Murphy_All Atts to Mtn to Disqualify Judge Ison

List of Attachments to March 26, 2015 Motion for Disqualification

of Senior Judge William Ison

Affidavit of Millard Farmer in support of Motion to Disqualify Senior Judge William Ison

Att. 1 Order Designating Senior Judge William Ison as Judge in Murphy v. Murphy, Superior Court of Coweta County, No. 2012-V-413 Att. 96 Affidavit of Larry King, October 7, 2013 Att. 120 June, 2015 emails, Judge Baldwin and Millard Farmer Att. 154 Transcript of Deposition of Nan Freeman, Official Court Reporter to Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., November 22, 2014 Att. 155 Undated invoice of Harwell, Brown & Harwell, PC Att. 156 Petition for Mandamus served on Attorney General Dec. 3, 2013 Att. 157 Notice to Produce to Peter Durham, Glover & Davis, et al. Att. 158 Motion to Disqualify Judge McFadden w/o attachments Att. 159 Order Denying Motion to Disqualify Judge McFadden

Att. 161 Voluntary Recusal Order of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., February 9, 2015 Att. 162 Order of Recusal of Judge John T. Simpson, Judge Dennis Blackmon and Judge William G. Hamrick III, February 11, 2015 Att. 163 Order of Recusal of Judge Jack Kirby, Judge Emory L. Palmer and Judge W. Travis Sakrison, February 19, 2015 Att. 164 Part 1 of Motion for an Investigation, Public Disclosure and

Termination of the Corruption of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. (Tendered on January 30, 2015 with a Request for Permission to File,

But Not Permitted to be Filed)

Attachment 1

Order Designating Senior Judge William Ison as Judge in Murphy v. Murphy,

Superior Court of Coweta County Civil Action No. 2012-V-413

March 18, 2015

Order Designating Senior Judge William Ison as Judge in Murphy v. Murphy,

Superior Court of Coweta County Civil Action No. 2012-V-413

March 18, 2015

Attachment 96

Affidavit of Larry King October 7, 2013

Attachment 96

Affidavit of Larry King October 7, 2013

Attachment 96, Page 1 of 23

Superior Court of Coweta County and styled Nancy Michelle Murphy, Plaintiff

vs. Delia Tedder Crouch, Civil Action No. 08-V-2137. The Amended Affidavit

that I provided in that litigation is Attachment 3.

4. The legal malpractice litigation involved the 2006 Final Decree of Divorce

that included a Settlement Agreement that was made a part of the Final Decree

in the Superior Court of Troup County styled Murphy v. Murphy, Civil Action

04-CV-494. This final decree is the decree that John Harold Murphy seeks to

have modified in this current litigation.

5. In connection with the legal malpractice litigation the following materials

are included in the materials that I reviewed.

5.1 I reviewed the Complaint and the attachments to the Complaint, which

include some of the following documents that I identify that I have read.

5.2 I reviewed the December 20, 2006 Final Decree of Divorce of the

Superior Court of Troup in Murphy v. Murphy, Civil Action 04-CV-494 and

Exhibit A to the Final Decree of Divorce, a Settlement Agreement, made a

part of that Order.

5.3 I reviewed the April 24, 2007 Qualified Domestic Relation Order

Regarding AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company Pension, which is

referred to at times in the Complaint as the AXA QDRO.

5.4 I reviewed the December 2, 2008 letter to Michelle Murphy from Sheila

Labita, CEBS with AXA Equitable.

5.5 I reviewed the Domestic Relations Financial Affidavit provided by

John Murphy to the Court on November 22, 2005.

5.6 I reviewed the transcript of the August 7, 2006 hearing, where the

settlement agreement was read in open court.

5.7 I reviewed the transcript of the October 18, 2006 hearing relating to the

enforcement of the settlement agreement.


5.8 I reviewed the transcript of the November 15, 2006 hearing relating to

the enforcement of the settlement agreement.

5.9 I reviewed by scanning the certified copy of the entire record of the

Superior Court of Troup County in Murphy v. Murphy, Civil

Action 04-CV-494 and selected documents in that record to read in their

entirety and thumbed through other documents to view the nature of the

document.

5.10 I reviewed the Billing Statement of Delia Tedder Crouch to Michelle

Murphy for legal services provided in connection with a domestic relation

matter that involved litigation in the Superior Court of Troup in Murphy v.

Murphy, Civil Action 04-CV-494 and in the implementing of the Final

Decree if Divorce in that litigation.

5.10.1 During the divorce litigation five (5) different Superior Court

Judges were involved in segments of the litigation.

5.10.2 Neither party sought to remove any of the five judges from the

case.

5.10.3 Each of the five (5) judges served, as the judges appeared on

hearing days, or as they were available for particular segments of the

divorce litigation.

5.11 That litigation was settled with a confidential settlement agreement

that I did not negotiate, or participate in negotiating.

5.12 My experience with the post-divorce malpractice litigation provided

me the knowledge and understanding of the issues between the parties such

that I accepted the request for my participation as counsel in the modification

for custody action that John Harold Murphy filed against Nancy Michelle

Murphy.


5.12.1 In my attempt to promptly resolve the dispute in this litigation,

after Renee Haugerud was made a party to the litigation, but before her

answer was due or she had retained counsel, I reached out to her with a

letter that resulted in her calling me. I offered to meet with me at her

convenience at her home in Chattanooga, Tennessee. I extended this

invitation, as she had been implemental in resolving the dispute in the

malpractice case. After a cordial conversation, she refused to meet with

me in an attempt to reach a resolution in this case.

6. I began representing Nancy Michelle Murphy when John Harold Murphy

brought this current action against Nancy Michelle Murphy and have

represented her continually since that time with Millard Farmer.

7. Based upon my extensive knowledge of domestic relations law and

lengthy experience with litigation, the initial incident of

Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. signing an order that was reported to me that he

did not read designating a guardian ad litem with authority not authorized by

the Uniform Superior Court Rules, and the process by which

Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. was obtained to be the judge in the case, I was

an active decision maker with Millard Farmer and Nancy Michelle Murphy in

making the determination that a motion to disqualify Judge A. Quillian

Baldwin, Jr. was necessary as an initial step in obtaining a fair proceeding for

Nancy Michelle Murphy and her two children.

8. Throughout this litigation, I have been an active decision maker with

Millard Farmer and Nancy Michelle Murphy in continuing to pursue the

disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

8.1 The reasons for the disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

have escalated at each phase of this litigation. Nancy Michelle Murphy, nor


her counsel have ever been treated equally with John Harold Murphy, Renee

Haugerud and their counsel.

8.2 The inequality of treatment received by Nancy Michelle Murphy and

her counsel has never been legally justified.

9. Never have I been so certain that Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. should

have been and now should be disqualified as on Thursday, October 3, 2013.

9.1 On that Thursday, October 3, 2013, I realized that the conduct of

Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. was more vindictive against

Nancy Michelle Murphy and everyone assisting her than just his vendetta

against Millard Farmer for his ill-perceived role of being the most active

participant in attempts to disqualify Judge A. Quillian, Jr. There is no legal

basis for the vindictiveness and bias that Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. has

exercised against Nancy Michelle Murphy and her counsel.

9.2 Millard Farmer has been the scribe, expressing the law and the facts

marshalled by the team of people who have attempted to assist Nancy

Michelle Murphy and her two children. Beginning with the initial

disqualification motion there was and is uniformity of belief by the legal

team supporting Nancy Michelle Murphy that Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

is disqualified to serve in any capacity in this litigation.

10. On Thursday, October 3, 2013 I appeared in Courtroom B of the

Superior Court of Coweta County. I appeared to answer the call of the calendar

call in Murphy v. Murphy.

10.1 The Thursday, October 3, 2013 calendar posted and sent to counsel

from the Clerk of Court of Coweta County does not indicate that a motion for

contempt is on the Thursday, October 3, 2013 calendar, as the

Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover& Davis did not obtain and serve

a Rule Nisi upon either Nancy Michelle Murphy, or her counsel.


