Your Memories on Facebook
Sloan, we care about you and your Facebook memories. We thought you'd like to look back on this post from 7 years ago.How is that relevant today?
Well, in Judith Haney's lawsuit efiled against me yesterday in Birmingham, Alabama, Haney sets out to tell the court I don't have any worthwhile ties to Key West, so she should be allowed to sue me in Birmingham, where I hatched my evil scheme to do her all manner of harm, and, yeah, well, it's also where my father's very large estate is domiciled, Haney told the court.
Mike Mongo has known me since 2002. He ran for mayor of Key West in 2009, and again in 2014, I think. I ran for mayor those years. Mike got a lot more votes than I got, both times.
Next up today,
Judith Haney efiled a motion in the Birmingham court today. I received the motion from Haney by email even though I have not yet been served the lawsuit papers. The motion proves what Leeds, Alabama city attorney Johnny Brunson told me on the telephone early this year: that Haney is well known in the Birmingham courts.
The motion was included in the email I sent this morning to the Birmingham TV journalist who contacted me yesterday about the lawsuit, as reported in yesterday's post at this website:
From: Sloan Bashinsky
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 8:30 AM
To: Harris, Sherea
Subject: Re: FOX6 News request
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 8:30 AM
To: Harris, Sherea
Subject: Re: FOX6 News request
Good morning, again, Sherea -
This morning, Judith Haney emailed me a PDF copy of this poorly formatted copy I made of a motion she efiled today in her lawsuit against me, asking the judge assigned to the case to recuse himself. The motion proves Haney is well known in the Birmingham courts.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY ALABAMA
JUDITH E HANEY, Plaintiff
Vs CASE NO: CV-2017-902922.00
SLOAN Y BASHINSKY JR, Defendant
MOTION FOR RECUSAL OF JUDGE MICHAEL GRAFFEO
Plaintiff Judith E. Haney ("Plaintiff") hereby files this Motion for Recusal of Judge Michael Graffeo, pursuant to Ala. Code § 12-1-12 (1975) and the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, and states:
1. Historically Judge Michael Graffeo has recused himself from each previous cause of action filed by the Plaintiff in the 10th Judicial Circuit.
2. Plaintiff herein requests that Judge Graffeo recuse from this pending cause of action and allow the case to be reassigned as soon as possible.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiff herein requests that Judge Michael Graffeo recuse from this cause of action and allow the case to be reassigned as soon as possible.
Respectfully submitted, Judith E. Haney, Plaintiff PO Box 380911 Birmingham, Al 35238 205-821-0519
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served upon the Defendant via his postal address at P.O. Box 2681, Key West, FL 33045, with proper postage affixed thereto, and via electronic mail to firstname.lastname@example.org on this the 21th day of July, 2017.
Judith E. Haney, Plaintiff PO Box 380911 Birmingham, Al 35238 205-821-0519
Again, Sherea, I suggest you call the Leeds city attorney, Johnny Brunson, and ask him about Judith Haney. Brunson's phone number is (205) 702-6700.
If you do a Judith E. Haney, Judith Haney, Judith Eloise Haney, search of the St. Clair County, Jefferson County, and Shelby County clerk of court records, you will further see Haney is a professional pro se litigation cyber terrorist the public in the Birmingham area need to be made aware of.
Haney has caused a lot of Alabama people a great deal of grief. She came to Key West and did the same, before local judges intervened.
Why Haney has not be lassoed and hogtied by Alabama judges baffles me.
Heck, Judith Haney might be a Pulitzer prize story. I'm just the cannon fodder.
Apologies for the formatting of Haney's motion and lawsuit complaint further down in this post today. I don't have the software, if such exists, to copy efiled PDF court documents and paste them elsewhere and keep the original formatting. It all runs together, then I have to fix it somewhat by hand.
Not included below are Haney's Notary verification, which I was not able to copy, and the exhibit documents regarding my father's estate, which I don't think have anything to do with the lawsuit, nor do they reveal much about my inheritance, which Haney is after, again, after being quoted in the Key West Citizen back in the spring of this year, that she wasn't after my inheritance.
