MayB,2016

Hon. Jack L.Burr

Senior Judge

BOl Broadway

Goodland, Ks 6#735

CASENO. 15CV79P, 15CV75P, 15SC70P, 15SC71P, and 15SC85P

Dear Judge Jack Burr:

I am writing in response to attorney Stephen Phillips letter dated May 3,2016 which said he
objected to Kasey King writing a letter and asking questions by himself in the above mentioned
cases since he is not an attorney. I will now use my day off Sunday which is mothers day to start
writing a letter basically stating the same thing Mr. King already stated in his previous letter dated
April 26, 2016 that was addressed to you. Case number 15CV79P had a motion for a continuance
that was properly filed with a proper certificate of service to continue the AprillB, 2016 hearing at
10:00 a.m. in the above mentioned case of 15CV79P now that we have an attorney representing us
by the name of Adebayo Ogunmeno of Ogunmeno Law Firm of 155 S. 18th Street, Site 250 in KCKs
66102 in federal case number 2:16-cv-0210B-JAR-GLRagainst Respondents Lori Fleming, Kurt Loy,
My Town Media, and Joe Manns an employee of My Town Media. I can only speak for myself
according to attorney Stephen Phillips even though he is not a judge in the state of Kansas and I
have done research and I have not seen any information that shows that Mr. Stephen Phillips or Mr.
Dennis Depew are judges in Kansas. I have seen no information showing they are a magistrate, 11th
district judge, chief judge or supreme court judge in the State of Kansas so I am a little confused
why he has filing restrictions against me for only "1 case 15CV38P Community National Bank v.
James Beckley Jr. when I was the one that was sued as the defendant in the first place".

Am I the only person that has ever had filing restrictions granted against them for one case?
Doesn't this violate my first amendment right to freedom of speech? Doesn't this violate my right to
contract under article 1 section 10 of the United States federal constitution? Doesn't this violate my
due process under the 5th amendment and my right to equal protection under the 14th amendment?

How does one (1) case 15CV3BPCommunity National Bank v. James Beckley Jr. where I was sued

and I filed a counterclaim warrant filing restrictions? I can't afford an attorney every time I get

sued or I would gladly use an attorney. I would be more than willing to let the attorney generals

office represent me in any case where I am sued like they did according to the court transcript on

April1B, 2016 in case number 15CV79P when attorney Dennis Depew spoke for My Town Media in

case number 15SC70P and attorney Stephen Phillips joined him in the case to explain a motion for
change of judge under KS.A.20-311(t) even though they seemed to have skipped explaining the

procedure for KS.A.20-311d(b ) (c). They also seemed to have forgotten to explain that chapter 60

civil and chapter 61 small claims have different court rules and procedures and can not be ran

together on an assembly line unless the legislation has changed those rules for chapter 60 or

chapter 61 that I was not aware of. I also didn't think that 1999 Senate Bill 97 had been repealed

yet and attorneys couldn't represent corporations in KS.A. 61-2707(a). There was a previous

KANSASSUPREMECourt case, "KANSASBARASSOCIATION,JACKR. EULERANDJOELR. EULERv.

THE JUDGESOF THE THIRDJUDICIALDISTRICT,VIZ.HON.MARLAJ. LUCKERT,CHIEFJUDGE"

where the attorneys tried to amend statute KS.A. 61-2707(a) by: 1. declaring as unconstitutional,

and 2. Filing an order directing the Judges of the Third Judicial District (Judges) to prevent those

who are not licensed attorneys from representing any party in a small claims proceeding through a

writ of mandamus but the case was dismissed and KS.A.61-2707(a) has never been repealed since

1999 and was not declared unconstitutional.

The attorneys also argued in the case of "KANSASBARASSOCIATION,JACKR. EULERANDJOELR.

EULERv. THE JUDGESOF THE THIRD JUDICIALDISTRICT,VIZ.HON.MARLAJ. LUCKERT,CHIEF

JUDGEthat the amended 1999 Senate Bill 97 was unconstitutional because it allows non-lawyers to

represent parties in small claims court. In this case it shows that the statute was amended in 1999

by Senate Bill 97 as follows: "The trial of all actions shall be to the court, and except as provided in

K.S.A.61-2714, and amendments thereto, no party in any such action shall be represented by an

attorney prior to judgment. A party may appear by a full-time employee or officer or any person in

a representative capacity so long as such person is not an attorney." L. 1999, ch, 145 § 2.

According to Senate Bill 97 from 1999 it would seem that Dennis Depew, Stephen Phillips, and the
attorney general's office usurped their position at the hearing on April 18, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. and
intruded into 15SC70P Noah Day vs. My Town Media which I thought is not allowed under KS.A.
61-2707(a). Senate Bill 97 was amended and reads as follows: "The trial of all actions shall be to
the court, and except as provided in KS.A. 61-2714, and amendments thereto, no party in any such
action shall be represented by an attorney prior to judgment. A party may appear by a full-time
employee or officer or any person in a representative capacity so long as such person is not an
attorney." L. 1999. ch. 145. § 2. "See KS.A. 1999 Supp. 61-2707(a). The Kansas Attorney General
Opinion No. 95-100 says that in 1971 there were Reports and Recommendations to the 1972
Session of the Kansas legislature, p. 496. A special committee on small claims solicited input from
judges of courts of limited jurisdiction and found that it was not economically feasible for most
people to retain attorneys for claims of less than $300 nor was this the kind of litigation profitable
for most attorneys.

