Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JAMES B. STEGEMAN, *
JANET D. MCDONALD *
Appellants *
* APPEAL CASE NO. A07A1846
vs. *
*
WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., et., al *
Appellees *
pursuant to Georgia Court of Appeals Rule 37, Appellees filed their Response
Court’s Order. Among the reasons for granting Appellant’s Motion For
controlling authority”.
Lack of action by this Honorable Court would lead one to conclude that The
Georgia General Assembly and or Congress have amended the Constitutions and or
statutes by removing liability of tortfeasors and removing the Right to relief for
law-abiding, tax-paying citizens with no criminal record, who have not been
charged, arrested or convicted of any crimes, yet who have become victims with
their property seized and damaged without due process of law and having been
Appellants have been denied the Georgia and United States’ Constitutional
Right of due process of law; they have been denied the Constitutional guarantees
of the right to “be heard”, and not to be “treated differently” by the Courts than
Appellees are not above having to abide by the rules, regulations, procedures,
statutes. Appellants will show in the following that even the State of Georgia has
had to follow the same rules, regulations and procedures as the normal litigant, yet
2
Motions To Dismiss and Defaults
The trial Court improperly granted Appellee’s Motion To Dismiss and the
case should be remanded to Superior Court with instructions to the trial Court
statutes to the point that bias, prejudice and discrimination is obvious. Shown
below, even the State of Georgia has been held to “stringent” rules, regulations,
procedures and statutes; Wachovia is not above the law and favoritism should not
See:
Administrative Affairs, 245 Ga. App. 256, 245 Ga. App. 256, 537
Judge.:
*fn1 the trial court erred in allowing the State to claim res
3
be raised in a timely filed responsive pleading. OCGA § 9-11-8
(c).”
at [16]: “(b) The trial court also erred in finding that a "general
and punctuation omitted.) Cohran v. Carlin, 254 Ga. 580, 585 (3)
at [19]: “In this case, Azarat's complaint shows that (1) there
recovery have occurred; and (4) the State has refused to pay for
4
sufficient to state a cause of action for breach of contract and
8 (a) (2); 9-11-55 (a); see also Morgan v. Ga. Vitrified Brick &c.
Co., 196 Ga. App. 779, 780 (1) (397 SE2d 49) (1990) (all doubts
state a claim).”
See also:
“The trial court also found correctly that Jesson's remedy was to
and (3) proper case; the four conditions are: (1) showing made
5
defense. . . . Generally, the opening of a default rests within the
See also:
the claim." Hardy v. Gordon, 146 Ga. App. 656, 657 (247 SE2d
166) (1978).”;
6
pleading states "conclusions" or "facts" as long as fair notice is
given, and the statement of claim is short and plain.' [Cit.] '(T)he
true test is whether the pleading gives fair notice and states the
It has clearly been shown that Appellees had defaulted not only in Superior
Court, but upon Removal to Federal Court failed to timely file an answer in that
Court as well. Superior Court failed to follow procedure concerning default giving
7
Appellees more lee-way than this Honorable Court in the past, allowed the State of
The trial Court violated procedure and statutes when grating Appellee’s
could prove many of the counts in their complaint and The Georgia General
8
648)(1978). The record contains no motion for a more
Before filing this Civil action and continuing to date, Appellees have cast
aspersions, demeaned, slandered, defamed the characters of Appellants for the sole
purpose of bringing bias and prejudice in the Courts against the Appellants, thus
ensuring unsuccessful legal action against them. The tortious acts of Appellees
must not be ignored, the Appellants are not the first victims of the fraudulent
scheme bestowed upon them; should this Honorable Court fail to act, they will not
The Appellant’s complaint alleges causes of action for “tort” in nature and
stated several times that they possess supporting, concrete evidence in support of
their allegations. Appellees are aware of the supporting evidence due to discovery
performed and Superior Court is well aware of the evidence due to Superior Court
9
civil action #: 02-cv-9732-8,1 Joyner v. Stegeman in which there was a Motion to
the opening of the accounts, Certified Bank Records showing fraud and
Securities and Senior Compliance Officer stating exactly how the accounts came
about, how the accounts were opened, and to whom the accounts belonged; the
1
Judge Hunter was presiding Judge, therefore the claim in her Order Dismissing
the case dated April 12, 2007 states on page 1, second ¶: “Plaintiffs allege…”;
actions taken by the court appointed guardian…” These statements are false, Judge
Hunter presided over the case for two years and had full knowledge of the events
alleged in the complaint. Further, after two and a half years when the Guardian
could produce no evidence against Stegeman, he backed out of the case, and
10
lack of Court Orders setting aside Stegeman’s Durable Power of Attorney2 and the
than one account number, and along with the fact that Certified Bank Records
indicate that the Appellees had moved the assets numerous times and different
account numbers one might surmise as an effort to hide the assets, then in the end
Appellees would have the Courts believe that: “the funds and property in
Plaintiff’s accounts emanated from Ms. Jean Caffrey”3; and they go on to state:
“Despite the Temporary Guardianship Letter…”4; Appellees continue: “To this end
Plaintiffs appear to complain that Wachovia and Mr. Joyner acted without proper
2
Special Durable Power of Attorney on file at DeKalb County Courthouse dated
January 21, 1998 Book 9791 pgs. 22-24 as well as Wachovia Bank and Wachovia
Securities
3
pg. 2, I. Summary of Alleged facts, 2nd¶ of “Wachovia Bank, National
11
documentation to change both names and addresses on accounts, deny Plaintiffs
access to the accounts, de-link the accounts, close the accounts and sell mutual
The reality is that legal documentation shows that: “the funds and property
amounts to nothing without a Judge’s signature and Seal, the document has no
claim to have no relationship with does not replace a Court Order and clearly
shows that not only did Appellees have some kind of relationship with, but at the
direction of John Joyner breached the fiduciary duty that banks owe their
customers;
4
pg. 2, I. Summary of Alleged facts, 3rd¶ of “Wachovia Bank, National
5
pgs. 2-3, I. Summary of Alleged facts, 3rd¶ of “Wachovia Bank, National
12
Appellees admit they had no Court Order signed and sealed by a Judge
Stegeman or Caffrey agreed to allow the “Guardian” access to any of the accounts
legal authorization that would enable them to take any action regarding Appellant’s
accounts.
