GENERAL DISTRICT COURT OF
THE CITY OF ALEXANDRIA
|
AND
MEGAN S. ROBERTS, Public servant,
Individually
and in her official Capacity as City Attorney for the City of Alexandria
Plaintiff,
vs.
JANICE WOLK GRENADIER,
Defendant
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Sanctions for not responding to Defendants
– First set of Interrogatories, Production of Documents - Admissions
|
Defendant
requests Sanctions against George McAndrew’s. Megan S. Roberts and the City of
Alexandria for not timely responding to
Defendant’s Request for Admissions, Production of Documents & First Set of
Interrogatories
Defendant on August 13, 2012 pursuant to Rule 4:9 of the Rules of the
Supreme Court of Virginia requested
that the Plaintiff’s respond in a 21 day time frame as required by law. Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney is paid by
the City of Alexandria, where Defendant has paid taxes since 1983. Defendant believes for this reason
Plaintiff’s and Plaintiff’s attorney work for Defendant, and have a higher
degree of fiduciary and ethical responsibility to the truth and to Defendant. This again represents the slippery sloop of
the collusion against Defendant, when Plaintiffs’ attorney and employee of the
COA George McAndrew’s informed Defendant without totally re-viewing the
situation that he did not believe her and that she was a liar. That Judge Fortkort had a letter from the
Supreme Court of Virginia, for his order in December of 2007, no such letter
exists according the Supreme Court of Virginia.
Defendant has been at a disadvantage
in the Judicial system since September of 2007 when Attorney Ilona
Grenadier lied to Judge Kloch, In Defendants appeal to the Supreme Court The
following was stated: ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
The
trial court of the Circuit Court of Alexandria erred by failing to follow Va.
Code 17.1-105(b) after all judges recused themselves (or were required to
recuse themselves) from this matter because of personal relationships between
Defendants and the judges. Instead of
having the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoint an out of Circuit Judge
to hear the case, the Circuit Court of Alexandria (or its clerk) selected a
judge themselves. Appellant’s motions
challenging the appointment of the out of Circuit judges were denied and
judgment ultimately entered against her.
QUESTION PRESENTED
Question:
Did the Circuit Court of Alexandria err by appointing an out of Circuit judge,
instead of have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoint an out of Circuit
judge pursuant to Va.Code 17.1.105(B), when all judges of the Circuit Court of
Alexandria recused themselves (or were required to recuse themselves) because
of relationships between Defendants and the Judges.
Answer: Yes.
Thus, the judgment against Plaintiff should be vacated and the matter
remanded for trial before a new out of Circuit judge appointed by the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court.
PARTIES
1)
Plaintiff
(Appellant) Janice Wolk Grenadier a 50% Owner of 28 East Bellefont Avenue,
Alexandria of which the other 50% is owned by Grenadier Investment Co. Ltd.
(“GIC”). She is divorced from David Mark
Grenadier.
2)
Defendant (Appellee) – David Grenadier is a 49% owner of
GIC. He is the stepson of Ilona Ely
Freedman Grenadier Heckman and the son of the late Judge Albert Grenadier of
the Circuit Court of Alexandria.
3)
Defendant (Appellee) - Ilona Ely Freedman Grenadier
Heckman
is a 51% owner of GIC. She is a licensed
attorney in Virginia and was the wife of the late Judge Albert Grenadier
4)
Defendant
(Appellee) - Grenadier Investment Co. Ltd (“GIC”) a Real
Estate Investment Co. owned 51% by Ilona Grenadier Heckman and 49% by David
Grenadier.
STATEMENT
OF FACTS
Plaintiff
Janice Wolk Grenadier (“Plaintiff”) filed claims in the Circuit Court of
Alexandria (the “Circuit Court”) in September, 2007 against Defendants related
to 28 East Bellefonte Avenue, Alexandria VA (the “Property”) owned 50% by
Plaintiff and 50% by GIC (which was owned by Defendants Ilona and David ). Plaintiff alleged that Defendants failed to
pay their fair share of expenses related to the Property. Plaintiff claimed damages of approximately
$300,000, including interest compounded at 10%.
Defendants Ilona and David were related to the late Judge Grenadier of
the Circuit Court.
At
the time that Plaintiff filed suit, the judges of the Circuit Court were Judge
Donald Haddock, Judge Lisa Kemler, and Judge John Kloch. On or about September 22, 2007, Plaintiff
was informed by Diane Fisk, the Court administrator, that all three judges had
recused themselves, i.e. (1) Judge Kemler was a close friend of and grew up
with Defendant David; (2) Judge Haddock was a personal friend of Defendant
Ilona; and (3) Judge Kloch had a personal relationship with Defendant Ilona and
her late husband, Judge Grenadier.[1] The matter was assigned to out of Circuit
Court judges who were not appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
as early as December, 2007 when out of Circuit Court Judge Thomas A. Fortkort
denied Plaintiff’s motion for a default.
In
April, 2008, Judge Kloch retired and was replaced by Judge Dawkins who was
appointed on April 24, 2008 and sworn in on June, 2008. In July, 2008, out of Circuit Court Judge
Brown denied Plaintiff’s motion for a jury trial. After the decision, Defendant Ilona informed
Plaintiff that Judge Brown was her friend.
This was never disclosed to Plaintiff before Judge Brown’s
decision. Judge John McGrath, an out of
Circuit Court judge, was chosen by the Circuit Court to hear the matter in May,
2008. Judge McGrath dismissed the case
in September, 2008.[2]
In
June, 2010, Plaintiff learned of Va.Code 17.1.105(B). On July 13, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion to
set aside all decisions from September 17, 2007 forward because the out of
Circuit Court judges were improperly appointed.