If her lips are moving?
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF JEFFERSON COUNTY ALABAMA
JUDITH E HANEY, Plaintiff
Vs CASE NO:
SLOAN Y BASHINSKY JR, Defendant
Plaintiff Judith E. Haney ("Plaintiff") hereby files this Verified Complaint and states:
1. Plaintiff, Judith E Haney (“Plaintiff”) is an individual over the age of 19-years who resides at 7220 Rowan Road, Jefferson County, Leeds, Alabama. 2. Defendant, Sloan Young Bashinsky Jr (“Defendant”) is a homeless male residing on the streets of Key West, Monroe County, Florida. He receives mail at P.O. Box 2681, Key West, FL 33045.
VENUE 3. This cause of action is subject to the jurisdiction of this court as it seeks civil monetary damages in excess of $10,000.
4. Jurisdiction properly resides in this court because this cause of action arises from the wrongful acts of the Defendant that commenced on December 21, 2016, while he was living at 3400 Cliff Road, Birmingham, Jefferson County, AL 35205. 5. The Defendant has a substantial connection to Alabama by way of his being a beneficiary to the Alabama estate of his deceased father, Sloan Young Bashinsky, Sr, including: (a) SYB, Inc., (Sloan Young Bashinsky aka SYB); and, (b) the Bashinsky Foundation, Inc; and, (c) proceeds and benefits of the 2016 merger between Golden Enterprises, Inc, and Utz Quality Foods, Inc. ELECTRONICALLY FILED 7/18/2017 6:26 PM 01-CV-2017-902922.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA ANNE-MARIE ADAMS, CLERK. The Defendant’s father’s Alabama estate is more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 7. Upon information and belief the Defendant is not now employed in Florida, does not own, rent, or lease, any real estate in Florida, does not own or have registered any vehicles in Florida. The Defendant’s nexus to the state of Florida is minimal and his whereabouts as a homeless drifter is unknown on any given day.
8. On or about December, 21, 2016, while he was residing in Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama, the Defendant devised and implemented a scheme to defraud the Plaintiff by falsely alleging inside of emails to her that she had “contracted” to provide him housing and financial support. 9. When the Defendant’s fraudulent “contract” scheme failed in its objective to extract financial support and other things of value from the Plaintiff, the Defendant began extorting the Plaintiff by sending her emails containing threats to use the Internet and his “family name” to harm her if she refused his demands for financial support and other things of value. 10. When the Defendant’s extortion of the Plaintiff failed, he commenced following through on his threats to harm her via using the Internet to publish and distribute defamatory content about the Plaintiff. 11. The Defendant’s daily defamatory Internet publishing’s that contain headlines and content that target the Plaintiff by name and address, i.e., “Judith Eloise Haney of Leeds, Alabama” are indexed on Internet search engines and available for public consumption by searching the Plaintiff’s name. DOCUMENT 2 3 12. Plaintiff has preserved multiple exhibits of the Defendant’s defamatory Internet publishing’s wherein he has targeted her by her full given name of “Judith Eloise Haney of Leeds, Alabama”, “Judith Haney, Leeds, AL”.
13. Plaintiff is a certified appraiser in Birmingham, AL. The success of Plaintiff's appraisal practice relies in large part upon Plaintiff's reputation as an honest, fair, and credible individual. Plaintiff's clients come from various walks of life and come from throughout the State of Alabama and the country. It is the nature of Plaintiff's line of work that potential clients often first learn about Plaintiff and her appraisal firm through an online web search. 14. Plaintiff is not a public figure and, even if she were, the false, defamatory, and libelous statements that Defendant has published on the Internet about her are based on malice and are made either with actual knowledge that they are not true or with a reckless disregard as to their truthfulness.