Neither the Superior Court nor this Honorable Court has the power to
change, inflate or diminish the meaning of either Georgia law or The State of
2003 Ga. App. LEXIS 1463,*264 Ga. App. 252, 590 S.E.2d
13
follow the decisions of the Supreme Court, we are not at liberty
to decline”
See also [*32]: “to follow the "patent defect" rule as decided
by that Court. Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. VI.
Accordingly, Bastien, 209 Ga. App. 881 (434 S.E.2d 736) and
Watts v. Jaffs, 216 Ga. App. 565 (455 S.E.2d 328) (1995) (which
McCutcheon v. Smith, 199 Ga. 685, 691 (2) (35 SE2d 144)
14
the law, nor can the legislature enlarge or diminish a law by
219 Ga. 710, 715 (135 SE2d 383) (1964).” And: “Courts like
property. Superior Court failed to protect the property when the protection from
waste was requested, and the Appellees admittedly aided a County Guardian6 in the
6
Certified Bank records clearly show, and Appellees freely admit a lack of legal
assets, thereby Appellees breached their contract with and their fiduciary duty to
Appellants, both recoverable causes of action for which Appellees are liable.
15
Appellants were denied their Right to produce evidence in support of the
complaint, the only hearing that had a date set was cancelled by the trial Court,
what the hearing set was to address was changed and a decision made while
Appellant’s supporting briefs and documents were held un-filed in the Court.
had no contract. There should have been a hearing, a hearing had been set, no
objection to a hearing was filed. The hearing was requested in order for Appellants
to present their evidence and since there appears to have been rebutted evidence, a
the Constitution of the United States, are void, and the Judiciary
See also:
16
IN RE LAW SUITS, 235 Ga. App. 551, 510 S.E.2d 91
amend. XIV, sec. 1; see also Ga. Const., [Art. I, Sec. I, Par. I].
CONCLUSION
Appellants have clearly shown that the trial Court as well as Appellees
violated rules and statutes; Appellees defaulted in both US District Court as well as
17
Superior Court 7; The Appellants in this matter have been held to a more
discrimination toward the Pro Se Appellants which in turn has shown them
Regulations, Procedures and Statutes are abided by and all parties treated equally.
7
When making statements about US District Court, Appellees clearly perjured
pleading was due and claiming that the Court allowed them longer to file an
answer than 30 days see Appellee’s Brief, pg3, 2nd ¶; Appellees further perjured
themselves by claiming that they didn’t know when US District Court Remanded
the case when it was sent to them the same day electronically see Appellee’s Brief
pg.4, fn2.
18
BY: ___________________________
JAMES B. STEGEMAN, Pro Se
821 Sheppard Rd
Stone Mountain, GA 30083
(770) 879-8737
BY: __________________________
JANET D. MCDONALD, Pro Se
821 Sheppard Rd
Stone Mountain, GA 30083
(770) 879-8737
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this 3rd day of January 2008, served a copy
19
Appellees/Defendants in this matter through their attorney by causing to be
deposited in the U.S. Mail, proper postage prepaid, a true and correct copy of same
William J. Holley, II
Jodi Emmert Zysek
PARKER, HUSON, RAINER & DOBBS, LLP
1500 Marquis Two Tower
285 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE
Atlanta, GA 30303
___________________________
JAMES B. STEGEMAN, Pro Se
___________________________
JANET D. MCDONALD, Pro Se
821 Sheppard Rd
Stone Mountain, GA 30083
(770) 879-8737
20