I don't understand according to Senate Bill 97 and KRPCRule 1.5 Fees why Dennis Depew was able
to enlighten the court on case number 15SC70P. I also don't understand why the small claims order
for 15SC70P has "Defen not present crossed out but Plaintiff not present is left and the case is
dismissed with prejudice when he is the assistant attorney general.

A settlement offer was sent prior to the hearing on April1S, 2016 in case number 15CV79P to
attorney Stephen Phillips suggesting everybody "DROPEVERTHINGIN THIS CASE"and the only
case be remaining would be the federal case number 2:16~cv-0210S-JAR-GLRagainst Respondents
Lori Fleming and Kurt Loy if attorney Stephen Phillips would just drop his filing restrictions then
there would be no more paperwork filed in this case which is all that Stephen Phillips seems to
complain about us doing even though I have not filed very many cases in Crawford County. I don't
feel I deserve filing restrictions at all and at the most, attorney Stephen Phillips should have filed a
"timely counterclaim" "not filing restrictions which in my opinion violates my first amendment
right to freedom of speech. Attorney Stephen Phillips filed inappropriate responses for the
Defendants in case number 15CV79P by filing his response in case number "15CV75P which is the
case of AKCCManagement LLCvs. Two Big Fish LLCwhere his "RESPONSEOF DEFENDANTSLOY,
WACHTER,FLEMING,FLEMING,JACK,LYNCH,RUSSELL,SMITH,SANDERS,HAZLETT,GRILLOT
ANDSCHMIDTTO PLAINTIFFS'THREEMOTIONS"was improperly filed on 4/11/2016 with an
"IMPROPERCERTIFICATEOF SERVICE". The certificate of service says it was mailed out on April
8,2016 which is a Friday and if it was mailed out late on Friday the envelope would show "4-9-
2016" instead of the enclosed envelope it came in which is dated 4-11-2016 which shows the
certificate of service should have been 4-11-2016 and therefore the response is ineffective
according to KS.A. 60-210(a). I don't understand why there was never a new "NOTICEOF
HEARING"for April 18, 2016 in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 131(a) (b) (c)(d) that changed
the small claims court case of 15SC70P to 10:00 a.m. and the small claims cases 1SSC71P and
15SCS5P to 10:00 a.m. along with chapter civil case 15CV79P. I did not appear because there was
a "motion for continuance" that was filed appropriately in accordance with KS.A.60-207(b )(2)
KS.A.60-210(a), KS.A. 60-211(a) in this case on time and Defendant's attorney Stephen Phillips
filed his "RESPONSEOF DEFENDANTSLOY,WACHTER,FLEMING,FLEMING,JACK,LYNCH,
RUSSELL,SMITH,SANDERS,HAZLETT,GRILLOTAND SCHMIDTTO PLAINTIFFS'THREEMOTIONS
in the wrong court case which did not comply with KS.A.60-207(b )(2). KS.A. 60-210(a), and KS.A.
60-211(a) because he filed it in case number 15CV75P in the wrong case titled AKCCManagement
LLCvs. Two Big Fish LLCon 4-11-2016 according to the court docket in that case with the wrong
dated certificate of service because it was mailed out on April 11, 2016 not AprilS, 2016 which was
a Saturday.

The copy of the court transcript from 4-1S-2016 shows that you heard our case on April 18, 2016
with 3 other small claims cases in 22 minutes from 10:00 a.m. until 10:22 a.m. even though the
other cases were not scheduled until 1:30 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. I also read where you dismissed case
number 15CV79P first, but then granted filing restrictions against us after you already dismissed
the case even though the response by Stephen Phillips was filed on 4-11-2016 in AKCC
Management LLCvs. Two Big Fish LLCand the certificate of service is improper.
It would seem to me that the order from 4-18-2016 should be vacated and void because it seems to
be a void judgment because it did not comply with "REPORT OF SUPREME COURT STANDARDS
COMMITTEE-GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS" which says
"Justice is effective when it is: (A) Fairly Administered Without Delay, (B) Competent Judges, (C)
Operating in a Modern Court System without overlapping-jurisdictions or multiple appeals. CD)
Under Simple and Efficient Rules of Procedure. Number (3) under letter CD)says "The ultimate
judicial goal should be justice. not speed. in the disposition of cases. Cases should be determined on
an individual basis. not on an assembly line. It seems that since case numbers lSCV7SP, lSCV79P,
lSSC70P, lSSC71P, and lSSC8SP were all heard at 10:00 a.m. on 4-18-2016 that the hearing would
be able to be vacated with a "motion to vacate a void judgment".

