You are on page 1of 8

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MUSCOGEE COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

LINDA ELLIS
Petitioner,
v.
MATTHEW CHAN
Respondent.

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

CIVIL ACTION FILE
SU-13-DM-409

RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS STALKING PROTECTIVE ORDERS
On February 13, 2013, Petitioner Linda Ellis petitioned the Court and the Court issued a
stalking ex-parte temporary protective order against Respondent, Matthew Chan.
On February 27, 2013, a hearing convened and the Court ruled in favor of Petitioner
Linda Ellis. A stalking permanent protective order was then issued by the Court on March 6,
2013.
On August 19, 2013, Respondent and Appellant, Matthew Chan, filed an appeal with the
Court of Appeals which was subsequently transferred to the Supreme Court on July 2, 2014.
On March 27, 2015, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment that was issued in favor of
Petitioner, Linda Ellis. Chan v. Ellis, S14A1652 (2015) (attached as Exhibit A). The Remittitur
was then transmitted to the lower court on April 15, 2015 (attached as Exhibit B).
Respondent has included his sworn affidavit (attached as Exhibit C) explaining recent
events that has led to filing this motion to dismiss stalking protective orders.

The Supreme Court asserted authority in this case based on "the constitutional contention
[by Appellant Matthew Chan] form[ed] the basis of exercise of appellate jurisdiction in this
case…"
The Remittitur states "This case came before this Court upon an appeal from the Superior
Court of Muscogee County and it is considered and adjudged that the judgment is reversed and
that the remittitur be transmitted with the attached decision."
It is Respondent's belief that the stalking ex-parte temporary protective order dated
February 13, 2013 ceased to be in effect once the stalking permanent protective order was issued
on March 6, 2013. However, Respondent's belief may be insufficient because he is not a lawyer,
judge, court officer, or law enforcement officer.
Hence, Respondent proactively exercises extra care, diligence, and caution regarding the
matter. Respondent also has no wish to continue burdening the Court with further pleadings on
this case.
Accordingly, Respondent moves for formal dismissal of the stalking permanent
protective order dated March 6, 2013 with prejudice AND Respondent also moves for formal
dismissal of the stalking ex-parte temporary protective order dated February 13, 2013 with
prejudice. A proposed order has been provided (attached as Exhibit D).
This 15th day of January, 2016.
Respectfully submitted,

Matthew Chan, PRO SE
P.O. BOX 6391
COLUMBUS, GA 31917
Phone: (762) 359-0425
Email: matt30060@gmail.com

-2-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that I have this day served RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
STALKING PROTECTIVE ORDERS by filing the same through U.S. Postal Service First
Class Mail to the following attorney of record:
Elizabeth W. McBride
PAGE, SCRANTOM, SPROUSE, TUCKER, FORD
1111 BAY AVE, THIRD FLOOR
P.O. BOX 1199
COLUMBUS, GA 31902
This 15th day of January, 2016.
Respectfully Submitted,

Matthew Chan, PRO SE
P.O. Box 6391
Columbus, GA 31917
Phone: (762) 359-0425
Email: matt30060@gmail.com

-3-

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MUSCOGEE COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

LINDA ELLIS
Petitioner,
v.
MATTHEW CHAN
Respondent.

CIVIL ACTION FILE
SU-13-DM-409

AFFIDAVIT OF MATTHEW CHAN
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF MUSCOGEE
Personally appeared before the undersigned officer, I swear as true and correct to the
following:
1. I am over the age of eighteen, suffer from no legal disability and am otherwise competent
to give this Affidavit.
2. I am the Respondent and have previously and currently represent myself ("pro se") in this
court.
3. The matters stated herein are based on my personal knowledge.
4. On December 12, 2015, after returning from a Caribbean cruise originating at the Port of
Houston (TX), I was unexpectedly detained by a U.S. Customs agent for approximately
20-minutes without explanation.

