IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA JANET D. MCDONALD, JAMES B.

STEGEMAN, PLAINTIFFS V GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et., al., DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO MOTION TO VOID THIS COURTS JUNE 11, 2008 ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS CASE WITH PREJUDICE
____________________________________________________________________________

CIVIL ACTION FILE NO: 07CV11398-6

COMES NOW Plaintiffs Janet D. McDonald and James B. Stegeman and file Plaintiffs Reply to Defendants Response to Motion to Void This Courts June 11, 2008 Order Dismissing Plaintiffs Case With Prejudice. Counsel for Georgia Power, infamous for changing Plaintiffs pleadings and requests, has attempted to change Plaintiffs Motion and Brief In Support of Motion To Void This Courts June 11, 2008 Order Dismissing Plaintiffs Case With Prejudice into a Motion to Recuse. The complaint Plaintiffs filed stated on the first page, second stated that Plaintiff Stegeman is 100% Federally disabled; page 17 127: Stegeman is a Federally disabled individual, a member of a protected class; page 17 128: Plaintiffs informed Georgia Power as well as the State Troopers that he is a disabled individual; Plaintiffs have repeatedly requested that Judge Becker and Superior Court abide by the law. It is

not necessary for a disabled individual to file with the Court Judicial Notice for a partys ADA Title II Rights to be observed by a Judge. Defendants responsive objections overlook several facts:
1. The Court conveniently refused to file the following documents for a period of

time 1: a. Plaintiffs Motion and Brief In Support of Motion To Void This Courts June 11, 2008 Order Dismissing Plaintiffs Case With Prejudice Judicial Notice of Plaintiff Mr. Stegemans Invocation of His Rights Under Americans With Disabilities Act, Title II Plaintiffs Brief In Opposition to Defendants/Counterclaimants Motion for Summary Judgment

b.

c.

2. Judge Becker failed to follow legal procedure set out in O.C.G.A. 44-2-40 The

Land Registration Law."; a Ruling in violation of due process of law. 3. The Ruling was the direct result of fraud and fraud upon the Court.
4. In violating The Land Registration Law, and the Georgia and United States

Constitutions, Judge Becker violated her Oath of Office.

5. Records together with Affidavit of Affidavit S. Marcus Calloway; Managing

attorney of Calloway Title and Escrow, LLC, who performs title searches, oversees and reviews title examinations, in August 2007, before Georgia Power Nancy Huddlestons letters to Plaintiffs and before the cutting of Plaintiffs trees; had already performed an examination/investigation into the documents and at that same time, a reformation of the handwritten 1941 easement document was performed in further violation of Georgia law. See Exhibit 1

The documents were hand delivered, Plaintiffs presented the documents, the clerk stamped the documents, returned Plaintiffs stamped Filed copies to them. The documents did not show on the docket until on or around March 25, 2009, see Exhibit 1 showing the Docket Report for March 6, 8, 13, 25; Plaintiffs have no way of knowing what is actually filed at this point, they must assume that nothing was filed, thus assuring that Summary Judgment will be granted in favor of Defendants/counterclaimants.
1

6. Affidavits indicate that two different entities claim to have surveyed, yet there is

no stamped survey included with the Affidavits, and not one of them show or mention that Plaintiffs entire property, from back to front is enclosed with a fence and the property is gated, there is a 6-12 tall x 100 wide granite wall at the very front of Plaintiffs property, or that there are No Trespassing signs. 7. Two different entities make claims about aerial photos of Plaintiffs property, but the Exhibits included are after the photos have been manipulated. 8. For the relief sought by defendants/counterclaimants, only a Jury can make a determination, not the Judge. In the following, Plaintiffs more thoroughly discuss these issues, not that it will matter; this case was a done deal as soon as the illegal reformation was performed August 2007. One can only come to the most logical conclusionsince according to The Land Registration Law, the handwritten 1941 easement document could not be changed without a Superior Court Judge signing an Order, and opposition continues to specify the handwritten 1941 document, that Judge Becker gave the Order to perform the reformation August 2007. I. REFUSAL TO FILE PLAINTIFFS PLEADINGS

