Kasey King Complaint Against Senior Judge Jack Burr - 04262016

April 27, 2016
Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications

301 SW 10th
Topeka Ks 66612
Re: Case Numbers 15SC70P, 15SC71P,15SC85P, 15CV75P,and 15CV79P
THIS COMPLAINT ISAGAINST 11THSENIOR JUDGE JACK L. BURR OF 801 BROADWAY
IN GOODLAND KS66735
Judge Jack L. Burr has violated Rule 601 (B) Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct and rules
1.1 Compliance with Law, 1.2 Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary, 1.3 Avoiding
Inappropriate Use of the Prestige of Judicial Office, 2.2 Impartiality and Fairness, 2.3
Bias, Prejudice, and harassment, 2.4 External Influences on Judicial Conduct, 2.5
Competence, Diligence, and Cooperation, 2.6 Ensuring the Right to be Heard, 2.7
Responsibility to Decide, 2.8(A) Decorum, Demeanor, 2.9 Ex-Parte, 2.10 Judicial
Statements on Pending and Impending Cases, 2.11(A) Disqualification, 2.15 Responding
to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct, because he heard four (4) different cases at one time,
in one hearing and heard them all as an assembly line even though 3 of the cases were
small claims. This violates "REPORT OF SUPREMECOURT STANDARDSCOMMITTEEGENE~l PRINCIPLESAND GUIDELINESFOR THE DISTRICTCOURTS" which says
"Justice is effective when it is: (A) Fairly Administered Without Delay, (B) Competent
Judges, (C) Operating in a Modern Court System without overlapping jurisdictions or
multiple appeals, (D) Under Simple and Efficient Rules of Procedure. Number (3) under
letter (D) says "The ultimate judicial goal should be justice, not speed, in the disposition
of cases. Cases should be determined on an individual basis, not on an assembly line.
Case number 15CV79P was scheduled for 10:00 a.m. but the small claims cases of Noah
Day vs. Lori Fleming in 155C71P and 15SC85P were not set to be heard until 2:30 p.m.
Judge Burr also allowed assistant deputy attorney general Dennis Depew to trespass in a
small claims case where the attorney had no jurisdiction to be there according to K.S.A.
61-2707(a) and My Town Media's resident agent Robert Young should have been there
to litigate the case and not attorney Dennis Depew.
On page 4 line 11of the transcript attorney Dennis Depew says "Your honor, Dennis
Depew, Deputy Attorney General, I have the afternoon cases so I'm just hear a little
early". On page 5 Line 5 Judge Burr says "Yeah I got a motion to continue but since I
already had this trip planned and I have not been down her on these cases, I decided to
come down and see what happened".
Judge Burr wasted everybody's time in this case because he put his "TRIP" as top priority
over justice. Judge Burr says on page 7 line 10 that the plaintiffs have an attorney from
Kansas City but he does not know the name. We put the name of the attorney in the
"MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE" so he is either lying or totally unprepared!
We also did not show up because attorney Stephen Phillips filed his response in case
number 15CV75P not 15CV79P!! This is the 2ndtime that attorney Phillips has filed
motions in case number 15CV75P which is titled AKCC Management LLC vs. Two Big Fish LLC.
The same motion for sanctions and filing restrictions against us that was granted by Judge
Burr was titled under 15CV75P so nobody showed up because attorney Phillips is the one
filing frivolous motions and responses in case number 15CV75P!!!
Judge Burr was not prepared again on Page 8 Line 10 when he says "I was under the
assumption that the federal case, since the plaintiffs had asked that this be dismissed,
included the same complaints as in the chapter 60 case here". Then he allows attorney
Phillips on line 14 on page 8 to say "Not yet Judge" and is allowing Mr. Phillips to talk
about Noah Day's small claims cases of 15SC70P, 15SC71P,and 15SC85P where attorney
Phillips is "NOT SUPPOSETO BETHERE OR COMMENT ON ANY PENDING CASE"!
K.S.A.61-2707(a) says "A PARTYMAY APPEAR BYA FULL-TIMEEMPLOYEEOR
OFFICER OR ANY PERSON IN A REPRESENTATIVECAPACITYSO LONG AS SUCH
PERSON ISNOT AN ATTORNEY"! This violates Judicial Statements on Pending and
Impending Cases Rule 2.10(A) A judge shall not make any public statement that might
reasonable be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending
or impending in any court, or make any nonpublic statement that might substantially
interfere with a fair trial or hearing.
Judge Burr then dismisses case number 15CV79P on page 8 line 23. On page 9 line 13
Judge Burr then "GRANTS SANCTIONS" against all of the plaintiffs even though Judge
Burr already dismissed this case on the previous page8Il! A judge can-not have
jurisdiction over a motion for sanctions after he dismissed the case! The judge would
have had to hear the motion for sanctions before dismissing the case and he didn't so he
issued the sanctions in a case he had already dismissed!
On page 10 Iine25 he says case 15CV79P is dismissed and the request for sanctions is
granted. What else do we need to talk about in this case today? Judge Burr then on
page 11 Iine17 says he wants to ask a couple questions of Mr. Depew, is it.
How is he asking Dennis Depew questions in case number 15CV79P about small claims
case numbers 15SC70P, 15SC71P, and 15SC85P? This violates Rule 2.10 again as it is a
comment on a pending case!
Dennis Depew had no right to talk about case number 15SC70P at all since it is Noah
Day vs. My Town Media and the representative was Robert Young like it says 'on the
"NOTICE OF HEARING" scheduled for 1:30 p.m. not 10:00 a.m. The problem was is
that on page 15 line 5-7 Judge Burr says" D don't force-I guesswhat I'm trying to do is
get out of town before this afternoon to be quite frank!!!!
What is Judge Burr talking about trying to get out of town before his scheduled 1:30
p.m. hearing with My Town Media??
~
15Sc
70p
On page 16 line 13 Dennis Depew then "TRESSPASSES"in the small claims case of
t5SC85P Noah Day vs. My Town Media when he says "And there is also a suit against a
separate small claims suit against My Town Media that is - I am not here on." Judge
Burr then says on line 16 of the same page "I DIDN'T REALIZETHAT"! This shows Judge
Burr is incompetent and unprepared which violates Rule 2.5.
That is because Judge Burr is incompetent and not prepared which violates Rule 2.5. He
then says on line 18 on page 16 to Dennis Depew "Now can you tell - enlighten me on
the other one, it is 70P, I think!!
JUDGE BURR CANNOT ALLOW ATTORNEY DENNIS DEPEWTO SAYANYTHING IN
CASENUBMER 15SC70P since he is not the attorney in the small claims case.
Noah Day had three (3) different "MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH
AFFIDAVIT"filed in case numbers cases 15SC70P, 15SC71P, and 15SC85P so Judge Burr
did not have ANY JURISDICTION TO HEAR THOSE CASESUNTIL ANOTHER JUDGE
RULEDON THE MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT!!!
Judge Burr then on page 17 line 4 says "I am going to dismiss cases 15SC70P, 15SC71P,
and 15SC85P, isn't it?" And Dennis Depew the attorney on line 6 says "YES,SIR".
Judge Burr needs to be reprimanded for not knowing the small claims rules under K.S.A.
61-2707(a) which do not allow an attorney in small claims unless it is a motion to dismiss
against a public official. My Town Media was not a public official and Dennis Depew
trespassed in this case and usurped his office and violated K.S.A. 60-1202(1) by using his
public office inappropriately to intrude into a private small claims case.
On page 17 line 22 deputy assistant attorney Stephen Phillips then "TRESSPASSES"in
small claims case number 15SC70P My Town Media vs. Noah Day when he says:!
would join Dennis's comments about 20311(f). I do think there is also a time limitation
in his motion for recusal." Attorney Phillips was referring to the motion for change of
judge with affidavit that Noah Day filed in case number 15SC70P of Noah Day vs. My
Town Media which do not allow attorneys but somehow attorney Stephen Phillips and
Dennis Depew were allowed to represent My Town Media and rule on the motion for
change of judge affidavit instead of it being assigned to another judge to rule on.
The transcripts show that all four of these cases were done from the time of 10:00 a.m.
until 10:22 a.m. How can Judge Burr hear case number 15SC71p and 15SC85P at 10:00
a.m. along with case number 15CV79P which was a civil case but they were scheduled
for 2:30 p.m.? How can he listen to 15SC70P My Town Media at 10:00 a.m. when it
was scheduled at 1:30 P.M. and was not scheduled in the same case as civil case
15CV79P. This violates Rules of 11th judicial district Rule No.2 Assignment of Cases(6)
Reassignment. Judge Burr can not "REASSIGNOR SWITCH THE TIME" of scheduled
hearing on the same day of the hearing just to leave town early like he says on the
record!! He also had no jurisdiction to hear any of the small claims cases since the
change of judge with affidavit was filed by Noah Day in case numbers 15SC70P. 15SC71P,
and 15SC85P.
Please investigate why Judge Burr is running assembly lines and hearing small claims
Chapter 61 cases and civil court chapter 60 cases at the same time when they have
different rules and different procedures.
Stephen Phillips has violated KRPC Rule 223 Immunity by getting filing restrictions
sanction against me in case number 15CV79P which is a retaliation from his clients which
violates Rule 2.16(A)(B) of the Code of Judicial Conduct when he has no right to be in
any of these cases because Lori Bolton-Fleming. and all of the judges in this case should
have had to get a private attorney for all of the above mentioned cases and therefore
Stephen Phillips has also violated KRPC Rule 3.1 Meritorious Claims and Contentions for
attempting to defend frivolous claims and failing to report Lori Bolton-Fleming and
Kurtis Loy for ruing the radio advertisement under KRPC Rule 8.3. Judge Jack Burr
should have reported Stephen Phillips and Dennis Depew under Responding to Judicial
and Lawyer Misconduct Rule 2.15(B) for his inappropriate actions and violations of the
Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct for trespassing in a small claims matter in Kansas
and violating K.S.A. 61-2707(a) and KRPC Rule 1.16(a)(1) Declining or Terminating
Representation. Stephen Phillips and Dennis Depew both usurped their power by
representing My Town Media in case number t5SC70P where attorneys are not allowed
in Kansas.
Please investigate to find out why Judge Burr on page 11line 10 tells attorney Phillips
"And you can forward that to me at probably better forward it to my house"!!!! Then
on line 13 on page 11attorney Phillips says "How about we do that later off the
record"!!!! Then the judge agrees to this planned ex-parte conversation without any of
the plaintiffs in this case so that attorney Phillips can have the judges "PRIVATE
ADDRESS"but not the Plaintiffs!!!l! This violates Rule 2.9(A) Ex Parte Communications
which says "A judge shall not initiate. permit. or consider ex parte communications. or
consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or
their lawyers. concerning a pending or impending matter. except as follows"!I!! Judge
Burr also made those comments about his private home address when we are suppose to
use the public office since he is a public official in front of attorney Jim Emerson. Carrie
Barney. Dennis Depew. and Stephen Phillips which once again is a comment on a
pending case and violation of Rule 2.10(A).
Was Judge Burr paid hourly for the above mentioned court cases or by the case or by the
day because it looks suspicious now that he "BAllED OUT EARLY".ran 4 hearings in 22
minutes. had Dennis Depew prepare the order in case number 15SC70P My Town Media
vs. Noah Day but did not have the court staff file it until 1:37 p.m. to make it look like
the hearing with My Town Media actually was at 1:30 p.m. when he really left around 11
a.m. but I'm sure he collected a "FUll PAYCHECK ON THE TAXPAYERSOF
KANSAS"!!!
Io..i,k- f\ea."-&' r
When the attorneys stated that the~from us on "last Thursday" that comment was not
right since last Thursday was April 14 and the response to our motion for continuance
which was listed in case number 15CV75P and filed in case number 15CV75P with the
certificate of service saying mailed out on April 8. 2016 but was not mailed out until
April 11. 2016 was sent in the envelope dated April 11. 2016 and this is lying about a
certificate of service and lying to the tribunal!!! This violates KRPC Rule 3.3 Candor
Toward The Tribunal(l)(a) which says a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false
statement of material fact or law to a tribunal!
Please investigate this matter and find out why a senior judge can't type and does not
know that chapter 61 and chapter 60 cases can not be ran together andean not have
attorneys representing My Town Media in case number 15SC70P. and can not have exparte conversations and give one party his home address and does not allow the other
party the same access.
Sincerely.
Kasey King
PO Box 101
Opolis Ks 66760
1
,.'
IN THE DISTRICT
ERIC M. MUATHE,
COURT OF CRAWFORD
et al.,
COUNTY, KANSAS
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
) CASE NO. 15CV79P,