CAUSES OF ACTION – COUNT ONE DEFAMATION PER SE AND LIBEL
15. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 16. Beginning in December, 2016, and continuing to the present date of filing this cause of action the Defendant has targeted the Plaintiff with false and fraudulent allegations and accusations of criminal wrong doing that he has repeatedly published on the Internet and repeatedly emailed to people in Alabama and elsewhere. 17. During the month of April, 2017, the Defendant wrote and published the following on his Google blog https://afoolsworkneverends.blogspot.com/2017/; and on Facebook.com; and on bigpinekey.com (Exhibit B, hereto): “Did Judith Eloise Haney, of Leeds, Alabama, attempt to blackmail Major Bashinsky because he was bi-sexual and was in the closet about it, and when he refused to go along, she threatened to out him and so he killed himself and tried to make it look like murder to save his reputation and cause a large life insurance policy to be paid to his creditors and his heirs?” 18. As of the date of filing this cause of action the Defendant’s above described false accusations of criminal wrong doing lodged against the Plaintiff remain published on the Internet and available for public consumption via Internet search engines. 19. Since December, 2016, the Defendant has unlawfully used the Internet to target the Plaintiff with false and fraudulent allegations and false accusations that accuse her of committing multiple violent crimes and financial crimes including: a. the Plaintiff had a direct connection to the death of his brother, Major Bashinsky; b. the Plaintiff has arranged to have the Defendant killed; c. the Plaintiff has conspired with the Defendant’s step mother to have the Defendant killed; d. the Plaintiff conspired with the Defendant’s step mother to have his brother, Major Bashinsky, killed; e. the Plaintiff is a scam artist who steals money from people. 20. In addition to publishing false and fraudulent allegations and accusations against the Plaintiff on the Internet wherein he states that she has planned and committed crimes, the Defendant also accuses the Plaintiff of being mentally ill, of having a bad character, and having a bad reputation. 21. Defendant is motivated to publish his false, defamatory, statements about the Plaintiff due to his malice, ill will, and hatred of the Plaintiff. 22. The Defendant’s false, defamatory, statements, allegations, and accusations that he publishes on the Internet about the Plaintiff – on a daily basis -- are made either with actual knowledge that they are false or with a reckless disregard as to whether or not they are false. 23. The Defendant’s false, defamatory, statements that he is publishing on the Internet about the Plaintiff -- on a daily basis -- is exposing the Plaintiff to public ridicule, contempt, and hatred. The Defendant’s false, defamatory, publishing’s on the Internet about the Plaintiff are damaging her personal reputation and her business reputation as a licensed state certified real estate appraiser.
CAUSES OF ACTION – COUNT TWO MENTAL ANGUISH AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
25. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 26. Since December, 2016, the Defendant has used the Internet and email to intentionally inflict emotional distress upon the Plaintiff including publishing, emailing, and distributing the following: a. false statements about the death of her father, b. false statements about the Plaintiff’s mother, c. false statements about the Plaintiff’s childhood, d. false statements about the Plaintiff’s education, e. false statements about the Plaintiff’s employment, f. false statements about the Plaintiff’s character, g. false statements about the Plaintiff’s mental state, h. false statements about the Plaintiff’s financial background, i. false statements about the Plaintiff’s marital background, j. false statements about the Plaintiff’s medical background, k. false statements about the Plaintiff’s credit worthiness. 27. In addition to publishing the above false and fraudulent allegations and accusations about the Plaintiff, he has also repeatedly published his desire to see the Plaintiff dead of a heart attack or disease. The Defendant has also written and published his violent fantasies of torturing and murdering the Plaintiff including: killing her with a “pitchfork”; and “cutting off her hands”; and writing that she “should be hog-tied and gagged and tossed into a padded cell and shot full of Thorazine until death relieves her of her miserable, wretched self”; and writing that “what she most needs right now is a good keel-hauling in shark-infested waters to readjust her perspective.” DOCUMENT 2 6 28. Since December, 2016, the Defendant has published his belief that the Plaintiff deserves to die or be killed on account of her refusing to allow him to live in her apartment and refusing to give him money and other things of value when he was in Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama during the month of December, 2016. 