MOTION FOR TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF N.C.R.A.P. RULE 11 PENDING REVIEW OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND MOTION OF EXPEDITED REVIEW
https://www.ncappellatecourts.org/show-file.php?document_id=254700
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. 306P18-2 THREE-A DISTRICT
SUPREME
COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA
*************************************************
HUNTER F. GRODNER, )
(now
Summerlin) )
Plaintiff-Appellee-Respondent,
)
)
From Pitt County
vs. )
No. (COA) P19-308
)
ANDRZEJ GRODNER,
)
(now
Andrew Grodner)
)
Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner,)
____________________________________)
*************************************************
MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF N.C.R.A.P. RULE 11
PENDING
REVIEW OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
AND
MOTION OF
EXPEDITED REVIEW
*************************************************
(Filed
electronically 27 September 2019)
*****
TO THE HONORABLE SUPREME
COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA:
Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner Andrzej Grodner (currently Andrew
Grodner) ("Defendant"), acting pro se, pursuant to North Carolina
Rules of Appellate Procedure ("N.C.R.A.P.") Rules 2, 11, 27(c),
respectfully requests this Court to temporarily suspend the N.C.R.A.P. Rule 11
in regards to deadlines for settling record on appeal pending review of
Defendant's 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 with this
Court on 24 September 2019 ("24 September 2019 Petition"), and for
expedited review of said Petition. In support of this Motion,
Defendant-Petitioner shows the following:
SUPPORT IN FACT
- On 20 September 2019 Defendant-Appellant filed with North Carolina Court of Appeals ("COA") MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSE TO PROPOSED ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF RECORD ON APPEAL in the case P19-308, and on 23 September 2019 (filed 24 September 2019) COA denied Defendant's Motion.
- On 24 September 2019 Defendant promptly filed with this Court 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.
- On 24 September 2019 attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee-Respondent, Jeffrey L. Miller, requested that Judge Hardison, current trial judge for family court assigned to Pitt County case Grodner v. Grodner 13-CVD-398, to sign Jeffrey L. Miller's proposed Order without a chance by the Defendant to file his response because in his view:
Mr. Grodner [Defendant] has delayed or sought the delay of this
appeal at every stage he could. He continues to send me emails against my
instructions and wishes. He continues to file his disparaging and defamatory
statements in the Court record and in his public blog. Until this appeal is
resolved he will continue to do so.
(email from Sep 24, 2019 at 12:27 PM)
SUPPORT IN LAW
4. North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure
(N.C.R.A.P.) Rule 11 specifies provisions for settling record on appeal such as
appropriate deadlines, and thus this Court has control and jurisdiction over
that process.
5. N.C.R.A.P. Rule 2 provides that Appellate Court
may vary the "requirements or provisions of any of [N.C.R.A.P.]
rules" to "prevent manifest injustice to a party," such as, in
Defendant-Appellant's opinion, when a pro se litigant does not have sufficient
time to respond to proposed Order to settle the record on appeal that he has
taken.
6. Rule 27(c)(2) provides that "[a]ll motions
for extensions of time other than those specifically enumerated in Rule
27(c)(1) may be made only to the appellate court to which appeal has been
taken."
SHOWING OF PROPER PURPOSE
7. Since N.C.R.A.P. Rule 11 requires district Court
Judge with specific deadlines to sign and file Order to Settle Record on
Appeal, but which will exceed the timeline within which this Court may respond
to Defendant's 24 September 2019 Petition, the only remedy to prevent this
Court to be denied the opportunity to respond to Defendant's 24 September 2019
Petition before the Order to Settle Record on Appeal is filed, and to prevent
harm to Defendant caused by denying him right to respond to proposed Order to Settle
Record on Appeal, is for this Court to suspend N.C.R.A.P. Rule 11 pending its
review.
8. It is an urgent request because Jeffrey L.
Miller continues to pressure Judge Hardison to sign his proposed Order based on
(1) his personal reasons without any showing of any harm to his client or the
Court system, and (2) based on more misrepresentations of facts; for example,
Defendant's statements about Jeffrey L. Miller cannot be "disparaging
and defamatory" if they are supported by evidence that has been
thoroughly reviewed and never disputed by Jeffrey L. Miller himself.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court
suspends N.C.R.A.P. RULE 11 pending review of Defendant's 24 September 2019
Petition and conducts expedited review of said Petition.
Respectfully submitted, this 27th 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 27th 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