)
HONORABLE
KURTIS LOY, et al., )
i ~t\ s ~/;e.~,.~.o~
. v''-
Defendants.
NOAH IAN DAY,
)
)
) "'If:>
Plaintiff,
vs.
'"
e N
-"ufl~L-e-,-:>
lJ'
) CASE NO. 15SC70P

)
Defendant.
11
)
)
10
)
)
NOAH IAN DAY,
Plaintiff,
12
)
)
13
vs.
14
LORI FLEMING,
) CASE NO. 15SC71P

)
)
)
15
Defendant.
)
)
NOAH DAY,
16
Plaintiff,
17
)
)
vs.
) CASE NO. 15SC85P
18
LORI FLEMING,
19
Defendant.
20
TRANSCRIPT
OF MOTIONS
21
PROCEEDINGS
had before
the Honorable
22
JACK BURR, Senior
Judge, assigned to the District
Court of Crawford
County, Kansas, at Pittsburg,
23
24
Kansas, on the 18th day of April,
25
-G
2016.
APPEARANCES:
2
The Plaintiffs
did not appear.
The Defendants
Kurtis Loy, Andrew
3
Wachter,
4
Robert
Fleming, Lori Fleming,
Jeffry Jack, Oliver Kent
5
Lynch, Janice Russell,
Richard Smith,
John Sanders,
6
Stanton Hazlett,
Tim Grillot appearing
by and through
7
their counsel, Mr. Stephen Phillips, Assistant
8
Attorney
General, Memorial
Bldg, 2nd Floor, 120 SW
9
10th Avenue,
Topeka, KS 66612-1597.
10
The Defendants
11
Kansas
Judicial
12
Qualifications
13
their counsel, Ms. Carrie A. Barney, Assistant
14
Attorney
15
Topeka, KS 66612-1597.
Panels A and B appearing
General,
120 SW 10th Avenue,
by and through
2nd Floor,
16
17
The Defendant
Michael
Gayoso,
Jr., appearing
18
by and through his counsel, Mr. James Emerson,
19
Crawford County
20
66743.
Counselor,
P.O. Box 68, Girard,
KS
21
22
The Defendant
23
though her counsel,
24
Attorney
25
Topeka, KS 66612-1597.
General,
Lori Fleming appearing
by and
Mr. Dennis D. Depew, Deputy
120 SW 10th Avenue,
2nd Floor,
THE COURT: My understanding
is that this is Case
No. 15CV79P, it would be entitled Eric M. -- is that
pronounced Muathe?
MR. PHILLIPS:
MR. EMERSON:
THE COURT:
I believe it is Muathe.
I believe so.
Okay.
And others, and those
plaintiffs
Kurtis Loy, and others, as listed in the caption.
appear pro se in this case, versus Judge
Let me tell you that my name is Jack Burr.
I'm a
10
Senior Judge who has been assigned to this case and
11
I'm one of a long line of judges apparently who have
12
been involved, and I'm here from Goodland by
13
assignment of the Supreme Court, so you are stuck with
14
me, at least for a while.
15
Would you announce your appearances,
16
MR. PHILLIPS:
please.
Steve Phillips, Assistant
Attorney
17
General, and I represent Kurtis Loy, Andrew Wachter,
18
Robert Fleming, Lori Fleming, Jeffry Jack, Oliver Kent
19
Lynch, Janice Russell, Richard Smith, John E. Sanders,
20
Stanton Hazlett,
21
THE COURT:
22
MS. BARNEY:
Tim Grillot.
All right.
Your Honor, Carrie Barney, Assistant
23
24
THE COURT:
I'm having trouble hearing you.
25
MS. BARNEY:
I'm sorry.
o?
"'-/'---
THE COURT: I've got a cold,

number
two, I don't hear very well.
MS. BARNEY:
Your Honor, Carrie Barney, Assistant
7-
Attorney
~
~
Judicial Qualifications
W~.:I
General,
THE COURT:
MR. EMERSON:
.i'~
] t
County Counselor,
County Attorney.
number one; and,
here on behalf
of Defendants
Panels A and B.
Okay.
Thank you.
Your Honor, Jim Emerson,
Crawford
"Q
C\-Q,
~J
e-
~
.
here on behalf
of Michael
Gayoso,
10
THE COURT;
All right.
II
MR. DEPEW:
Your Honor, Dennis Depew, Deputy
\"
Attorney
General,
I have the afternoon
cases so I'm
just here a little early.
~----------------~
THE COURT:
Okay. And
---
I may have some questions
-------------------------15
about those too when we finish here but, in any event,
16
apparently
17
appears in the courtroom
18
of or the plaintiffs
19
anything, Mr. Phillips?
20
MR. PHILLIPS:
21
checked with my office
22
Clerk's
----------------~------------------no appearances are made, nobody
-- no one
at least either on behalf
themselves.
Have you heard
No, Judge, we have not and I have

and we just checked with
Office and nothing has been
23
THE COURT:
24
MR. PHILLIPS:
25
THE COURT: Well,
the
filed here.
Okay.
The last
I have not received
anything,
nor have I heard anything.

MR. PHILLIPS:
We got a letter last
----------------------------
e-
Friday, saying something
about they wanted
MJ
or J
1\ e h
fJlcdm~ ~
\rlo C- G\. Fe
"I j.,,~.;/
q 'r" t
continuance.
....
err
___.....
Gt
./.\
THE COURT: Yeah, I got a motion to conti~

since I already had this -- this trip planned
have not been down here on these cases,
come down and see what happened.
I decided
And my questions,
here,
and correct me if I'm wrong,
have a motion
dismiss the motion