Plaintiffs on more than occasion approached the Court/Judge Becker on the matters concerning the filing of their pleadings.2 Plaintiffs began having to hand deliver everything they filed to get their pleadings filed the day the Court received them, yet defendants/counterclaimants documents were and continue to be filed the same day they are mailed to the Court. Judge Becker refused to allow the filing of Plaintiffs Objections to Video depositions until after the date of the depositions then mailed them back to Plaintiffs unfiled. The Court withheld knowledge, docketing, and mailing of its Orders for ten or more days. And lately, on February 24, 2009 Plaintiffs hand delivered the documents listed in 1. a., b., and c. above, which were hand delivered to the Court.

See Petition to Correct the Docket; Plaintiffs Statements for the Record and Judicial Notice; 3

Plaintiff Mr. Stegeman is a protected class, whether the opposition, Judge Becker, or the whole of Superior Court approves or not. He is protected under The Americans With Disabilities Act as well as several other civil rights protections that opposition, Judge Becker and Superior Court as a whole wants to ignore. He does not have to file Judicial Notice of Plaintiff Mr. Stegemans Invocation of His Rights Under Americans With Disabilities Act, Title II for his Rights to be enforceable, and he does not have to put the entities on Notice of the fact. There is only one logical explanation: prejudice/bias/discrimination, and the outcome of the case was determined from the beginning.
II.

THE LAND REGISTRATION LAW

Judge Becker and her infinite wisdom does not replace Georgias Land Registration Law, and does not excuse to process required. Plaintiffs land has not been brought under jurisdiction of the Court, see O.C.G.A. 44-2-61: all proceedings in the court in relation to registered land shall be proceedings in rem against the land; Exhibit 1 contains the rest of the pertinent statute involved in requests for relief of the kind requested by defendants/counterclaimants. Judge Becker failed to appoint an examiner of title as mandated in O.C.G.A. 442-100: The judge of the superior court of each judicial circuit shall appoint at least one auditor, who shall be known as the examiner, who shall discharge the duties provided for the examiner in this article but whose relation and accountability to the court shall be that of an auditor in the general practice existing in this state. An Affidavit by an entity paid by the opposing party does not excuse Judge Becker from appointing the examiner of title as provided for in Georgias Land Registration Law. Furthermore, the Affidavit signed January 2009 for acts performed in August 2007 shows fraudulent concealment, not all of the documents were provided with the affidavit. Exhibit 2 contains documents provided to Plaintiffs by Nancy Huddleston. Especially note the Certification date on the Certified document; then notice the signature of the Superior Court clerk as pointed out on the other documents. The document with the

Certification by Superior Court August 2007 clearly shows that the 1941 handwritten document has been reformed, but fails to shows on whose authority. Clearly not only has Georgia Law been repeatedly violated by Georgia Power, but by many others as well concerning Plaintiffs property. Logically, Plaintiffs case had to be dismissed by Becker with prejudice. Judge Becker has shown a pattern of ignoring Georgias Law, not only concerning Plaintiffs case, but other cases as well. One such result manifested just recently when a prominent cancer researcher was murdered by a multiple criminal offender Judge Becker allowed out of jail as a first-offender on time served when he legally should have been in jail for several years, see Exhibit 3 Clearly Judge Beckers Judgment is VOID, having no legal effect and Plaintiffs are not required to recognize the Ruling; it is not merely voidable, but VOID.

III.

VERIFIED ANSWERS, COUNTERCLAIM AND AMENDMENT

Defendants/counterclaimants Verified Answers, Counterclaims, and Amendments thereto show that they knew when they swore that their answers had been thoroughly investigated, and that all of their claims were true, were perjury. All one has to do is look at the relief requested. Plaintiffs may not be attorneys, but they are not stupid either. Plaintiffs have pointed out to the Court, and the Court ignored that if there is a legal, valid express easement, a party does not ask for the granting of every kind of easement known to man.

9. Title searches; oversee and review title examinations; 10. Performed work August 2007 before tree cutting 11. Guilty of fraudulent concealment, already had the reformation performed, Did Becker give the Order August 2007, thus the reason she had to throw out the case?