IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR CARROLL COUNTY, MARYLAND

William John Joseph Hoge, III

Plaintiff pro se,
v.
Brett Kimberlin, et al.
Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 06-C-16-070789

SCHMALFELDTS RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR AN
ORDER OF DEFAULT

NOW COMES Defendant William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr. of 3209 South Lake Drive,
Apartment 108, Saint Francis, WI, 53235, a pro se defendant in the above-styled case for the sole
purpose of challenging personal jurisdiction and without waiving any rights of jurisdiction,
notice, process, service of process, joinder, or venue to file this Response to Plaintiffs Request
for an Order of Default and states the following:
IN HIS LUST FOR A JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT SCHMALFELDT,
PLAINTIFF OFFENDS THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE AND MARYLANDS RULE OF
LAW AND DEMONSTRATES AN OBSESSIVE/COMPULSIVE NEED TO PUNISH
DEFENDANT SCHMALFELDT WHICH PRESENTS HIM WITH POTENTIAL
DANGER TO HIS LIFE AND/OR SAFETY.
1.

Plaintiff cites Maryland Rule 2-321 in demanding that this honorable Court ignore

the rule of law in the state of Maryland and file an order of default against Defendant
Schmalfeldt. The Court cannot rule on a request for an order of default until 15 days have passed
since the Courts ruling on a motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Rule 2-322.
2.

Schmalfeldt has a motion pending with this Court pursuant to Rule 2-322(a) that

the Court has not decided. Schmalfeldts Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue remains before
the Court. Therefore, the 15 days that Plaintiff claims have tolled since the Court dismissed
Schmalfeldts Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction must be disregarded as the
Court has not ruled on Schmalfeldts Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue.

3.

Furthermore, Defendant Schmalfeldt has filed a Motion to Transfer or Dismiss

Plaintiffs Case under the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens, entered into the Court Docket on
June 28, 2016, in accordance with Maryland Rule 2-327(c) which states:

Convenience of the parties and witnesses. On motion of any party, the court
may transfer any action to any other circuit court where the action might
have been brought if the transfer is for the convenience of the parties and
witnesses and serves the interests of justice.
4.

As the Court has not ruled on the above-mentioned motion, Plaintiffs Motion for

an Order of Default is inappropriate and untimely in the extreme.

5.

Plaintiff also cites Maryland Rule 2-613(b) in his motion. Plaintiff perverts the

Rule by asserting in his motion that this Court should file an order of default by saying:
The sixty days allowed to respond to the Complaint expired on 7 June, so
Schmalfeldt had fifteen days from the 9th to file an answer pursuant to Rule 2-321.
(Plaintiffs motion 2)
6.

Plaintiff has shown repeatedly in the past that he has a tendency to see words in

laws where such words to not exist. Rule 2-613(b) states:

If the time for pleading has expired and a defendant has failed to plead as provided
by these rules, the court, on written request of the plaintiff, shall enter an order of
default. The request shall state the last known address of the defendant. (Emphasis
added)
7.

Quite clearly, Defendant Schmalfeldt has not failed to plead, nor has any time for

pleading expired. Plaintiff tries to pull a fast one with this Court by substituting the word
answer for the word pleading in the Rule. This Court should not reward Plaintiffs duplicity
in playing fast and loose with Maryland Law as Plaintiffs actions demonstrate his vexatious

need for an unwarranted judgment against Defendant Schmalfeldt as well as utter disrespect and
contempt for this Court and the rule of law in Maryland.
8.

Plaintiff insults this Courts intelligence yet again in the conclusion to his Motion

for an Order of Default when he states:

All the requirements for an Order of Default pursuant to Rule 2-613(b) have been
met: 1) the time allowed for filing an answer has expired; 2) Schmalfeldt has not
filed an answer; 3) Schmalfeldts last known address has been provided herein; and
4) Mr. Hoge has filed this Request for Default.
9.

Again, Plaintiff shows his utter disrespect and contempt of this Court by trying to

bamboozle the Court with this blatant attempt to rewrite the Maryland Rules to substitute the
word pleading with his own choice of words.
THEREFORE, in the interest of justice and the rule of law in the State of Maryland,
Defendant Schmalfeldt prays that this court expeditiously DENY Plaintiffs Motion for an Order
of Default and either sanction or conduct a Show Cause Contempt of Court hearing to get an
explanation from Plaintiff WJJ Hoge III as to what he believes gives him the authority to change
the clearly-written Maryland Rules in a base and vindictive attempt to secure a judgment against
Defendant Schmalfeldt that has eluded him since 2014.
ALSO, Defendant Schmalfeldt prays that this Court will give speedy consideration to his
Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue as well as his Motion to Transfer/Dismiss under the
Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens, as Plaintiffs latest motion is proof that he is not seeking
justice for any perceived wrong done to him by Defendant Schmalfeldt, but rather an obsessive
need to punish Schmalfeldt for reasons known only to Plaintiff Hoge.
ALSO, Defendant Schmalfeldt has attached a Petition for an Emergency Evaluation of
Plaintiff WJJ Hoge III as his obsessive need to prosecute and persecute Defendant Schmalfeldt

raises suspicions of an obsessive/compulsive disorder, resulting in nearly 300 criminal charges

Hoge sought against Schmalfeldt (all of which were nolle prosequi by the Carroll County States
Attorney, save one for violation of a peace order for which Schmalfeldt was acquitted at trial),
numerous failed peace order applications against Schmalfeldt, an attempt to find Schmalfeldt in
Contempt of Court (including the suspected forging of a letter Schmalfeldt robustly denies
having written or sent to Hoge) and his obsessive need to fan the flames of hatred on his blog
(http://hogewash.com) against Schmalfeldt, raising a potential danger to his life and/or safety by
causing his readership to take actions against Schmalfeldt seeking to have him removed from his
current place of residence in Saint Francis, Wisconsin (where Schmalfeldt moved in the hopes of
making himself less available to Hoges obsession).
Respectfully Submitted this 29th day of June, 2016,

/s/William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr.

William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr.
3209 S. Lake Dr., Apt. 108
Saint Francis, WI 53235
414-249-4379
bschmalfeldt@twc.com
Pro Se Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of this pleading has on this day been sent by electronic mail to
WJJ Hoge III by agreement between the parties.

/s/William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr.

William M. Schmalfeldt, Sr.
Pro Se Defendant