Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Plaintiff,
IN THE
v.
to the jury in the Walker case.1 Mr. Hoge was not a party in that case, and the
Kimberlins have provided no evidence that Messrs. Walker and Hoge are in privity
with respect to that case, and Mr. Hoge denies that they are in privity. Therefore,
the Kimberlins may not rely on res judicata as shield, and Mr. Hoge is not estopped
from bring this suit.
Furthermore, the Kimberlins Corrected Motion misrepresents the Walker
jurys finding. The jury did not find that anything that the Kimberlins has written
in their Applications against Mr. Walker was true. Their actual findings were that
certain statement in those Applications were either knowingly false or failed to
include information that might have led a District Court Commissioner not to find
probable cause. See Exhibit A, 6, 13, 17, 24. Not only have the Kimberlins failed
to lay out any new facts, but also the facts they have presented are false. They
have provided no basis for the Court to reconsider its denial of their Motion for
Summary Judgment.
II. THE COURT HAS PREVIOUSLY RULED AGAINST THE KIMBERLINS LITIGATION
PRIVILEGE DEFENSE
The Kimberlins have already raised their argument for a litigation privilege
defense in their Motion to Dismiss. Docket Item 58/0. The Court denied that
motion during the hearing on 27 September, 2016. Thus, the Kimberlins were on
notice that defense is not applicable to them in this case. Yet, they submitted
another motion making the same argument. The law of the case is clear, and the
Walker v. Kimberlin, et al., Case No. 403868-V (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. 2016).
2
Court should not reconsider either its rulings on the Kimberlins Motion to Dismiss
or their Motion for Summary Judgment.
III. AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING FACTS REMAIN AT ISSUE IN THIS LAWSUIT
As noted in Mr. Hoges attached Affidavit (Exhibit A) the following material
facts are disputed with respect to the Kimberlins Affidavits attached to their
Corrected Motion:
a.
Judge Creighton never told Mr. Hoge that he was engaging in child
Affidavit, 5, 16.
d.
The Walker jury did not find that any statement made by Tetyana
f.
Mr. Hoge has never falsely called Brett Kimberlin a pedophile. Hoge
Affidavit, 9, 19.
g.
i.
Mr. Hoge has never attended a hearing involving the Kimberlin family
Tetyana Kimberlin contains statements that are false, and none have been found
to be true by a jury. Hoge Affidavit, 13.
k.
The Walker jury did not find that any statement made by Brett
Mr. Hoge has not filed multiple legal actions against Brett Kimberlin
Mr. Hoge has never tried to manipulate Tetyana Kimberlin while she
was having a mental health crisis (or at any other time). Hoge Affidavit, 21.
o.
Brett Kimberlin contains statements that are false, and none have been found to
be true by a jury. Hoge Affidavit, 24.
q.
s.
Mr. Hoge has never stated that he believes he has the right to harass
Respectfully submitted,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on the 4th day of January, 2017, I served copies of the foregoing
on the following persons:
William M. Schmalfeldt by First Class U. S. Mail to 3209 S. Lake Drive, Apt. 108,
St. Francis, Wisconsin 53235.
Brett Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817.
Tetyana Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817.
AFFIDAVIT
I, William John Joseph Hoge, solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury
that the contents of the foregoing paper are true to the best of my knowledge,
information, and belief.
Date: 4 January, 2017
William John Joseph Hoge
Exhibit A
IN THE
Although Brett Kimberlin is not licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction, he has
filed this and other court papers on his wifes behalf.
4.
he was engaging in child abuse and could end up in prison because of his
online bullying of my daughter. TK Affidavit, 2. As the partial transcript
submitted by the Kimberlins shows, Judge Creighton said no such thing during the
de novo peace order hearing on 14 May, 2015.
5.
Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: After a full jury trial, the jury
found that 99% if what I said in my complaints against Walker and Hoge
were true. TK Affidavit, 4. In fact, the jury made no finding that any of the
statements made by Brett Kimberlin or Tetyana Kimberlin in the Applications for
Statement of Charges at issue in the Walker case were true. The jury found that
some of the statements were either knowingly false or failed to include information
that might have led a District Court Commissioner to find that probable cause did
not exist. The Walker jury made no findings with respect to the Applications for
Statement of Charges filed against me.