I would like to file an "objection to the journal entry", "motion for reconsideration", "motion to
vacate a void judgment, "motion for change of judge with affidavit", and a "NOTICE OF APPEAL"
because I don't feel that we received due process with our chapter 61 case being heard on an
assembly line with 3 other chapter 60 small claims cases and I would like to possibly appeal this
case with the due process issues mentioned up above since I now seem to have filing restrictions
granted against me for 1 case lSCV38P Community National Bank v. James Beckley Jr. which I
objectto.

I don't want to file anything first without asking you to get permission first and get

contempt of court now that I have filing restrictions against me even though the "MOTION

OF DEFENDATNS LOY,WACHTER, FLEMING, FLEMING, JACK,LYNCH, RUSSELL, SMITH,

SANDERS, HAZLETT, GRILLOT, AND SCHMIDT FOR SANCTIONS WITH MEMORANDUM

INCORPORATED" was actually titled in case number lSCV7SP along with the "Response of

Defendants Loy, Wachter, Fleming, Fleming, Jack, Lynch Russell, Smith, Sanders, Hazlett,

Grillot, and Schmidt To Plaintiffs Three Motion Document" which is on the docket in the

case of AKCC Management LLC vs. Two Big Fish LLC with the wrong certificate of service.

don't understand how you could grant any filing restrictions against me for filing frivolous

filings when he is only talking about 1 case for me when the deputy attorney Stephen

Phillips appears to be the one filing frivolous filings as he has titled not one but "2" different

motions and responses in case number lSCV7SP and joined Dennis Depew in explaining

K.S.A.20-311(t) in case number 15SC70P Noah Day vs. My Town Media.

Have the abovementioned cases of lSCV7SP, lSCV79P, lSSC70P, lSSC71P, and lSSC8SP all

been consolidated as one case?

Another issue I would like to bring up is that I object to the fact that Stephen Phillips

addressed the letter dated may 3,2016 to your office address of801 Broadway, Room 201,

Goodland, Ks 67735 because Mr. Phillips had previously received your own private address

off the record according to the court transcript on 4-18-2016 and it does not follow court

rules and procedures to mail it to your own home address but list the office address to try to

deceive the plaintiffs in case number 15CV79P.

I also would like to have access to your own private address like you gave attorney Stephen

Phillips and Dennis Depew so he could mail you the orders for 15SC71P and 15SC85P off

the record in an ex-parte conversation before you left town early after the 10:22 a.m.

hearing according to court staff at Crawford County Courthouse so that I can communicate

with you quicker like attorneys Stephen Phillips, Dennis Depew, and Carrie Barney of the

attorney generals office is allowed to do.

I also would like to object to attorney Stephen Phillips request that you direct the Crawford

County clerk to refile the motion of "RESPONSEOF DEFENDANTSLOY,WACHTER,

FLEMING,FLEMING,JACK,LYNCH,RUSSELL,SMITH,SANDERS,HAZLETT,GRILLOTAND

SCHMIDTTO PLAINTIFFS'THREE MOTIONS"that was improperly filed on 4/11/2016 with

an "IMPROPERCERTIFICATEOF SERVICEin lSCV79P that he filed incorrectly in lSCV7SP

because attorney Phillips needs to re-do his "certificate of service" and re do and re date his

responses because 4-8-2016 was not when it was mailed out and it was 4-11-2016 and I

have included the envelope for proof. Stephen Phillips mailed out his RULE170 NOTICE

and JOURNALENTRYDISMISSINGCASEAND IMOSINGFILINGRESTRICTIONSaccording to

his certificate of service and the envelope on April 28, 2016 which shows that his office does

mail stuff out documents on the proper certificate of service date and this is an important

issue. I am also confused why Stephen Phillips even responded to the letter Kasey King sent

to Judge Jack Burr dated April 26, 2016 because according to attorney Stephen Phillips's
 own filing restrictions he claims he and no one else has to respond to anything the plaintiffs

write or say unless "ordered by the court" which he has not been ordered by you to respond
<,

to Mr. King's letter sent to you. Mr. Phillips has also replied on May 11, 2016 to a letter sent

to him by Mr. Carlton. None ofthis makes any sense because I don't understand what is

going on and Iwould appreciate a timely response to this letter and a new hearing in case

number 15CV79P without the small claims cases of 15SC70P, 15SC71P, and 15SC85P being

consolidated with the hearing.

Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my letter and the questions Ihave

about what Ican file and if I have filing restrictions granted against me for only filing one

counterclaim and other motions that all were in the guidelines of Kansas Rules and Civil

Procedure in one (1) case 15CV38P Community National Bank v. James Beckley Jr.

c/o Summary Judgment Group

P.O. Box 224

Pittsburg Ks 66762

Cc

James Emerson

County Counselor

Crawford County Courthouse

111 East Forest St.

Girard, Ks 66743

Stephen Phillips, No. 14130

Assistant Attorney General

Memorial Bldg., 2nd floor

120 SW 10th Avenue

Topeka, Ks 66612

Carrie Barney

Assistant Attorney General

Memorial Bldg., 2nd Floor

120 SW 10th Avenue

Topeka, Ks 66612