Friday, June 17, 2016

Amended notice of appeal Mary Cummins v Amanda Lollar 2015-002259-3, 02-16-00165-CV

Appeal No. 02-16-00165-CV
County Court Case No. 2015-002259-3


AMANDA LOLLAR,
                         Plaintiff,
            vs.
MARY CUMMINS,
                         Defendant Pro se

COUNTY COURT 3



TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANT’S AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL

    Defendant, Mary Cummins, files this amended notice of appeal per the Second Court of Appeal’s June 7, 2016 letter. Defendant, Mary Cummins desires to appeal from the oral order by the Court on May 17, 2016 to the Second District Court of Appeals of Texas. The oral order was a denial of the motion to dismiss. As of today Judge Mike Hrabal who presides over Tarrant County Court 3 refuses to write, sign, file an order on Motion to Dismiss[1] per Defamation Mitigation Act, Citizen Participation Act, Forgery, Fraud, Perjury, Lack of Jurisdiction and Statute of Limitations (Exhibit 1, Docket).
     The current case is 2015-002259-3. It was originally filed as 2015-002259-2 until Judge Jennifer Rymell voluntarily recused herself after hearing the Motion to Dismiss[2] and refusing to rule. Judge Mike Hrabal was then assigned the case by Judge Evans.
     The current case is copy/paste the 352-248169-10 case including claims which were reversed on appeal. This case was instantly filed after this court released their opinion in case 12-02-00185-CV April 2015. Randy Turner even included all of the reversed claims including the breach of contract claim. This was intentional to try to make the forum be Tarrant County, Texas per the void contract instead of California court which is the proper jurisdiction and venue. Plaintiff has repeatedly stated that Defendant allegedly defamed Plaintiff only while in California. Defendant has never defamed Plaintiff.
     In the original case Plaintiffs did not show elements of defamation or even state which items they felt were defamatory. Second Court of Appeals ruled that “defamation is assumed.” They also ruled that Defendant should have filed a rare motion to force Plaintiffs to identify the defamatory items. The alleged defamatory items were never identified in the trial or appeals court. The word “defamation” is not in that trial court order. A list of the allegedly defamatory comments was never made.
     The Defamation Mitigation Act and Citizen Participation Act both passed after Defendant was originally sued because of cases identical to Defendant’s. Plaintiff now had to specifically identify the alleged defamation, send a cease and desist letter then send proof that the items are indeed defamatory. Plaintiff failed to do these things before filing the current case.
     Because Defendant never defamed Plaintiff there was no evidence of defamation. Plaintiff Amanda Lollar and Randy Turner then forged the evidence in this case. Lollar added defamatory comments within the statute of limitations period and signed Defendant’s name to the anonymous public posts. The actual public articles with comments do not have a comment made by anyone on that date and time. There are no comments by Defendant. All of the exhibits were forged in the same manner. Here is but one of the forged exhibits. They were all exactly like this. Amanda Lollar's forged Exhibit 5[3]. The actual Exhibit 5 in my brief[4]. The actual Exhibit 5 online[5]. This is an Internet defamation case. The exhibits must be viewed online to compensate for viewer’s individual browser differences. There is no comment by “Mary Cummins” or anyone on that date, time. All entries in that website are anonymous.
     Plaintiff Amanda Lollar also forged an email from the head of the USDA clearing her of all wrong doing. In actuality the USDA sent an email stating Lollar was investigated and found guilty of causing “bats pain, suffering and death” and Lollar “violated the Animal Welfare Act” (Exhibit 3). The definition of “animal cruelty” is “pain, suffering and death.” Lollar’s USDA permit was then cancelled. The forged emails are dated two years after Lollar lost her USDA permit. There are actually three different versions of the forgery made and posted by Lollar which Defendant included in the Motion to Dismiss[6]. One forgery was included in the complaint in this case. Freedom of Information Act responses prove that no such email exists. The USDA would not clear someone of wrong doing two years after finding them guilty of wrong doing and cancelling their permit. In this current case Plaintiff argues that the 2011 email in Exhibit 3 written by Dr Laurie Gage of the USDA in Colorado is Defendant’s defamation. The claim and argument is beyond bizarre. Defendant believes Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner is not fit to practice law. Previously Turner filed a motion to strike his own expert. In the motion Turner viciously trashes his own expert not realizing it’s his own expert[7]. Defendant told Turner that it was his own expert. Turner still set the motion for a hearing.
     As Plaintiff Lollar and attorney Turner both wrote and signed sworn affidavits and motions stating the exhibits, USDA email were authentic, they committed perjury. Randy Turner needs to be disbarred. Both Turner and Lollar should be charged with forgery, fraud and perjury. Defendant requests that this court forward this document to authorities and the State Bar so action may be taken.
     In this case not only has Defendant never defamed Plaintiff but Plaintiff Lollar and her attorney Randy Turner have defamed Defendant. Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner has a 35 pg singled spaced ihatemary page in his business website[8] independently confirmed by the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Turner talks about the size of Defendant’s breasts when she was 11 years old in this site. Turner also falsely states that Defendant sued her grandmother, the bishop, is wanted by the law, has committed crimes… all completely false.
     Plaintiff Lollar has over 400 blogs devoted to defaming Defendant. Those blogs also talk about Defendant’s “breasts,” “ass,” “vagina,” “vomit,” “poop” and include child pornography using Defendant’s face. Here is but one post[9] certified by the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Defendant was forced to file police reports with the Fort Worth Police Department. The FWPD actually identified the child pornography, not Defendant.