10.2 The case was requested to be placed on the calendar by

Prosecutor/Plaintiff Attorney Drake, Taylor. The calendar also designated as

a movant, Prosecutor/Plaintiff Harwell, Elizabeth F., GAL. A true and

accurate clip from the Murphy v. Murphy segment of the Superior Court of

Coweta County calendar for Thursday, November 3, 2013 is as follows.

10.3 Upon call of the calendar above the Court proceeded to hear a Motion

for Contempt against only Nancy Michelle Murphy that was filed on

August 29, 2013. This Motion for Contempt was for an Indirect Contempt

based upon allegations that occurred outside the presence of the Court. The

motion sought criminal and other sanctions against Nancy Michelle Murphy.

10.4 Upon the call of the calendar above the Court also proceeded to hear an

Amended Motion for Contempt that was filed against Nancy Michelle Murphy

on September 27, 2013. The Glover & Davis lawyers did not even serve me

with a copy of this motion as their Certificate of Service clearly shows as

follows.


10.5 The September 27, 2013 Amended Motion for Contempt only apprised

me as follows about the disposition that was sought against Defendants

lawyer. Note lawyer is in the singular and not lawyers in the plural. There

are two lawyers for Nancy Michelle Murphy. A charging document must

identify the person who is being charged. When the defendant has two lawyers

the charging document cannot require either lawyer to guess who is charged

with the alleged contemptuous conduct. The term sanction further does not

define the scope of punishment sought that places the charged party on notice

if the charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The snip below is

from the September 27, 2013 Amended Complaint.


The Amended Motion for Contempt, Containing Distinct and Very Different Grounds for Contempt was Filed on Friday, September 27, 2013, Just Six (6) Days, that included a Saturday and a Sunday, Before the Thursday, October 3, 2013 Hearing, which was Twenty five (25) Days before a Response was Due on Monday, October 28, 2013

10.6 It was and is my strong legal opinion that Nancy Michelle Murphy

should not be assessed blame for the attempted due process violation of the

Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis.

10.6.1 The time between the filing of the Amendment to the Motion for

Contempt by the Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover& Davis

and the hearing was so short that even the Prosecutor/Plaintiff

Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis did not have his witnesses present for the

hearing, only served one lawyer, did not obtain or serve a Rule Nisi and

did not serve a Notice of Hearing upon any lawyer for Nancy Michelle

Murphy.

10.6.2 The challenges that I attempted to address on behalf of

Nancy Michelle Murphy are legal issues that any lawyer is entitled to raise

without having his professional reputation attacked by being cited for

contempt of Court, as I was cited by Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

10.6.3 In my more than thirty-seven years of practicing domestic

relations and other areas of law, I have appeared at thousands of calendar

calls, but unexpectedly and unbeknownst to me at the time of this

Thursday October 3, 2013 calendar call, I was about to experience a type

of judicial treatment that I had never before observed. I have never

experienced or even observed such judicial conduct as was about to be

directed toward me to the detriment of Nancy Michelle Murphy.


The Motion for Indirect Contempt, brought with Due Process Service Deficiency Seeking Criminal Sanctions which are Reflections upon Professional Reputations 10.7 The Motion for Contempt on the Thursday, October 3, 2013 calendar

was filed on August 29, 2013, by the Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of

Glover& Davis on behalf of John Harold Murphy.

10.7.1 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis on

September 12, 2013 served a Notice of a Thursday, October 3, 2013

Hearing for only the original August 29, 2013 Motion for Contempt.

10.7.2 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis

never served a Rule Nisi for the Thursday, October 3, 2013 hearing upon

Nancy Michelle Murphy nor her counsel for their appearance on

Thursday, October 3, 2013 for a hearing on the August 29, 2013 Motion

for Contempt.

10.7.3 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake apparently never even

obtained a Rule Nisi for the Thursday, October 3, 2013 hearing on the

August 29, 2013 Motion for Contempt.

10.7.4 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis in

most, if not all, of his previous hearings has included a Rule Nisi and has

never to my memory filed just a Notice of Hearing. The bench book

distributed by the Judicial Council provides guidance that in contempt

actions, due process requires a Rule Nisi as opposed to the quite different,

Notice of Hearing. Motions seeking Indirect Contempt against a person

provide very distinct statutory and constitutional protections.


The Amended Motion for Contempt, Due Process Service of Charges, Adequate Time to Respond, Identity of Charged Party and an Independent Jurist not Embroiled in the Issues Deficiency.

10.8 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis, on

September 27, 2013 filed an Amended Motion for Contempt. This was only

six days, including a Saturday and a Sunday before the

Thursday, October, 3, 2013 calendar date, and thirty (30) days before a

response was due.

10.8.1 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis

never served a Notice of Hearing nor a Rule Nisi for the Thursday,

October 3, 2013 hearing upon Nancy Michelle Murphy nor her lawyers

for their appearance at a hearing on the Amended Motion for Contempt

that contained a completely different array of charges for contempt. The

charging documents even failed to identify the name of defendants

lawyer. [Note: lawyer is singular and there are two lawyers] The

Certificate of Service on the Amended Complaint accurately reflects that

the charging Amended Contempt document was not served upon me as it

was only served upon Millard Farmer, one of the two lawyers for Nancy

Michelle Murphy.

10.8.2 The Amended Motion for Contempt was based upon an ex parte

communication that the Glover & Davis lawyers had with

Judge A. Quillian, Jr. that resulted in a modification of the custody of the

children by changing the scheduled visitation days of John Harold Murphy

from the schedule set out in the 2006 Final Divorce Decree and as further

modified by the pronouncement in open Court that John Harold Murphy

can take the children anywhere he wishes, even to Russia during his

visitation period.


The Constitutional and Statutory Detriment of the Due Process Service Deficiency 11. Nancy Michelle Murphy has a limited amount of financial resources that

she can appropriate to this litigation without affecting the welfare of the

children.

11.1 Counsel for Nancy Michelle Murphy subpoenaed the school

principal of the children, a teacher of the children and another witness who

had extensive knowledge of this family for the last hearing when

Judge Baldwin abruptly terminated the hearing with the witnesses of

Nancy Michelle Murphy left waiting to testify, but not allowed. The

testimony of these witnesses was relevant to the issue of whether a custody

evaluator was necessary. The affidavit of Dr. Jan Franks, the principal of

Arnall Middle School, is Attachment 1. The affidavit of Polly Craft is

Attachment 2.

11.2 A Rule Nisi permits an opportunity to subpoena a key witness, Renee

Haugerud, whose counsel has refused to allow her deposition and to take the

deposition of Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell after she produces her financial

and other records for which she filed a motion to quash.

11.3 The Response to the August 29, 2013 Motion for Contempt and the

Amendment to the August 29, 2013 Motion for Contempt present defenses

that could have been presented if Nancy Michelle Murphy and defendants

lawyer, if identified, had been provided due process notice.

11.4 The defective due process notification and statutory protections were

clearly identified in Michelle Murphys Notice of Supersedeas and Plea as

to the Absence of Jurisdiction and Unconstitutional Due Process Nature of

the Alleged Contempt Actions Filed by the Glover & Davis Lawyers.


11.5 The Amendment to the Motion for Contempt that was filed on

September 27, 2013 contained neither a Notice of Hearing nor a required

Rule Nisi, as the Amendment was also an Indirect Contempt seeking

criminal sanctions.

11.6 Neither Nancy Michelle Murphy nor Millard Farmer were

subpoenaed to appear at the calendar call or hearing. Neither appeared.

Thursday, October 3, 2013 in the Superior Court of Coweta County 12. That morning before court began, I filed the First Amendment to the

Response of Michelle Murphy to John Murphys Motion for Contempt. In open

court, after the calendar call of the Murphy case, I filed the Notice of

Supersedeas and Plea as to the Absence of Jurisdiction and Unconstitutional

Due Process Nature of the Alleged Contempt Actions Filed by the Glover &

Davis Lawyers.

12.1 Upon entering the courtroom, I sat on the wood bench on the far right

side.

12.2 I observed Nan Freeman, the court reporter, set up. As soon as she

had applied her last piece of duct tape to her wires, she returned to her desk.

