Professional Documents
Culture Documents
5, 2016
Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Board on Professional Responsibility
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
515 5th Street NW
Building A, Suite 117
Washington, DC 20001
To Whom It May Concern:
Please find attached an official complaint to the District of Columbia Bar concerning attorney
Aaron J. Walker, DC Bar# 481688, VA Bar #48882.
I maintain that Attorney Walker is in violation of several of the American Bar Associations
Ethical Standards, as laid out in the attached documents. A similar complaint has been filed
with the Virginia Bar.
Mr. Walker was the pro bono attorney representing a pair of defendants in a recently
concluded case in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Case #15-CV-1516NJ). That case was dismissed by the Magistrate Judge on July 1, 2016 because I failed as a pro se
representative to prove a case for personal jurisdiction over the defendants.
On July 2, I wrote a brief note to Mr. Walker to congratulate him on his win, and he responded
with what I believe to be an extortionate note informing me that he would file for sanctions
against me in excess of $5,000 unless I agreed to the conditions set forth in the attached
complaint.
To satisfy myself that these demands are authored by Mr. Walker, I asked point blank if these
were his recommendations or if he was representing the wishes of his clients. His reply was:
Bill, the deliberative process of my clients is a matter of privilege. I am not free to
discuss it. I will therefore only say (the clients) are in agreement with what I offered.
(Emphasis added.)
The case has been dismissed without prejudice. I was not accused of any wrongdoing
by the judge. The case was a simple matter of my having filed in an incorrect
jurisdiction. I am confident that if I file in the correct jurisdictions, I will prevail in my
complaint.
This is a blatant shakedown on a pro se plaintiff by an attorney of ill repute in his home
area, an attorney who was discharged from his last position as a compliance counsel at
a Virginia home health care office for dereliction of his duties while engaging in a
personal legal battle with another client, and while working under a pseudonym to offer
legal assistance to a client in Maryland where he is not licensed, and while authoring
an infamous Everybody Draw Mohammed Day blog that existed for the sole purpose
of enraging and inflaming American Muslims.
This is not the sort of professional behavior one expects from an attorney licensed to
the DC Bar, and I sincerely hope this complaint will be thoroughly investigated and the
proper disciplinary measures meted out.
Included:
1.
The DC Bar Complaint
2.
Copies of the extortionate e-mails sent by Attorney Walker
3.
The Order of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
dismissing my suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.
4.
A complete copy of the agreement Attorney Walker expects me to sign to deter
him from seeking sanctions against me in a case where the judge cited no specific
wrongdoing, a case that was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction, not on the
merits of my complaint.
5.
A proposed Consent Decree by which Mr. Walker expects me to surrender the
right to ever file a lawsuit without pre-clearance by a judge; a Permanent Restraining
Order to cover one of the two defendants in the case, including an unconstitutional
prohibition from contacting or speaking to this Defendants ex-husband who provided
valuable information in my case against her.
6.
Complaint Filed with the Virginia Bar.
If you need further information regarding any of these allegations, please feel free to
contact me at your convenience.
Inquiry Form
V I R G I N I A S TA T E B A R
Mail to:
NOTE: Send in this form if you have concerns about a lawyers conduct. Your inquiry might result in
discipline to the lawyer. If you are seeking other remedies against the lawyer, you may need to seek legal
advice from a lawyer in private practice. Also, the bar may require your further involvement in an investigation by asking you to be interviewed by a bar investigator and/or to participate at a hearing.
YOUR
NAME:
_
x
Mr.
_ Mrs.
_ Miss
_ Ms.
William
Matthew
first
YOUR
ADDRESS:
Schmalfeldt
initial
last
work (
)
street
Saint Francis
city
WI
53235
state
zip code
bschmalfeldt@twc.com
e-mail
LAWYERS
NAME:
Aaron
LAWYERS
ADDRESS:
No firm
first
(
)
Walker
initial
last
Manassas
VA
city
state
20108
zip code
Mr. Walker (Va Bar# 48882 DC Bar #481668) provided pro bono services to
two defendants I sued in the US District Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin. Case #2:15-cv-01516-NJ. The judge dismissed my case on July 1,
2016 against both defendants on jurisdictional grounds. I sent Mr. Walker
an e-mail to congratulate him. His response was, in my opinion, an
YOUR
SIGNATURE:
(Continue on the back or a separate page if you need more space. Also, attach copies of any documents that help explain
your inquiry.)
William M. Schmalfeldt
DATE:
7/2/2016
This Settlement Agreement (hereinafter Agreement) is made by and between William
Schmalfeldt, Eric Johnson, and Sarah Palmer.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, William Schmalfeldt has filed a suit against Eric Johnson and Sarah Palmer,
currently styled as Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-01516-NJ (E.D. Wisc. 2015)
(hereinafter Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al.), that suit having been dismissed for lack of personal
jurisdiction and other grounds on July 1, 2016;
WHEREAS, the parties to this agreement wish to end this dispute amicably and without
admission of fault or wrongdoing by any party; and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and releases contained herein
and for other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,
the parties agree as follows:
1.
Confidentiality and no admission of wrongdoing or fault. This agreement does not
constitute an admission of wrongdoing or fault by any of the parties. All of the parties (and
their counsel as applicable) shall keep this agreement confidential, providing, however,
that confidentiality can be breached as needed to enforce its provisions.
2.
3.
End of current litigation. William Schmalfeldt agrees he will not pursue any appeal in
relation to Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al. He will not pursue any further litigation arising
from the same factual nexus as that described in the complaints filed in Schmalfeldt v.
