May 19, 2009 ‘The Hon. Brent D. Benjamin, Chief Justice West Vitginia Subrene Court of Appeals . Paice, Beam 20 bdketaihe Boevar, Charleston, WV 25305-0632 Re; Norman Lee Alderman vs, Pocahontas County Hoard of Baucation, aka' Pocahontas County échooie, ‘Board Henber, kemmeth 2. Vance individual ‘befemdant, Bx-Soard Menber Ruch Taylor, ‘Individual Defendant, Board Member Tommy Vanreenen, Individual Defendant, Raped amber desuen Gtoneclowe: Tnelot nal afendane."eupee™ intendent ¢, Patrick Lem, Individual Defendant, “aoara Breasurer Mice Tevine, inéivigea! Defensane = Pocahontas County Civil Action No. 08-C-28 : Dear Chief Justice Benjamin: I enclose for consideration = of PLAINTIFF'S MOTION pg AMENIMENT no Dekurane sRoTeen fon A SBELZAL DRoGESUTOR AND MOTION FOR RECUSAL OF CURRENT JUDGE, JAMEG RONE PROM THIS CASS DUE ‘10 DISQUALIFICATION" filed with the’ Clerk May 18, 2003" on Fage 2 of his motion, Plaintitt makes reference to gceqnBtsSeEclagh BesIPEtrisSESEES ta ESERERIY 2? aca ecu ceee PMU Sie) Be ee cat eae ate aeeea cal imran Vattars em you dated Apri a4, Sees and Apeti ie, S009)” concetning the request for my disqualification’ in that cases fe Ag in the case, there io no basis for my gisqualification from thie ¢ase. Hewever, I will proceed no further and await an order to remain in the case or be removed. Thank you for your consideration of thie mateer Youre very tryly, Se Mer : cot oust Pits Norman Lee Alderman, Pro Se (w/o encl.) Chip B. Willians, Boguire (w/o enci.) Astley 'n. dustice, Baquire {w/o enci.) goR/wcn GREE IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENBRIER COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA-~ DAVID L. RYDER, USAPRID PH St Plaintiff, ¥ CIVIL ACTION NO. 04.C.21 (Honurable Janes J. Rowe) FIRST NATIONAL BANK, et al., Defendants. MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS AND GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION BY THE COURT ‘AND MOTION TO PRODUCE TRANSCRIPTS BY COURT REPORTER ‘Now comes ine Fiaintm, Lavid L. Hyder, by his undersigned counsel, and respectfully requests this Honorable Court to Disclose in open, public court, potential conflcts of interest by the Court with respect tothe parties and/or subject mstter inthis case, and to disclose all potential grounds for disqualification by the Court, and provided the Courtis not disqualified or ctherwise conflicted from acting further as the presiding judge in this case to ‘enter an Order directing the Court, Ms. Kelson, to prepare the requested ‘ranscrpis from the four hearings inthis matter Identified below, and on the following grounds: Motion Court 4. Attached hereto collectively as Motion Exhibit 4, aro copies of lattere {elated to the subject matiar of this Motion that ara eaif ayplanatary Pureuant ta the undersigned counse's Apri 2, 2009 comespondence to this Court, no response has been given by the Cour. Due tothe importance of the subject mater and to fully protout Mi. Ryder's due pruvess yh, Is ipsa a ne‘Court respond, and disclose in open, public court how the presiding judge meets the raquiramerts, then applicable in 1077 or 1078 for Admission to the Prauiive of Law in West Virginia, and to take the West Virginia bar oxam, when given, in those years. For purposes of this Motion, the information and arguments set forth !n-Motion Exhibit 4, collectively, are incorporated by and for reference os if the ‘same were set forth verbatim herein.: 2. Whether this Court meets the requirements, then applicable, to take the ‘West Virginia bar examination, and if eligible, to sit for and take the West Virginia bar examination, is a critical legal Issue with constitutional, ethical, and public interest implications, This Court refused to respond to the undersioned counsai ‘and to protect Mr. Ryder's rights, this Motion is being fled. Furthermore, because the Court (presiding judge) is not a graduate of an American Bar Association accredited law oohool by the Court's own admission, it nevessualy fallow that the presiding judge does not appear to meet the requirements and prerequisites, then applicable, to satisfy eligibilty to take the West Virginia bar exam, and "aturally, would not be eligible for the admission to the practice of law in West Virginia. No exception, exemption, or published waiver from the then applicable Tule governing the admission to the practice of law is known to exist by Mr, Ryder and his counsel, and the Court has not provided such information. Mr. Ryder asserts that f the presiding judge could not satisfy the then applicable rule and prerequisites governing the admission to the practice of law. and was nat aligihie to take the West Virginia bar examination, then the presiding judge would not, and could not be qualified to be a property licensed attorney at law in West, Viegini nd therefore would Le ineligible iu be a candidate for circurt coun, or an