29. Defendant has perpetrated his campaign of threats, harassment, malicious defamation, libel, slander, extortion, blackmail, and intentional infliction of emotional distress upon the Plaintiff aided and abetted by multiple actors and co-conspirators including Plaintiff’s former husband, Robert Wesley Fureigh, North Little Rock, AR; Plaintiff’s neighbor, Brandy Danielle Gill, Leeds, AL; Richard Dennis Boettger, Key West, FL; Naja Girard d’Albisson, Key West, FL; Stephan Arthur Freer, Miami, FL; Bruce Kenneth Gorman, Big Pine Key, FL; Michael Montgomery; Gulf Breeze, FL; and John Brunson, Leeds, AL. Each one of these actors and co-conspirators, have direct, first hand, knowledge of the Defendant’s unlawful acts perpetrated against the Plaintiff since December, 2016. Each one of these actors and co-conspirators have been active participants, and complicit, in the Defendant’s ongoing abuse of the Plaintiff. None have taken any steps to distance themselves from the Defendant and his ongoing abuse of the Plaintiff. 30. In his ongoing effort to libel and defame the Plaintiff, the Defendant, aided and abetted by his co-conspirator, Richard Dennis Boettger, Key West, FL, has published and re-published an insufficient check charge against the Plaintiff dated in the 1980’s that is maintained in the archives of the county court in Jacksonville, FL. Said check charge was dismissed against the Plaintiff and that dismissal was omitted when the Defendant published it on the Internet as if it is a current bad check charge. In that regard, Richard Dennis Boettger, under false pretenses of having a legitimate need to know, used the resources of a third party to solicit and obtain the check information that is no longer publicly available absent a hand search of archival records. This joint effort on the parts of the Defendant and his co-conspirator, Richard Dennis Boettger, documents the length to which the Defendant will go to harm, harass, libel and defame the Plaintiff. 31. The Defendant, aided and abetted by Richard Dennis Boettger, has also published the Plaintiff’s 1998 U.S. Bankruptcy record; and has published a list of lawsuits that the Plaintiff has filed in Alabama. According to evidence collected in the prior lawsuit in Monroe County Florida, Richard Dennis Boettger, along with publishing and distributing the check charge previously described herein, also printed and distributed copyrighted material of record in Alacourt. Said material has been repeatedly published on the Internet by the Defendant. When considering the ongoing violations of law that the Defendant, and his co-conspirator, Richard Dennis Boettger are actively pursuing to the detriment of the Plaintiff, the harm to the Plaintiff that has thus far occurred is incalculable and the future harm accruing to the acts of these individuals is inestimable. 32. The Internet record of the Defendant’s multiple, ongoing, acts of harm perpetrated against the Plaintiff serve to prove that he has been actively engaged in harassing, defaming, stalking, and cyberstalking, the Plaintiff every day since December, 21, 2016. In that regard, the extent and degree of the emotional distress and attendant physical stress that the Defendant is inflicting upon the Plaintiff is incalculable. 33. Facts and evidence document that when the Defendant is not actually engaged in stalking, cyberstalking, harassing, and defaming the Plaintiff, he is obsessively laying the ground work to do it, talking with others about it, making plans to do it and finding avenues, opportunities, and ways to do it. 34. The Defendant has a well-established pattern of using third parties to accomplish his goal of harassing, defaming, stalking, cyberstalking and threatening the Plaintiff. In that regard, he has published defamatory statements about the Plaintiff in quotations that he attributes to third parties including her quoting the Plaintiff’s neighbor, Brandy Danielle Gill; quoting Byron Jackson, the former Chief of Police in Leeds, AL; quoting John Brunson, City Attorney, Leeds, AL; and he has also copied and pasted conversations with third parties into his blog, including Facebook conversations he has had with Plaintiff’s former husband, Robert Wesley Fureigh, North Little, AR. Defendant has co-opted these third parties for the purpose of reinforcing his defamatory publishing’s about the Plaintiff. In that regard, the Defendant has written and published that the Plaintiff has multiple enemies and adversaries who would like to see the Plaintiff dead. 35. The Plaintiff draws to the court’s attention that, within his Internet publishing’s, the Defendant has repeatedly admitted to having intentionally and deliberately perpetrated his acts of harm against the Plaintiff, and has repeatedly stated his intent to continue doing so regardless of the legal consequences of his actions. The Defendant has repeatedly stated his intent to go to jail before he is willing to stop taking revenge against the Plaintiff and before he is willing to stop harming and harassing the Plaintiff.