a response
by the plaintiffs
asking
to dismiss on their behalf.
to the motion
by you, I believe,
I currently
Mr. Phillips,
indicating
17
opinion, but you want to talk about sanctions;
18
correct?
reinstate
21
dismiss,
22
reinstate
it.
in your
is that
Yes, Judge, and then they moved
They filed their 60-241 motion
then when
I have
that you
don't -- it has already been dismissed
20
to
to dismiss by the plaintiffs,
16
MR. PHILLIPS:
if --
to dismiss.
I also have a motion
23
to
guess, since I don't have the plaintiffs
on file by both parties
19
and I
I opposed
to
to
it they said we want to
it.
THE COURT: No, I understand
24
appeared
25
don't want any sanctions.
to me their reasoning
that.
And it
in that response
We don't mind
the
was we
dismissal,
we don't want
MR. PHILLIPS:
sanctions.
I want sanctions,
Judge.
"tC
3
4
THE COURT:
fJ-&
\:
Okay.
Now, let me hear -- what
MR. PHILLIPS:
restrictions,
Judge,
I'm asking for filing
and I've patterned
the restrictions
11
restrictions
12
more detail in my motion,
13
these plaintiffs
14
to be reviewed by the local Administrative
15
that Judge's designee
to see whether
essentially
or not.
17
are
you asking for in the way of sanctions?
requesting
'J~ 16
~~~~
Yes.
10
'\
~
that, but they
don't.
MR. PHILLIPS:
(;
No, I understand
't'
THE COURT:
off of a reported
18
docketed
19
not be docketed.
They are set forth in
but basically
before
any of
could file a new case, it would
After that screening,
authority
case that approved
just like these.
frivolous
I'm
have
Judge or
it was
it could go ahead and be
if the Judge approved
it, otherwise,
it could
And the case I think I cite as
for that is State vs. Lynn.
In my motion for sanctions, I cite a long list of

,
cases that various of these plaintiffs have filed that
...-
were absolutely
frivolous.
And if you look at this
case, they have done, obviously,

25
research
no meaningful
legal
on what a class action is, or how you bring
it, and this case can only be described
purposes
in this case.
4
5
6
of harassment
are requesting
indication
10
defendants
for is filing restrictions
is set forth in more detail
against the various
But what I'm asking
THE COURT:
as for
as
in my motion.
So basically
your sanctions,
is a predetermination
what you
of at least
some
of merit prior to filing.
MR. PHILLIPS:
Correct,
Judge.
THE COURT: Let me ask you this.
The plaintiffs,
11
I wish one or more of them were here actually,
12
plaintiffs
13
attorney and they cite a name, I don't know the name,
14
but I believe
15
Kansas, but somewhere
16
either have or are going to file a federal lawsuit.
17
Do you know whether
have indicated
that they now have
the
/J
an
~~--------------------~-----------
I"'"'"'
18
in Kansas City.
MR. PHILLIPS:
I assume Kansas
City,
in Kansas City, and that they
that has been filed?

The federal lawsuit has been
"J
r------------------19
20
21
filed, the attorney
did file it.
.~-----------THE COURT:
Okay.
...
And it apparently
indicates
{J~
1'" C\
many, if not all, of the same complaints?
:>- CY (:
22
MR. PHILLIPS:
The major
complaint
in that
(i)
?t:
'")
23
federal lawsuit
24
Lori Fleming to one of the owners of the radio
25
station.
is the e-mail allegedly
sent by Judge~
--------.
That federal case is just against,
as I
L~
~
".f
~
.. ~
VO~
'\~
\)
.~
~
~
remember it, Judge Fleming and Judge Lay, and I can
2 ~
even give you a copy of the complaint
if you'd
like.
~f-
U~
THE COURT:
\.0
I don't know that I need it but
(J\: ~
C)--.
'/
<,
9J
small claims cases than we are the case we ar~alking
about now.
~.?~
ap:arently we are ta~king more about involving
-~
MR. PHILLIPS:
I believe
that is correct,
I don't think there is much overlap between
and their federal
10
11
12~t
13
Judge,
this case
one.
THE COURT:
I see.
that the federal
I was under the assumption
case, since-theplaintiffs
this be dismissed,
as in the Chapter
included
had asked
the same complaints
60 case here --
14
MR. PHILLIPS:
Not yet, Judge.
15
THE COURT:
but that's not the case.
16
MR. PHILLIPS:
That's not the case.
THE COURT:
the
Okay.
MR. PHILLIPS:
Well--
The federal case has not been
-------------------19
served for whatever
20
attorney has not requested
reason.
It has been filed but the
~------------------21
THE COURT:
Yeah.
summons be issued
Well, no appearance
in that.
is made by
22
the plaintiffs
23
to find that this case, Case No. 15CV79P, has,
24
fact, been dismissed.
25
or anyone on their behalf.
I am going to deny the reinstatement
I'm going
in
requested
by
the plaintiffs
of their -- in other words, doing
with their request

parties
request
mentioned
to dismiss.
I think if'both
a case be dismissed,
and I think
in your brief, Mr. Phillips,
the case.
away
It is simply a matter
that point, and so I'm recording
it is
that dismisses
of recording
it at
it now and the case
~------------------------~
will be dismissed.
~-----------------Now, insofar as
the sanctions
-----
'V\
---------
have a little concern
about those, I guess, but,
10
obviously,
11
wrong, why they shouldn't
12
is clearly made and notice
13
are concerned,
there is nobody here to tell me, right or

be granted
and the request
given.
So I'm going to go ahead and grant your request,
14
Mr. Phillips.
15
you include in there the fact that it is not
16
necessarily
17
18
also a party to this action, so his designee or the

c:-
designee of the judicial system of the State of
19
Kansas,
20
want to leave enough
21
the determination
22
apparently
is acceptable
acceptable
to the defense,
sure
--------...
the Administrative
Judge, because
---------------------------~
.~~-------------~
I don't know how
happens.
25
I don't want to -- I want to make
request
for the
you want to word it, but I
leeway that somebody
that -- and, of course,
But basically
he's
to the plaintiffs
gets to make
somebody
and also
and we will see what
I'm going to grant your
------------------------~
sanctions.
who
10
Now, let's see if I have any other

about this case.
They also have in this case a motion
on file asking that I disqualify

any affidavit
questions
attached
but I did not receive
to that motion
in this case,
------------------------did you?
MR. PHILLIPS:
as I understand
procedure.
No, Judge, and I think that is
the statute,
that is the proper
There is supposed
.---THE COURT:
to be a hearlng'iirst .
------Oh, yeah.
MR. PHILLIPS:
THE COURT:
And at the hearing
I agree and I make the determination

-.............
as to whether
I feel there is a reason
to disqualify
and so forth and then you have to file an affidavit.

--------'------------~f' my
And I sugges td
e' In one 0
MR. PHILLIPS:
responses
that it be taken up at this hearing,
I mean,
they were on notice.

THE COURT: Right.
received
an affidavit
to send on to another
Well, in any event, I have not

so I didn't have anything
Judge if I was inclined
even
to do
so; but, in any event, I do not find that the motion

itself indicates
the reason
Since no affidavit
for me to disqualify.
was filed, I have not taken
~~---------------
any further action on that and don't
---------
point.
,And this case is dismissed,
sanctions
---------------------
is granted.
intend to at this
--
the request
for
What else do we need to talk
11
about in this case today?

MR. PHILLIPS:
2
3
entry,
Do I need to do a Rule 170 journal
Judge?
,..-----THE COURT:
I would -- yes, I do want you to do

-s;:::
the journal
circumstances,
--
entry and I think, under the

a Rule 170 probably
would be the way to
7
MR. PHILLIPS:
Yes, sir.
~
THE COURT:
probably
And you can forward that to me at --
better
forward it to my house,
I'm at the courthouse
in Goodland
---:.
13
reasonably
but I'm not there all the time.
regularly
And my address
is
----------------------MR. PHILLIPS:
How about we do that later off the
~--------------------------record?
THE COURT:
That's
fine, I will give it to you.
------------------------
MR. PHILLIPS:
Okay.
you know.
couple questions
I want
---.,...---------
of Mr. Depew, is it?
~----------------MR. DEPEW:
19
Yes, sir.
~------------------Yeah.
I know these are scheduled
----------------------------afternoon but I'm not sure we are going to be
20
21
that way --
THE COURT:
--------------------------------------'
able to do anything
~~
heard anything
~--~
MR. DEPEW:
this afternoon
anyway.
Have you
~-----
on either of these small claims
cases?
~---------
I have had phone calls with Mr. Day,
who is the plaintiff~--------------------------~
for
12
THE COURT: Right.
MR. DEPEW:
And back as early as February he
indicated to me that he wanted to dismiss the small
claims cases.
THE COURT: He kind of indicates that in a more
5
6
recent letter.
MR. DEPEW:
7
8
a stipulated
him.
10
Yes.
order of dismissal
He indicated
and I mailed
it to
that he's now living in Denver,
Colorado.
11
THE COURT: Oh.
12
MR. DEPEW:
13
And so what I did is I prepared
And so I mailed that to him back in
February.
14
THE COURT:
Uh-huh.
15
MR. DEPEW:
And I even included a stamped
16
self-addressed
17
easy for him to get it back.
18
And then when he filed here in very late March his
19
most recent letters, I called him, and I just said,
20
Mr. Day, I'm kind of confused as to why you are filing
21
more things when I sent you the stipulated order of
22
dismissal and he said well, I signed that and I sent
23
it back to you and I said well, I've not received
24
25
envelope back to me so it would be very

I never heard anything.
it.
And so he said that he had difficulty at times

with the mail at his apartment
so I sent him another
13
one along with another stamped, self-addressed

envelope and asked him to please mail that at a Post
Office.
I have not received it as of this morning's
mail in my office.
THE COURT: Well, let me suggest something
--.----------------------
---------------~
I was thinking about this before the hearing.

~
to you.
I've
........
written out a letter, which that's one of the bad
-------------------- <-------------------------
things about being a Senior Judge, I don't have any

staff and I don't type, so I will have to find
10
somebody to type it for me but, in any event, I have
11
written out a letter and basically
12
parties in the two small claims cases and basically
13
what I'm saying is that I'm aware that he's asked me
14
to disqualify and that I was not aware that he has
15
16
filed ~ffidavi
<'--. -------------~
I didn't
17
he was asking me to disqualify but he didn't send me a
18
copy of the affidavit,
19
until I saw it this morning
20
pointing that out in this letter but I also take note
21
that he's advised me there is a Federal Court case and
22
so forth, and I'm basically
23
hear from him by May 3 if he wants to dismiss these
24
cases.
25
to whoever they tell me to for determination
--------------------------~'-
addressed
it to the
~-------------------------------t.
I got a copy of a letter saying that
so I didn't know there was one

in the file and I'm
telling him that I want to
If not, I'm going to forward the affidavit

and go
on
Ct--~cA~
3v (\t> .>
r~\S
;.3'-'
14
from there.
D o~-t)' c'3-----'
vl ~"vOl)}:'
0\, J
K~O-311{f)
'
Your Honor, I would point
MR. DEPEW:
--
THE COURT:
\P--
Well,
MR. DEPEW:
vJ
out
Yea~
And in that statute it states
~------------------------
that
there is a clear time limit by which someone must
arrtJLItl~quest
seven days after the pretrial
receiving written
----------------------------for recusal of a Judge
file
and that is
~~----~----~----~--~~--------or seven days after

notice
10
case is to be heard .
.J?"OJ () ~
11
Your appointment
t~ ,
12
~ J
v b
13
THE COURT: Sometime
14
MR. DEPEW:
of the Judge before whom the
in this case
in these two
(J.II\.Jt'\
'vV
t""
:
'r/i
v~l~
small claims cases was made -ago.
months
ago and so we would
-- we
would object to
<,
16
______ THE COURT: So you are indicating
~~
:>(ytJ
17
procedural
V)
18
notification.
grounds
""-
don't even need to give him that
---
19
MR. DEPEW:
That's
c:-
our position,
Your Honor,
and
-------------~--~-~
you can -- because
read his
20
21
March
22
want to dismiss this case.
think that -- I think

30 letter filing
23
THE COURT:
That's
24 (~'
MR. DEPEW,
And
2~
that on
the same way you do, which
the way it appears
to me.
so we would ask that we go ahead
----
---
and dismiss the case.
is I
.
eCir('1.
--,
,/
O~P<'W
/I-.e. 0 I d<f
v-
rJ
~\~~I~~
S1()~~
e~{\-i~
THE COURT: Well, you know, it is probably not a
------------------------------bad request simply from the standpoint
if there is
'7 ()I
\'
15
H~
r -e..-\- O<-f\.;\ ~ )
rj'''l
fV\ It;
some reason he can show me why I ought to reconsider
that, I suppose I could do it.
circumstances,
And under the
I don't force -- I guess what I'm

.
trying to do is get out of town before this afternoon

7
~~-----------------~-------------------------------
to be quite frank.
MR. DEPEW:
8
.9
I understand
and I would feel the
same way, Your Honor.

THE COURT:
10
.-----------------------------~
I don't see any reason for me to hang
11
around, and I will make them aware in the Clerk's
12
Office that if Mr. Day does happen to show up, and
13
there is no indication
14
haven't had any, that he's going to show.
-------
--
that you've had and I certainly
.-----------------------------------------------
f\PJ~~(\Jt
f1 ~ ,
-1
\.
15
16
D~
17
--------------------------------------------MR. DEPEW:
He indicated to me that he
did not,
in fact, want to drive from Denver.

THE COURT:
Well, I almost drove from Denver.
~va~~
MR. DEPEW:
THE COURT:
20
'MR. DEPEW:
THE COURT:
Pittsburg,
I know.
And I don't blame him.
You could have carpooled, Your Honor.
---------~~~~~-<~~~~~
I don't have anything against
it is just quite a ways from where
I'm going to go along with you, Mr. Depew.

going to dismiss
I live.
I'm just
these on the basis that he's filed a
federal lawsuit including
the same allegations.
- ---------------------------------------------
He's
16
me in his letter, or letters maybe I
indicated that to
should
say, and I'm just going
We will proceed
from there.
MR. DEPEW:
All right.
THE COURT:
to note a dismissal.
The two cases
that
------------------------
Oh .
.:;::..--
MR. DEPEW:
afternoon
-- that I'm involved
in this
rr----------------------__
--
THE COURT:
Yeah.
"f'"
MR. DEPEW:
Oth~~~
1'rtC~7V
MR . DEPEW:
12
.. \.-?-71>
13L-~
Day vs. Lori Fleming.
---
Right.
15SC85P
and 15SC71P.
'-
::l./>.J.
y!...s'
10
11
.~
P:
V)r7,
THE COURT:
-- are Noah
THE COURT:
Okay.
Now,
MR. DEPEW:
And there
and --
is'also
a suit against
-- a
c:-=.
\9
14
separate
15
is
16
.>
17 ~
claims
small
suit against
My Town Media
that
I am not here on.

THE ~T_:
__ I d_i_d-n-'-t-r..:.e-a-l-i-z...;;e---t'l~:::;a...
.,
._-I~t:.:.~Ught
there were only
two of them and I see what you are
~------------------------------about now.
Now, can you tell -- enlighten me
--------------------------------~-------------------on the other one, it is 70P, I think .
...------- ----"talking
18
19
20
MR. DEPEW:
..
21
thing.
Yes.
It is basically
He is suing the radio
exactly
station,
~----------=~------------------~---the advertising
contract.
22
they terminated
the
because
What he
------------------------------
~~
-.
23
neglects
24
when they terminated:::.-:i:..t=--t;::.;h:.::.;e~-,r:::-;:;.e=f..:::

,.:J .
to mention
in any of his paperwork
was that
(\
!,
q(
tJ
25
r/l
w \'i~
~{f\V"(
7io (}I'
Nn
THE COURT:
+O/'<I('<9~1f\'Z
\ '.
'3 0 !Yf\;
iO
It is a part
{b..,.rJ
of the same series

,
of ~
11A-cJ,<t] );1e~ ",p l"''1IJAJ
It) ~14,M.
17
It is and the radio station is a

federal lawsuit as well.
THE COURT:
I am going to dismiss cases l5SC70P,
15SC71P and 15SC85P,
isn't it?
MR. DEPEW:
Yes, sir.
THE COURT:
And for the reasons
suppose I can jot a dismissal

not involved
,------------------~
I will happy to prepare
12
THE COURT:
If you would forward me the same form
17
\J,,~\\tJ-'
18
,-------..---in, I
~------------------------------------=----------would appreciate it.
'
r
.
t~
"c.,}-\
".)
tR')
~EPEW:
I will do s~
THE COURT:
And if you would step into chambe rs
afterwards,
I will make y'; aware of ~my
r--
--
address is and how you can send that.
l.-t.
them.
for the third case that you are not involved
15
. \,\6-.~(, ~
on the one that you are
MR. DEPEW:
14
11
13
BP" ~
Now,
in, Mr. Depew, but since you have the

so.~
stated.
;;:;;;;;:
Are there any
-----------
19
ot~ons
about any of those--c-a-s-e-s-a-t-t-h~i-s-
20
21
point?
:0,
22
23
24
~~
/
t:
MR. PHILLIPS:
about 20-311 (f).
limitation
your~
I would join Dennis's
I do think there is also a time
in his motion
THE COURT:
comments
Yeah.
for recusal.
Well, and I'm trying to -- I
18
get one of these every once in a while and try to

picture
it in my mind and I thOIn k you are rlght.
,~on't
a problem with that.
o. _.-'
____ have-~:..=~-!.!..::;.-===--~Lk....t----.:l\nything
further?
MR. DEPEW:
No, Your Honor.
MR. EMERSON:
THE COURT:
No.
Well, Court will be in recess
'
--.......
(Whereupon the proceedings
concluded
at 10:22
a.m., April 18, 2016.)

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
E~-------------------157 7)[7 ~J)5c'65/

~II
~(J('k{'5
o..li
21
e.
Cq~
IJa/- h-eeV\
q','ooA-1N'\
~\~
f lej?qt<cJ..
ON
qS
6F
Lf~~'5~)fo
22
23
24
25
OJJ\er
J)'CYI
fI
iCJ
rJ)"V~""
0e'~Ie.. ~;~
fr~('(""<"J,
el,' -e>J:-
)'Ar7t>t..N
v,/; F Je-fNt ::,,//'
jf\..,Nr5
r/c!e,.,. S
19
STATE OF KANSAS)
)
CRAWFORD COUNTY)
SS.
CERTIFICATE
I, Shaun J. Higgins,
4
5
Reporter,
by virtue
Kansas,
acting official Reporter
District
that as such official
a Certified
Shorthand
of the laws of the State of
and the regularly
appointed,
qualified
for the Eleventh
Judicial
of the State of Kansas do hereby certify

reporter,
10
reported
11
foregoing proceedings
12
before
13
Judicial District
14
and for the County of Crawford.
in machine
shorthand
the Honorable
15
I was present
had on the date above set out

JACK B~R,
Judge of the Eleventh
certify
that pursuant
Sitting
shorthand notes were transcribed
17
and that the foregoing
is a true and correct
18
transcript
in said case.
20
21
22
of my notes
officially
the Clerk of the District

~,
2016.
~G
under my supervision
sealed, and filed with
Court this
~Y'4
day of
1-,\- i.a.,~
RMR
23
SHAUN' J. HIGGINS}
24
KS CSR #0904
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
25
in
to law my
16
Signed,
at and
the above and
of the State of Kansas,
I further
19
and
~'2~
t{
,_.3~-J--L~u
)..lla~~J~~=-d--e
:-C\.J.:..~\~6.LW-~J-'=t\~~~.
:(,/I:~:!S~')~+~!A~e~V"~f~h\~'I\~if5~(0~j
~W~~IV~71~{)
~~(.;t:-c~
,,;Lll
SUPREME COURT RULES
'Gfj
REPORT OF SUPREME COURT STANDARDS

COMMITTEE-GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND
GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS
'F'
fi'
I
The attached report, adopted by the Supreme Court

Standards Committee on October 24, 1980, is hereby
adopted by the Supreme Court, effective December
11, 1980, as a statement of the goals of the Kansas
judicial system and of the general principles and time
standards to be used as guidelines for the processing
of cases by the District Courts of this State.
,
;/
/'
f~
The report shall be published in the Kansas Reports

as a part of the Supreme Court Rules Relating to
District Courts,
determined Q n individual basis, not on an assembly

line. Litigants an counse s ou
e a forded a
reasonable time to prepare and present their cases.
(1) We approve the credo of the Joint Committee

for the Effective Administration of Justice adopted in
the 1960's as a general statement of the goals and
purposes of the Kansas Judicial System.
(4) No case should be permitted to float in the

system. It is the responsibility of the trial judge
assigned the case to take charge of the case at'"1m
early date in the litigation and to control the progress
of the case thereafter until the case is determined.
.J;
"'I
r.-
<5;
::
"<1
t-sp.ed,
(3) The ultim~te judicial goal should be justice, not \ 1/
in the diSposltJon of cases. Cases should be ~'"
- Justice
~~~;,.
P u 0i
'Selected through
merit,
non-political methods
based on
In sufficient numbers to carry the load,
'-
(C) Operating in a Modern Court System.
~. 1"(
Simple in structure, without overlapping jurisdictions or multiple appeals,
(8) The most effective way of combating court delay is to modify the local legal culture by the adoption
and use of a case management system. The basic
concept of case management is that the court, rather
than the attorneys, should control the pace of litigation. It is the duty of the judge to the people to run
the court and not abdicate the responsibility to counsel.
Businesslike in management with nonjudicial duties