12.3 I was aware that Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. had threatened to put

Millard Farmer in jail for attempting to have the court reporter take down the

calendar call. This previous event occurred as follows according to the sworn

testimony supporting the Friday, September 13, 2013 Addendum to

Wednesday, August 28, 2013 Amendment to the Monday, August 19, 2013

Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian

Baldwin, Jr. that was pending awaiting a decision by Judge A. Quillian

Baldwin, Jr. That Amendment to the August 19, 2013 disqualification

motion states as follows.


4.1.2 The transcript of that August 6, 2013 hearing documents the following portion of the transcript before the lawyers, their clients and other persons awaiting a full call of the calendar.


4.1.3 There was a very quiet, conversational speaking tone by counsel for John Murphy to Judge Baldwin. It was Judge Baldwin who yelled; at one point, Im going to put you in jail. Do you understand me? Do you understand me?... very loudly to Millard Farmer, who was standing still and motionless in amazement of the apparent no reason other than bias resulting from the disqualification motions for such conduct by Judge Baldwin.

12.4 In order to avoid any confrontation with Judge A. Quillian Baldwin

about obtaining a recording of the calendar call, long before Court began, I

informed the court reporter that I understood Judge Baldwin's position about

taking down the call of the calendar and was not raising that issue again. I

then pointed to the Murphy case on the calendar and stated that I wanted my

announcement on this case taken down and everything said during the case

taken down.

12.5 In the Notice of Supersedeas and Plea as to the Absence of

Jurisdiction and Unconstitutional Due Process Nature of the Alleged

Contempt Actions Filed by the Glover & Davis Lawyers document that I


filed in open Court, the following explanation of counsels fear that

Judge A. Baldwin, Jr. would not allow issues of law to be presented to the

Court was made.

2.2 Nancy Michelle Murphy, Millard Farmer and Larry King, while reserving all rights, enter this notification of a plea as to the lack of jurisdiction of the court and a plea as to the statutory and constitutional authority of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. to proceed with the following items that the Glover & Davis lawyers have requested that the Clerk of the Superior Court Coweta County place on the list of matters to be called for hearing today. This is an informational notice that documents placed on the calendar of the Court for Thursday, October 3, 2013 do not provide Nancy Michelle Murphy, Millard Farmer and Larry King their constitutionally protected rights. After appropriate notice and charging documents, and a continuance of time, they will respond fully.

12.6 I then gave the court reporter my business card, exchanged

pleasantries and she agreed to my request for the takedown of all matters.

13. The calendar call began without the presence of the court reporter.

13.1 When Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. called the Murphy case, I

immediately stood and stated that I had made arrangements for the court

reporter to take down my announcement and requested that the Murphy

announcement be made when the court reporter returned. Judge Baldwin

complied with my request and called the remainder of the calendar. Judge

Baldwin then apparently asked for someone to retrieve the court reporter, as

she appeared and the Murphy case was called at the end of the calendar.

14. In response to the calendar call I was prepared to make my announcement

in the following order.


14.1 I wanted to provide Judge Baldwin of the dates of the pending

disqualification motions that were awaiting a ruling by him and that Uniform

Superior Court Rule 25 required Judge Baldwin to cease acting on the matter

until he ruled upon the disqualification motions. The following documents

relating to the disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. are pending

and awaiting a ruling by Judge Baldwin or an independent judge assigned to

hear the motions. These disqualification motions are summarily identified as

follows.

July 2, 2012 Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

Monday, August 19, 2013 Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., Constitutional Challenges to Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 et seq. and for Other Uses as Allowed by Law August 28, 2013: Amendment to Monday, August 19, 2013 Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., Initiated with this Judges Ill Put You in Jail Threats that Motivated John Murphy to Sic the Deputy Sheriff of Coweta County on the Mother of the Children whom She Raised Since John Murphy Abandoned the Family Friday, September 13, 2013 Addendum to Wednesday, August 28, 2013 Amendment to the Monday, August 19, 2013 Consolidated Motions for Disqualification of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

14.2 After informing Judge Baldwin of the pending disqualification

motions, I wanted to advise the Court that the required personal service and

a Rule Nisi, had been given and that the matter was not before the Court.


14.3 I wanted to advise the Court that it had no jurisdiction, as the

Amended Motion for Contempt attempted to add what could be one of two

parties, identified as the lawyer for Nancy Michelle Murphy. The adding

of one of possible two new parties to the motion for contempt was a violation

of the rights of the newly added party but was additionally prejudicial to

Nancy Michelle Murphy, as such conduct is detrimental to Michelle Murphy

to have Judge Baldwin allowing the Glover & Davis lawyers attacking her

lawyer.

14.4 I wanted to advise the Court that the August 23, 2013 Order was on

appeal and that any contempt of that Order was superseded by the appeal.

14.5 Additionally, I wanted to advise the Court that the

September 27, 2013 motion was not noticed nor ripe for hearing on October

3, 2013.

15. At some point during my monotone announcement of the above

statements of what I felt to be an initial consideration, Judge Baldwin stated

something like, I hold you in contempt. I am tired of all this stuff you all are

doing. I order you incarcerated until you pay $1000.00 attorney fees as a

purge.

15.1 The transcript being prepared by Nan Freeman, the court reporter, of

the exact language use by Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. is being sought to

obtain the exact language.

15.2 After this pronouncement by Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., I

walked towards the Sheriff and Clerk with my right hand in my right pocket

to retrieve the money.

15.3 The deputy, a white male raised in Clayton County who graduated

from Jonesboro High School 1995, grabbed my right biceps as I attempted

to obtain the purge money. I felt as if I was in his custody while I obtained


the money from my pocket and as I paid the purge to the Deputy Clerk in

open court.

15.4 After paying the $1,000, I stated, let the record reflect that I have

paid the purge to the Clerk of Court.

15.5 Judge Baldwin seemed frustrated that I could immediately purge the

contempt by paying the $1,000.

15.6 Other matters on the calendar were handled after I paid the $1,000.

15.7 Judge Baldwin took a break around 10:00 a.m. and stated that the

Murphy case would be dealt with when he returned from break. I sat at

counsel table during the break.

After the Contempt for Reciting the Basis for the Court not Proceeding

16. I rely on the transcript for a more comprehensive statement of the events

that followed; however, the following accounting of the events is accurate to

the best of my knowledge and belief.

16.1 I made as my opening, a statement of some of the issues. It became

obvious that any further identification of these due process and statutory

protections or the disqualification motions that were not yet ruled upon

would result in me being held in contempt of court once again.

16.2 The contempt action affected my presentation of issues to the Court,

as it was unpredictable to me when, or what would ignite the fury of

Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. once again. Judge Baldwin had held me in

contempt for merely reciting some of the constitutional and statutory

protections accorded persons charged as Nancy Michelle Murphy and one of

the two lawyers for Nancy Michelle Murphy.

16.3 The Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis called

John Harold Murphy as his first witness. Taylor Drake attempted to present

the issues raised in the August 29, 2013 Motion for Contempt relating to


visitation and the issues raised in the September 27, 2013 Amended Motion

for Contempt relating to the alleged noncooperation with the custody

evaluator with only the testimony of John Harold Murphy.

16.4 It is relevant to note that John Harold Murphy only provided a

verification that the facts were true and accurate to the best of his

knowledge and belief to support the motion for Contempt and the Amended

Motion for Contempt.

During the Direct Examination of John Harold Murphy, Judge Baldwin Informed Counsel that he Wished to Speak with Counsel in Chambers 17. During John Harold Murphys testimony, Judge A. Harold Murphy stated

that he wished to talk to counsel in chambers. The court reporter did not proceed

to chambers, or take down the communications that occurred in chambers.

17.1 As counsel walked down the hallway with Judge Baldwin to his

chambers, he stated, "I did not want to embarrass anyone out there, but I

cant do anything about the failure to cooperate with the evaluator unless I

hear from her." (Meaning the Custody Evaluator). The Custody Evaluator

was selected by Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell, who took money from the

guardian ad litem trust account as explained under oath in the Response of

Michelle Murphy to Counsel for Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell, Teresa E.