CAUSE OF ACTION - COUNT THREE PHYSICAL INJURY AND DISABILITY
36. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 37. Plaintiff has sustained permanent physical injury and disability due to the unlawful acts of the Defendant. 38. Beginning on December 21, 2016, the Defendant embarked upon a series of crimes against the Plaintiff the result of which created a nearly fatal level of physical and emotional stress upon the Plaintiff, said stress was sufficient to be the direct cause of her nearly fatal heart attack on January 3, 2017. The Defendant is continuing to impose the same level of stress on the Plaintiff by way of his continuing to perpetrate crimes against the Plaintiff using the Internet as a weapon against her. On December 21, 2016, and on each consecutive day, thereafter, the Defendant stalked, cyberstalked, defrauded, threatened, defamed, extorted, black mailed, libeled, and harassed the Plaintiff by sending her emails and publishing false and fraudulent accusations and allegations about her on the Internet, on Facebook, and inside of mass emails. And, on January 3, 2017, the Plaintiff sustained a nearly fatal heart attack that has left her 100% disabled. 40. The Plaintiff’s nearly fatal heart attack was a direct and proximate result of the physical and emotional stress and strain sustained as a result of the criminal acts of the Defendant. 41. Plaintiff’s current disability is a direct and proximate result of the criminal acts of the Defendant.
CAUSE OF ACTION - COUNT FOUR HARASSMENT, INVASION OF PRIVACY, AND IDENTIFY THEFT
42. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 43. With a goal to deliberately and intentionally harass and inflict harm upon the Plaintiff and place her at risk of identity theft at the hands of criminals, since December, 2016 the Defendant has repeatedly published the Plaintiff’s private facts on the Internet including her full given name, date of birth, physical and mailing addresses, telephone number, social security number, her medical, family, marital, and financial history, her credit card numbers and names of issuers of her credit cards, her email addresses, and other private, protected, information. 44. The Defendant has falsely alleged in his Internet publishing’s that he obtained copies of the Plaintiff’s credit reports. He has published on the Internet that following his obtaining the Plaintiff’s credit reports that he became apprised of the fact that the Plaintiff has bad credit, owes a lot of money, is over mortgaged on her home, and that she is financially irresponsible. 45. However, what the Defendant did not know at the time he published his lies about the Plaintiff’s credit is that her credit files with all three credit bureaus has been frozen since January, 2017, at the request of the Plaintiff. Therefore, it is impossible for the Defendant to have come into possession of the Plaintiff’s credit reports via any means. The Defendant’s lies about the Plaintiff’s credit serves to prove the criminal component of his intentional acts of harm. More specifically, the Plaintiff’s credit is, by law, private and not for public consumption. And at no time would the Defendant ever have standing to obtain the Plaintiff’s credit reports. 46. Following the Plaintiff’s heart attack, the Defendant contacted the Plaintiff’s physician by phone and attempted to obtain private, protected, health information about the Plaintiff. 47. During his phone call to the doctor’s office, the Defendant informed the staff that the doctor should avoid doing business with the Plaintiff. He further informed the staff that he may file a complaint against the doctor with the Alabama Medical Licensing Board on account of the doctor’s refusal to share the Plaintiff’s private health information with him. The Defendant’s pattern of extortion and threats of harm to force compliance with his unlawful demands are fully documented within his Internet publishing’s. 48. The Defendant followed up his call to the doctor by publishing on the Internet the statements he uttered to the doctor’s staff. 49. Within the Defendant’s Internet publishing’s about his conversation with the Plaintiff’s physician’s staff, he confirmed that he endeavored to interfere and undermine the Plaintiff’s relationship with her doctor. Within his Internet publishing’s concerning his contact with the Plaintiff’s doctor’s office, he also published the doctor’s name and Birmingham, AL address, leaving no doubt as to which doctor he was harassing and targeting with his threats of harm. 50. Plaintiff made her physician aware of the criminal conduct of the Defendant and also notified the doctor’s hospital affiliation and its legal staff so as to alert them to the Defendant’s ongoing attempts to obtain the Plaintiff’s private, protected, health information. The Defendant’s invasion of the Plaintiff’s privacy in regard to his attempting to obtain the Plaintiff’s private credit report and her private health records for the purpose of publishing the information on the Internet constitute identify theft and are state and federal crimes. His crimes in this regard are well documented by him via his Internet publishing’s.