performed by a competent administrative staff,
Ct}
With practical methods of equalizing the judicial

workload,
With an annual conference of the judges for the

purpose of appraising and improving judicial techf..J..KE!. niques and administration,
I
~,pr; (D) Under Simple and Efficient Rules of Proce.: I' " ~ "7f' dure
;kG
.. -
(9) An effective case management system requires

that specific steps be taken to monitor and control the
pace of litigation. Among these are the following:
Designed to encourage advance trial preparation,

rv,
4 E~~inate the element of surprise,
(A) Early and continuous control of the court calendar by the judge;
i-:
?'('
Facilitate the ascertainment of truth,
(B) Identifying cases subject to alternative

resolution processes;
Reduce the expense of litigation,
~\.r' \
<L
l/;'~
dispute
....------(C) Developing rational and effective trial-setting

policies;
And expedite the administration of justice.
J\(~~
(6) Assuming adequate trial court staffing and facilities, trial court delay, i.e., unnecessary waiting time,
is not inevitable, The pace of litigation is not necessarily determined by court size, individual case loads,
or the percentage of cases that go to trial.
(7) The pace of litigation is often the result of "local
legal culture" rather than court procedures, case load,
or backlog. Local legal culture consists of the established expectations, practices, and informal rules of
behavior of judges, attorneys and the public.
With security of tenure, subject to an expeditious

method of removal for cause,
'.?-
-:
Adequately compensated, with fair retirement benefits,
is effective when it is: ,.,-.: o ~

r:;7'f- ro, ;I.i
(5) There should be time standards established as a
fl (A) Fairby Administered Without Delay l-D{I ve[~~''VI guide for the disposition' of cases, with the underW'th--lll't'
indiigen t an d 0th erwise,
t'VL>+anp..:d
\
standing that the system must have flexibility to
1
a mgan tS, m
espeaccommodate the differences in the complexity of
cially those charged with crime, represented by comcases and the different problems arising in u~ban and
petent counsel,
I 1).
rural judicial districts. A certain amount of delay,
(B) By Competent JUdrz:...s
~\Cv~J....
may be necessary in an individual case.
(2) Liti~ation delg.y causes litigants expense and

anxiety.udges
and lawyers have a professional obligatron To avoid misuse and overuse of discovery and to
terminate litigation as soon as it is reasonably possible
to do so,
'- f)
\b\lJv~
('
'5' ~C~ J('"~
470
l ~ 5'
c D;,~.m
S \)L-~v\\ -\b '3~~1'
,
l'fl11
,,
days after the small claim is filed, service of process is

obtained or the first publication is made for service by
publication. Otherwise, the action is deemed commenced at the time of service of process or first
publication. An entry of appearance shall have the
same effect as service.
(b) Upon the filing of a plaintiffs small claim, the
clerk of the court shall require from the plaintiff a
docket fee of $26, if the claim does not exceed $500;
or $46, if the claim exceeds $500; unless for good
cause shown the judge waives the fee. The docket fee
shall be the only costs required in an action seeking
recovery of a small claim. No person may file more
than 10 small claims under this act in the same court
during any calendar year.
[Amended effective July 1, 1986; January 1, 1991; July 1,
1992; July 1, 1996; July 1, 2000.]
thereby waive the right to recover any excess, assessing the costs accrued to the plaintiff; or (3) if the
plaintiffs demand for judgment is within the scope of
the court's general jurisdiction, allow the plaintiff to
amend the plaintiffs pleadings and service of process
so as to commence an action in such court in compliance with KS.A. 61-1703 and amendments thereto,
assessing the costs accrued to the plaintiff.
(b) Whenever a defendant asserts a claim beyond
the scope of the court's small claims jurisdiction: but
within the scope of the court's general jurisdiction, the
court may determine the validity of defendant's entire
claim. If the court refuses to determine the entirety
of any such claim, the court must allow the defendant
to: (1) Make no demand for judgment and reserve the
right to pursue the defendant's entire claim in a court
of competent jurisdiction; (2) make demand for judgment of that portion of the claim not exceeding $1,800,
plus interest, costs and any damages awarded pursuant to KS.A. 60-2610 and amendments thereto, and
reserve the right to bring an action in a court of
competent jurisdiction for any amount in excess thereof; or (3) make demand for judgment of that portion
of the claim not exceeding $1,800, plus interest, costs
and any damages awarded pursuant to KS.A. 60-2610
and amendments thereto, and waive the right to recover any excess.
. i
[Amendedeffective July 1, 1986; July 1, 1994.]
~
61-2705. Pleadings
It is the purpose of this act to provide and maintain
simplicity of pleading, and the court shall supply the
forms prescribed by this act to assist the parties in
preparing their pleadings.
The only pleading required in an action commenced under this act shall be
the statement of plaintiff's claim, which shall be on the
form prescribed by this act and be denominated a
petition, except that a defendant who has a claim
against the plaintiff, which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the
plaintiffs claim, shall file a statement of the defen 61-2707. Trial of Action; Exclusion of Atdant's claim on the form prescribed by this act if the .
torneys; Appearance by Others in a
claim does not exceed the amount specified in subsecresentative Capacity; EnfOrcement of
tion (a) of KS.A. 61-2703, and amendments thereto.
lUdgment; Certain Judgments Null and
If the defendant's claim exceeds the amount specified
Void
in subsection (a) of KS.A. 61-2703, and amendments
thereto, the defendant may file a statement of the
(a) The trial of all actions shall be to the court, and
defendant's claim on the foim prescribed by this act.
except as provided in K:S.A. 61-2714, ~nd amendThe court shall not have any jurisdiction under this
ments thereto, no party many. such a~tlOn shall be
act to hear or determine any claim by a defendant frepresented
by an attorne~ prior to Judgment. A,
which does not arise out of the transaction or occurparty may a~pear by a full-tIme employ~e or officer 01"(
rence which is the subject matter of plaintiffs claim.
any person in a representatIve capacity so long as
d f . herei
such person is not an attorney. Discovery methods or
No p Iea din gs at h er t h an t h ose pr-ovid
ov~ e 01 erem
proceedings shall not be allowed nor shall the taking
~l
1\
shall .be allow:d. It shall be S?ffiCIent that each

pie~dmg se~ for th a short and ~l~m st~tement of ~he
c arm, sho:''lng that the pl~adeI 18 entitled to ~ehef,
an~ contam a demand for J~dgment for the relief to
which the pleader deems entitled,
[Am
d d eff . Jul 1 1990]
en e
ective y,
.
E
di
Small Claims
61 2706 CI
arms
"Rep:
of depositions for any purpose be permitted.

No
order of attachment or garnishment shall be issued in
any action commenced under this act prior to judgment in such action.
(b) When entering judgment in the action, the
judge shall include as a part of the judgment form or
order a requirement that, unless the judgment has
been paid, the judgment debtor shall submit to the
clerk of the district court, 'within 30 days after receipt
of the form therefor, a verified statement describing
the location and nature of property and assets which
the person owns, including the person's place of employment, account numbers and names of financial
institutions holding assets of such person and a description of real property owned by such person. The
office of judicial administration shall develop the form
xcee mg
in Jurisdiction
(a) Whenever a plaintiff demands judgment beyond
the scope of the small claims jurisdiction of the court,
the court shall either: (1) Dismiss the action without
prejudice at the cost of the plaintiff; (2) allow the
plaintiff to amend the plaintiffs pleadings and service
of process to bring the demand for judgment within
the scope of the court's small claims jurisdiction and
237
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CRAWFORD COUNTY, KANSAS
Eric Muathe, et al.
FU.-EO
VS.
=K=ur..!:..:tl:::<..s
Plaintiffs,
'
)
)
)Case No. 15 CV 79 P
)
=l-=L=o,.L..J.v,--=e;.:...t al: ------."'hI!6~fEEB;a--+2~~s. )
NOTICE OF HEARING
CLERK Of mST. coU~;,
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE th~~aYitWJlfhrR~~6tions in the above matter have been
Bf-----scheduled for hearing on the 18th day April, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. before Hon. Jack Burr at the
Crawford County Judicial Center, 602 N. Locust, Pittsburg, Kansas.
Dated:
U~G3Aad.:>h(wr
Administrative Assistant
Copy to:
Eric Muathe
P.O ..Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Noah Day
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS
Kasey King
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
James Beckley
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Travis Carlson
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Stephen Phillips
Assistant Attorney General
120 S.W. io" Ave., 2nd Floor
Topeka, KS 66612
Carrie Barney
120 S.W: 10th Ave., 2nd Floor
Topeka, KS 66612
James Emerson
County Counselor
Crawford County Courthouse
111 East Forest St.
Girard, KS 66743
Hon. Jack L. Burr

Senior Judge
Office of the
Clerk of the District Court
801 Broadway
Goodland, KS 66735
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was
deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to the above party or
parties on the ,"')1 L day of kbAkVt'5.A,...::j
,2016.
~u.-:hlavC\ \~
9.P
c:;...-"'"~kII?eputyClerk of the DIstrict Court
Fll,EO
Noah Day,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2015 SC 70 P
vs.
'16 FEB24 P!2 :26

Defendant.
My Town Media,
CLERK OF DIST. COlii': i

CR~WFORD CJ)!JHD: '
NUTICE OF HEARING
B(
The above entitled action is scheduled for HEARING
on the 18th day of APRIL, 2016, at 1:30
p.m., before the Honorable Jack Burr in the District Court of Crawford County, Kansas, located at 602
N. Locust, Pittsburg, Kansas.
Dated this
day of February, 2016.
Copies to:
Noah Day
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
My Town Media
c/o Robert Young, Registered Agent
250 N. Water, Suite 300
Wichita, KS 67202
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
I do hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of the above case setting on the parties
noted above and that the same was placed in the US Mail postage prepaid or in the official Court Mailbox
onthe
a,
dayof
't~
,2016.