     Defendant requests that Justice Bonnie Sudderth not be on the panel for this appeal. Justice Sudderth was the sitting judge for the previous identical case and is biased. Justice Sudderth requested two vacations for one specific injunction hearing and the trial. Both times then Judge Bonnie Sudderth specifically requested Judge William Brigham to oversee the proceedings. Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner bragged to Defendant in court “I’ve known this judge for years. He’ll sign anything I put in front of him.” Defendant witnessed Judge William Brigham sign an order written by Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner without even reading it. Judge William Brigham did sign every order written by Randy Turner without edits. Randy Turner even sent the final court order to Judge Brigham’s personal residence. Judge Brigham never even signed an oath of office after the assignments or before the hearing and trial. The judgment in the original case is therefore void. Justice Bonnie Sudderth and 84 year old retired Judge William Brigham clearly “gamed the system”[10] using their positions to help their friend Randy Turner.
     Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner also mentions Justice Bonnie Sudderth personally in Plaintiff’s reply to motion to dismiss. Turner mentions a website SudderthCoverup[11] written years before Defendant ever went to Texas and tries to insinuate that Defendant is involved in the website. That is false. The website most likely written by one of the prosecuting attorneys also has nothing to do with this case. The website is about Justice Bonnie Sudderth using her position as Judge to speak as a character witness for her brother Sky Sudderth in his criminal case for alleged child rape in 2007.
     Defendant requests that the Justices on the panel for appeal of the identical previous case 12-02-00285-CV[12] i.e. Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot, Justice Bill Meier, Justice Lee Gabriel, not be on the panel for this appeal as they are biased.
     The Justices took 18 months to write an approximately 80 page opinion stating that Defendant defamed Plaintiff with malice when Defendant has NEVER defamed Plaintiff. Plaintiffs in that case NEVER stated what they felt was allegedly defamatory. Justice Dauphinot stated that indigent out of state pro se Defendant should have known to write a rare legal demand to request a list of the defamatory statements. Justice Dauphinot then stated “defamation is assumed” and “doesn’t have to be proven.” Justice Dauphinot repeatedly misquoted the record even adding items which were never in any legal filing. Justice Dauphinot even personally attacked Defendant in the opinion. Justice Dauphinot mentions the amicus briefs[13],[14] filed by Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen who has been a freedom of speech lawyer for over 40 years and David Casselman of Cambodia Wildlife Sanctuary and ElephantsinCrisis.org then Justice Dauphinot dismissed them. The amicus briefs supported Defendant’s own arguments.
     Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot stated in the opinion in that case that Defendant did not argue damages in the case. Plaintiff Lollar in the trial admitted Lollar had no proof of any damages or causation by Defendant. There were no damages to argue! Pro se defendant was never advised of defendant’s right to object to the Facts & Findings, Conclusions of Law which were written by Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner and signed by Judge William Brigham unedited. Not objecting did not mean Defendant agreed with the Facts & Findings, Conclusion of law. Of course Defendant would never agree to a $6,176,000 judgement when there was not a penny of actual loss or damages, Defendant never defamed Plaintiff and Defendant is penniless.
     After the opinion was released Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner continued to brag about his close relationships with the Judges and Justices in the case. Randy Turner and his wife Patti Gearhart-Turner have been lawyers in Fort Worth, Texas for over 30 years. They are on many panels, boards, committees with these same Judges and Justices in this case and the previous one. Randy Turner in his business websites brags about his communications with the Justices.
     In the previous case UCLA freedom of speech lawyer professor Eugene Volokh even wrote an article about the opinion[15] stating the opinion was clearly in the wrong in regard to protection for media defendants. Defendant was and still is media. In the previous case Plaintiff Lollar bragged in court many times that Lollar was a public figure in regard to bats and non-profits. Justice Dauphinot merely stated Lollar was not a public figure, Defendant is not media so defamation would not have to be proven. Justice Dauphinot even stated Defendant never stated Defendant was indigent until after the trial. That is completely false. For Justice Dauphinot to affirm $3,000,000 in compensatory damages and $3,000,000 in exemplary damages when there were no damages whatsoever and Defendant had a negative net worth is beyond surreal. As the claim was allegedly with malice this is an unjust life long financial death sentence for Defendant.
     In Plaintiff’s reply to motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s attorney Randy Turner for no reason includes information about Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot’s son’s criminal record stating it’s not really his criminal record. Defendant believes Turner did this to further defame Defendant to the Judges and Justices in this case. Randy Turner has been having ex-parte communications with the Judges, Justices in this case. For this reason Justice Dauphinot should not be on the panel in this appeal.
     For all these reasons the new case must be dismissed. The older identical case must also be reversed as Plaintiff’s have unclean hands as they forged the evidence, committed fraud and perjury. Defendant must appeal the Motion to Dismiss which was denied by Judge Mike Hrabal in County Court 3. This  notice of appeal is filed in County Court 3 and the Second Court of Appeals of Texas. Defendant requests a stay in the case on appeal.