EXHIBIT C

5. In the last 20 years, I have traveled internationally many times and passed through U.S.
Customs during return trips without inquiry or detention.
6. Initially, the customs agent would not offer any explanation as to why I was being
detained. After an extended wait, he finally asked me if there was a protective order
issued against me. I told the agent that there had been a protective order issued against
me in 2013 but it had been appealed and reversed many months ago. I asked him where
he was seeing this information on the protective order. He said it came from "local
records". I told him that I was surprised that those same records didn't show a full
reversal of that protective order. He said there was nothing he could do but I should
check with local records. I thanked him and told him I would follow up on the matter
when I returned home.
7. On or around December 17, 2015, I visited the Columbus Police Department Public
Safety Building. I met with an officer on duty and explained the incident with the
customs agent. I asked him if there were any entries in my background check/police
records that might cause a customs agent to detain me. The officer on duty looked up my
name and showed me a report that seemed to indicate that a domestic protective order
from February 13, 2013 was in effect. I showed him my copy of the Remittitur from the
Supreme Court which stated that the judgment on my case was reversed. I asked him
where the information on his report was coming from. He said it looked like it came from
Superior Court. I thanked him and told him I would follow-up.
8. On January 13, 2015, I called the Clerk of Superior of Court - Civil Division and shared
the aforementioned personal account of events to the first woman that answered the
phone. I explained to her that if she viewed the docket of the case, she would see both a

2

decision reversing the judgment and a Remittitur from the Supreme Court was posted
April 15, 2015. She confirmed my assertions but she did not know how or where the
domestic protective order was being reported and why it appeared with U.S. Customs or
the Columbus Police Department. I asked if she could assist me and find someone that
could answer my questions.
9. After a brief hold, another woman's voice answered the phone. She explained to me that a
petition for a stalking temporary protective order was filed and granted on February 13,
2013. Following the February 27, 2015 hearing, the stalking temporary protective order
was no longer in effect. But then on March 6, 2013, a stalking permanent protective order
went into effect. I asked her why then did the report I read show a February 13, 2013
date. She explained that domestic protective orders are reported based on the original
case number, original filing date, and the stalking permanent protective order was part of
the original case number. She explained that although the Supreme Court decision
reversed the judgment, the stalking permanent protective order was never formally
dismissed. She said that only the judge could formally dismiss the stalking permanent
protective order. I asked if she had seen other sample cases where a dismissal was filed
and issued on other protective orders. She said she did. I asked if she had any sample
forms and she said she could not provide me with any.
10. As a proactive and precautionary measure, I then decided I needed to file a motion to
dismiss both stalking protective orders. I needed a signed dismissal order from the Court
that explicitly states that both stalking protective orders have been dismissed so there is
no misunderstanding by any party or any agency. It would then allow the Clerk of
Superior Court's office (per their comments to me) to update any public information

3

records and public information database so they do not show any current or active
stalking protective orders against me regarding Petitioner Linda Ellis. Specifically, I seek
a dismissal order that clearly states that both stalking protective orders regarding
Petitioner Linda Ellis are no longer active

so that that it is fully understood that

this case and matter has been fully litigated, appealed, and adjudged to conclusion.

This 15th day of January, 2016.

Matthew Chan

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this ______ day of January, 2016
__________________________
Notary Public

4

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MUSCOGEE COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA

LINDA ELLIS
Petitioner,
v.
MATTHEW CHAN
Respondent.

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

CIVIL ACTION FILE
SU-13-DM-409

PROPOSED ORDER FOR DISMISSAL OF STALKING PROTECTIVE ORDERS

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Temporary Protective Order
dated February 13, 2013 issued against Respondent, Matthew Chan is hereby DISMISSED with
prejudice.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Permanent Protective Order
dated March 6, 2013 issued against Respondent, Matthew Chan is hereby DISMISSED with
prejudice.
This ______ day of _____________, 2016.
Signed,

Judge, Superior Court
Muscogee County

For transmission to Georgia Protective Order Registry

EXHIBIT D