Plaintiff filed an addendum on August 4, 2010. Judge Kloch denied Plaintiff’s post-trial
motion on August 11, 2010 (even though he had recused himself in 2007 and
retired in April, 2008) and then recused himself and immediately vacated his
decision on August 12, 2010. Thereafter,
Judge Dawkins denied Plaintiff’s post trial motion on or about October 20, 2010
even though in June, 2010 Plaintiff was informed by Diane Fisk that all judges
of the Circuit Court had recused themselves.
ARGUMENT
Supreme Court Rule
§17.1-105(B) provides:
If all the judges of any court of record are so situated
in respect to any case, civil or criminal, pending in their court as to render
it improper, in their opinion, for them to preside at the trial, unless the
cause or proceeding is removed, as provided by law, they shall enter the fact
of record and the clerk of the court shall at once certify the same to the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who shall designate a judge of some other
court of record or a retired judge of any such court to preside at the trial of
such case.
In September, 2007,
Plaintiff was informed that all judges of the Circuit Court recused themselves
because of their close relationship with opposing parties and counsel. Nonetheless, as early as December, 2007, the
Circuit Court appointed various out of Circuit judges itself to adjudicate the
matter, including Judge McGrath to hear the case, instead of following Rule
§17.1-105(b). Thus, this Judge lacked
jurisdiction to decide the matter because the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court should have taken responsibility to appoint a judge to hear the case in
September, 2007. Plaintiff learned of
this in June, 2010 and preserved this point in her July 13, 2010 motion and
August 4, 2010 addendum filed before the Circuit Court.
Here,
not only has the Rule been violated, but the Circuit Court acted with
impropriety and created the appearance of impropriety by having judges who
recused themselves (or were required to recuse themselves) because of personal
relationships with Defendants select the out of circuit judge, instead of the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court making the selection. Even, assuming, for argument, the Judges did
not formally recuse themselves, if they were required to recuse themselves,
they were not permitted to circumvent the procedures of Rule §17.1-105(b) by
selecting an out of Circuit Court judge themselves. This violation is particularly egregious when
the interests of a per se party suing an attorney are at stake.
CONCLUSION
The
petition for appeal should be granted.
All prior decisions and the judgment against Plaintiff should be vacated
and the Chief Justice should reassign the case for trial before a Judge outside
of the Circuit Court.
Plaintiff’s attorney George
MacAndrew’s on September 5, 2012 questioned Defendant’s integrity and honesty
in what has taken place without appropriate research of Plaintiff’s past case
and the lack of integrity of the Virginia Judicial System. Plaintiff is at a disadvantage with not being
able to afford an attorney. If Plaintiff
was lying about any allegations – Plaintiff would have a liable suit against
her. Plaintiff in all pleadings has been
up front – direct - while the City of Alexandria has been disingenuous and
actions have been shady and corrupt. Defendant has been lied to by City
employees on the Rules of the Supreme Court on procedures, on several occasions,
to cover up Judge Donald M. Haddocks mistakes.
The slippery sloop of the illegal and unprofessional behavior of the judicial
system in Virginia started on September 5, 2007 and continues. Defendant on several occasions said “A
mistake was made – Let’s just fix it”
Instead all the way to the Supreme Court of Virginia the collusion to
protect the corrupt City of Alexandria’s actions which Defendant is not the
only victim of Judge Donald M. Haddock’s, Judge Dawkins et al or the City of
Alexandria’s cronyism and favoritism in making judicial decisions. Randy Sengel the Commonwealth Attorney, Ed
Semonian the Clerk of Court, and Patsy Ticer and many others have violated
Defendant and her girls.
Defendant prays this court sanction
Plaintiff’s and there attorney for each day Admissions, Discovery and
Interrogatories are not provided to Defendant.
Defendant is aware the Judge is on Vacation and will not be able to hear
Motion till September 20, 2012.
Defendant reserves the right to delay trial at that time if Plaintiff’s have
not provided Defendant with information requested, and served properly.
Dated this September
6, 2012
________________________________
Janice
Wolk Grenadier
15
West Spring Street
Alexandria,
Virginia 22301
202-368-7178
I hereby certify that
a true and accurate copy of the foregoing document was delivered on September 6,
2012 to Megan S. Roberts and The City of
Alexandria @ 301 King Street, Suite 1300, Alexandria Virginia 22314. Care of George McAndrews Attorney for the
City of Alexandria and Meagan Roberts. A
copy to Judge Richard J. McCue appointed by the Supreme Court of Virginia at
1425 N. Courthouse Road, Suite 2400, 2nd Floor, Arlington Virginia,
22201.
September 6, 2012
Janice Wolk Grenadier
Pro se
[1] Judge
Kloch denied Plaintiff’s motion for default on September 12, 2007 prior to
recusing himself.
[2] In his August 12, 2010
decision vacating his decision and recusing himself, Judge Kloch disclosed a
close business relationship with Judge McGrath through Judicial Solutions, a
private dispute resolution company based in Harrisonburg. Needless to say, this creates the inference
that Judge Kloch may have been involved in the selection of Judge McGrath – the
exact type of appearance of impropriety that Va.Code 17.1.105(B) is designed to
avoid, i.e. recused judges (or judges who should be recused) selecting their
successors instead of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
