The following is valid material for scholastic curriculum of an actual ongoing case being heard within the

Springfield Ohio Court of Appeals

If you are here to see the actual Appellate Case, jump down to the SEQUENCE OF EVENTS which shows the Court Record.

TAKE THE FOLLOWING SHORT QUIZ

LET'S SEE WHERE YOU STAND!

http://springfield-ohio-post.com/federal/clark-county-municipal-court-springfield-Ohio.html

Today You Are The Judge


>>>  Answer each short Quiz honestly. 

Ready For Your First Quiz?


Here we go, A CASE IS PRESENTED FOR YOUR REVIEW.

You are the higher Court Judge of the Second Appellate Court of Appeals reviewing the Judgement of the Lower Court Judge's Decision in a Landlord/Tenant Dispute in which a 3rd Party has been attempting to "Correct The Record" and "Intervene".

The 3rd Party is not a Defendant, nor a Plaintiff; yet the 3rd Party claims to have evidence,  and informed the Lower Court that they have a case before them in which the wrong party is being Sued.  


The Lower Municipal Court Judge Trempe Denied the Motions and the Court Entries.

This leaves YOU in a precarious situation.
The Judge you are reviewing works across the hallway from you

Here is the CASE:

You are the higher Court Judge that will decide whether or not the lower Municipal Court Judge acted according to the Law, or acted outside of the Law in restricting the 3rd Party Claimant.

I will be the 3rd Party Claimant, my name is Kenny Hendrick a.k.a. Kenny Baldino (by error of the landlord).

http://springfield-ohio-post.com/federal/fed.htmlRental Reciept
I appeal to you in timely fashion (following Pre-Trial of the Lower Court's Decision to Deny me, the 3rd Party, access to the Case).   I Appeal to you that I was unlawfully withheld from a Municipal Court's Landlord/Tenant Dispute in which I claim to be a necessary party to the lower Court's Property Damage Claim. 

Let's begin.

With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?

Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case


_______________________

Quick Test 2

Now let's step up a notch !

YOU will now be availed a bit more information. 

   You are the Court of Appeals Judge. Again, You will decide whether or not my request to become involved in a Landlord/Tenant Dispute Case was unlawfully Denied by the Lower Court Judge.

In effect, YOU are a Judge, Judging a Judge.

http://springfieldoh.ddns.net

I appeal to you.

My claim to you is that I am:

1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case,

My claim to you is that I am:

2.) In possession of Video/Audio evidence that would  refute the Landlord's Claim,

My claim to you is that I am:

3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case,

My claim to you is that I was:

4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring  The Suit was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder and became domiciled in the State of Florida 2 years prior to the Plaintiff's filing.   This last Claim is evidenced by the Crow Letter which is also entered into the Municipal Court Record

http://springfieldoh.ddns.net/appeals.html

<*Side Note: Landlord's use of Tec as a Business Name (which doesn't Legally Exist)>

With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?


Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case

_______________________

Quick Test 3

Now let's step up to yet another level !

For this next Quiz, you will familiarize yourself with a few paragraphs of Law. 


https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/AboutLawyers/Pages/StaticPage-84.aspx
YOU are the Judge of the Second Appellate Court of Appeals.
You will Judge the Lower Court's Judge(ment). 
You will either OVERTURN or AFFIRM the lower Court's Decision (to Deny my becoming a part of a Case in which I'm not a party to).

Read the following short paragraphs, and submit your answer following the Quiz.

*******

Fed R Civ Rule 24.

(a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:

    (1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see TITLE IV. PARTIES);

or

    (2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.

(b) Permissive Intervention.

    (1) In General. On timely motion, the court may permit anyone to intervene who:

        (A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute(see TITLE IV. PARTIES); or

        (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.

***

Fed R Civ Rule 18.

Joinder of Claims

   (a) In General. A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim may join,

as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party.

    (b) Joinder of Contingent Claims. A party may join two claims even though one of them is contingent on the disposition of the other; but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the parties’ relative substantive rights. In particular, a plaintiff may state a claim for money and a claim to set aside a conveyance that is fraudulent as to that plaintiff, without first obtaining a judgment for the money.