CAUSE OF ACTION - COUNT FIVE EXTORTION AND RACKETEERING
52. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 53. Some, but not all, of the Defendant’s “known” crimes that he has perpetrated against the Plaintiff since December, 2016, have been described within other counts in this cause of action. 54. The evidence filed of record by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s own pleadings filed of record, in the now dismissed without prejudice Monroe County Florida Circuit Court Case No: 17-000001- K, Haney v Bashinsky, dismissed on April 28, 2017, constitutes prima facie evidence of the Defendant having immediately acted upon his threats to harm the Plaintiff during the time that he remained inside of the Plaintiff’s Birmingham, AL, apartment. And once he was removed from the apartment he continued his Internet attacks on the Plaintiff with publications of false and fraudulent allegations of criminal wrong doing including publishing that the Plaintiff is a “scam artist” who “extorted” the Defendant. 55. Within the Monroe County FL Circuit Court record are multiple, written, admissions by the Defendant wherein he admitted to intentionally harming the Plaintiff after she refused his demands for financial support and other things of value. 56. Historically, the Defendant has boasted and bragged on his blog about perpetrating his crimes against the Plaintiff and has bragged of intention to continue doing so. 57. The Defendant has written and published that he has a first amendment right to publish his defamatory writings about the Plaintiff on the Internet and brags that he is exercising his first amendment right in his capacity as a “journalist” who is “reporting” on the lawsuit the Plaintiff filed against him. And after the case against him was dismissed, he continued writing and publishing false, fraudulent, defamatory accusations and allegations about the Plaintiff on his Google blog, on Facebook, on bigpinekey.com, and elsewhere on the Internet. 58. The Plaintiff has sought to profit from his ongoing false, fraudulent, publishing’s about the Plaintiff by soliciting money from his readers within the same blog where he harasses, defames, libels, and stalks the Plaintiff. 59. By definition, extortion, which is not limited to the taking of property, involves the verbal or written instillation of fear that something will happen to the victim if they do not comply with the extortionist's will. Another key distinction is that extortion always involves a verbal or written threat, whereas robbery does not. In United States federal law, extortion can be committed with or without the use of force and with or without the use of a weapon. 59. By definition, in blackmail, which always involves extortion, the extortionist threatens to reveal information about a victim or their family members that is potentially embarrassing, socially damaging, or incriminating unless a demand for money, property, or services is met. 60. In support of this fifth count, the Plaintiff herein attests that the Defendant extorted and blackmailed her for financial support and other things of value while he was residing in her Birmingham AL apartment located at 3400 Cliff Road, Birmingham, AL 35205, during December, 2016. The Defendant’s extortion and blackmail consisted of written demands that were emailed to the Plaintiff. 61. Within the Defendant’s written demands were threats of harming the Plaintiff if she refused his demands. On December 31, 2016 the Plaintiff filed a civil action seeking equitable relief against the Defendant in Monroe County Florida Circuit Court. The claim was dismissed without prejudice on April 28, 2017. 63. Prior to her claim being dismissed, the Defendant continued extorting the Plaintiff by emailing her written demands that she “drop” her lawsuit against him or face more degradation, harassment, stalking, cyberstalking, and Internet defamation by the Defendant. 64. When the Plaintiff refused the Defendant’s demands to drop her lawsuit against him, he published his intention to continue harming her, even if it meant he would go to jail. Within his written extortion demands were statements to the Plaintiff that he had told the Plaintiff “what would happen to her” if she refused his demands. Also, within the Defendant’s written extortion demands were threats to the Plaintiff advising her that he would never stop harming her regardless of the consequences to himself.