Lazzaroni of Hawkins Parnell Thackston & Youngs Motion on behalf of

Guardian ad Litem Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwells Request for Protective

Order and Motion to Quash Michelle Murphys Subpoena for Deposition

and Production of Evidence and Notice of Deposition

1.2 The subpoenaed documents from Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell, in part, relate to the illegal conversion of trust funds to the personal use of Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell. This conduct is a violation of Uniform Superior Court Rule 24.9 (8) (g), and


thereby OCGA 16-8-2 and Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.15(I) 1.2.1 Uniform Superior Court Rule 24.9 (8) (g) provides as follows.

g. Payment of GAL Fees and Expenses. It shall be within the Court's discretion to determine the amount of fees awarded to the GAL, and how payment of the fees shall be apportioned between the parties. The GAL's requests for fees shall be considered, upon application properly served upon the parties and after an opportunity to be heard, unless waived. In the event the GAL determines that extensive travel outside of the circuit in which the GAL is appointed or other extraordinary expenditures are necessary, the GAL may petition the Court in advance for payment of such expenses by the parties. emphasis supplied

1.2.2 Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell took the money that was provided in trust to Melissa Griffis, the first guardian ad litem appointed by Judge Baldwin, which she apparently transferred to Elizabeth Lisa F. Harwell in trust. The funds were subject to the protections of Uniform Superior Court Rule 24.9 (8) (g), and thereby OCGA 16-8-2 and Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.15(I) The street language for this conduct is stealing.

1.2.2.1 The street analogy of the conduct of Elizabeth Lisa

F. Harwell would be a company employee taking money from

the cash register for the employees personal use, with a written

company policy against such conduct, after the employee had

worked a few days before the employees paycheck was due later

in the week.

1.2.2.2 The message from Judge Baldwin to the people in the

Coweta Judicial Circuit is that the Chief Judge believes that it is


permissible for a court appointed fiduciary to engage in such

conduct because the conduct of the guardian ad litem is being

challenged by counsel who is also challenging the judges ethical

conduct for converting to the judges personal benefit, legally

protected rights belonging to a litigant.

1.2.2.3 A political benefit is a thing of value that a judge cannot

accept in exchange for denying a litigant rights protected by law.

17.2 Instead of coaching Taylor Drake about the evidence that he needed,

Judge Baldwin could have done the one thing that a jurist is required to do:

ask if counsel for John Harold Murphy had additional evidence to present. If

the Prosecutor/Plaintiff Taylor Drake did not have further evidence, a

dismissal was appropriate rather than Judge Baldwin taking over a portion

of the prosecution of a motion which was unconstitutionally before him.

18. Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. would not have been constitutionally

accorded the opportunity to engage in the conduct in which he engaged on

Thursday, October 3, 2013, if Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 was facially

constitutional, as this Rule has been consistently challenged in this litigation.

The challenge is as follows.

Uniform Superior Court Rule 25, as applied and facially violates the

protections afforded The Michelle Murphy and Children Parties in this case and

to others in all cases under the United States Constitution, equal protection U.S.

Const. amend. XIV, 1 and State of Georgia Constitution Bill or Rights equal

protection (Ga. Const. Art. I, 1, 2)

Uniform Superior Court Rule 25, as applied and facially, violates the

protections afforded the Michelle Murphy and Children Parties in this case and

to others in all cases under the United States Constitution due process, U.S.


Attachment 120

Emails, Judge Baldwin and Millard Farmer

Attachment 120

Emails, Judge Baldwin and Millard Farmer

Attachment 154

Transcript of Deposition of Nan Freeman, Official Court Reporter to Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

November 22, 2014

Attachment 154

Transcript of Deposition of Nan Freeman, Official Court Reporter to Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.

November 22, 2014

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA

2 NANCY MICHELLE MURPHY, )

3 ) Plaintiff, )

4 ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION FILE

5 ) NO. 2014CV241705 NAN FREEMAN and FREEMAN )

6 REPORTING, INC., ) )

7 Defendants. ) _____________________________)

89 * * *10 Videotape Deposition of

NAN DUBOSE FREEMAN,11 (individually and as

30(b)(6) representative of12 Freeman Reporting, Inc.)13

November 22, 201414 9:44 a.m.15

5180 Lone Oak Road16 Hogansville, Georgia17

By Marcia Arberman, RPR, CCR B-10591819 ***************************************************20212223 VERITEXT LEGAL SOLUTIONS24 1075 Peachtree Street, NE - Suite 362525 Atlanta, Ga 30309

Page 1

Veritext National Court Reporting CompanyToll Free: 855.282.1018 404.817.9606


E X A M I N A T I O N

Page2

Cross-Examination by Mr. Farmer 53

E X H I B I T S4

Plaintiff's5 Exhibit Description Page6 1 Notice of Deposition 57 2 Payments from the State of Georgia to 13

Freeman Reporting, Inc. from 2010 to8 20139 3 9-22-12 Freeman Reporting, Inc. 23

invoice to Farmer10

4 6-19-14 e-mail to Farmer from Harris 3811 (Judge Baldwin's secretary)12 5 Certificate page of 5-27-14 49

transcript13

6 6-10-14 Freedom of Information 5014 request letter15 7 6-12-14 letter to King from Freeman 5016 8 Transcript addendum 5117 9 6-5-14 Freeman Reporting, Inc. 66

invoice to Farmer18

10 10-16-13 Freeman Reporting, Inc. 7419 invoice to Farmer20 11 8-12-14 letter to Farmer from 85

Skandalakis2122232425

Page 31 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:2 On behalf of the Plaintiff:3 MILLARD C. FARMER, JR., ESQ.

151 Nassau Street4 Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone: (404) 688-81165 [email protected] On behalf of the Defendants:7 KENNETH LAMAR GORDON, ESQ.

5180 Lone Oak Road8 Hogansville, GA 30230

Phone: (706) 637-45589 [email protected]

10 Also Present:11 Nancy Michelle Murphy

Kimellen Tunkle12 Spencer Bush, Videographer13141516 * * *171819202122232425

Page 41 MR. FARMER: I think maybe we'll let the2 parties identify themselves.3 I'm Millard Farmer, and I represent4 Nancy Michelle Murphy. And with me is Paralegal5 Kimellen Tunkle, and with me is Nancy Michelle6 Murphy, who is the Plaintiff.7 MR. GORDON: Ken Gordon, attorney to8 Nan Freeman, and my client Nan Freeman.9 MR. FARMER: And Freeman Reporting,

10 Inc., right?11 MR. GORDON: Right.12 MR. FARMER: And this is a deposition.13 It's taken by agreement. And we got a Notice of14 Deposition that we have some documents that15 we'll probably be able to substitute for during16 the deposition unless there's some dispute about17 the documents. And I will ask that this be made18 a part of the deposition, if you will.19 You want to identify these as -- how20 would we like to identify the -- how would we21 like to identify the --22 MR. GORDON: The notice?23 MR. FARMER: No, just Plaintiff's 1?24 MR. GORDON: Yeah, that would be fine.25 MR. FARMER: We'll just mark this for

Page 51 Plaintiff's Exhibit 1.2 THE REPORTER: Should I mark it now?3 MR. FARMER: You may mark it now, if you4 will.5 (Whereupon, marked for identification,6 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1.)7 MR. FARMER: If you will, please swear8 the witness.9 NAN DUBOSE FREEMAN,

10 having been first duly sworn, was deposed and11 testified as follows:12 CROSS-EXAMINATION13 BY MR. FARMER:14 Q Would you state your name, please?15 A Nan DuBose Freeman.16 Q And are you here in the capacity of also17 representing Freeman Reporting, Inc.?18 A Yes, sir.19 Q And would you please tell us what is20 Freeman Reporting, Inc.?21 A I'm a court reporter. And that's the22 name I'm incorporated under.23 Q And are you the owner -- or what is the24 owner status of Freeman Reporting, Inc.?25 A I'm the owner, I guess.

