aware of at least one instance when he issued subpoenas to the Summerlins for what appears to be a truly improper purpose, 14 December 2016 hearing on Motion for Reconsideration. To the best of my understanding there was no legitimate purpose for their presence during that hearing and Jeffrey L. Miller never called them as witnesses despite having plenty of time left for presenting his case. Jeffrey L. Miller has be properly served with the Verified Rule 59 Motion and he was aware that the subpoenas he is objecting to where issued together with said Motion.
- Jeffrey L. Miller stated in his Objection that "(10) the document [I] sent to the Family Court administrator and Deputy Clerk, and the subpoenas, have been issued and filed by [me] or at [my] request and behalf." This statement is false because I have not requested any subpoenas to be issued for the Family Court administrator or Deputy Clerk and no subpoenas have been filed because both myself and Jeffrey L. Miller were informed that there is not enough time to hear my Verified Rule 59 Motion or obtain testimony from witnesses during 7 January 2019 hearing. I believe this statement is also false because I am not aware of any "document" that Jeffrey L. Miller alleges that I sent to Family Court administrator and Deputy Clerk and then filed - at least he has not referenced it properly enough for me to verify whether it is true or false statement. At the time of filing his Objection Jeffrey L. Miller was fully informed about any and all communication that I had with anyone at the Pitt County Courthouse and he had been informed and properly served with any and all legal documents I filed in this case.
This
is the .... day of ................... (month), ........................ (year)
____________________________
Andrzej Grodner, pro se
(currently Andrew Grodner)
P.O. Box 3571
Greenville, NC 27836
(252) 558 3040
email: agrodnercase@gmail.com
Sworn
to and subscribed before me this
.... day of ...................
(month), ........................ (year)
(Official
Seal) ____________________________
Signature
of Notary Public
____________________________
Printed
Name of Notary Public
My
commission expires: _________________
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I,
Andrzej Grodner, Defendant in the cause, do hereby certify that the foregoing
was served upon all parties via email delivery per ORDER TO WITHDRAW entered on
December 13, 2016 and by depositing in a post office or official depository
under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal Service a copy
of the same in a postage prepaid envelope properly addressed to counsel of
record of the parties as follows:
VIA EMAIL AND BY US MAIL
Mr. Jeffrey
Miller, Esq.
Email address:
jeff@millerandaudino.com
US Postal address: 2510 E. 10th Street
Greenville, NC
27858
This is the .... day of .................. (month),
................. (year)
____________________________
Andrzej Grodner, pro se
(currently Andrew Grodner)
P.O. Box 3571
Greenville, NC 27836
(252) 558 3040
email: agrodnercase@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)