Noah Day,
vs.
16 FEB24D~il~.
Lori Fleming,
NOTI~~i~iNG
sr
The above entitled action is scheduled for HEARING on the 18th day of APRIL, 2016, at 2:30
p.m., before the Honorable Jack Bun- in the District Court of Crawford County, Kansas, located at 602
Dated this ~
Copies to:
Noah Day
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Dennis D. Depew
Deputy Attorney General
120 S.W. io" Ave., 2nd Floor
Topeka, KS 66612
CERTIFICATE
OF SERVICE
onthe~daYOf
~~
,2016.
FIL.Eo
Noah Day,
Plaintiff,
vs.
16 FEE24 P12:26
Lori Fleming,
CLERK OF mST. COU/( i
CRAWFO~FDE
Bf
Defendant.
OF HEARING
The above entitled action is scheduled for HEARING on the 18th day of APRIL, 2016, at 2:30
p.m., before the Honorable Jack Burr in the District Court of Crawford County, Kansas, located at 602
Dated this
I rkiDepujY Cler~ of the District Court
Copies to:
Noah Day
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Dennis D. Depew
120 S.W. 10th Ave., 2nd Floor
Topeka, KS 66612
on the
Q~dayof
(~
,2016.
r
~
Clef
\I~...e.Q,Q;:j
~puty Clelk of the DIstrict Court
JuJ,~
{?v({
~ (~ Vlo+ o (e{/Ctf'-e..
U"
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CRAWFORD COUNTY. KANSAS
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
~
SITTING IN PITTSBURG
Noah Ian Day
PO Box 224
Pittsburg, KS
..~
I
c .
..)
Case No. 2015-SC-000070-P
'16
APR 18
P 1 :,37
(JeflN 5
PLAINTIFF
~"f.~)
66762
Vs.
-:
11"1 vi1\e
,0i~~d~
UV'
U')
o If,,,~ttJ of
96W'ey
DEFENDANT
My Town Media
250 N Water Suite 300
Wichita, KS 67202
~EAL
1.5'
On this
day of
person against whomjudg
that this court has jurisdiction
JO~kNAL ENTRYlWJUDGMENT
FOURTEEN DAYS AFTER JUDGMENT
---)
~~\}
(6 .
20
this action comes on for trial. The court finds that each
nt is entered has been properly served with summons or process herein and
to enter the judgment requested.
Whereupon, the court finds that judgment should be entered:

Defendant(s)
.
by agreement of the parties;
Witnesses (or Plaintiff
uJ 'f S it?
n C.e()er,(.:-<:
L\
"..
1\~
by reason of default of said
by trial of the issues herein.

Witnesses for Defendant
()
JUDGMENT IS ENTERED AS FOLLOWS:

RECOVERY OF MONEY:
Judgment for Plaintiff
gains!
_______
for the principal balance of $
0
-r with interest at
___
% per annum to date of judgment and costs. Principal balance s all bear interest at
per annum from this date until payment in full.
DISM ISSA L: On motion of plainti ff, the action is dismissed
with __
without
prejudice.
"
cJ. ~
(it
tV ~
.e(').
LA,
(_:' .
~tt-~"e'7
~,,\-
).
fr\lt>VV~
%
APPEAL ADVISORY:
OTHER:,-ASB~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The judgment creditor in this case is the partY or parties to whom money is owed and the judgment
debtor is the party or parties who owe money. If this judgment has not been paid within 14 days of the
date of this judgment, the judgment creditor shall mail a copy of this judgment form by certified mail to the
judgment debtor together with the statement of assets.
Within 30 days of receiving the statement of assets form, unless the judgment has been paid, the
judgment debtor shall complete the statement of assets form and return it t the Clerk ofDi
ict Court.
t(~IA
(q
~\_?--767
....
..
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OFFl*~
COUNTY, KANSAS
SMALL CLAIMS COURT
'16
Noah Day
l...
".'.
) I
~~
"~"'_'''
'
VS.
My Town Media
<C:::"
A9:58
'f.RK Of' msr

.,'.
;,:,1.;
Ct.
~,., .t.~
-WFOI'D\ .,.... ~.:: .'
Plaintiff,
APR-l
__
. .
H'''.
CASE NO. 15SC70P
)
Defendant.
MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JugGE
WITH AFFIDAVIT
Pursuant to Chapter 2Q
COMESNOW, Plaintiff Noah Day Pro Se and in accordance with K.S.A.61-2707(a), K.S.A.20-311d(b) for
a change of judge, and K.S.A. 20-311e and states as follows:
1.
Plaintlff
believes a change of judge in accordance with K.S.A. 20-31ld(b)
.
is appropriate
.
in this
case and that is why Plaintiff has filed this "MOTION FORCHANGEOF JUDGE ~ITH AFFIDAVIT".
2.
Plaintiff should be prohibited from contempt of court in accordance with K.S.A. 20-311e for
filing this motion.
AFFIDAVIT
County; Crawford
)SS
State: Kansas
I, Noah Day, Affiant herein, declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the united states of
America, that Affiant Is competent
to be a witness and that the facts contained-hefein
are true, correct,
complete, and not misleading to the best of Affiant's first hand knowledge.
Statement of Facts
1. Honorable Jack Burr was one of (3) judges that was appointed
by the KansasCDur.to.f Appeals Chief
Judge Gary Rulon along with Robert J. Fleming of Parsons to hear a lawsuit that claimed state budget
cuts for school funding violate state school children's constitutional
rights on November 8,2010. (Exhibit
Al
2. Affiant filed a class action injunctive petition in case number 2015CV79P where Hoporable
Fleming is one of the defendants In the
Robert
case and he was served on JulV 27, 2015 and it should be a
conflict of Interest under Rule 2.7 Responsibility to Decide and Rule 2.11(A) Disqualification
of Rules
Relating To Judicial Conduct for Judge Burr to rule on a case Involving Honorable Robert Fleming as a
defendant.
3. Affiant has filed an ethic complaint
against Honorable Burr on November 3,.2015 with the Kansas
Commission on Judicial Qualifications
and Affiant believes that Honorable Burr is now biased and
prejudiced against Affiant for making that complaint.

4. A local google search on the name Judge Jack Burr Robert Fleming Kansas shows a list, of information
on the above mentioned
court case that Robert Fleming and Jack Burr decided on togethlr
and Affiant
(G~"~bi+
8)
bell eves this Is a conflict of interest.
WHEREFORE, for all the above mentioned facts Affiant feels that he can not receive a fair and
impartial judge under Rule 2.11(A) Disqualification
from the 11th judicial district and reQ!.lests an ORDER
granting this Motion ForChange Of Judge With Affidavit.
I hereby certify that on this ~day