2 (Pages 2 - 5)Veritext National Court Reporting Company

Toll Free: 855.282.1018 404.817.9606Attachment 154, Page 2 of 53

Q Okay. And you're here in the capacity2 to represent Freeman Reporting, Inc. also?3 A Yes, sir.4 Q And would you tell us a little bit about5 your experience and occupation?6 A Well, I'm a court reporter. I was7 certified several years ago. And I have been working8 first as a freelance and shortly after, an official.9 Q In -- in your ownership of Freeman

10 Reporting, Inc., did you have other reporters working11 for you, or do you have employees of Freeman12 Reporting, Inc.?13 A No, sir. I'm a sole reporter.14 Sometimes I will help people find a reporter. Or I15 will -- if I need to be away, I will just give the job16 to somebody. I don't employ anybody. I have a17 typist, but she's under contract. You know, she's a18 contract worker.19 Q And what type of contract is she under?20 A I mean, we don't -- it's not a signed21 contract. But she just -- you know, she's not an22 employee. She's self-employed as well.23 Q You have an oral agreement with her?24 A Yes, sir.25 Q And does she do your -- all of your

Page 71 typing, primarily all of it, or would you explain?2 A It depends. It helps me to have her to3 type when I'm busy in court and so forth. It just4 depends. I send her some. I do some -- I do a lot of5 it myself.6 Q And who -- who is she?7 A Patricia Britt.8 Q And where does she live?9 A Oklahoma.

10 Q Say it again.11 A Oklahoma.12 Q And how does she get the material,13 working out of Oklahoma?14 A I mail her the recording, and she15 e-mails me the transcripts.16 Q And did she participate in preparation17 of any of the transcripts in the case of Harold --18 Harold Murphy against Nancy Michelle Murphy?19 A Not that I recall. I don't believe she20 did in any of those.21 Q So you think --22 A I think I did them all.23 Q You did it all.24 And what is your arrangement with the25 person in Oklahoma? How does that -- how does that

Page 81 work?2 A I pay her by the page.3 Q But does she work for a company or4 how --5 A No. No, she doesn't. As far as I know,6 I'm the only court reporter she types for.7 Q Okay. And how did you locate her?8 A I've just known her all my life.9 Q All right. And where did she live

10 before Oklahoma?11 A She's lived several places. Austin,12 Texas; Tallahassee, Florida; in Georgia.13 Q And where in Georgia did she live?14 A Washington.15 Q And -- and for the -- what year were you16 certified, the first year that you were certified as a17 reporter?18 A I believe 1996.19 Q And do you -- are you employed as the20 court reporter in the Coweta Judicial Circuit?21 A I am now, yes.22 Q And what period of time have you been23 employed in that capacity?24 A I have a hard time remembering this. I25 think it was in 1999.

Page 91 Q And who employed you?2 A Well, I'm self-employed, actually. But3 I've worked for two different judges.4 Q Okay. And what two judges have you5 worked for?6 A Allen Keeble and Quillian Baldwin.7 Q And what period of time have you worked8 for each of those judges?9 A All right. Best I can remember, I

10 started with Judge Keeble in 1999, and I think I11 worked with him through 2011. And I've worked with12 Judge Baldwin since the beginning of 2012, I believe.13 (Whereupon, a cell phone rang.)14 MR. FARMER: Just a second.15 Okay. The cell phones -- the cell16 phones are off. We had a cell phone17 interruption there.18 BY MR. FARMER:19 Q I got interrupted with the cell phone20 and diverted. You were telling me that you worked21 with Judge Keeble and --22 A Yes.23 Q -- then what?24 A I think I worked from him -- for him25 from 1999 till 2011 -- through 2011. In 2012 I began



to work for Judge Baldwin.2 Q And was it Judge Baldwin and3 Judge Keeble that selected you? Is that the basis for4 that employment? How does that work?5 A I don't really know. I think6 Judge Keeble's former court reporter was moving away7 and she suggested me. I don't really know the process8 because I was only involved in being employed. I9 don't know what went on behind the scenes.

10 Q All right. Do you have any special11 arrangement with them or just that you're going to12 do the -- you're going to do their work, or how does13 that work?14 A I'm not sure. I think -- I think that15 they maybe -- I'm not sure about this. Maybe they16 submit something to the State. I don't really know.17 Q And you -- as I understand, you receive18 a stipend from the State of Georgia; is that right?19 A Define "stipend." For you -- I mean, I20 know that -- I mean, I know what it means to me. What21 do you mean?22 Q It means -- what I'm trying to say, it23 means that you get money from the State of Georgia.24 A Yes, sir.25 Q And what money is that, and how does

Page 111 that money -- how do you get the money from the State2 of Georgia?3 A To my knowledge, the only thing I get4 from the State of Georgia is because of -- we go to5 five different counties. I get a small check because6 I go to five counties. That's all I know.7 Q And does that amount to around three to8 four thousand dollars a year in the last years?9 A That requires math. I'm not sure.

10 Q Okay. But it's -- the State -- the11 State -- I will show you this -- this State of Georgia12 record just so you can look at it. It shows that13 Freeman Reporting received $3,840 in 2013.14 A Okay.15 Q And it's DOAS-Court. I don't know what16 that means. Do you -- how did you apply for or how17 did you receive that money?18 A I don't know what that is.19 MR. GORDON: Department of20 Administrative Services.21 A Okay. I would say it's possibly the22 amount that I get from the State for the five counties23 I cover.24 BY MR. FARMER:25 Q And do you make an application -- when

Page 121 you say you, you mean Freeman Reporting? Is that what2 you mean?3 A Well, that's -- that's who gets the4 check.5 Q That's what I'm asking.6 A Yes, sir.7 Q Because it is a different entity from8 you individually. You understand that?9 A I do, right.

10 Q And then you understand in -- that you11 got $4,160 in 2010.12 A That's what that says. I don't -- I13 don't know.14 Q Okay. But is that -- is that consistent15 with your memory?16 A I never totaled it that I remember.17 Q And when do you receive that?18 Monthly?19 A Yes, sir.20 Q And is it a flat rate or is it part of21 a -- or is it part of a -- is it part of -- according22 to how much work you do or is it --23 A Honestly, I don't know. It comes with24 the job. And it's just a monthly amount.25 Q So it is a flat rate, not -- not --

Page 131 A Yes.2 Q -- according to how many jobs?3 A No, sir.4 Q I'm going to identify these two things5 as Plaintiff's Exhibit --6 MS. TUNKLE: It's just one. It's only7 one page.8 (Previously marked for identification,9 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2.)

10 BY MR. FARMER:11 Q One page. It's two copies. It's12 Plaintiff's Exhibit 2. If you will, just take a look13 at Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 and see if that's consistent14 with what -- the information you've been discussing15 with us. And it's on the -- projected on the screen.16 A What's -- what's on the screen, that's17 certain. I have no idea if that's the total I got a18 year or not, but that's what that says.19 Q And is that separate from other money20 that you receive?21 A Yes, sir.22 Q And do you receive -- do you receive23 other money from the County that's on a flat-fee24 basis?25 A I receive money from the Counties,



yes.2 Q And is it based on a flat fee?3 A Some is.4 Q It is?5 A Some of it is.6 Q Say it again.7 A Some of it is.8 Q Well, is some of it not?9 A Yes.

10 Q Okay. Explain to me that.11 A I get a per diem for the day that I'm in12 court from the County that I serve in that day, and13 then I get paid by the page for transcripts.14 Q Do you -- do you understand the basis15 for the -- for that pay?16 A I don't --17 Q Do you know how much you receive per18 day?19 A Yes, sir.20 Q And is that -- who is that set by?21 A I don't know. The State, I guess. I22 really don't know exactly who sets it.23 Q Do you know who sets the amount per page24 that you're paid?25 A Same entity. I don't know if it's the

Page 151 Board of Court Reporting or the legislature. I'm not2 sure.3 Q Do you keep up with that amount?4 A How do you mean?5 Q Do you -- are you familiar with what6 you're entitled to receive?7 A Oh, yes, sir.8 Q And will you explain to us how that --9 how much -- how does that work? If you go to court,

10 you're there a part of a day or if you go to --11 A I get paid a per diem for going that12 day. If we stay longer than a certain number of13 hours, I get more. I don't -- and I think it's more14 than eight hours I get a certain amount; more than15 nine, I get a little bit more. I don't remember those16 two amounts.17 Q Do you bill the County? Or who do you18 bill to get --19 A I bill the County.20 Q And what kind of billing records do you21 have for that?22 A I just have the invoices that I pay --23 that I send to them.24 Q Okay. So in these documents that we're25 requesting in this notice to bring to the deposition,