DEMAND FOR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, COSTS, MEDICAL EXPENSES, LEGAL EXPENSES, AND FOR PUNTIVE DAMAGES
65. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference the above stated paragraphs as if fully restated. 66. As a direct and proximate result of the repeated, deliberate, and intentional acts of harm inflicted upon the Plaintiff by the Defendant as set forth and described herein, the Plaintiff has been required to obtain medical treatment, legal assistance, has sustained physical and emotional injury, has been unable to work, has sustained irreparable harm to her personal and professional reputation and her ability to earn her living. 67. Plaintiff herein demands compensation in an amount equal to costs of hospital bills, medical treatment for her heart condition, legal fees and costs, lost wages, living expenses, private nursing care, in an amount of $400,000 (Four hundred thousand dollars). Plaintiff further requests the court award her punitive damages equaling $1,500,000 (One million five hundred dollars). The nature, extent, and longevity of the Defendant’s harmful acts perpetrated against the Plaintiff renders his acts particularly repugnant. The Defendant’s acts are cruel, deliberate, intentional, and ongoing. His acts are criminal acts. The injuries sustained by the Plaintiff are substantial, and life threatening, and those injuries have been deliberately, and intentionally inflicted upon her by the Defendant. Premises considered, an award of punitive damages to the Plaintiff is well founded and supported in this cause of action. 69. The Plaintiff hereby requests that this Court Order Defendant to pay Plaintiff's attorney fees, costs associated with bringing this action, and compensatory and punitive damages to be determined at trial. 70. The Defendant’s capital assets include his benefits derived from the estate of his father. The Plaintiff herein elects as a remedy the Defendant’s benefits of his father’s estate, in their entirety, as they are dispersed and distributed to him in whatever intervals dictated by the terms of the estate. 71. The Defendant has already come into possession of some of his benefits via the estate and, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the estate of Sloan Y. Bashinsky, Sr., the Defendant will come into possession of the balance of his benefits upon the death of his 85-year old step-mother. 72. The Plaintiff requests the court order that any and all unpaid, unsatisfied, compensatory and punitive damages that this court awards to her via this cause of action accrue with interest from the date of the filing of this cause of action against the Defendant or from the date of filing of the judgment. 73. The Plaintiff further requests the court give substantial weight to the ongoing, multiple, criminal acts intentionally and deliberately practiced against the Plaintiff by the Defendant as part of the basis of any compensatory and punitive damages the court may award her by way of this cause of action.
My general thoughts:
Whereas, if I were any of the other judges in the civil division of the Jefferson County Circuit Court in Birmingham, I would be down on my knees praying to God that I PLEASE!!! not be assigned the case, if Judge Graffeo recuses himself.
I have not yet been served with Haney's Complaint. When that happens, I imagine I will efile a limited appearance with a verified motion to dismiss, because the jurisdiction and venue are in Key West where I live and published everything that pissed Haney off. If that motion is granted, I will await further developments.
If that motion is not granted, I will go to Plan B.
Haney might like Plan B less than Plan A.
I kinda imagine Haney will twist that last sentence into a court pleading saying I threatened her life and she had to hire even more bodyguards for which the court and I should pay.
Haney should not be be so conceited. I don't want the karma even threatening her miserable life would visit back on me. However, if she just upped and died because of her own redneck justice karma, I would would view that as the best outcome for her own beleaguered soul and for society.
Last today, Facebook discussion spawned by yesterday's post at this website: