The Appellant Points on Appeal present that ARCP 41(b) was ignored by Judge P. on ( date ) 12, ( year ) , yet on ( date ) 12, ( year ) , I observed Judge P listening politely to the Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss A County Circuit Court Case # XXCV-zz-50, before denying the Appellant’s Motion.
a. Even from the “reporter notes in the Appellant’s brief on page Ab 5”, the court asked the Appellant” Sir, what is….what is your point? What point are you trying to make, so I can understand it?” wherefore, if the Court was ignoring the Defendant motion on ( date ) 12, ( year ) , Judge P would not have asked the Appellant to be more precise of what the Appellant was actually trying to communicate to the Court. During court Judge P did not elaborate on why the Appellant’s Motion to Dismissed was denied however, the Appellant may be seeing the denial of his Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice as being ignored, since Judge P did not explain in detail why the Appellant’s Motion was denied.
b. I, cannot speak for exactly why Judge P denied the Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss A County Circuit Court Case # XXCV-zz-50, wherefore I do believe Judge P was intuitively correct to denied the Appellant’s motion as the Appellant had failed to process his Motion for Dismissal correctly before the schedule court date of ( date ) 12, ( year ) ; Judge P has been practicing law since 1985.
c. The Appellant did file on ( date ) 03, ( year ) , a Motion for Dismissal under ARCP 41(b) but then the Appellant may or may not have provided a summons form for the clerk to sign to serve upon the Plaintiff(s) for A County Circuit Court Case # XXCV-zz-50.
• A County Circuit Clerk does not generally prepare summons, but only when authorized by the circuit court for delivery by the county sheriff .
d. The Appellant did not follow judicial procedure after filing his complaint with the A County Circuit Clerk:
- Service: When Required. Except as otherwise provided in these rules, every pleading and every other paper (Motion for Dismissal – Involuntary Dismissal), including all written communications with the court, filed subsequent to the complaint, except one which may be heard ex parte, shall be served upon each of the parties, unless the court orders otherwise because of numerous parties
- Summon: A summon concerning the Appellant Motion for Dismissal under ARCP 41(b) filed on ( date ) 03, ( year ) for A County Circuit Case # XXCV-zz-50 was not served upon the Appellee(s) in accordance with ( ) Rule of Civil Procedure 5(a).
• The Mechanics of Filing the Complaint and Other Pleadings and Motions (pg 15)
• Service of Process Within the State of ( ) (17)
• Proof (or Return) of Service or Process (pg 20)
(c & d) Moreover, in examining the complete text of ( ) Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the guidelines within ARCP 41(b) the Motion for Dismissal of A County Court Case #XXCV-zz-50 could not have been ordered by Judge P on ( date ) 12, ( year ) as certain criteria within ARCP 41(b) had not been satisfied. Wherefore this Appeal to the ( ) Court of Appeal is just another frivolous attempt by the Appellant John Roach to stop the A County Court Case # XXCV-zz-50 from completion.
- ARCP 41(b) Involuntary Dismissal. In any case in which there has been a failure of the plaintiff to comply with these rules; The Appellant nonsense where there has been a failure of the plaintiff to comply with these rules or any order of court; The Appellant makes this assumption without any evidential proof. A order of the court has a heading “Order”, yet the Appellant thinks the plaintiff, me, Appellee ignored a letter dated January 4, 2019 by Judge P because of a case that I, Appellee had filed on December 17, 2018 in Pulaski County, ( ) ; The Appellant fails to say exactly what I, Appellee ignored in a letter dated January 4, 2019 by Judge P and Judge P is not my attorney, wherefore anything in a letter to Appellee and brother without the heading of “Order” and the “IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF A COUNTY, ( ) CIVIL DIVIDION letterhead is legal information which can be ignored if chosen by me or brother. This particular argument by the Appellant on page Arg 2 is more twaddle to fill up a frivolous appeal to the State of ( ) Court of Appeal.
- Further on the page index as Arg 2, the Appellant comment that I, Appellee willfully obeyed a letter from Judge P on March 19, 2019 and again the Appellant fails to give specific details of what Judge P wrote that I, Appellee willfully obeyed; more drivel by the Appellant as there was an Order Approving Deed signed by Judge P on 03/19/2019, and a letter informing the Plaintiffs of XXCV-zz-50 that a Commissioner Deed had been signed.
- (a) ARCP 41(b) Involuntary Dismissal. In any case in which there has been a failure of the plaintiff to comply with these rules or any order of court or in which there has been no action shown on the record for the past 12 months; Not only does the Appellant thinks letters from Judge P with legal information is legal advice should review Legal Information vs. Legal Advice Fact Sheet, published by the Center for ( ) Legal Services and Legal Aid of ( ) but the Appellant thinks that the “legal date” Attorney JM withdrew as legal counsel for the Plaintiffs of XXCV-zz-50 was when Attorney JM wrote a Motion to Withdraw as counsel on 9/26/2018. The Appellant is not realizing, a “Motion is a Request” and inform the court an action is being requested. JM provided / served all parties involved with a copy of his Motion in accordance of ARCP 5(a). The true date JM was withdrawn as counsel for the Plainfitt(s) was on 12/28/2018 when Judge P signed an ORDER wherefor JM was no longer the Counsel for the Plaintiff.
- (b) Did XXCV-zz-50 have no actions show on the record for 12 months? The Appellant wishes there was no action so but there were actions since the date JM Order to withdraw was signed on 12/28/2018. At the request of the Plaintiffs, David Drake, Commissioner presented to the court the deed to be sign, which was signed and filed on 03/19/2019. The Plaintiffs of XXCV-zz-50 communicating with Mr. Drake to sent to the court the Commissioner Deed that need signing does not comply with the Appellant bunk statement at the bottom of the page index Arg 4 “The Co-Plaintiffs did abandon their civil case and did abdicate from their legal responsibilities”. Additionally, the Appellant has the opinion on the top of the page index as Arg 5, that I have to finalize the proceeding at the Land Commissioners Office to someone else schedule and by not finalizing at the Land Commissioner office when I was at the A County Court House in June 26, 2019, and January 29, ( year ) that I as one of the Co-Plaintiff abandon XXCV-zz-50. This is more assumption by the Appellant trying to fit circumstances into his judicial appeals that has no merits.
- Consequently, within ARCP 41(b) Involuntary Dismissal. In any case in which there has been a failure of the plaintiff to comply with these rules or any order of court or in which if there has been no action shown on the record for the past 12 months, the Appellant fails to realize that before A County Court Case # XXCV-zz-50 could not be dismissed in one day “the court shall cause notice to be mailed to the Attorney of records, and to any party not represented by an attorney. Again, the Appellant is having a mis conception for ARCP 41(b) and thinks just by bringing the motion to the court in one day, the court would dismiss the Plaintiffs case