Johnson, et al. Eric Johnson and Sarah Palmer also agree that they will not pursue any
appeal in relation to Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al. Eric Johnson and Sarah Palmer will not
pursue any further litigation arising from the same factual nexus as that described in the
complaints filed in Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al. The parties to this agreement shall not
seek sanctions, attorneys fees, or any other kind of damages, sanctions, penalties, or costs,
except for the payment established in paragraph 2. They will walk away bearing their own
costs, except for the payment established in paragraph 2.
4.
Consent decree. The parties agree that the parties shall submit the attached Consent
Decree in the case of Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al. The parties shall take every reasonable
action necessary to ensure that the decree is adopted by that court and is binding upon the
parties, and, conversely, shall take no action to oppose the entry of that Consent Decree.
Sarah Palmer and Eric Johnson will submit the attached Consent Motion to Enter a
Consent Decree Settling This Matter and Preventing Future Litigation to the court in
Schmalfeldt v. Johnson, et al., and this agreement constitutes William Schmalfeldts
consent to that motion.
5.
Any pro se complaint filed in any court in the United States or any state in which
William Schmalfeldt is a named plaintiff or purports to act as a party representative
shall be subjected to review by the court in which it is filed prior to the issuance of
any summons or service of process. In such case the following provisions apply:
1.
2.
Good cause requires a prima facie showing for each element of each cause
of action asserted. Good faith also requires a prima facie showing that
personal and subject matter jurisdiction is present for each defendant and
that venue is appropriate. Such prima facie showing must be supported by
competent and admissible evidence.
3.
If the court determines that good cause has not been shown, the action will
be dismissed sua sponte without further notice.
4.
6.
If William Schmalfeldt files any suit without complying with the procedures
outlined in this Agreement as soon as practicable, that shall be immediate
grounds for dismissal.
Permanent restraining order. Without admitting that William Schmalfeldt has done any
of the following acts, William Schmalfeldt agrees to a permanent injunction prohibiting
him from committing any of the following acts and William Schmalfeldt agrees, separate
from any injunction, not to commit the following acts:
a.
William Schmalfeldt will not do the following to Sarah Palmer, Briana Palmer, T.L.
Palmer, or Nicholas Palmer-Beck (hereinafter the Protected Persons):
b.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
William Schmalfeldt also shall not contact Michael W. Palmer or any person acting
on his behalf. If Michael W. Palmer or any person acting on his behalf should
contact William Schmalfeldt, William Schmalfeldt shall explain that he is not to
have contact with that person and end that contact as soon as practicable.
7.
8.
be terminated unless done so in writing and executed by each of the parties. In the event
that any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable by any
court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable
any other provision of the Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the
successors and assigns of the parties. This Agreement and its terms shall be governed by
and interpreted in light of Wisconsin law. This Agreement supersedes all other prior
agreements, both written and oral, between the parties. If a civil suit is instituted based on
an alleged violation of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such a suit will be entitled
to attorneys fees. Sarah Palmer and Eric Johnson acknowledge that they have consulted
with their attorney prior to executing this agreement and William Schmalfeldt
acknowledges that he was given the opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to
executing this agreement. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience
only and shall not be used to define, limit, or describe the scope of this Agreement or any
of the obligations herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this
__________ day of _____________, 2016.
_________________________________
_________________________________
William Schmalfeldt
Date
_________________________________
_________________________________
Sarah Palmer
Date
_________________________________
_________________________________
Eric Johnson
Date
WILLIAM SCHMALFELDT,
Case No. 2:15-cv-01516-NJ
Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC P. JOHNSON, SARAH PALMER,
and JOHN AND JANE DOES,
Defendants.
CONSENT MOTION TO ENTER A CONSENT DECREE SETTLING THIS MATTER AND PREVENTING
FUTURE LITIGATION
NOW COME Defendants Sarah Palmer and Eric Johnson, by their counsel Aaron J. Walker,
Esq., in the above-styled case for the sole purpose of filing this Consent Motion to Enter a Consent
Decree Settling this Matter, without waiving any rights of jurisdiction, notice, process, service of
process, joinder, or venue. In support of this motion, they state the following:
1.
The parties to this caseMr. Schmalfeldt, Mr. Johnson, and Ms. Palmerhave
3.
Further, as part of the Agreement, the parties wish this Court to enter the proposed
order as a Consent Decree regulating the conduct among the parties going forward.
4.
All three partiesMr. Schmalfeldt, Mr. Johnson, and Ms. Palmerhave consented
WHEREFORE, these parties pray that this Court grant the consent decree attached to this motion,
and provide any other relief that is just and equitable.
Monday, July 04, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
s/ Aaron J. Walker
Aaron J. Walker, Esq.
Attorney for Defendants Johnson and Palmer
Va Bar# 48882
DC Bar #481668
P.O. Box 3075
Manassas, Virginia 20108
(703) 216-0455
(No fax)
AaronJW1972@gmail.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on July 4, 2016, I served copies of this document on William Schmalfeldt by
email by his consent.
s/ Aaron J. Walker
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WILLIAM SCHMALFELDT,
Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC P. JOHNSON, SARAH PALMER,
and JOHN AND JANE DOES,
Defendants.
CONSENT DECREE
Upon consideration of the Defendants Consent Motion to Enter a Consent Decree
),
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that in order to facilitate the amicable resolution of the abovecaptioned litigation and without a finding or admission of fault or wrongdoing, the court orders
the following:
1.
a.
Any pro se complaint filed in any court in the United States or any state in
which William Schmalfeldt is a named plaintiff or purports to act as a party
representative shall be subjected to review by the court in which it is filed
prior to the issuance of any summons or service of process. In such case
the following provisions apply:
i.
ii.
If the court determines that good cause has not been shown, the
action will be dismissed sua sponte without further notice.
iv.
2.
a.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
b.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that such consent decree shall constitute a permanent
injunction.
NANCY JOSEPH
United States Magistrate Judge