7.
found in my favor, and Judge Mason told Walker he wasted the court and
jurys time with his revenge suit, and could not file another pleading in
2
Walker. Indeed, from what I have read of his work, he also encourages his readers
to leave the Tetyana Kimberlins children alone. I have never given any support,
financial or otherwise, to any campaign to harass a child.
12.
involving private family matter [sic] and then exploit[ed] those for his own
perverted agenda. TK Affidavit, 7. I have attended hearings in open court
related to domestic difficulties between Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin, but my only
involvement other than reporting what had happened was to arrange legal counsel
for Tetyana Kimberlin for a hearing on dueling protective orders between her and
her husband.
13.
complaint against Mr. Hoge were found to be true by a jury and are in fact
true. TK Affidavit, 8. No jury has ever considered the statements made by
Tetyana Kimberlin in her Application for Statement of Charges against me and
their truthfulness with respect to me.
14.
minor daughter, my wife and me for years. We have asked him repeatedly
to stop, but he continues on an obsessive, depraved and relentless manner.
BK Affidavit, 1. In fact, I have never engaged in stalking any person. Therefore,
I have never continued an activity in which I have never engaged.
15.
Brett Kimberlin falsely states: After a full jury trial, the jury
found that 99% if what I said in my complaints against Walker and Hoge
were true. BK Affidavit, 5. In fact, the jury made no finding that any of the
statements made by Brett Kimberlin or Tetyana Kimberlin in the Applications for
Statement of Charges at issue in the Walker case were true. The jury found that
some of the statements were either knowingly false or failed to include information
that might have led a District Court Commissioner to find that probable cause did
not exist. The Walker jury made no findings with respect to the Applications for
Statement of Charges filed against me.
18.
Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Even after the Walker jury found
in my favor, and Judge Mason told Walker he wasted the court and jurys
time with his revenge suit, and could not file another pleading in
Montgomery County without an attorney BK Affidavit, 7. Judge Mason
did not tell Aaron Walker that he had wasted the courts or the jurys time. While
5
he did say that he was contemplating a show cause order preventing both Mr.
Walker and the Kimberlins from filing further pro se suits against each other, he
has not issued such an order. In any event, Judge Mason never said that he was
considering an order preventing Mr. Walker from filing any pleading except through
counsel.
19.
family matter hearings and then exploit[ed] those for his own personal
agenda, approaching my wife during a mental health crisis and then
manipulating that situation to try to harm me BK Affidavit, 8. I have
attended hearings in open court related to domestic difficulties between Brett and
6
Tetyana Kimberlin, but my only involvement other than reporting what had
happened was to arrange legal counsel for Tetyana Kimberlin for a hearing on
dueling protective orders between her and her husband. As to Brett Kimberlins
assertion that his wife was having a mental health crisis, I will note that he filed a
petition for an involuntary examination of her which was denied by the District
Court in Montgomery County.
22.
complaint against Mr. Hoge were found to be true by a jury and are in fact
true. BK Affidavit, 9. No jury has ever considered the statements made by Brett
Kimberlin in his Application for Statement of Charges against me and their
truthfulness with respect to me.
25.
Affidavit, 10. However, at the time Brett Kimberlin sent the email he knew or
should have know that stalking had be denied as a basis for the temporary peace
order.
26.
29.
which is under a protective order issued by the United States District Court for the
District of Maryland in Kimberlin v. Frye, Case No. 13-CV-03059-GJH. Because I
am bound by that protective order, I can only say that Kimberlins characterization
of the evidence is false.
30.
online sheriff who has the right to harass me because he believes that do
things of which he disapproves. BK Affidavit, 14. In fact, it was Breitbart
Unmasked that initially portrayed me as the Internet Sheriff of Blogsmoke. Since
then, I have posted on my blog a recurring feature of radio scripts parodying the
radio version of Gunsmoke under the title Blogsmoke. The scripts do usually make
fun of Brett Kimberlin and/or his associates. Of course, I do not have the right to
harass anyone, but I do have a First Amendment right to make fun of someone who
has engaged in multiyear campaign of lawfare aimed at silencing me.
I, William John Joseph Hoge, solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury
that the contents of the foregoing paper are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief.
Date: 3 January, 2017
William John Joseph Hoge