           
                                                                           ________________________________
Mary Cummins, Defendant Pro se
                                                                                  





[1] Mary Cummins’ Motion to Dismiss per Defamation Mitigation Act, Citizen Participation Act, Forgery, Perjury, Fraud, Lack of Jurisdiction, Statute of Limitations (minus filed exhibits) http://animaladvocates.us/DEFENDANT_motion_dismiss.pdf
[2] Mary Cummins Motion to Dismiss w/o Exhibits http://animaladvocates.us/DEFENDANT_motion_dismiss.pdf
[3] Plaintiff Lollar’s Exhibit 5 http://animaladvocates.us/exhibit%205.pdf
[6] Three USDA emails forged by Lollar http://animaladvocates.us/usda_email_forgery_proof.pdf
[7] Randy Turner files Motion to Strike his own Expert http://animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/motion_strike_expert.pdf
[12] Mary Cummins v Amanda Lollar, Bat World Sanctuary 12-02-00285-CV http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=02-12-00285-CV&coa=coa02
[13] Paul Alan Levy, Public Citizen, amicus brief http://www.animaladvocates.us/cummins_amicus_brief.pdf
[14] David Casselman, ElephantsinCrisis.org, Cambodia Wildlife Sanctuary http://www.animaladvocates.us/mary_cummins_v_bat_world_sanctuary_amicus_letter.pdf
[15] Eugene Volokh, Washington Post, Nonmedia’ speakers don’t get full First Amendment protection, rules a Texas Court of Appeals panel https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/04/20/nonmedia-speakers-dont-get-full-first-amendment-protection-rules-the-texas-court-of-appeals/

                                                                      

No comments:

Post a Comment