Page 161 you would have records to support that?2 A I believe so.3 Q And how do you itemize that to the4 County?5 A I itemize the per diem for how many days6 of -- usually I try to bill by the week. Sometimes --7 excuse me, sometimes -- anyway, I just bill by the day8 for the County. And then when I submit transcripts, I9 usually list the case and the case number and the

10 date, and then I -- the amount based on the pages.11 Q And do you get that in addition to what12 you're compensated by the parties if the parties buy13 the --14 A Well, that would be a civil case. The15 County has nothing to do with that.16 Q So you receive that amount only in17 criminal cases?18 A I think I charge the same page rate, but19 I don't bill the County for the civil -- civil20 transcripts. I bill them for the day that I'm in21 court but not for the transcript.22 Q All right. So let's -- so we understand23 it, on the per diem rates, you bill the County for24 both civil and criminal; am I correct?25 A Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

Page 171 Q And then, of course, for the criminal2 cases, you bill the County on the page limit,3 right?4 A Yes, sir.5 Q And is the page limit that you bill the6 County for, is it the same as the page limit that you7 bill individuals for?8 A Yes, sir.9 Q And do you bill the individuals for the

10 per diem rate?11 A No, sir.12 Q So the individuals do not pay the13 per diem rate for the County?14 A That's correct.15 Q And do you submit that to the judge for16 approval?17 A Yes, sir.18 Q And you submitted it in the case of John19 Harold Murphy versus Michelle Murphy?20 A Now, I have for the per diem. I do not21 submit my bill for a civil case transcript to him.22 Q All right. Do you submit the23 per diem --24 A Yes. I do that but not for the25 transcript --



Q And --2 A -- or for the takedown -- excuse me --3 or for the takedown in a civil case.4 Q So as I -- just so we're clear about it,5 in a civil case, the County does pay for you coming?6 A Providing for the court reporter. The7 County pays for me to be there.8 Q And the County is not reimbursed if the9 parties in the civil case pays you for the takedown or

10 anything like --11 A No, sir.12 Q The County is not reimbursed? That's13 just a --14 A No, sir.15 Q And if -- if the parties agree to pay16 for the takedown -- one of the parties agree to the17 takedown and then they order the transcript --18 A Uh-huh (affirmative).19 Q -- do you charge for the takedown plus20 the transcript, or do you just charge for the21 transcript?22 A For the takedown and the transcript.23 Q Two separate things?24 A Yes, sir.25 Q And how do you account for the time that

Page 191 you spend for the takedown?2 A I usually keep a record of it.3 Q Do you -- do you include that record in4 your billing?5 A Do you mean do I put down how many6 minutes it was or --7 Q Right.8 A No, I don't.9 Q And how does a person know how much time

10 is --11 A I usually keep a record of it, and I12 bill it. If they question me, I can go back and look.13 Q Okay. So you would have that record14 that you could --15 A I would assume so. I can't swear that I16 would have it on every one, but I would -- I would17 imagine I could or I could at least do the math to18 figure it out.19 Q So do you have it in the -- in the20 transcripts that we're dealing with, John Harold21 Murphy versus Michelle Murphy?22 A I can't answer. I don't know.23 Q Would you have originally kept it?24 A I believe so.25 Q And are you the record keeper?

Page 201 A Yes, sir.2 Q You do all of the record and all of the3 billing yourself?4 A Yes, sir.5 Q And do you -- so in the Murphy case, as6 I understand, you -- you did all of the --7 A To the best of my recollection, yes.8 Q To the best of your recollection?9 A Yes, sir.

10 Q You did both the record keeping and you11 did the actual typing of the transcripts?12 A I do believe I did. I'm not -- I can't13 say 100 percent, but I'm pretty sure I did.14 Q And in the takedown part of it, it's for15 the time that you actually were involved in taking16 down the --17 A To the best of my knowledge.18 Q And if two parties are a party to the19 case, is that divided --20 A Yes, sir.21 Q -- between the two parties?22 A I'm sorry. Yes, sir, it is.23 Q And explain that for the transcript and24 for the takedown. Explain to me how that works.25 A Okay.

Page 211 Q Let's say two parties in the case --2 A All right.3 Q -- and both -- and they split the --4 split the amount.5 A Okay. In this case, as I recall, I6 divided the takedown in half and charged each party7 for one-half the takedown. And in this case because8 you both -- both sides ordered the transcript pretty9 much on the same day, I remember the first day

10 discussing it, and I don't remember if I discussed it11 any more than that. But I do remember I divided -- I12 took everything and divided it by 2.13 In some cases the party that orders it14 first you would charge the copy -- I mean the original15 and two copies. Later the other party orders it, and16 I would charge them a copy rate.17 In this case, as I recall, you pretty18 much both ordered it at the same time, and I divided19 it in half so that each party paid the same amount.20 Q And if -- if in a -- if in a case21 involving someone else, say, not the Murphy case --22 A Uh-huh (affirmative).23 Q -- one party orders it and a week later24 or two weeks later the other party orders it, do25 you -- do you give the party the credit -- that



ordered it first credit for the -- when the other2 party pays for it?3 A I don't understand what you're asking.4 Q All right. It's not a very clear5 question.6 As I understand, if the person orders it7 afterwards, you're only charging for the copy?8 A As a rule, yes, I would say pretty much9 that's the case.

10 Q Okay. And is there any provision for11 that in the Rules, or how do you --12 A Not that I know of. But I don't think13 that's an uncommon practice.14 Q By uncommon practice, how do you --15 A Among court reporters. I do believe16 other court reporters bill that way, where they divide17 it totally in half.18 Q All right. I understand, the "totally19 in half" part.20 A Yes, okay.21 Q I'm talking about where one party orders22 it earlier.23 A Oh, yes, sir. And sometimes it's months24 later when the other party orders the copy.25 Q And so then if you order it later --

Page 231 A Yes.2 Q -- you only pay -- you only pay for one3 copy?4 A That's my understanding. I mean, that's5 how I charge. That's my understanding of the way it's6 supposed to be.7 Q And where do you obtain that8 understanding?9 A Well, I just know that the copy rate --

10 the original and two copies is one charge and the copy11 rate is another. And if the other party has already12 ordered it and I've submitted it to them, the other13 party is entitled to a copy if they participated in14 takedown.15 Q So the person that orders it first is16 charged at a higher rate?17 A As a rule. But in this case I divided18 it in half because --19 Q This case meaning Murphy v. Murphy?20 A -- yes, sir -- because pretty much it21 was ordered at the same time.22 (Previously marked for identification,23 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3.)24 BY MR. FARMER:25 Q I'm going to show you what I marked as

Page 241 Plaintiff's Exhibit --2 MR. FARMER: 4 are we up to?3 MS. TUNKLE: 3, I think.4 BY MR. FARMER:5 Q 3, 3. I'm going to -- I'm not going to6 mark this as an exhibit, but I'm going to show you the7 transcript of the proceedings.8 A Yes, sir.9 Q And I'm going to show you that. If you

10 prefer, here's a -- (hands document to the witness.)11 A This is fine.12 MR. GORDON: Yeah, we're okay.13 MR. FARMER: I'm trying to hand it to14 her.15 MR. GORDON: Oh, you're trying to hand16 it to her?17 MR. FARMER: Yes.18 BY MR. FARMER:19 Q And I'm going to ask, if you will, if20 you will explain --21 A Okay. Evidently in this one you ordered22 first. In the other -- it appears in this one -- I23 must have been mistaken. It appears in this one you24 must have ordered it first and I mailed you an25 original and one. I made a mistake, I guess, in that.

Page 251 That was from my memory.2 Q So that billing is incorrect? Is that3 what you're telling me?4 A No, sir. I'm saying I was incorrect5 when I said that I thought that I had to have every --6 Q All right. Do you have records to7 support the ordering of that transcript?8 A I'm not sure. I would have to look9 back. I don't know. I usually take an oral order.

