Plaintiffs' case in United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, dismissed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. under Younger Abstention.
Plaintiffs filed for Rule 59 or 60 Reconsideration.
Doc. 23-2 and 23-3 are the Exhibits which were attached to this Motion for Reconsideration
Plaintiffs' case in United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, dismissed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. under Younger Abstention.
Plaintiffs filed for Rule 59 or 60 Reconsideration.
Doc. 23-2 and 23-3 are the Exhibits which were attached to this Motion for Reconsideration
Plaintiffs' case in United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, dismissed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. under Younger Abstention.
Plaintiffs filed for Rule 59 or 60 Reconsideration.
Doc. 23-2 and 23-3 are the Exhibits which were attached to this Motion for Reconsideration
FICE
rungs
SEP -9 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT .
ATTEN, CLERM
cote
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGE Wi
Atlanta Division Bes
JAMES B. STEGEMAN,
JANET D. MCDONALD, CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiffs
FILE NO: 1:08-CV-1971
vs.
SUPERIOR COURT, et., al.,
Defendants
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER RULE 59%e)
AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER RULE 60(b)
Comes now Plaintiffs, who file their Motion For Reconsideration pursuant
to and in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 59e) and Rule 60(b) within ten
(10) days of this Court’s Order and Judgment dated August 26, 2008.
BRIEF BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs filed their complaint’ in this Court June 9, 2008. Service perfected
upon all Defendants June 10, 2008. Judge Becker dismissed Plaintiff's Superior
Court action June 11, 2008 in retaliation for being named Defendant in this action.
This Court Dismissed the case August 26, 2008.
' This case was brought to US district Court due to illegal acts, fraud upon the
Court, and conspiracy in a Superior Court action between Plaintiffs and Georgia
Power Company that resulted in Dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Superior Court complaint
and leaving only Georgia Power Company’ counterclaim.AUGUST 26, 2008 OPINION AND ORDER.
Superior Court and Judge Becker (Superior Court Defendants) Moved to
Dismiss June 17, 2008; Georgia Power, Brain Watt and Scott Farrow (GA Power
Defendants) moved to dismiss June 27, 2008; all defendants claimed Rooker-
Feldman, and Younger Abstention. This Court Dismissed the case August 26,
2008 on the grounds of Younger.
Plaintiffs address the Court’s Opinion and Order in the same sequence as
addressed by this Court. Plaintiffs had asked that irrelevant and immaterial matters
be disregarded (Response to Superior Courts Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
(doc.8, pg.2) and Response to GA Power Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (doc.9,
pgs.2-3); Nevertheless, this Court addressed several of the issues, and made
incorrect statements, which must not be allowed to stand as stated.
Concerning Stegeman v. Georgia, et. al, No.: 1:06-cv-02954-WSD (fl
pg. 2 Order and Opinion?) see the following:
Page 2, fnl, 1" 4: “Plaintiff claimed he improperly was charged
with elder abuse and financial fraud...wrongfully revoked his
Power of Attorney...”
* The statement is incorrect, see the following:
Plaintiff showed through undisputed documentation that without having
been charged, tried or convicted, Stegeman was found guilty of Family Violence
? Order and Opinion dated August 26, 2008 referred to hereinafter as “Or.”
oeand financial fraud by the Probate Clerk Jeryl Rosh, who lacked jurisdiction over
criminal matters, and lacked power to do so, revoked a special Durable Power of
Attomey with an interest.
Concerning Stegeman, et, al., v. Wachovia Bank, et. al., No.: 06-cv-1065-8
Fnl, 2™ 4: “Wachovia Bank filed an action in DeKalb County
Superior Court against Plaintiffs Stegeman and McDonald for
accounting and damages...”
* The statement is incorrect, see the following:
Wachovia Bank has never filed suit against either Plaintiff Stegeman or
Plaintiff McDonald. The case being referenced is Superior Court case: Joyner v.
Stegeman, and vice versa No.: 02-cv-9732-8. Joyner, the County Probate Court
appointed Guardian of Property of Jean Caffiey, filed suit against Stegeman only
for accounting damages. Plaintiff McDonald was not named in the suit.
Attached is a copy of the Docket Report for the case Exhibit A
Ful 2™ { continues: “Plaintiffs refused to conclude the
settlement,...Plaintiffs Stegeman and McDonald brought a
separate pro se action....against Wachovia. ..”
* The statement is incorrect, see the following:
When 02-cv-9732-8 concluded, neither attorney would file the agreement
with Superior Court; Stegeman upheld his part of the agreement and Withdrew the
Caveat to the Will. The opposing party refused to honor their part of the
agreement, that’s why the case continued. That case finally ended, by Stegeman