identification,
of December, 2015, A.D., a man appeared with proper
to attest and affirm that he is the man executing the foregoing Affidavit
I, therefore, set forth my hand and seal in affirmation
thereof of the execution t
~~~~
NOTARY PUBLIC
Date:
HEATHER TURP\~
~
No\a~ public 51 te
t.ly Mpl. ExP"u, \ \
f Kan~as
by his hand.
ereof.
My commission expires on NC)Jt.W\~
3,
, ~,<6
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays to the Court, under K.S.A. 20-311d(b) for the court to hear
the HMOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" and disquaUfy/recuse
number lSSC70P and for this case to be assigned to a new judge out ofthe
itself from case
Uth
judicial district
that do not have any conflict of interests with the defendants.
Pro Se Noah Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks 66762
124,/ ch
I certify that on
'3 ~
. 2olb, I mailed.the
FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" to the Defendant's
Dennis
D. Depew, Sup. Ct. No. 11605
Deputy Attorney
120
sv 10
th
foregoing
"MOTION
attorney at the fo~owing address:
General
Ave., Second Floor
Topeka, KS 66612
Pro Se Noah Oay.
c/o P.O. Box 224

Pittsburg, Ks 66762
Article
J
1 . '
....
....\
News / Events
November 08, 2010
av:
Gene Mever
Source: K.nu~Rf!porter
Kansas Court of Appeals Chief Judge Gary Rulon Thursday named three judges, Irom widely separate pans of the state, to hear a lawsuit that claims state budget cuts
for school funding violate state school children.' constitutional rights.
The three include Shawnee County DistrictJudge franklin R. Theis, of Topeka, who also was appointed the panel's presiding judge; labette County Judge Robert J.
Fleming, of Parsons in far southeast Kansas, and retired Sherman County District Judge Jack L. Burr, of Goodland, in the northwest.
The three are members of a special panel that legislation by the 2005 Kansas Legislature requires to be formed to preside over challenges to Kansas school finance
legislation.
On Tuesday attorneys for a group of more than five doz en school districts filed suit in Shawnee County District Court in Topeka, alleging that $303 million in school
funding cuts made during the last few yeats of the state's fiscal crisis drop state support for education below a state constitutional requirement to provide suitable
funding for elementary and high school students' educations throughout the state.
The thre judge panel will hear those contentions, made on behalf of 32 students in the Wichita, Kansas CitV, Kan., Dodge City and Hutchinson school districts, plus a
request in the suit to elevate the claims to a class action on behalf of students in 311289 school districts in the state.
No date for iI hearing has been set.
All three judges appointed to the panel are veteran Kansas jurists
Theis has been a Kansas district judge in Topeka since 1977, handling primarilv civil cases. He previously has practiced as a private attorney and also served as an
assistant U,S. attorney, Pardon Attorney for former Kansas Gov. Robert Docking and been chief attorney and an assistant Kansas attorney general for the Kansas
Department of Administration. In his most recent rating for judicial retention, in 7.008, attorneys and non-attorneys in a statewide survey gave him a 3.63 point
favorable rating on a 4.0 point scale, just slightly higher than a statewide average 3.5 rating for all Kansas judges at the time.
Fleming was appointed to the bench In 1996 and handles a mixed docket of civil, criminal and probate cases. He previouslv served as a trial lawyer for 28 years.
Attorneys and non attorneys surveyed for his rating for retention this year gave him an everall3.19 points on a 4.0 scale, which is below the statewide average 3.27
fer judges statewide.
Burr sat more than 30 years on the bench before retirinc in 2009, Including time as chief judge in northwestern
weren't immediately avail~ble Thunday.
Kansas 15th Judicial District. His latest peer ratings
Co20112013 AaeAly
"
JUOGE lacll b.n ROBER, F\.EM\toIG KPoNSAS - Gooie &Ben
Google
JUDGE lack burr ROBERT FLEMING KANSAS
Images
News
Web
More .
Maps
Shopping
Search tools
Aboul 252,000 results (0.52 seconds)
Plaintiff school districts, state battle in school finance hearing

YMW2.ljWorld.com/ .. .Iplaintiff-schOOI-districls.
... " Lawrence JournalWorld
Jon 4, 2012 - ... case are from lerl 10 right Judges
Robert Fleming.
Jack Burr. Attorney Arthur Chalmers. representing
the state of Kansas,
Franklin Theis.
anc
...
School funding lawsuit could set stage for constitutional ...

YMW2.1jworld.com/ .. .Ischoo!-fundinglawsuit-c
... " lawrence Journal-World
May 10. 2015 - t.abette County Dislrict Court Judge Robert Fleming. left. Shawnee
Counly ... center, and former Sherman County Dislrict Court Judge Jack Burr ...
Wchlta
and Kansas Cily. Kansas. dislricts
are asking
three-judge
panel 10 '"
Judges: Kansas not adequately funding K-12 schools - The ..,

www.hutchnews.coml .. .Ijudges-kansaS
...Iarticle_2e85a7fO-3e8a-5f74b(:04...
Dec 30, 201~ - State of Kansas. spoke guardedly about the judicial ruling Tuesday that
... Tuesday by Judgos; Franklin Theis, Robert fleming
and Jack Burr.
Judges rule school finance inadequate
I Cjonline.com
m.cjonline.coml
The Topeka Capital-Journal
...IJudg&s-rule-scl'lOol-financ
Dee 3D, 2014 - A three-judge

Though jUdges
....
.-
panel ruled Tuesday thai Kansas public school funding ...
Franklin Theis. Robert Fleming
and Jack Burr avoided
Veteran judges fill panel for Kansas schools case

'W'Iffl.hutchpos!.com/
Mobile
I Hutch
Post
..Jveleran-judges-fill-panelfor.kanSCls-schools-case
.. , ..
Dee 3D, 2014 - (AP) -
The Itvee Judgos l'.Iho say KlInsas isn~ spending enough money
on ... Robert fleming
of Labe1te County and retired District Judge Jack Burr of ... Burr
early in 2009 after serving more than 30 ...
retired
as a full-time
judge
Court panel says Kansas isn't spending enough on public ...

www.scrippsmedia.com/
..JCourt-panel-says-KamiBs-isnl.spending-enoug
Dec 30. 2014 - (AP) The three Judgos wno say Kansas
FlemIng
judge
.....
isn't spending enough ... Robert
of Labelle Counly and retired Dislrict Judge Jack ... Burr retired as a fulllime
early in 2009 after serving rnore than 30 years on the bench
Images for JUDGE jack burr ROBERT FLEMING KANSAS

Report images
More images for JUDGE jack burr ROBERT FLEMING KANSAS

Kansas judges satisfied on equity issue of school funding ...
WIN'W.kan8ls.com/news/polilic&
.../article1145955.html
. The \Mchita Eagle '
Jun 11, 201<4- Slate of Kansas will now move on to the bigger queslion of wnetner ...
But in the end neither he. nor Judges
Robert Floming
and Jack Burr. said
'"
Court rules school funding is inadequate under Kansas ..,

WIN'W.kansas.COminews/local/ .. .iarticle5169S64.html
..The Wchita Eagle
Dee 30, 2014 - Dislriet Court panel: School funding inadequate under Kansas ... the
judges-Franklin
R. Theis. RobertJ.
Fleming
end Jilek L. Burr-spent
Latest Kansas school finance trial starts ~ Education ...
...
Eric
JUDGE lack D.n ROBERT FlEM ING KANSAS Goorie Se<vch
Gocgle
JUDGE jack burr ROBERT FLEMING KANSAS
Web
Images
News
Shopping
Maps
Search tools
More "
Page 2 of about 252.000 results (0.42 seconds)
I KSNT ...
Veteran judges fill panel for Kansas schools case
ksnt.coml. ..l)udgos-rule-kansas-not-spendlng-enough-on-public-schoolsl
"
Dee 31. 2014 - (AP) _. The three Judges v.ho say Kansas isn't spending enough money
on '" Robert FI9mlng
of Labelle County !tOOretired Districl Judge Jack Burr of .. Burr
retired as a Iull-tirne judgo
early in 2009 after serving more Ihan 30 ...
Judges assigned to hear school finance challenge News ...

WVrW.mcphersonsentinel.comlarticle/
...1311059888 McPherson Sentinel
Nov 5, 2010 - Tnree judges from across Ihe state have been appointed by Kansas
Court of Appeals .... Labelte County District Judge Robert J. Fleming of Parsons and
Y
rei ired Sherman Counly District Judge Jack L. Burr of Goodland
...
Fleming to hear school lawsuit - Parsons Sun: News

www.parsonssun.comJ ...Iart\cle_ 490c8a24-6381-5B20-Bb5b-Oa...
Parsons Sun
Nov 4, 2010 - A t.abette County district judge will be among three j udgcs named 10
preside over a new lawsuil challenging the current level of state funding for Kansas
schools.
Judge
Franklin R. Theis. Labelle County Dislrict Judge Robert J. Fleming
and retired Sherman County Dlslricl Judge Jack L. Burr 10 ine panel.
Kansas School Finance Case Goes To Judges - WIBW.com

www.wibw.coml. ..IKans3s-School-Finsnce-Case-Goes-To-Ju
... " 'MBW TV ~
Aug 29, 2012 - Slate of Kansas challenges the stale's school finance system. saying ...
Judges
Robert Fleming,
Jack Burr. and the presiding Judge Franklin
..
Attorney: Kansas need not have best school funding system '"
www.newslimes.coml .../Kansas-officials-to-lestify.in.Kans...
The NewsTimes
May 8, 2015 - Labelle Counly District Court Judge Robert Fleming,

Theis, center, and former Sherman County District Court Judge
left, Shawnee .
Jack Burr ....
Arguments on school block-grant law focus on equity ...

WVrW.hdnews.neU ...Iarlicle_ea91acfd-d5a2-5ba9-91bc-
... " Hays Daily News ,.

May 9, 2015 - Labe1le Counly District Court Judge Robert Fleming. left. Shawnee
County ... center, and former Sherman County District Coun Judgo Jack Burr di5CUS~
an ... Dale Dennis. deputy commissioner for Ihe Kansas Department of ...
Judges rule Kansas public school funding inadequate ...

asumag.com ) Planning & Design) Funding> Legislation"
Jan 6.2015 - Kansas' approach to publiC school funding violates the state's ... funding."
Judgos Franklin Theis, Robert Fleming
and Jad
Burr said in their
KS: Court to rule on $1.58 education funding lawsuit ...

watchdog.org
Aug 30. 2012
The judgos,
Kansas
Watchdog.org
from left, ere Rob9rt Fleming.
Burr . ...mo is hidden. By Travis Perry Kansas Watchdog.
JPDFJ
Franklin Thais and Jack

TOPEKA
-- It could
...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY ...
www.kscourts.org/Kansas
...frhree%20Assigned%20to%2Dschool%2OFin
Nov 3, 2010 - STATE OF KANSAS,. Defa"danl. .. Judge Robert J. ,FlemingParsons. Judge Jack L. Burr - Retired Dlstnct Judgo- Goodlsf\d.
....
The presiding
Three Veteran Kansas Jurists Picked to Hear ." - Accelify

accelify.com/Home/Arliclel1914
..
Noy 8,2010 - Kansas Court of Appeals Chief Judge Gary Rulon Thursday named three
JUdges, ... Counly Judge Robert J. Fleming,
of Parsons in far southeast
retired Sherman County District Judge Jack l. Burr. of Goodland.
Kansas, and
Eric
er
IN THE DISTRIcqrW.~
CRAWFORD COUN:fY, KANSAS
SMALL CLAIMS COURT
'16
Noah Day
APR-1
A9 :59
CLERK OF D!ST.'!-;,
Plaintiff,CRAWFOHO CG~)" r','
9f
VS.
Lori Fleming
CASE NO. 15SC71P

I.
)
Defendant.
MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT

Pyrsuant to Chapter 20
a change of judge, and K.S.A.20-311e and states as follows:

1.
Plaintiff believes a change of judge in accordance with K.S.A.20-311d(blls ~ropriate
in this
case and that Is why Plaintiff has filed this "MOTION FOR CHANGE OF lllPGE~ITH AFFIDAVIT".
2. Plaintiff should be prohibited from contempt of court in accordance with K.S.A.20-311e for
filing this motion.
AFFIDAVIT
County: Crawford
)S5
State: Kansas
I, Noah Day, Affiant herein, declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the Ul;lltedstates of
America, that Affiant is competent to be a witness and that the facts contained herein
arp true,
correct,
Statement of Facts
1. Honorable Jack Burr was one of (3) Judgesthat was appointed by the Kall$asCoUfi~ppeals
Chief
Judge Gary Rulon along with Robert J. Fleming of Parsons to hear a lawsuit that claimed state budget
cuts for school funding violate state school children's constitutional rights on November 8, 2010. (Exhibit
A)
2. Affiant filed a class action injunctive petition in case number 2015CV79P where.tloporable Robert
Fleming is one of the defendants in the case and he was served on July 27, 2015 and it sl'tould be a
conflict of interest under Rule 2.7 Responsibility to Decide and Rule 2.11(A} Disqualification of Rules
Relating To Judicial Conduct for Judge Burr to rule on a case involving Honorable-RQbert Fleming as a
defendant.
3. Robert Fleming's daughter-in-law Lori Fleming is the defendant in this case..aQd,AfU(lt thinks it is a
conflict of interest for the Honorable Burr to rule on a case involving the defendant due to his working
relationship with her father-in-law Robert Fleming.
3. Affiant has flied an ethic complaint against Honorable Burr on November 3, 2015.wj~ the Kansas
Commission on Judicial Qualifications and Affiant believes that HonorableBurr1snow~~d
and
.,
4. A local google search on the name Judge Jack Burr Robert Fleming Kansasshows a list of information
on the above mentioned court case that Robert Fleming and Jack Burr decided on t~~l:ler
believes this is a conflict of interest. (Exhibit B)
and Affiant
\
WHEREFORE,forall the above mentioned facts Affiant feels that he can not receive a fair and
impartial judge under Rule 2.11(A) Disqualification from the
n" judicial
district and requests an ORDER
granting thls Motion ForChange Of Judge With Affidavit.
I hereby certify that on this
1-1~
day of December, 2015, A.D., a man appeared with proper
identification, to attest and affirm that he is the man executing the foregoing ~it
I, therefore, set forth my hand and seal in affirmation thereof of the execution thereof.
by his hand.
-~~
{'7 rU. /1Ot_._...5 _
1
Date:
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission
expires on
~ ~~;~:~;.R
T~~~as
l....
"".""'.
IVaIi'M"?" '3; ~6tg
M1I1PPt. Expires'
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays to the Court, under K.SA 20311d(b)

the "MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT"
fo~\he court to hear
and dlsquallfyJrecuse~tselffrom case
number 15SC71P and for this case to be assigned to a new judge out of the
n" Judicial district
f interests with the defendants.
Pro Se Noah Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks66762
I certify that on
&/1/
Ch
'3?
. 201~, I mailedthei'On!going
FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" to the Defendant's
attorney
"MOTION
at the following address:
Dennis D. Depew, Sup. Ct No. 11605

120 S.W. 10th Ave., Second Floor

Topeka, KS 66612
Pro Se Noah Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks 66762
..
er
IN THE DISTRI~W.~
CRAWFORD COUN!'Y, KANSAS
SMALL CLAIMS COURT
'16
APR-1
A9 :59
r;,
Noah Day
Plaintiff,
8f
CLERK OF 0\ 5 T.
CHAWFOHO CGl~' r _','
VS.
Lori Fleming
CASE NO. 15SC71P

'.
Defendant.
MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT
Pyrsuant to Chapter 20
a change of judge, and K.S.A.20-311e and states as follows:
1.
Plaintiff believes a change of judge in accordance with K.S.A.20-31ld(b)
is ~ropriate
in this
case and that Is why Plaintiff has filed this "MOTION fOR CHANGEOf l1lPGE~ITH AFFIDAVIT".
2. Plaintiff should be prohibited from contempt of court in accordance with K.S.A.20-311e for
filing this motion.
AFFIDAVIT
County: Crawford
)SS
State: Kansas
I, Noah Day, Affiant herein, declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the uz::itedstates of
America, that Affiant is competent to be a witness and that the facts contained nerein
arr true, correct,
Statement of Facts
1. Honorable Jack Burr was one of (3) judges that was appointed by the Kall5as Coun~ppears
Chief
Judge Gary Rulon along with Robert J. Fleming of Parsonsto hear a lawsuit that claimed state budget
cuts for school funding violate state school children's constitutional rights on November 8,2010. (Exhibit
A)
2. Affiant filed a classaction injunctive petition in case number 2015CV79Pwhere.tiororable
Robert
Fleming is one of the defendants in the case and he was served on July 27, 2015 and it should be a
conflict of Interest under Rule 2.7 Responsibility to Decide and Rule 2.11(A} Disqualification of Rules
Relating To Judicial Conduct for Judge Burr to rule on a case involving Honorable Robert Fleming as a
defendant.
3. Robert Fleming's daughter-in-law Lori Fleming is the defendant in this c~Afilitt
thinks it is a
relationship with her father- in-law Robert Fleming.
3. Affiant has flied an ethic complaint against Honorable Burr on November 3, 201S.w.j1:hthe Kansas
Commission on Judicial Qualifications and Affiant believes that HonorableBtlrr1snow~fi.sed
and
prejudiced against Affiant for making that complaint.;

4. A local google search on the name Judge Jack Burr Robert Fleming Kansasshows a list of information
on the above mentioned court case that Robert Fleming and Jack Burr decided on t~ther
and Affiant
\
WHEREFORE,forall the above mentioned facts Affiant feels that he can not receive a fair and
impartial judge under Rule 2.11(A) Disqualification from the
n" judicial
granting ~his Motion ForChange Of Judge With Affidavit.
/JI~
identification, to attest and affirm that he is the man executing the foregoing ~it
I, therefore, set forth my hand and seal in affirmation thereof of the execution thereof.
by his hand.
. ,
~~
II] (~J1<>~--5
_
1
Date:
NOTARY PUBLIC
My
commission
expires on
Na/t'.W)0?~ ~ ~6Jg
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff
prays to the Court, under K.S.A. 20311d(b)
the "MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" and

number
N~a~:~~~ TU~~a5
My I\ppl. F.xpifes ~
15SC71P and for this case to be assigned
to
for\he
court to hear
dlsq~rewse~tselffrom
a new judge out of the
case
11th judicial district
f interests with the defendants.
Pro Se Noall Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg,
Ks 66762
I certify that on
/J!Jd/ Ch '3?
201&, I mailedtheioroegoing
FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" to the Defendant's attorney at the following

Topeka,
KS 66612
Pro Se Noah Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks66762
"MOTION
address:
. ..
Noah Day
)CLERK OfIJISIC,
CnAWfORO COUl, r (
Plaintiff,
g(~-.-----
VS.
Lori Fleming
CASE NO. 15SCB5P
Defendant.
MOTION
F~
CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT
: Pursuant to Chapter 20
COMES NOW, Plaintiff Noah Day Pro Se and in accordance with K.S.A. 61-2707(a), K.S.A. 20-3Ud(b)
for
a change of judge, and K.S.A. 20-311e and states as follows:

1.
Plaintiff believes a change of judge in accordance with K.S.A. 20-311d(b) is a~roprlate
case and that is why Plaintiff has filed this "MOTION FOR CHANGE
2.
plaintiff should be prohibited
AFFIDAVIT
County: Crawford
)SS
State: Kansas
AFFIDAVITII.
from contempt of court in accordance with K.S.A. 20-311e for
filing this motion .
.'"
OFJUDGEWITH
in this
I, Noah Day, Affiant herein, declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the U(Jitedstates of
America, that Affiant is competent to be a witness and that the facts contained herein
~.Ptrue,
correct,
Sti!tement of Facts
1. Honorable Jack Burr was one of (3) judges that was appointed by the Kansu.(mw.t:of.A.ppeals Chief
Judge Gary Rulon along with Robert J. Fleming of Parsonsto hear a lawsuit that claimed state budget
cuts for school funding violate state school children's constitutional rights
on November 8, 2010. (Exhibit
A)
2. Affiant filed a class action injunctive petition in case number 201SCV79P Where liororable
Fleming Is one of the defendants
Robert
in the case and he was served on July 27, 2015 and It should be a
conflict of interest under Rule 2.7 Responsibility to Decide and Rule 2. l1(A) Disqualification of Rules
Relating To Judicial Conduct for Judge Burr to rule on a case involving HonorableRobert Fleming as a
defendant.
3. Robert Fleming's daughter-in-law Lori Fleming is the defendant in this caseaAd..Affia(lt thinks it is a
relationship with her father-in-law Robert Fleming.
3. Affiant has filed an ethic complaint against Honorable Burr on November 3, 2015,~~ the Kansas
Commission on Judicial Qualifications and Affiant believes that Honorable Burr is now hliSed and
'
4. A local google search on the name Judge Jack Burr Robert Fleming Kansas shows
on the above mentioned
a list of Information
court case that Robert Fleming and Jack Burr decided on t~~her
and A.ffiant

WHEREfORE, for aUthe above mentioned facts Affiant feels that he can not receive a fair and
impartial Judge under Rule 2.11(A) Disqualification from the
n" judicial
ting this Motion forChange of Judge With Affidavit,
1,:;:t.
identification, to attest and affirm that he is the man executing the foregoing A~it
" therefore, set forth my hand and seal in affirmation thereof of the execution thereof.
by his hand.
"""1
. I.
.
Date:
NOTARY PUBLIC
1\. HEATHER TURPIN

My commission expires on
}JlNeJt!\~
WHEREFORE,
'3,'101&
Notary Public
My Appl. Expires
It
t<lte of Kansas
Plaintiff prays to the Court, under K.S.A.20311d(b} fo,.,t~e court to hear
the "MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVIT" and disqua1Jfv/.remse-1tself from case
number 15SC85P and for this case to be assigned to a new judge out of the 11 U1 judicial district
c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks 66762
I certify that on
If) '1/ vIA
')0
FORCHANGE OF JUDGE WITH AFFIDAVlr'
. 201"
to the Defendant's
I mailed the faiegoing uMOTION
attorney at the following address:

Topeka, KS 66612
Pro Se Noah Day.

c/o P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, Ks 66762
Date:
4/25/2016
Time:
08:13 AM
Crawford County District Court (Pittsburg)

ROA Report
Case: 2015-CV-000075-P
Page 1 of 1
Current Judge: Kurtis 1 Loy

c;;.
&:.
AKCC Management LLC vs. Two Big Fish LLC, et al
Other Contract
>'\. )Il\-e
Judge
Date
Petition Filed
Document ID Number: 286123
Kurtis I Loy
2 Request For Personal Service

Kurtis I Lay
2 Summons Issued Back to Attny for Service

Document 10 Number: 286125
Kurtis I Lay
8/14/2015
Clerks Order For Additional Time to Answer Or Plead to Petition

Kurtis I Lay
8/27/2015
Answer
Kurtis I Lay
8/28/2015
Email Sent Date: 08/28/2015

11:31 am To: vbrisbin@wntlaw.com
Attached: ANSWER.pdf Name of Document: Answer
8/31/2015
Notice of Case Management Conference

7/15/2015
Hearing Scheduled
PM)
(Case Management
Conference
Answer To Counterclaim
10/29/2015
Hearing Scheduled
(Pretrial Conference
Hearing Scheduled
(Court Trial 05/19/2016
3/2412016
Kurtis I Lay
Kurtis I Lay
9/412015
12/17/2015
File
10/26/2015
02:30
Kurtis I Lay
Kurtis I Lay
04/27/2016
11 :00 AM)
09:00 AM)
Kurtis I Lay
Kurtis I Lay
Scheduling Order
Kurtis I Lay
Notice of Service of Discovery Requests

Kurtis I Lay
Notice of Service of Discovery Requests

Kurtis I Loy
Email Sent Date: 03/24/2016

03:44 pm To: vbrisbin@wntlaw.com File
Attached: SCHEDULINGORDER.pdf
Name of Document: Scheduling
Order
Kurtis I Loy
Response of Defendants Lay Wachter Fleming Fleming Jack Lynch

Kurtis I Lay
Russell Smith Sanders Hazlett Grillot and Schmidt to Plaintiffs Three Motion
pA \ I\I P 5
F-1l-eJ. h j'5 te SPOil!> ~
cq~..e fVvmb~vA'
FI")Vbl ovS -p.hfl)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF CRAWFO

ERIC M. MUATHE, et aI.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
HONORABLE KURTIS LOY, et al.,
COUNTY, KANSAS
)
)
)
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
RESPONSE OF DEFENDANTS
LOY, WACHTER, FLEMING, FLEMING, JACK, LYNCH, RUSSELL, SMITH,
SANDERS, HAZLETT, GRILLOT AND SCHMIDT TO PLAINTIFFS' THREE
MOTIONS
Defendants
Kurtis Loy, Andrew J. Wachter, Robert J. Fleming, Lori Fleming, Jeffry L.
Jack, Oliver Kent Lynch (District Court Judges for the Eleventh Judicial District), Janice D.
Russell, Richard M. Smith, John E. Sanders (Senior District Court Judges), Stanton A. Hazlett
(Disciplinary Administrator), Tim Grillot (assigned discipline complaint investigator), and
Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt, by and through counsel, Stephen Phillips, Assistant
Attorney General, submit this response to Plaintiffs' most recent three motions: "Motion to
Withdraw Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss,"
"Motion for Change of Judge," and "Motion for
Continuance. "
Plaintiffs' Petition is dismissed.
"[W]hen a document seeking dismissal is filed within
the time frame set out in K. S.A. 60-241 (a)(1), it will operate as an automatic dismissal of the
action upon filing." Smith v. State, 22 Kan. App.2d 922,926 (1996). Defendants'
Motion to
Withdraw is but a further example of their frivolous court filings that warrant filing restrictions.
Because the dismissal is without prejudice, however, and in order to promote finality in
this case, Defendants do not oppose reinstatement of Plaintiffs' case provided that it be reinstated
on the condition that Defendants pending motions-Defendants'
Dismiss; Defendants'
23,2015,
Sanctions-
September 8, 2015, Motion to
September 28,2015, Motion for Sanctions; and Defendants' November
Motion for Extension of Time To File Response to Pro Se Plaintiffs' Motion For
be deemed to remain pending be taken up at the previously scheduled April 18
hearing. Defendants, therefore, oppose Plaintiffs' Motion for Continuance.
This case has been
pending since August 7, 2015

Defendants' Motion for Change of Judge changes nothing. It is only now filed, months
after Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and is nothing more than a delaying tactic. K.S.A. 20-311
provides for a hearing on the motion. That can easily be accomplished at the April 18 hearing
along with consideration of Defendants' motions.
Respectfully submitted,
OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEREK SCHMIDT
/s/ Stephen Phillips

Stephen Phillips, No. 14130
Memorial Bldg., 2nd Floor
120 SW io" Avenue
Topeka, Kansas 66612-1597
Phone:
(785)296-2215
Facsimile: (785) 296-6296
Attorney for Defendants Lay, Wachter, Fleming,
Fleming, Jack, Lynch, Russell, Smith, Sanders,
Hazlett, Grillot and Schmidt.
c. ~,,-\.
~Gv'1
~{tPvJ7
~erJ~
0S 1~v(4 Li-
VbA{('
\q~~
\()efr,r~
I hereby ce~
-1'k<S
10-l\O
.:::-'
as
:\-
vJ \~CAO,J
~ N \~~
l A-'
fk
on this 8th day of April, 2016, the above and forgoing document was~O
,"---<::
filed with the Clerk of the Co"urt ofthe District of Crawfo'rd County, Kansas via U.S. Mail. I
further certify that a copy was served via first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid to:
-.l(\Eric Muathe
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Noah Day
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Kasey King
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
James Beckley Jr.

P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Travis Carlton
P.O. Box 224
Pittsburg, KS 66762
Jim Emerson
Crawford County Counselor
111 East Forest, 2nd Fl.
Girard, KS, 66713
Noah Day
9601 Iliss Ave., Apt. 1527
Denver, CO 80231
Judge Jack Burr
Sherman County District Court
801 Broadway, Room 201,
Goodland, KS 67735
and hand delivered to:
Carrie Barney
Memorial Bldg., 2nd Floor
120 SW 1oth Avenue
Topeka, Kansas 66612-1597
/s/ Stephen Phillips

Stephen Phillips
-,
CS~ .
FIRST -CLASS
8211
MAIL
$000.392
~
II
~~~1\1
:1~~
..'"s:
ZIP 666i16
011E12650520
~~ ,~c\
ATTORNEY G ENERAL
OF
D EREK 5
ME
120
MORIALHALL
CH M I DT
o U'\-
SW 10THAVE
TOPEKA
",2ND FLOOR
, KS 66612-1597
~'L
\\~
Noah Day
7'"~
PO Box 224
Pittsburg , K ansas 66762
,tlU.IIWS
I::i F;',::'" 1,/"'/":'''-.'."" .:::r
I'\lat~~
.J,
rr
(UM~C~~
01()e, ,f-V \-td'
h,,~)
AprilS, 2016
Hon. Jack L. Burr
Senior Judge
SOl Broadway
Goodland, Ks 66735
Vi
l~"~
5
~()le ~,
--:1.;rJ. (o/1l ~
+-) C-fJ \t/K S /0 ws
dow Y' COUf'{! r-o<.~~)
CASE NO.
15CV79P
Dear Judge Jack Burr:

We have asked for a continuance from the April IS, 2016 hearing in the above mentioned case now that we
have an attorney representing us in retained attorney Adebayo Ogunmeno of Ogunmeno Law Firm of 155
S. ISth Street, Site 250 in KC Ks 66102 to represent Plaintiffs in federal case number 2: 16-cv-0210S-JARGLR against Respondents Lori Fleming and Kurt Loy.
One of the reasons that attorney Stephen Phillips was requesting sanctions of "FILING RESTRICTIONS"
was that he stated that case number 15CV79P was filed by James Beckley Jr., Noah Day, Kasey King, Travis
Carlton, and Eric Muathe in the guise of a class action.
There has now been approximately 45 people that are part of federal case number 2: 16-cv-0210S-JARGLR against Respondents Lori Fleming and Kurt Loy that shows that it was not the "GUISE" of a class and
that people that signed the "GRAND JURY PETITION" "OR WANTED TO BUT DID NOT GET A
CHANCE" thought that the judges of the 11thdistrict should be disqualified from hearing their cases due to
a conflict of interest.
We would be willing to dismiss case number 15CV79P to save all the defendants, their attorney, and the
court time if attorney Stephen Phillips would dismiss his motion for sanctions since we have now retained
an attorney to represent us and other people that signed the grand jury petition or wanted to but were
deprived due to the email that was sent by Lori Fleming.
In the meantime, we have filed a "motion for change of judge, "motion for a continuance", and "motion to
withdraw motion to dismiss" for you to decide before the April l S, 2016 hearing. We understand that it is
a long way for you to travel and we did not want to wait until a few days before the hearing to file any
motions. We just wanted to give you a chance to rule the on motion we have filed including the "motion
for change of judge" or "motion for continuance" prior to the April 18, 2016 hearing to save you any
unnecessary travel time if possible.
Sincerely,
P.O. Box 224 Pittsburg Ks 66762
Cc
James Emerson
County Counselor
111 East Forest St.
Girard, Ks 66743