10 And I may or may not have made a note. I don't know.11 You could have mailed me -- sent me an e-mail. I12 don't remember.13 Q Was there a division of the takedown in14 that -- on that occasion?15 A Yes, sir.16 Q And you're telling me that they did17 not -- that they did not order?18 A I'm saying from looking at this, it19 appears that they would have ordered it later. I20 don't know.21 Q Do you have records to support that?22 A I'd have to look and see.23 Q Can you provide those records for us?24 A I'll see if I can. I don't know that I25 do. I'll see.



I would say based on that, that that is2 what I did and that is what occurred.3 Q And do you have any -- do you have any4 rule to rely upon that allows you to do that?5 A Not that I'm -- not that I can think of6 right now.7 Q Are you familiar with the -- are you8 familiar with the basis for charging fees that the9 State has?

10 A I don't know that I know what you11 mean.12 Q Okay. The State controls the Board of13 Court Reporting --14 A Yes.15 Q -- through the Council -- the Superior16 Court judges? They control the fees; is that right?17 A As far as I know.18 Q And are you familiar with those rules?19 A I guess I am. I've told you what I20 understand.21 Q Okay. Have you examined the fees that22 you charged in the Murphy case to Michelle Murphy to23 see if you were in compliance with the Board of Court24 Reporters' rules?25 A When I made my bill, it was my

Page 271 understanding that I was --2 Q Okay. But since that time --3 A -- in compliance.4 Q -- we've said that you did not -- that5 you had not charged correctly. And I'm asking you,6 have you examined to see if you did charge7 correctly?8 A Based on the pages, I charged9 correctly.

10 Q Based on the fee that you collected, did11 you charge correctly?12 A Based on the fee that I charged by the13 page, I believe that I charged correctly.14 Q Well, did you charge incorrectly by any15 other basis?16 A Could you be more specific?17 Q Yes. The law, it's not just a page18 requirement. You understand that?19 A Yes, sir.20 Q It's other requirements --21 A Yes, sir.22 Q -- for the charges.23 A Uh-huh (affirmative).24 Q Have you looked at -- since you know25 that we said you didn't charge --

Page 281 A Yes, sir.2 Q -- that you overcharged --3 A Uh-huh (affirmative).4 Q -- have you looked to see if you5 overcharged?6 A Yes, I did.7 Q Yes, you did look or, yes, you did8 overcharge?9 A Yes, I did look.

10 Q Okay.11 A And it's my understanding that I made a12 mistake and that instead of having space for13 63 characters, I had space for 61. So it was two14 characters per line.15 Q And did that make a difference in the16 billing?17 A I think it probably would. It probably18 would. But it would just depend on the transcript as19 to what difference it would make because of20 different -- different --21 Q Did you calculate to see what difference22 that it would make?23 A It could be figured. Yes, sir.24 Q Did you figure it?25 A I have looked at it. Yes, sir.

Page 291 Q Okay. And what did you determine?2 A I can't tell you per transcript. But I3 recalculated, and it appeared to me it was less than4 $45.5 Q But you did --6 A -- for all of them.7 Q But you say you -- that's what you8 calculated? You overcharged by $45?9 A If I reconfigured the page, it appeared

10 that that's what it would be.11 Q And when did you reconfigure -- when did12 you make those calculations?13 A Within the last two or three months. I14 don't know. I don't know the date.15 Q Was that after the complaint was16 filed?17 A Yes, sir.18 Q And did you calculate the reason for19 that overcharge?20 A As I said, instead of having space for21 63 characters on a line, I had space for 61.22 Q And how did you -- how do you make those23 determinations of what you had?24 A I counted per space on a line.25 Q And when you -- before you billed it,



how did you make the calculation?2 A I just used the template that I had set3 up. And evidently at some point it was set up4 incorrectly.5 Q Okay. What kind of template do you6 have?7 A It's just something I've had set up a8 long time. I had -- when I bought my first computer,9 I had help. I had to learn Word. I used Microsoft

10 Word.11 Q Okay. Which version? 210?12 A I've used different ones but --13 Q Okay. When you first set it up.14 A This would be a much earlier version. I15 don't know what version it was.16 Q Okay.17 A And I've continued to use that. I18 just -- I found out from the person I bought my19 computer from -- somebody in their office. The person20 I bought it from didn't know anything about Word, but21 there was somebody in the office that showed me the22 legal template. And I just used it and kind of had to23 figure it out myself.24 I was new in LaGrange. I didn't know25 anybody. I was new in LaGrange. I didn't know

Page 311 anybody to ask. I didn't really know anybody. I just2 set it up by myself. I remember counting spaces. I3 remember working to get the thing set up.4 And at some point I guess inadvertently5 it changed from 63 to 61. I don't know. I don't6 really know when -- when -- I don't know when it7 became 61 characters. I don't know if it was from the8 beginning or when. I don't know.9 Q And who did you buy the computer from?

10 A I don't remember. It's the company11 that's been out of business. I can tell you where12 they were located many years ago, but --13 Q All right.14 A -- they've been out of business for a15 long time.16 Q Where were they located?17 A LaGrange.18 Q And where in LaGrange?19 A Off of Whitesville Road on Lukken20 Industrial Boulevard.21 Q And when you set it up, did you continue22 using the same program all the way through when you23 did the Murphy case?24 A Well, I -- oh, with the Murphy case,25 yes, sir, as far as I remember.

Page 321 Q Okay. From the time you had the2 computer?3 A I just used -- as far as I remember, I4 haven't changed the template -- I used the -- I used5 the same version as far as I remember.6 Q For approximately how many years?7 A The whole time I've been a court8 reporter probably.9 Q And since we don't know that, tell us.

10 A Well, I said 1996.11 Q Okay. Since 1996?12 A As far as I know, yes.13 Q And you've used the same version of14 Word?15 A No, sir. I've just used the same16 template.17 Q The same template?18 A Yes, sir.19 Q And what font do you use?20 A 12. 12 Courier. Whatever that --21 whatever the Courier is and 12, size 12, whatever that22 is.23 Q Okay. And what version of Word did you24 use in preparing the Murphy transcripts?25 A I'm not sure. Maybe 2010. I'm not

Page 331 sure.2 Q And what version do you use now?3 A Same.4 Q And do you use the same template now?5 A Yes, sir. Well, I've changed it now,6 but I --7 Q How did you change the template?8 A I changed the left margin by two spaces,9 or to allow for two more spaces.

10 Q And is that -- did you use the same11 template in preparing the criminal transcripts for the12 State?13 A Pretty much, yes, sir.14 Q During all that time?15 A Yes, sir.16 Q So you would have overcharged them the17 same as you did --18 A I don't know. I don't know -- I don't19 know. I haven't gone back to count spaces on every20 transcript. I don't know.21 Q You see the requests that we have made.22 Do you have those transcripts?23 A I should.24 Q All of the transcripts for the State?25 A As far as I know, yes. Well, not for



the State but for the Counties, yes.2 Q For the Counties?3 A Yes, sir.4 Q And so all of those would be5 available?6 A As far as I know, yes.7 Q And who approves of the payment to the8 County?9 A I submit my bill to the judge. And he

10 signs it, but he does --11 Q The judge meaning? By name who?12 A Well at first, it was Allen Keeble.13 Q All right.14 A Now it is Quillian Baldwin. And15 sometimes it might be a senior judge if I reported for16 him.17 Q But you submit it to Judge Baldwin?18 A Yes, sir.19 Q And does -- how do you submit the --20 the -- how do you submit the billings to21 Judge Baldwin?22 A I just give it to him, and he signs it.23 And then I submit it to the County.24 Q Are you with him when he signs them?25 A I can't say I've been with him every

Page 351 time.2 Q No. I mean --3 A I might have left them with the4 secretary. But usually he signs it in my presence.5 Q Okay. And what does he do as far as6 checking it?7 A Well, he doesn't go through the8 transcripts and count the pages.9 Q Has he ever looked at -- has he ever

10 looked at the transcripts?11 A Not to my knowledge except what he sees12 in court.13 Q Okay. But what I'm saying is, he's14 never seen that you comply with the law?15 A Not to my knowledge.16 Q And has anybody ever brought it to your17 attention that you don't comply with the law other18 than in the case we brought against you?19 A Never.20 Q Have you ever been audited by the21 County?22 A No, sir.23 Q They have never made any audit to the24 County?25 A Not to my knowledge.

