Holkesvig v. Welte

20110373 Randy Holkesvig, Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
Peter David Welte, Defendant and Appellee

Appeal from: District Court, Northeast Central Judicial District, Grand Forks County
Judge Wickham Corwin
Nature of Action: Other (Civil)
Counsel:
Appellant: Pro se
Appellee: Daniel Lee Gaustad
Term: 05/2012   Argument: 05/30/2012  2:45pm
ND cite: 2012 ND 142
NW cite: 818 N.W.2d 760

Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format

Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
I. Did Peter Welte knowingly and intentionally block the Plaintiff from gaining access to the closed files in the Chris Moore/Heather Eastling 2008 civil cases in December 2010, by having another Assistant DA block my access to get it without a legal or proper protective order in place that became a Brady violation, which in turn violated my 5th and 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which implies a Title 42 U.S.C.  1983 claim.
II. Did Peter Welte knowingly and intentionally issue internal memos to various Grand Forks County employees, ordering them not to give or share any information with me concerning Case Nos. 18-10-C-294, 295, 296, or 18-10-C-00362?
III. Did Meredith Larson knowingly and willingly contact Chris Moore's Attorney Shannon Uglem in October 2010 with an email and/or phone call, then offered her input regarding Moore's January 2008 Qwest home phone records that Meredith Larson intentionally withheld which was the exculpatory evidence for my 6-5-08 hearing?
IV. Did Judge Corwin knowingly and intentionally abuse the judicial process by violating my substantive and procedural due process rights, which could imply a Title 18 U.S.C.  241 or Title 18 U.S.C.  242 claim?
V. Was the injunctions that Judge Corwin issued on 3-31-11 and 10-25-11 legal and were the events between 11-8-11 and 11-14-11 legal, ethical, and justified?

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1.Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court Approval to Allow Petitioner to File 4 New Lawsuits in Grand Forks County because the claims presented in the "New Lawsuits" were the same or similar to those sought by Plaintiff and dismissed in a prior case and therefore barred by doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel?
2.Did the trial court properly modify a court order, sua sponte, enjoining Plaintiff from filing any new lawsuits or causes of action that arise from or relate to Plaintiff's previous causes of action because the court determined any such claims would be meritless and frivolous?

Add Docket 20110373 RSS Add Docket 20110373 RSS

Docket entries:
112/29/2011 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 12/22/2011
212/29/2011 THIS CASE IS CONSOLIDATED W/20110374 & 20110375.MAKE ALL ENTRIES IN THIS CASE EXCEPT ROA, DIS & MAN
301/18/2012 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
401/18/2012 ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK. Granted: 03/01/2012
501/25/2012 Electronic RECORD ON APPEAL dated January 24, 2012 (entry nos.1-257)(no entry:146,148,181,182& 226)
601/30/2012 1st Electronic SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD ON APPEAL dated January 27, 2012 (entry nos. 285-270).
702/02/2012 2nd Electronic SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD ON APPEAL dated January 31, 2012 (entry nos.271-273).
802/27/2012 APPELLANT BRIEF
902/27/2012 APPELLANT APPENDIX
1002/28/2012 DISK - ATB
1103/07/2012 3rd SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD ON APPEAL dated March 1, 2012 (entry no. nt by U.S. Mail)
1204/02/2012 APPELLEE BRIEF
1304/02/2012 E-FILED BRIEF
1404/02/2012 APPELLEE APPENDIX
1504/02/2012 E-FILED APPENDIX
1604/05/2012 Received e-filing surcharge for AEB & AEA (Receipt #20958)
1704/09/2012 Received 7 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating.
1804/09/2012 Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating.
1904/11/2012 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT
2004/12/2012 Received additional $1.50 e-filing surcharge for AEA (Receipt #20970)
2104/16/2012 REPLY BRIEF
2204/17/2012 DISK - RYB (e-mailed)
2305/09/2012 MOTION FOR Remand
2405/14/2012 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied
2505/30/2012 APPEARANCES: Randy Holkesvig; Daniel L. Gaustad
2605/30/2012 ARGUED: Randy Holkesvig; Daniel L. Gaustad
2705/30/2012 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
2805/29/2012 4th Supplemental electronic ROA DATED 5/25/12(ENTRY NOS.1-328,Items not sent 146,148,181,182,226)
2906/06/2012 5th ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED June 5, 2012 (ENTRY NOS. 329 - 331)
3006/13/2012 6th ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED 06/12/2012 (ENTRY NOS.332-334)
3107/12/2012 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
3207/12/2012 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning
3307/12/2012 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee
3407/13/2012 Judgment Sent to Parties
3507/16/2012 7th ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED 07/13/2012 (ENTRY NOS.335-339)
3607/21/2012 PETITION FOR REHEARING with separate Addendum
3707/23/2012 DISK - PER (e-mailed)
3808/14/2012 8th ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED 8/13/2012 (ENTRY NOS.343-344)
3908/16/2012 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied
4008/17/2012 9th ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED 8/16/2012 (ENTRY NOS. 345-346)
4108/22/2012 MOTION TO STAY THE COURT'S MANDATE PENDING A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
4208/23/2012 ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 09/22/2012
4309/24/2012 MANDATE
4409/27/2012 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 09/30/2014