Professional Documents
Culture Documents
20 Ridge Road
Westminster, Maryland 21157,
IN THE
Plaintiff,
v.
Brett Kimberlin
8100 Beech Tree Road
Bethesda, Maryland 20817;
Tetyana Kimberlin
8100 Beech Tree Road
Bethesda, Maryland 20817;
Matt Osborne
546 Riverview Drive
Florence, Alabama 35630;
William M. Schmalfeldt,
3209 S. Lake Drive, Apt. 108
St. Francis, Wisconsin 53235;
William Ferguson
10808 Schroeder Road
Live Oak, California 95953;
Breitbart Unmasked
Address Unknown;
Almighty Media
Address Unknown;
John Does 1, 2, 3, and 4; and
Acme
(an unknown business entity);
Defendants.
06-C-16-070789
Case No. ____________________
PARTIES
1.
5.
owner of Breitbart Unmasked. Its actual form of business organization and the
and belief, he supervises Matt Osborne. His current location and identity are
unknown.
12.
manages Almighty Media. His current location and identity are unknown.
13.
On information and belief, Acme owns or controls Almighty Media. Its actual form
of business organization and the location of any of its offices are unknown.
14.
Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie, 407 Md. 415 (2009) concerning the presently unknown
locations and/or identities of business entities and natural persons.
15.
Kimberlin, Tetyana Kimberlin, and William Schmalfeldt under Md. Cts. & Jud. P.
6-102(a). This Court has specific personal jurisdiction over the remaining
Defendants (and, alternatively, Schmalfeldt) under Md. Cts. & Jud. P. 6-103(b) as
participants in a civil conspiracy. Also, Breitbart Unmasked and its writers
specifically target Maryland. Alternatively, the Court has jurisdiction over
Defendants John Doe 3, John Doe 4, Almighty Media, and Acme under the aiding
and abetting doctrine.
16.
6-201(b).
The circumstances underlying this action are bizarre and complex, and
a bit of history is necessary in order to provide context for Mr. Hoges Complaint.
18.
which terrorized the town of Speedway, Indiana, in the late 70s.2 During his teens
and twenties, he engaged in drug dealing, becoming a significant wholesaler of
marijuana in the Midwest. His first conviction was for perjury before a grand jury
in relation to his drug dealing.3 He was subsequently convicted of drug charges,
impersonating a federal officer, misuse of military insignia, and misuse of the Seal
2
Following his release in 2001, Brett Kimberlin created and has since
Id., 490-494.
Kimberlin v. Allen, Case No. 339254V (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. 2011), Dkt. No. 97.
6
At the time he was advising Mr. Allen, Mr. Walker was also writing
Brett Kimberlin falsely accused Mr. Walker of assaulting and harassing him, and
he sought a pair of peace orders against Mr. Walker.9 Both were overturned on
appeal.10 The second peace order contained an unconstitutional gag order
preventing Mr. Walker from speaking or writing about Kimberlin, the District
Court judge disregarding controlling Supreme Court precedent by name. Various
writers on the Internet, including Mr. Hoge, took notice of that order and began
writing about Brett Kimberlin and what one writer called his brass knuckles
reputation management. On 25 May, 2012, hundreds of bloggers, including Mr.
Kimberlin v. Walker, Case No. 0601SP005392012 (Md. D.Ct. Mont. Co. 2012) and
Kimberlin v. Walker, Case No. 0601SP019792012 (Md. D.Ct. Mont. Co. 2012).
Kimberlins claim that he had been assaulted by Mr. Walker in the Montgomery
County Circuit Courthouse was shown to be false by surveillance video.
10
Kimberlin v. Walker, Case No. 8444D (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. 2012) and Kimberlin
v. Walker, Case No. 8526D (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. 2012).
7
Hoge, confronted Kimberlin and his use of lawfare to silence critics in an online
event called Everyone Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day. The event was a sort of I
am Spartacus response to Kimberlins attempt to use the courts to silence his
critics by joining in the criticism. On 25 June, 2012, the unconstitutional gag order
was struck down by Judge Rupp of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County.
Later that evening, Mr. Walker was SWATted.11 He was the fourth individual to be
SWATted after having written about Brett Kimberlin.12 On information and belief,
Brett Kimberlin is a prime suspect for having ordered the SWATting to take place.
22.
began writing blog posts for Breitbart Unmasked. On or about 7 October, 2012,
11
SWATting involves someone making a false call to 911 claiming that a violent
crime such as a murder has just occurred at the victims residence with the
intention of provoking a weapons-ready police response.
12
Mike Stack, a blogger in New Jersey; John Patrick Frey, a Deputy District
Attorney in Los Angeles County, California; and Erick Erickson, a radio and cable
TV personality, were all SWATted after criticizing Brett Kimberlin.
8
William Schmalfeldt, using the pseudonym The Liberal Grouch, took over as
editor of the website under the supervision of John Doe 3 as publisher. On or about
13 March, 2013, Matt Osborne began writing for Breitbart Unmasked, and on a date
between 10 August, 2013, and 1 September, 2013, Osborne took over as editor.
24.
by Schmalfeldt (under the byline Liberal Grouch) titled The Craven Cowardice of
Aaron Walker Revealed in His Own Words. This article contained sealed discovery
material from a lawsuit involving Brett Kimberlin and Mr. Walker. The article was
also defamatory of Mr. Walker. Kimberlin was only party to the suit who could
9
have been the source the sealed documents for Schmalfeldt. After Mr. Hoge
reported and commented on this breach of the courts seal, he became one of the
targets of the conspirators harassment and defamation. The first mention of Mr.
Hoge by Breitbart Unmasked was on or about 5 December, 2012, in an article by
Schmalfeldt (again writing as Liberal Grouch).
27.
29.
[H]e has offered my mentally ill wife things of value to sign false
documents prepared by him and his associate Aaron Walker.
Id. Mr. Hoge never offered Mrs. Kimberlin anything of value to sign a false
document.
He is co-publisher of a blog called KimberlinUnmasked, which
publishes daily false attacks on me. He is publisher of another blog
called HogeWash [sic] that publishes daily false attacks on me.
Id. Mr. Hoge was not the publisher of any blog other than Hogewash! in July, 2013,
11
Mr. Hoge believes that she seemed competent during July, 2013.
Mr. Hoge has been using the Internet, blogs, Twitter, and other
electronic means to stalk and harm me. He is doing this to harm
me and my reputation and destroy my business and ability to earn
a living.
Id. Mr. Hoge has never engaged in any stalking or cyberstalking or harassment of
Mr. Kimberlin. Kimberlin knew that all these allegations were false or misleading.
Further, the time period during which Mr. Hoge was alleged to have acted included
several months before he was aware of Brett Kimberlin or had written about him.13
On information and belief, the charge was filed in retaliation for Mr. Hoges writing
about a series of protective orders filed between Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin and
for Mr. Hoges assistance to Mrs. Kimberlin in obtaining legal counsel.
30.
thought so little of the allegations that they entered a nolle prosequi in the case and
requested that the charge be expunged without every communicating with Mr.
Hoge. On 15 August, 2013, the Judge Wolfe of the District Court expunged the
charge. Both actions were taken without Mr. Hoges knowledge or agreement.
13
Mr. Hoge was charged with a course of conduct that supposedly began in
January, 2012. While Mr. Hoge would have had a general recollection of that
federal prisoner who lied about being Dan Quayles dope dealer, Brett Kimberlin
was not on Mr. Hoges radar until after late May, 2012. He did not write about
Kimberlin until the week of 25 May, 2012.
13
32.
and it was resolved in Mr. Hoges favor. Given that theCommissioners finding of
probable cause was based on Kimberlins false statements, there was no true
probable cause. If Kimberlin had told the truth, no charge would have been issued.
As for malice, it may be inferred from a lack of probable cause. Thus, by pursuing
the false harassment charge, Kimberlin engaged in the tort of malicious prosecution
against Mr. Hoge.
33.
against him and in preparation for a possible defense against the charge. These
expenses included, but were not limited to, costs associated with seeking legal
advice, the cost of round trips from Carroll County to Rockville, Maryland, to
retrieve copies of court documents, as well as incidental expenses such a copying
charges. Thus, Mr. Hoge suffered actual damages.
35.
with Matt Osbornes byline titled William Hoge Stalking A Teenager For His
Conspiracy Theory. 14 That article states that the teenager Mr. Hoge allegedly
14
Osborne, Matt, William Hoge Stalking A Teenager For His Conspiracy Theory,
http://www.breitbartunmasked.com/2015/03/04/william-hoge-stalking-a-teenagerfor-his-conspiracy-theory/, viewed 27 Feb., 2016.
14
stalked was the elder daughter of Tetyana Kimberlin (K. Kimberlin, a minor
child). The article falsely states:
William Hoge of Maryland indicated that he still pays entirely too
much attention to [K. Kimberlin], the teenage daughter of his chief
obsession. Its hard to overstate this: Walker, Hoge, and their
felonious friends ruined a teenage girls public debut in the worst
way imaginable.
The allegation that Mr. Hoge stalked K. Kimberlin is false.15 The claim that Mr.
Hoge has ruined her career is false.
36.
The 4 March article falsely states that Mr. Hoge suborned perjury.
Remember, this is the girl whose family, personal life, and budding
music career were destroyed when Hoge and his sociopathic friends
colluded to suborn perjury from her mother.
Id. On information and belief, the sole source for this false allegation is Brett
Kimberlin, a convicted perjurer who this Court has prevented from offering
testimony pursuant to Md. Cts. & Jud. P. 9-104. Kimberlin has a history of
making false allegations against his perceived enemies and of losing in court
because he cannot prove his claims. He has been caught filing altered exhibits with
court papers in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County and the U. S. District
15
On 6 March, 2013, a peace order petition was filed against Mr. Hoge by Brett
Kimberlin on behalf of K. Kimberlin alleging that Mr. Hoge had stalked and
harassed her. (Case No. 0601SP012712015) During the ex parte hearing for the
temporary peace order, that order was granted only on the basis of harassment but
not stalking. Stalking by Mr. Hoge could not be demonstrated to a reasonable
possibility standard. At the hearing for the final peace order on 13 March, 2013, the
petition was denied because the petitioner could not meet the burden of proof for
harassment.
15
The 4 March article further states that Mr. Hoge published on his
16
See, e.g., Kimberlin v. Kimberlin Unmasked, Case No. 13-CV-02580, (D.Md. 2015),
ECF No. 19 and Kimberlin v. National Bloggers Club, et al., Case No. 13-CV-03059
(D. Md. 2015) ECF No. 124. Both filings include of extracts of an 9 April, 2014,
hearing before Judge Ryon in Montgomery County concerning an altered Certified
Mail green card. ECF No. 19 deals with a similarly altered card in a federal
lawsuit. ECF No. 124 primarily deals with a forged summons.
17
Fifty Shades of Grey is the title of a popular novel dealing with sadism/
masochism. Christian Grey is the title character.
16
add up to allegations that Mr. Hoge committed crimes, i.e., stalking and
subornation of perjury, and Osborne knew the statements concerning Mr. Hoge
were false or he acted with reckless disregard for the truth in publishing them.
Thus, Osborne and Breitbart Unmasked, together with Almighty Media, Acme, and
John Does 3 and 4 (who aided and abetted the publication), are at fault.
40. On 4 March, 2015, John Doe 1 (writing as Mark Cammerling) sent the
following email:
From: Mark MRLND <marknmaryland@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 4:32 PM
Subject: Carroll County Chair Connie Hoges husband is litigious
and unstable. Now obsessed with teenager.
To: info@marylandforestryboards.org,
[redacted].davis@maryland.gov, HoCoForestryBoard@gmail.com,
[redacted]@pepco.com, [redacted].lewis1@maryland.gov,
[redacted].eierdam@maryland.gov
Once again, another story has come out about husband of Connie
Hoge, Goddard employee WJJ Hoge. This story is regarding his
obsession with a teenaged girl.
17
2015, email were false, that he knew they were false or that he acted with a reckless
disregard for the truth. Thus, he acted with actual malice, and he is at fault. See
footnote 15 above. Moreover, the email tended to expose Mr. Hoge to scorn, hatred,
contempt, or ridicule, thereby discouraging others in the community from having a
18
good opinion of him or from associating or dealing with him. Additionally, the email
implied that Mr. Hoge was unstable and unfit and incompetent to perform his
professional duties and caused disruption in his community and workplace
relationships.
43.
that was an appropriately brutal and true depiction of events. William Hoge
Stalking A Teenager For His Conspiracy Theory, Comments. This comment
endorses the contents of the article as truthful and is, in essence, a restatement of
the defamatory remarks contained in the 4March, 2015, article.
44.
the 4 March, 2015, article amounts to an allegation that Mr. Hoge committed
crimes, i.e., stalking and subornation of perjury. It implies that he has independent
and undisclosed knowledge of facts not in the article. The facts demonstrate that
the statements in the article were false, that Schmalfeldt knew they were false or
that he acted with a reckless disregard for the truth, and that by endorsing them
Schmalfeldt acted with malice. Thus, Schmalfeldt, Osborne, and Breitbart
Unmasked, together with Almighty Media, Acme, and John Does 3 and 4 (who aided
19
and abetted the publication), are at fault. Osborne and Breitbart Unmasked acted
with bad faith in publishing Schmalfeldts comment to third parties.
46.
2015, article is an allegation that Mr. Hoge committed at least one crime, i.e.,
stalking. The facts demonstrate that the allegations of committing a horrendous
crime and engaging in harassment were false, that John Doe 2 knew they were
false or that he acted with a reckless disregard for the truth, and that by making
them John Doe 2 acted with malice. Thus, John Doe 2, Osborne, and Breitbart
Unmasked, together with Almighty Media, Acme, and John Does 3 and 4 (who aided
20
and abetted the publication), are at fault. Osborne and Breitbart Unmasked acted
with bad faith in publishing John Doe 2s comment to third parties.
49.
Brett Kimberlin has filed multiple civil actions against Mr. Hoge,
including a recent suit filed in the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland,
Southern Division.18 One of Mr. Hoges codefendants in that matter is the U. S.
Chamber of Commerce. On or about 9 March, 2015, as part of his pre-suit
negotiations with the Chamber of Commerce, Kimberlin sent an email containing
the following paragraph:
You may or may not know all the defendants. Please note that
last Friday, Defendant Hoge was served with a Peace Order
prohibiting him stalking or harassing my teenage daughter. He
has proudly been using the tactics developed by Team Themis to
do so. Yes, its the same daughter mentioned by Aaron Barr after
he scraped her social media sites and disclosed what school she
was attending. And yes, she was bullied out of two schools after
that. I am also attaching a copy of that PO.
Kimberlin v. Hunton & Williams LLC, et al., Case No. 15-CV-00723-GJH, (D.Md.
2015), ECF No. 71, Ex. 1. This explicitly states that Mr. Hoge has engaged in the
crimes of stalking and harassment. That is false. See footnote 15 above. Moreover,
given the denial of stalking as a basis for the temporary Peace Order, Kimberlin
18
Kimberlin v. Hunton & Williams LLP, et al., Case No. 15-CV-00723-GJH (D.Md.
2015).
21
clearly knew that the District Court did not find that Mr. Hoge had engaged in
stalking.
50.
the Chamber of Commerce is an allegation that Mr. Hoge committed crimes, i.e.,
stalking and harassment. The facts demonstrate that Kimberlins statement in the
email to the Chamber of Commerce was false, that he knew it was false or that he
acted with a reckless disregard for the truth, and that he acted with malice. Thus,
he is at fault.
52.
with Matt Osbornes byline titled William Hoge, Adjudicated Stalker? Peace Order
Hearing This Friday.19 The opening sentence is the following false statement: A
Maryland judge may finally put an end to W.J.J. Hoges habitual stalking of the
Kimberlin family this Friday.
53.
an allegation that Mr. Hoge committed a crime, i.e., stalking. The facts
demonstrate that Osborne made a defamatory statement to third parties by
19
Osborne, Matt, William Hoge, Adjudicated Stalker? Peace Order Hearing This
Friday, http://www.breitbartunmasked.com/2015/03/09/william-hoge-adjudicatedstalker-peace-order-hearing-this-friday/, viewed 27 Feb., 2016.
22
55.
with Matt Osbornes byline titled Judge Calls Out Hoge For Perjury; Case Goes To
Circuit Court.20 In reporting on the final hearing held that day for a Peace Order
sought against Mr. Hoge by Brett Kimberlin on behalf of K. Kimberlin, Osborne
wrote:
Judge Zuberi B. Williams also found that Hoge had perjured
himself during the hearing when he denied leaving comments
under an August, 2013 article about [K. Kimberlin]s budding
music career only to have proof of his actions presented to the
court. You just lied under oath, Williams reportedly said to Hoge
on the witness stand before turning to his attorney, Patrick
Ostronic. How am I supposed to find your client credible?
20
Osborne, Matt, Judge Calls Out Hoge For Perjury; Case Goes To Circuit Court,
http://www.breitbartunmasked.com/2015/03/13/judge-calls-out-hoge-for-perjurycase-goes-to-circuit-court/, viewed 27 Feb., 2016.
23
In fact, Judge Williams made no such finding, and he did not tell Mr. Hoge that he
had lied under oath. Osborne was not present at the hearing. Because the article
was published the same day as the trial, neither a transcript nor a court audio CD
were available at the time the article was published. On information and belief,
Osbornes source of information concerning the hearing was Brett Kimberlin.
56.
authenticate as his own a Twitter message (tweet) which stated that its author
had commented on a particular article published at gazette.com together with Mr.
Hoges denial of having made such a comment at gazette.com. The purported tweet
was offered as evidence during the 13 March hearing by convicted forger Brett
Kimberlin. It was, in fact, an altered version of a tweet authored by a third party
named Lee Stranahan. Given that Osborne, writing under the pseudonym
Xenophon, had included a copy of that tweet properly attributed to Mr. Stranahan
in a 29 August, 2013, Breitbart Unmasked article on a related topic,21 he knew or
should have known that the basis of the perjury allegation was false.
57.
Hogewash! detailing how Brett Kimberlin obtained the altered tweet offered in
evidence during the 13 March hearing. Breitbart Unmasked subsequently
published an Update to the 13 March article standing by the accuracy of the 13
21
Xenophon, Lee Stranahan and Aaron Walker Smear a Teenagers Family and Try
to Snuff Out Her Career, http://www.breitbartunmasked.com/latest-news/leestranahan-and-aaron-walker-smear-a-teenagers-family-and-try-to-snuff-out-hercareer/index.html/, viewed 18 Sept., 2013.
24
and Ferguson in the Update add up to allegations that Mr. Hoge committed a crime,
i.e., perjury. The facts demonstrate that Osborne made defamatory statements to
third parties by publishing the 13 March article on the Internet on Breitbart
Unmasked. The facts also demonstrate that the Update written by William
Ferguson and published to third parties on the website was defamatory. The facts
demonstrate that the statements in both the article and the Update were false, that
Osborne and Ferguson knew they were false or that they acted with a reckless
disregard for the truth. Thus, Osborne, Ferguson, and Breitbart Unmasked acted
with malice, and those Defendants, together with Almighty Media, Acme, and John
Does 3 and 4 (who aided and abetted the publication), are at fault.
COUNT IXACTS RELATING TO DEFAMATORY STATEMENTS MADE TO TWITTER
59.
60.
suspended for allegedly engaging in targeted abuse. The suspension was the
result of one or more false complaints by Brett Kimberlin alleging that Mr. Hoge
had engaged in cyberstalking and harassment of K. Kimberlin. During a de novo
appeal trial on 14 May, 2015, for the Peace Order petition denied on 13 March,
2015, K. Kimberlin proffered an email to Brett Kimberlin from Twitter concerning
his complaint against Mr. Hoge. Upon investigation, Twitter found Kimberlins
25
allegation(s) of targeted abuse to be false, and it was in fact false. On 8 July, 2015,
Twitter restored the account and apologized to Mr. Hoge for suspending it.
61.
Mr. Hoges @wjjhoge Twitter account was used to promote his blog
Hogewash! and other business activities. Loss of that account and the relationships
built up with other Twitter users who had followed his account over the previous
three years had an adverse and continuing financial impact on revenue generated
by Mr. Hoges blog. That loss resulted from the false statements about Mr. Hoge
made to Twitter by Brett Kimberlin. While the @wjjhoge account was suspended,
Mr. Hoge had to expend time and money (for example, paid advertising for the new
account) rebuilding a following with the second Twitter account.
62.
26
63.
64.
Osbornes byline entitled Vindictive: Hoge, Walker Running Out Of Ways To Harass
Families. 22 The article falsely accuses Mr. Hoge of the crimes of subornation of
perjury and harassment. The complainant is Tetyana Kimberlin, the very woman
from whom Hoge and Walker attempted to suborn perjury against her husband in
2013. This is a rehashing of the false allegation described in paragraphs 36 and 37
above. On information and belief, Tetyana Kimberlin has never recanted the
allegations made in her Application for Statement of Charges filed against Brett
Kimberlin (Application II).
65.
allegation that Mr. Hoge committed a crime, i.e., subornation of perjury. The facts
demonstrate that Osborne made a defamatory statement to third parties by
publishing the article on the Internet on Breitbart Unmasked. The facts
demonstrate that the statement was false, that he knew it was false or that he
acted with a reckless disregard for the truth, and that the Osborne and Breitbart
Unmasked acted with malice. Thus, those Defendants, together with Almighty
Media, Acme, and John Does 3 and 4 (who aided and abetted the publication), are at
fault.
22
67.
Order he sought on the behalf of K. Kimberlin.23 A de novo trial was held in the
Circuit Court for Montgomery County on 14 May, 2015. During that trial, Brett
Kimberlin was not permitted to testify pursuant to Md. Cts. & Jud. P. 9-104.
Also, because he his not a lawyer, he was not allowed to represent his daughter as
he had in the District Court on 13 March. The Circuit Court denied the Peace
Order petition because there was no statutory basis for relief, i.e., that court found
that Mr. Hoge had not engaged in harassment of K. Kimberlin.
68.
Statement of Charges (Application III) against Mr. Hoge, alleging that he had
engaged in electronic harassment of a minor (i.e., K. Kimberlin) in violation of Md.
Crim. L. 3-805(b)(2). On information and belief, Mrs. Kimberlin filed Application
III on behalf of Brett Kimberlin. Upon information and belief, Application III was
actually drafted by Brett Kimberlin. Although Application III did not properly
allege violation of the elements of 3-805(b)(2), a District Court Commissioner
issued a summons based solely on her false statements.24 On 24 June, 2015, the
Montgomery County States Attorney entered a nolle prosequi on the charge, stating
23
B. Kimberlin obo K. Kimberlin v. Hoge, Case No. 9148D (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co.
2015).
24
State v. Hoge, Case No. 3D00333028 (Md. D.Ct. Mont. Co. 2015).
28
Mr. Hoge, and it was resolved in Mr. Hoges favor. Because Application III relied on
her false statements, there could be no proper finding of probable cause by the
District Court Commissioner who issued the charge. As for malice, that may be
inferred from the lack of probable cause. Thus, by pursuing the false online
harassment charge, the Kimberlins engaged in the tort of malicious prosecution
against Mr. Hoge.
71
against him and in preparation for a possible defense against the charge. These
expenses included, but were not limited to, the cost of round trips from Carroll
County to Rockville, Maryland, to retrieve copies of court documents and to meet
with counsel, as well as incidental expenses such a copying charges. Thus, he
suffered actual damages.
73.
infringement.25 On 14 August, 2014, the case was settled via ADR. The terms of
the settlement required that neither party would publish any of the others works
without prior written permission unless the work had been published under terms
of service allowing republication. No exception is allowed for Fair Use. The
Settlement Agreement is a contract enforceable under the Laws of the State of
Maryland.
74.
his blog Deep Brain Radio titled Goodness. Someone Thinks HES All That! (http://
deepbrainradio.com/2015/12/goodness-someone-thinks-hes-all-that/) which
contained material taken without permission from the Hogewash! blog post Bonus
Legal LULZ Du Jour published Mr. Hoge on that same date. (http://hogewash.com/
25
2015/12/24/bonus-legal-lulz-du-jour-2/)
77.
his blog Deep Brain Radio titled Repition Is An Advanced Indicator Of Senility
(http://deepbrainradio.com/2015/12/repetition-is-an-advanced-indicator-ofsenitlity/)which contained material taken without permission from the Hogewash!
blog post Legal LULZ Du Jour published Mr. Hoge on that same date. (http://
hogewash.com/2015/12/26/legal-lulz-du-jour-5/)
78.
blog The Pontificator titled Is WJJ Hoge Just A Blogger? Or Cult Leader? (http://
thepontificator.com/2016/01/15/is-wjj-hoge-iii-just-a-blogger-or-cult-leader/) which
contained material taken without permission from the Hogewash! blog post An
Email published by Mr. Hoge on that same date. (http://hogewash.com/2016/01/15/
an-email/)
80.
lulz-du-jour-9/)
81.
blog The Pontificator titled The Grand Hoge ITSELF Lifts Its Filthy Face From The
Trough To Boast About My Not Having Won A Case That Isnt Even Ready To
Proceed (http://thepontificator.com/2016/01/19/the-grand-hoge-itself-lifts-its-filthyface-from-the-trough-to-boast-about-my-not-having-won-a-case-that-isnt-evenready-to-proceed/) which contained material taken without permission from the
Hogewash! blog post Team Kimberlin Post of the Day published by Mr. Hoge on that
same date. (http://hogewash.com/2016/01/19/team-kimberlin-post-of-the-day-1045/)
82.
blog The Pontificator titled Which of the Audio Comedy Bits Turned Hoggy On the
Most? (http://thepontificator.com/2016/02/15/which-of-the-audio-comedy-bits-turnedhoggy-on-the most/) which contained material taken without permission from the
Hogewash! blog post Bonus legal LULZ Du Jour published Mr. Hoge on that same
date. (http://hogewash.com/2016/02/15/bonus-legal-lulz-du-jour-3/)
84.
taken without permission from the Hogewash! blog post Logins published Mr. Hoge
on that same date. (http://hogewash.com/2016/02/23/logins-47/)
85.
33
Defendant Brett Kimberlin and in favor of Mr. Hoge for one count of malicious
prosecution;
ii.)
Defendants Brett Kimberlin and Tetyana Kimberlin, jointly and severally, and in
favor of Mr. Hoge for one count of malicious prosecution;
iii.)
against all the Defendants except Tetyana Kimberlin, jointly and severally, and in
favor of Mr. Hoge for each of nine counts of defamation;
v.)
prominently published for a period of one year on the Home page Breitbart
Unmasked and at the top of the William Hoge Stalking A Teenager For His
Conspiracy Theory; William Hoge, Adjudicated Stalker? Peace Order Hearing This
Friday; Judge Calls Out Hoge For Perjury; Case Goes To Circuit Court; and
34
Vindictive: Hoge, Walker Running Out Of Ways To Harass Families articles as long
as they remain posted on the Internet;
vi.)
filing any further false Applications for Statement of Charges against Mr. Hoge;
and
viii.) Such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
35
Exhibit A
Application for Statement of Charges, State v. Hoge, Case No. 3D00333028
(Md. D.Ct. Mont. Co. 2015). Minor childs first name redacted.
Exhibit B
Application for Statement of Charges, State v. Hoge, Case No. 3D00333028
(Md. D.Ct. Mont. Co. 2015). False statements striken.
Exhibit C
Settlement Agreement from Hoge v. Schmalfeldt, Case No. 14-CV-01683-ELJ
(D.Md. 2014).
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Dated: August l4r20l4
This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into this 14th day of
August, 2014by and between Plaintiff William John Joseph Hoge ("Hoge") and Defendant
William M. Schmalfeldt ("Schmalfeldt") (Hoge and Schmalfeldt are collectively referred to
herein as the "Parties") in the case of Hoge v. Schmalfeldt, Civil No. ELH-14-1683, in the United
States District Court for the District of Maryland ("the case"). The purpose of this Agreement is
to fully settle any and all claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party claims raised in the
case; to document the Parties' agreement to certain conditions; and to allow the Parties to move
for the enforcement of the Agreement.
The Parties agree as follows:
1. Hoge agrees to dismiss all of his claims against Schmalfeldt in this case with
prejudice. Schmalfeldt agrees to dismiss all of his counterclaims and amended counterclaims
against Hoge and all of his counterclaims and amended counterclaims against "Paul Krendler"
(Anonymous Blogger) with prejudice.
2.
In order to facilitate the dismissal of the Parties' claims and counterclaims, the
Parties agree that the Court will enter an Order pursuant to Local Rule 111 dismissing all claims,
counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party claims.
3.
The entry of the Local Rule 111 Order will be without prejudice to the right of the
Parties to move for good cause within 30 days to reopen the case if settlement is not
consummated. If neither of the Parties move to reopen, the dismissal shall be with prejudice.
4. The Panies agree that they will not post or re-publish any work or article written
by the other without receiving written permission, in advance, from the other party, unless the
terms of service permit republication without permission.
5. The Defendant agrees to remove any and all remaining alleged infringement
materials as to Hoge and Hogewash.
6. In the event that either of the Parties breach this Agreement, this Agreement does
not restrict the rights of the non-breaching party to take the appropriate legal actions in the
appropriate legal forum to seek relief for the breach of contract.
7.
I of2
apply. This Agreement sets fonh the entire agreement of the Parties. This Agreement may not be
changed orally, but may be changed only by a writing signed by both of the Parties.
10.
This Agreement represents a fully negotiated agreement. The Parties have both
been afforded the opportunity, which each has exercised, to review the terms of the Agreement.
By:
out"a,
By:
William M. Schmalfeldt
Page2 ofZ