Rule 19; Required Joinder of Parties

New subdivision (a) defines the persons whose joinder in the action is desirable. Clause (1) stresses the desirability of joining those persons in whose absence the court would be obliged to grant partial or “hollow” rather than complete relief to the parties before the court. The interests that are being furthered here are not only those of the parties, but also that of the public in avoiding repeated lawsuits on the same essential subject matter. Clause (2)(i) recognizes the importance of protecting the person whose joinder is in question against the practical prejudice to him which may arise through a disposition of the action in his absence. Clause (2)(ii) recognizes the need for considering whether a party may be left, after the adjudication, in a position where a person not joined can subject him to a double or otherwise inconsistent liability. See Reed, supra, 55 Mich.L.Rev. at 330, 338; Note, supra, 65 Harv.L.Rev. at 1052–57; Developments in the Law, supra, 71 Harv.L.Rev. at 881–85.

With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?


Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case

_______________________

Quick Test 4

 READY FOR THE NEXT TEST?

https://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/

In this short Quiz, You will need to slow down and consider the evidence that was NOT permitted by the Lower Municipal Court (yet is entered into the Court Record so it cannot be disregarded).

Your job as the Higher Court Judge is to decide whether or not the Lower Court acted appropriately in keeping the 3rd Party from presenting a case that might refute the Plaintiffs' Claim. 
The 3rd Party (me) Claims that the Lower Court erred in allowing a completely wrong party to be Tried by the Plaintiff.   

Let's get you up to speed.

As a Higher Court Judge, You must review the Court Record of the Lower Court.
Below You will find actual documents that were presented to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL. 
Presented to you now are One of the Two Motions that the 3rd Party submitted to the Lower Court PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL.

My timely filed MOTION TO INTERVENE

(2 months prior to Pre-Trial)

Page1

Page2

Page3

Page4

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2


The law does not specify that one must prove him or herself to be included in an ongoing case.
 The Law merely states that: 

Fed R Civ Rule 24.

(a) Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:

    (1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute (see TITLE IV. PARTIES);

or

    (2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.

With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?


Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case


_______________________

Quick Test 5

 READY FOR THE NEXT TEST?

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/Divisions?OpenForm
As formerly stated, there were TWO Motions I submitted to the Lower Court Prior to Pre-Trial.  
Below is the Second Motion which is on Public Court Record.   
Review the Motion, consider the matter, and answer accordingly below.
Below is the
timely filed MOTION TO CORRECT THE RECORD

(Prior to Pre-Trial)

Page1

Page2

Page3

Page4

Page5

Page6

Page7

Page8

Page9

Exhibit Video 1

THERE WAS A VIDEO SUBMITTED TO THE COURT RECORD PRIOR TO PRE-TRIAL,

DID THE VIDEO AFFECT YOUR JUDGEMENT ?   Since the video shows damages to ceiling tiles and carpet, would the video have made a difference in finding that the downstairs tenant is guilty of damages that are clearly the result of the upstairs tenant?


With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?


Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case


_______________________

Quick Test 6

 READY FOR THE NEXT TEST?

There is a local Law you should be familiar with.   Review this Law and submit your response below.

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/CaseSearch?OpenForm

Ohio Revised Code, Rule 24. Intervention

"Intervention of Right. On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who:

(1) is given an unconditional right to intervene by a Federal Statute (*see Rule 19. Required Joinder of Parties, et. al.);

or

(2) claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action."

The following is a letter from the Plaintiff!

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/DailyScheduleSearch?OpenForm
Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case


_______________________

Quick Test 7

 You've hung in there just fine so far.  

ARE YOU READY FOR THE NEXT QUIZ?

Okay, now would it alter your Decision to know that the former Lease Holder with the Plaintiff (Landlord) of the Municipal Court Case,
is my mother?

Think about this one for a moment.   I'm 52 which makes my mother 70++.

How does that affect you?   Does it affect your Decision?


 Remember, I'm the 3rd Party Claimant attempting to become a party to the case that is free to present evidence, stating that:

1.) The wrong party is being sued.
2.) The Plaintiff hasn't any ground to sue.
3.) The Plaintiff entered into the Court Record fraudulent Documents.
4.) That there are videos and witnesses that are able to prove the aforementioned claims made by the 3rd Party.

Presented to you are two verifiabe letters which my mother sent over 3 years ago.  
Luckily she kept the tracking/sending information.

Read the Letters.  
Consider the dates of the letters.  Consider the date that the damages Claim was filed in the Municipal Court.

