P19-308 (COA): ORDER denying 'Motion for Extension ofTime to Submit Response to Proposed Order for Settlement of Record on Appeal'

20190924.0807.Order.P19-308.pdf

All files in the case P19-308: https://www.ncappellatecourts.org/search-results.php?sDocketSearch=P19-308&exact=1

(NCSC, 306P18-2): PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FROM ORDER BY NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS (CASE P19-308) DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO PROPOSED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF RECORD ON APPEAL

Writ.of.Certiorari.Grodner.v.Grodner.NCSC.from.COA.Order.20190924.with.exhibits.pdf

All files in the Supreme Court case: 306P18-2:
https://www.ncappellatecourts.org/search-results.php?sDocketSearch=306P18-2&exact=1


All files in the case COA case P19-308: https://www.ncappellatecourts.org/search-results.php?sDocketSearch=P19-308&exact=1

=========================

No.                                             DISTRICT 3A

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

*************************************************

HUNTER F. GRODNER,                )

     (now Summerlin)              )

          Plaintiff-Appellee,     )

                                  )         From Pitt County

     vs.                          )           No. 13-CVD-398

                                  )           

ANDRZEJ GRODNER,                  )          

     (now Andrew Grodner)         )          

          Defendant-Appellant,    )          

___________________________________)

*************************************************

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

FROM ORDER BY NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS (CASE P19-308)

DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO

PROPOSED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF RECORD ON APPEAL

*************************************************

(Filed electronically 24 September 2019)

*****

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA:

     Defendant-Appellant Andrzej Grodner (currently Andrew Grodner), acting pro se, pursuant to North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure ("N.C.R.A.P.") Rule 21(a)(2) and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), respectfully requests this Court to review and reverse 24 September 2019 Order by NC Court of Appeal ("COA") denying him MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO PROPOSED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF RECORD ON APPEAL in case P19-308, because it contradicts its previous ruling where COA acknowledged that Defendant-Appellant has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ("ADHD") and is entitled to special accommodations such as reasonable extensions of time and where it granted such extensions, and because COA believed false statement by Jeffrey L. Miller, attorney for Plaintiff, who stated that there is no circumstance under which Defendant-Appellant may present "a rational, believable, meritorious excuse for seeking additional time" even though he is aware that such excuse exists due to ADHD being a genetic condition and thus Defendant-Appellant always has it and will always have it. In support of this Petition, Defendant-Petitioner shows the following:

SUPPORT IN FACT

1. On 15 July 2019 COA granted Defendant-Appellant extension of time to Serve Proposed Record on Appeal in the case P19-308 solely based on the argument that Defendant-Appellant has ADHD and therefore is entitled to special accommodations pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). (EXHIBIT (I))
2. ADHD is a genetic condition and therefore Defendant-Appellant always has it and will always have it and therefore once acknowledged by the Court, he will always require special accommodations. 
3. On 20 September 2019 Defendant-Appellant filed with COA MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO PROPOSED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF RECORD ON APPEAL ("20 September 2019 Motion") in the case P19-308, where he argued that his extension is due to him having ADHD (EXHIBIT (II)) which will require him to review the transcript of the hearing in question, which was presided by Honorable Judge Paul Hardison on 17 September 2019 in Pitt County. Since Defendant-Appellant was informed that he may not be in possession of the transcript for as long as long as forty (40) days, he requested an extension of total of fifty (50) days with the deadline of 8 November 2019.
4. COA has not given Jeffrey L. Miller any time to respond to 20 September 2019 Motion and in their decision COA relied solely on the false statement that Jeffrey L. Milled made to Defendant-Appellant in an email and quoted in Defendant-Appellant's 10 September 2019 Motion.
5. On 23 September 2019 (filed 24 September 2019) COA denied Defendant's Motion based on a single argument made by Jeffrey L. Miller who stated that there is no circumstance under which Defendant-Appellant may present "a rational, believable, meritorious excuse for seeking additional time" even though he is aware that such excuse ALWAYS exists due to ADHD being a genetic condition and thus Defendant-Appellant always has it and will always have it and thus he will always have rational, believable, meritorious excuse for seeking additional time should he determined that such is required for him to adhere to Court procedures.

SUPPORT IN LAW 

6.      Rule 21(a)(2) states "[t]he writ of certiorari may be issued by the Supreme Court in appropriate circumstances to permit review of the (...) orders of the Court of Appeals when no right of appeal exits." There is no right of appeal from 24 September 2019 Order by COA (EXHIBIT (I)).

7.      Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (42 U.S. Code 12131-12134), as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-325, 122 Stat. 3553), the ADA Amendments Act Final Rule (81 FR 53202, published Aug. 11, 2016), and its implementing regulations, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S. Code §701), provide that public entities, such as state Courts, are prohibited from discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities, and requires such public entities to make reasonable modifications to their policies accomodating needs of such individuals.

SHOWING OF PROPER PURPOSE

8.      ADHD is a genetic condition which Defendant-Appellant has since birth but was only diagnosed in 2006. He is currently receiving medications which he will have to take for the rest of his life. ADHD cannot be cured but can only be partially managed. Thus, having this condition is outside of the Defendant-Appellant control.

9.      COA erred by denying Defendant-Appellant's 20 September 2019 Motion since it is an undisputed fact that Defendant-Appellant has ADHD and thus is entitled to special accommodations by any Court in North Carolina, and yet COA choose to willfully and knowingly believe false statement by Jeffrey L. Miller that no such excuse can ever exist, which demonstrated extreme prejudice against Defendant-Appellant, and is in violation of federal rules, and is in violation COA own past Orders in case P18-308.

10.    Defendant-Appellant is not acting for any improper purpose or to delay the resolution of this matter.

     WHEREFORE, Petitioner-Defendant asks this Court to reverse COA 24 September 2019 Order and remand it for consideration to grant him an extentions of additional fifty (50) days to submit a response to proposed Order to Judge Hardison regarding Settlement For Settlement of Record on Appeal for, which would mean a new deadline of 8 November 2019. 

Respectfully submitted, this 24th day of September, 2019.

        /s/ Andrew Grodner    _    

Andrzej Grodner, pro se

(currently Andrew Grodner)

P.O. Box 3571

Greenville, NC 27836

252-558-3040

email: agrodnercase@gmail.com 

Defendant-Appellant, pro se

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

     I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served upon all counsel of record by emailing and mailing a copy thereof by first-class mail, postage paid, and addressed as follows:

Mr. Jeffrey Miller, Esq.

Miller and Audino, LLP

2510 E. 10th Street

Greenville, NC 27858

252-493-6138

email: jeff@millerandaudino.com 

Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellee

This the 24th Day of September, 2019.

        /s/ Andrew Grodner    _                       

Andrzej Grodner, pro se

(currently Andrew Grodner)

P.O. Box 3571

Greenville, NC 27836

252-558-3040

email: agrodnercase@gmail.com 

Defendant-Appellant, pro se