Page 361 Q When we first brought this to2 Judge Baldwin's attention or he first -- I don't know3 whether we brought it to his attention or he heard it4 from somebody that you would probably be subject to5 litigation about this --6 A Yes, sir.7 Q Do you remember that?8 A Of course.9 Q And did you bring it to his attention?

10 A Yes, sir.11 Q And what did he say at that time?12 A Goodness, I don't remember.13 Q Well, about what -- what was the --14 what was the gist of the conversation?15 A I can't tell you. I don't remember.16 Q How did you bring it to his attention?17 A I went to his office as far as I know.18 No. I believe we talked on the phone.19 Q You called him on the phone?20 A I did not. But he called me.21 Q Okay. What did he --22 A That's the best of my memory.23 Q Okay.24 A I don't really remember exactly.25 Q Okay. Anyway, y'all communicated?

Page 371 A Yes, sir.2 Q And what was that communication?3 A I really don't remember, Mr. Farmer.4 Q Okay. Well, it had to be something.5 A I just told him -- I honestly do not6 remember what he said.7 Q Okay. But how did the conversation8 begin?9 A I honestly do not remember. I remember

10 I told him.11 Q And did you tell him you couldn't afford12 the litigation?13 A I don't think I needed to tell him, but14 I don't remember.15 Q Did -- did he tell you he would do16 anything about it?17 A I don't remember that he told me he18 would do anything about it.19 Q Was there any kind of understanding that20 he was going to do something about it?21 A I really don't think so.22 Q Did you request that he did anything --23 do anything about it, or did he do it on his own?24 A I can't -- I don't believe I would have25 asked him to do anything about it.



MR. FARMER: I'm going to ask you to2 mark this as Plaintiff's Exhibit 4.3 (Whereupon, marked for identification,4 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4.)5 BY MR. FARMER:6 Q I ask you to take a look at Plaintiff's7 Exhibit 4 and see if you can -- if you can read that8 and tell me if you've seen that document before.9 A I have seen this before.

10 Q All right. And when was the first time11 that you had seen it or learned anything about it?12 A I guess when I was copied on it.13 Q Okay. And did Judge Baldwin copy you on14 it?15 A His secretary did.16 Q And we're talking about Plaintiff's17 Exhibit 4? He sent you a copy of that?18 A Yes, sir.19 Q It's on the screen. And are the20 statements in there correct? (Reading) Nan Freeman21 discussed with me your latest e-mail -- our latest22 e-mails back and forth; is that correct?23 A Yes, that's correct.24 Q And --25 A And I was deeply concerned.

Page 391 Q Say it again.2 A And I was deeply concerned.3 Q Okay. In the second paragraph -- is4 that -- is that statement in the second paragraph5 correct?6 A It is. But I -- before this I think I7 suggested to you that I -- that's how I would like to8 do it, to put a sealed copy in the Clerk's file.9 Q But not give it to me for my use as I

10 chose?11 A That's correct because I didn't think it12 should be disseminated in any manner, taken out of --13 anything taken out of context.14 Q The third paragraph.15 A I believe that's what he decided to16 do.17 Q Is that true and correct?18 A As far as I know.19 Q And the last paragraph or20 next-to-the-last paragraph.21 A Well, that's what he said.22 Q And did you have a conversation with him23 after this?24 A I've talked to him a lot after this.25 Q About this incident.

Page 401 A I remember -- do you mean after the2 e-mail or after he filed those?3 Q We're going to go through all of it, so4 you can begin after the e-mail and then after5 everything else.6 A Well, I'm sure we did. I don't remember7 a specific conversation. I don't remember a specific8 conversation.9 Q But I'm not asking about specific

10 conversations. Did you discuss it with him?11 A Well, I just expect we did, but I12 can't -- I do not have a firm recollection of a13 particular -- any particular conversation.14 Q And the part in here about "Ms. Freeman,15 she will not voluntarily give you directly or file16 with the Clerk's office copies of the audio17 recording" --18 A That's what he said.19 Q Well, is that true?20 A At that time it was true.21 Q Was it true after the hearing on that22 day? Did I approach you and ask you to let me23 purchase those audio recordings on the -- after the24 27th hearing?25 A The 27th of?

Page 411 Q May.2 A Yes, you did.3 Q And did you respond to me when I --4 A I said no. And you asked why. And I5 said, because I don't believe I'm required to.6 Q And did I ask you politely to let me7 purchase them?8 A You asked me. I won't say it was9 impolite.

10 Q Did I say "please, Nan"?11 A I don't remember.12 Q Would you like -- would you like to hear13 the audio on that?14 A I've heard it before. But I don't15 remember if you said the word "please."16 Q Okay. You wouldn't dispute it if you17 heard the audio of that request?18 A If I heard the audio, no, sir, I would19 not.20 MS. TUNKLE: Do you want to play it?21 You said "Nan, please."22 THE WITNESS: I don't dispute that he23 said "please."24 BY MR. FARMER:25 Q All right.



A I just don't remember that you -- I do2 not remember that you said "please."3 Q Okay, good enough. But you're not4 disputing it?5 A I'm not disputing it. I don't know6 whether you did or not.7 Q Okay, okay. And you would not let me8 have it?9 A I would not. I did not release it that

10 day. No, sir.11 Q And -- and you weren't going to release12 it until something was done to make you release it; is13 that right?14 A That is probably not true.15 Q What were you -- what were you -- when16 were you going to release it to me without me doing17 anything to require you to do it?18 A When you said you were going to sue me,19 I decided it was not worth it. And so I decided at20 that point that I would like to give it to you to21 avoid a lawsuit.22 Q Okay. So until I said that I was going23 to sue you, you were not going to do it.24 A Well, it's my understanding that I25 wasn't required to.

Page 431 Q Okay. But you weren't going to do it2 unless I sued you or unless I threatened --3 A I won't --4 Q -- to sue you?5 A -- say that. But I did not want to be6 sued, and so I didn't think it was worth it.7 Q Okay.8 A So I was willing to release it. Because9 it was my work product and it was mine, if I wanted

10 to, I could.11 Q Okay. Did you discuss with anybody that12 gave you the opinion that you're not required to13 release it?14 A Did I discuss with anybody --15 Q Yes.16 A -- that I was not required -- well, I17 did talk to Judge Baldwin about it but --18 Q What did Judge Baldwin say?19 A He said different things at different20 times.21 Q Okay. What did he say about that?22 A First he said he didn't care if I did or23 not. Another time he said he wasn't going to let me.24 And another time he said that he would do it.25 Q Was he discussing it with someone else

Page 441 that was giving him advice about it?2 A I can't answer that. I don't know.3 Q Well, did he indicate to you that he4 would?5 A Discuss it with someone?6 Q Yeah.7 A Not that I recall.8 Q Was the information that I wanted to9 get, was it something that was different from what was

10 in the transcript?11 A I don't know what you wanted to get.12 Q Okay. Did the audio depict something13 differently than what I could have obtained by reading14 the transcript?15 A It's my opinion that it did not.16 Q So it's your opinion that when you first17 released the transcript, you gave everything to us?18 A I don't know what you mean by that.19 Q All right.20 A I did not give you the recording.21 Q Okay. Did you give us all of the22 information that took place up until -- before -- that23 there was a request for a Freedom of Information24 request obtained in the transcript from --25 A I don't understand the question at

Page 451 all.2 Q Okay. Did you leave out part of the3 testimony? Did you leave out "blame yourself, blame4 yourself, blame yourself"? Did you leave that out?5 A I don't remember.6 Q Okay.7 A I don't know what -- I don't know.8 Q Okay. If you will, I'm going to show9 you this transcript of the hearing, and I'm going to

10 ask -- see if you certified that to be correct.11 A Yes, I did.12 Q Is the "blame yourself, blame yourself"13 in there?14 A I'll have to read it.15 Q Read it. Look toward the end.16

Documents

Murphy_All Atts to Mtn to Disqualify Judge Ison