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/RulesPage?OpenFormThis Document was received by Sheriff Lyons, the Plaintiff Crow's Son-in-Law, on November 25, 2014

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/CostsPage?OpenFormThis Document was recieved by the Crow Attorney stating similarly.

With nothing more to go on Do YOU, Affirm or Overturn the Lower Court's Decision?

Affirm = Keep all other parties out of a Court Case
Overturn = Allow any party that has evidence to a Court Case
_______________________

Quick Test 8

The original Clark County Municipal Court Case,

from which this appeal is derived, can be seen Here.

Check it out, there's a world of exhibits and evidences that were denied!

NOTES: Although a slew of exhibits and evidences were entered into the Municipal Court Record, every one of them were denied
(including videos of the live damages as they were occurring, audio recordings of live narration, relevant documents, witness Testimonies (others), my testimony, etc.).  
Denied.  Not allowed in the Court Case, why?

You are already aware that there were a couple of Motions filed to the Lower Municipal Court Record prior to Pre-Trial,  which alleged:

 1.) The Wrong party was being sued.
2.) Evidence was NOT permitted in the Municipal Court as seen here:  http://springfieldoh.ddns.net
3.) That the Claim was fraudulent in the first place, and knowingly filed against the wrong party.
4.)
That the Lower Court did not wait for the Court of Appeals' Decision (YOUR DECISION, AND YOU ARE THE HIGHER COURT JUDGE, DENIED!) as to decide upon my right to stand within the Municipal Court Case (to show and tell like neither the Plaintiffs nor the wrongfully maligned Defendant).

Continue below to familiarize yourself with the Live Case you have been tested on.

As it stands now, the Municipal Court manipulated a 70+ year old woman to come all the way to Ohio to be told that she's the cause of the damages.  
Shamefully, the Municipal Court of Springfield Ohio found She was found guilty (while I was denied Court Access to present ANY  evidences, even those that were on the Court Record!!!).  Denied.

Eric Crow, the (now) Municipal Court winner, was not a signer (or signor) on any Lease Agreement, yet seems to have the approval of the Lower Municipal Court concerning standing... in a Lease Agreement in which he's not even named.   The Court gave the award to Eric Crow.    My contention as the 3rd Party is that if Eric can make a claim against Margaret Baldino in a Lease Agreement dispute that he's not even a party to, then why can I not make a Claim against either of the Crows when I have expressed to the Municipal Court Record to be:

1.) A First-Person Witness of the damages that the Landlords were seeking money for in the (then) ongoing Municipal Court Case,

2.) In possession of Video/Audio evidence that would  refute the Landlord's Claim,

3.) In possession of documents relevant to the Municipal Court Case,

4.) The actual tenant during the very time that damages were occurring (so the Case was filed completely against the wrong party, a 70+ year old woman that was the former Lease Holder).

Yet, regardless of who was the tenant or which of the Leases the Court was willing to see, Eric Crow is oddly enough shown on the Court Record as being the recipient of the Court award and champion winner of the Theresa Crow / Margaret Baldino Lease (dis)Agreement.  In fact, Eric Crow was permitted to be present in the Court Room throughout the entirety of his wife's Contractual Trial; whereas Margaret Baldino's witnesses were told to stay in the hallway until called. 

My mother and I even went and filed a Counter-Suit against the Crows ($50+ dollars).   You guessed it. 
Denied (but the Municipal Court  kept the money).


Lucky Crows?  Or something else?

http://www.clerkofcourts.municipal.co.clark.oh.us/web.nsf/HomePage?OpenFormAcknowledgement

Last quiz question, it is this: 

That if I've impressed upon you enough to email your answers to the aforementioned questions. the next question should be a breeze.    

Read the short Sequence of events below, if you feel this case has unlawfully left the Tenant out of the Tenant/ Landlord Dispute

OR

if you feel that at very least I should have been a party that is Free to present evidence,

then please call the Second Appellate's 800 number and leave a message concerning your opinion of this form of Justice.    

(800) 608-4652,   (937) 225-4464,   (937) 496-7724 (fax) 

Appellate Case Number: 2016-CA-56

to the Municipal Case Number:
15-CVF-02981

Thank you for your time, and enjoy the remainder of this page.

P.S.  As of May 14, 2017 the Appellate Court agreed with the lower court, that I shouldn't present my evidence because I'm not a party to said action and I have not shown "interest"....

I say, if they didn't give themselves immunity, we'd get a better polity/judiciary that would consider its actions with more sincerity.