Memorial Bldg., 2nd floor
120 SW 10th Avenue
Topeka, Ks 66612
Carrie Barney
Memorial Building, 2nd Floor
120 SW
io" Avenue
Topeka, Ks 66612
April 26, 2016

Hon. Jack L. Burr
Senior Judge
801 Broadway
Goodland, Ks 66735
CASE NO.
15CV79P Not 15CV75P
Dear Judge Jack Burr:

We had asked for a motion for a continuance from the April 18, 2016 hearing in the above mentioned case now that
th
we have an attorney representing us in retained attorney Adebayo Ogunmeno of Ogunmeno Law Firm of 155 S. 18
Street, Site 250 in KC Ks 66102 to represent Plaintiffs in federal case number 2: 16-cv-021 08-JAR-GLR against
Respondents Lori Fleming and Kurt Loy.
Attorney Stephen Phillips never made any appropriate response to our "motion to continuance and our other 3
motions", because his response was titled in case number 2015CV75P which is the case of AKCC Management LLC
vs. Two Big Fish LLC and their response was filed in this case on 4/1112016.
We have received a copy of the transcript which shows that you heard our case on April 18, 2016 with 3 other small
claims cases in 22 minutes from 10:00 a.rn. until 10:22 a.m. even though the other cases were not scheduled until
1:30 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. We also read where you dismissed case number 15CV79P first, but then granted filing
restrictions against us after you already dismissed the case.
We would like to file an "objection to the journal entry", "motion for reconsideration", a "motion for change of judge
with affidavit", and a "NOTICE OF APPEAL" because we don't feel that we received due process with our chapter 61
case being heard on an assembly line with 3 other chapter 60 small claims cases.
We don't want to file anything first without asking you to get permission first and get contempt of court
now that we have filing restrictions even though the "MOTION OF DEFENDATNS LOY, WACHTER,
FLEMING, FLEMING, JACK, LYNCH, RUSSELL, SMITH, SANDERS, HAZLETT, GRILLOT, AND
SCHMIDT FO~ SANCTIONS WITH MEMORANDUM
INCORPORATED"
was actually titled in case
number 15CV75P along with the "Response of Defendants Loy, Wachter, Fleming, Fleming, Jack, Lynch
Russell, Smith, Sanders, Hazlett, Grillot, and Schmidt To Plaintiffs Three Motion Document" which is on
the docket in the case of AKCC Management LLC vs. Two Big Fish LLC so we don't see how you could
grant any filing restrictions against us for filing frivolously when the deputy attorney Stephen Phillips appears
to be the one filing frivolous filings as he has titled not one but "2" different motions and responses in case
number 15CV75P.
We also would like to have access of your own private address like you gave attorney Stephen Phillips off the
record in an ex-parte conversation before you left town early after the 10:22 a.m, hearing according to
court staff at Crawford County Courthouse.
Sincerely,
Kasey King
c/o Summary Judgment Group
P.O. Box 224 Pittsburg Ks 6
Cc
James Emerson
County Counselor
111 East Forest St.
Girard, Ks 66743

Memorial Bldg., 2nd floor
120 SW
io" Avenue
Topeka, Ks 66612
Carrie Barney
Memorial Building, 2nd Floor
120 SW 1Oth Avenue
Topeka, Ks 66612
JI
JiOi,!,VIO
KANSAS
UbUoieo 0Vr
MARCH 7.20163:27
iitWmaKerS
vveign move IO impeacn lOPJUC.gesj i ne Kansas
City' oiar
USlJ~pt\*IO(\
\",. \ \\. \
r'd 1...
b. d\e/t\)
e f ~~6("e-r
0 fH(-R- \ \ \
PM
Frustrated GO P lawmakers weigh move to
impeach top judges
"':;/A*~Arf>
r
.eV\f(6\.()
71'-
f)e\'\ f\\S 0 'iJ

_
..
I"', \
~;
o-v
a;
J~.'
ff'p
c..;Y'CJ \l)e.. \
CD
>
1 of 3
()
'In~\ \\ \ \'
on.eW
l::>
<
L\P~-U"
"
BYJOHN HANNA
AP Political Writer
TOPEKA, KAN. - Republican lawmakers in Kansas, weary' of conflicts with a judiciary that
has been pushing for more school spending, are beginning to act on a measure to expand
tne legal grounus ror irnpeacrung jucges.
.1
"1
r".
The move is part of an intensified effort in red states to reshape courts still dominated by
moderate judges from earlier administrations.
-rk~ G
P f <!. t..J rtl 'tAler' 5 0... ~ (''E'~

J uohes>
S hCll) Id., h~
(J
lAJ \ ~
U\
{AA~+
~Mpe~J.. \ \~,
r-rustrarec \.:jut-' rswrnasers Vv"6lgnmove to unpeacn top JudgeS f The Kansas City Star
JlOJ.UiO
committee in the GOP-controlled Senate plans to vote Tuesday on a bill that would make
"attempting to usurp the power" of the Legislature or the executive branch grounds for
impeachment.
Impeachment has "been a little-used toor' to challenge judges who strike down new
legislation, said Republican Sen. Dennis Pyle, a sponsor of the measure. "Maybe it needs to
be oiled up a little bit or sharpened a little bit."
h'
.
~
. 1
.,
. ,
l'
b
1ne proposal nas conSlGeraule support In a LegIslature In wrucn RepUOllcansoutnum er
Democrats more than 3 to 1. Nearly half the Senate's members have signed on as
sponsors. It's unclear whether its novelty could complicate passage.
..
,
1 ,
The serious consideration of the measure, though, signals the exceedingly bitter political
climate in the state .
......,.r
r -~
. .,.
since 00V. oam rownnack ana 0UJ:' supermajonnes won control or tne stateHOuse In
2010, conservatives have passed a steady stream of bills cutting income taxes and
,.
,.
spenumg, expanamg
1.
.,
,.
gl.'u'1rignts ana restncung aooruon.
The state Supreme Court has issued rulings to force increased spending on public schools,
citing a constitutional requirement that schools be adequately funded, and threatened last
month to shut the schools this fall if lawmakers don't comply. The court also has
overturned death sentences in capital murder cases and is reviewing a case that could toss
out abortion restrictions.
"I believe the court has a tremendous problem with overreach," said Republican Sen. Mitch
Haimes, one of the impeachment bill's sponsors.

Callie Denton, executive director of the state trial lawyers ' association, said Kansas is
"really ground zero" for conservative antagonism toward the courts. Legal groups like hers
fear Republicans will be motivated to initiate impeachment proceedings if the bill passes.
"We're taking it very seriously," Denton said.
Four of Kansas' seven Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democratic Gov. Kathleen
Sebelius, who served from 2003 to 2009, and two by her predecessor, Bill Graves, a
moderate Republican. Only one was appointed by Brownback.
r rusuareo bUI'Ia'VV'maKerS wergn move to rrnpeacn top JUOges! ! ne Kansas Cfty' star
Replacing the justices through elections is difficult in Kansas because they don't run in
contested races. Instead, they face a "retention election" every six years, remaining in
office unless more than 50 percent of voters vote against them, No justice has ever been
voted out.
',..,01"',..
"" .; e b
"'roups
\...J
I ;'C1VClUV
TY
a""ee'''
1
Ai' e'''.
'-''- ed
U
"0
'''''''0'''1('
L
Hi
UJ.
" J.J.
..
1"')"'
.effort
'"
a.
Cl V1
11
L .
LV
vote
VL
""'T
VU,-
four
Sup J...eHI e
1V J. of
J. the
UI
UU
Court justices on the ballot this fall. But critical lawmakers also hope to make impeachment
a tool.
Currently, the state constitution allows impeachment only for treason, bribery or other high
crimes and misdemeanors. No public official has been impeached since 1934.
In other states, conservative groups are spending heavily in contested judicial elections.
Two Arkansas Supreme Court candidates were defeated last week after two groups spent
more than $850,000 on broadcast ads targeting them; one was a sitting justice seeking to
become the chief justice.
n
1
l:HOWnDaCK
ano.rl
1
1
'
h~ave tneu
,"
iawmaxers aireauy
unsuccessruuy
r:r'ln
v,-.h
11
1
to cnange no\v IL1e
1
justices are selected and to cut the judiciary's budget.

"The attacks on the courts in Kansas have definitely been corning faster and more furious
than in other states," said Debra Erenberg, spokesman for Justice at Stake, a Washingtonbased group promoting judicial independence. "It just seems like the Legislature has been
throwing everything it can think of at the courts."
Online:
.-r.1 ext. orr" 1111peacnlUentoiu: httpr,' / brt.Iy,
1 /iocs
~T3
.1'<.,.,-, vre
1
'"
"
111'
MORE KANSAS
"nit!!
- ., "
Y\"UMAT
"",
lU\t
Sponsored linKS by Taboola

Kasey King Complaint Against Senior Judge Jack Burr - 04262016

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Kasey King Complaint Against Senior Judge Jack Burr - 04262016

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

April 27, 2016

Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications

) CASE NO. 15CV79P,

KURTIS LOY, et al., )

) CASE NO. 15SC70P

NOAH IAN DAY,

) CASE NO. 15SC71P

) CASE NO. 15SC85P

Judge, assigned to the District

County, Kansas, at Pittsburg,

did not appear.

Kurtis Loy, Andrew

Fleming, Lori Fleming,

Jeffry Jack, Oliver Kent

Tim Grillot appearing

Bldg, 2nd Floor, 120 SW

their counsel, Ms. Carrie A. Barney, Assistant

Panels A and B appearing

120 SW 10th Avenue,

by and through his counsel, Mr. James Emerson,

P.O. Box 68, Girard,

though her counsel,

Lori Fleming appearing

Mr. Dennis D. Depew, Deputy

120 SW 10th Avenue,

THE COURT: My understanding

is that this is Case

No. 15CV79P, it would be entitled Eric M. -- is that

And others, and those

Kurtis Loy, and others, as listed in the caption.

appear pro se in this case, versus Judge

Let me tell you that my name is Jack Burr.

Senior Judge who has been assigned to this case and

I'm one of a long line of judges apparently who have

been involved, and I'm here from Goodland by

assignment of the Supreme Court, so you are stuck with

me, at least for a while.

Would you announce your appearances,

Steve Phillips, Assistant

General, and I represent Kurtis Loy, Andrew Wachter,

Robert Fleming, Lori Fleming, Jeffry Jack, Oliver Kent

Lynch, Janice Russell, Richard Smith, John E. Sanders,

I'm having trouble hearing you.

THE COURT: I've got a cold,

two, I don't hear very well.

Your Honor, Carrie Barney, Assistant

number one; and,

Your Honor, Jim Emerson,

Your Honor, Dennis Depew, Deputy

I have the afternoon

just here a little early.

I may have some questions

about those too when we finish here but, in any event,

appears in the courtroom

anything, Mr. Phillips?

checked with my office

----------------~------------------no appearances are made, nobody

at least either on behalf

Have you heard

No, Judge, we have not and I have

Office and nothing has been

THE COURT: Well,

nor have I heard anything.

We got a letter last