Published with permission of the author, Jakkie Pidanick who is involved in a hotly contested Visitation Case where he ex-partner consistently refuses to pick up his daughter during mid-week visitation and then blames the Mother for his missed visits–all the while posting pictures of dates and ski trips on his Facebook page.
Thanks, Jakkie, this is a good example of unfairness in the SC court system.
Maddaloni v. Piddanick
Beaufort County Court, South Carolina
Corruption 2014 to 2016
Peter L Fuge
All Members of the Unified Judicial System in this state shall take the following oath of office: I do solemnly swear that: I am duly qualified, according to the Constitution of this state, to exercise the duties of the office to which I have been appointed, and that I will, to the best of my ability, discharge those duties and will preserve, protect and defend the constitution of this State and of the United States. I pledge to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. I pledge, in the discharge of my duties, to treat all persons who enter the courtroom with civility, fairness and respect. I pledge to listen courteously, sit impartially, act promptly, and rule careful and considerate deliberation.
I pledge to seek justice, and justice alone.
!. Fuge would not let me speak in temp hearing (date)
- He made up evidence (how did he do that?)
- He opened past files to use evidence unrelated to case against me
- Told me he will take away my child
- told me I was a whining ex that was out for money
- As I testified Fuge wrote what looked to be a grocery list
- Mis quoted me
- changed the verdict after the case and hiring
- Recusal himself and then unrecused himself
- As Regina, frank bolgra, Horton, and others rule the way he wants provided by a kickback system albert clay as proof of.
Much more please see my lawsuit, FUGE in VIOLATION OF THE FOLLOWING:
Canon 1: A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the Judiciary
A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct.
Deference to the judgements and ruling of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depends in turn upon their acting without fear of favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law including the provisions of the code.
Canon 2: Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all of the Judge’s Activities.
- A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges.
- A judge shall not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgement. Nor shall a judge convey or permit to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.
Cannon 3: A judge shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently
- Responsibilities: a judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge except those which disqualification is required (LIKE me suing him was a recusal stated by the lawyer, Mr. Wilson for judge Fuge).
- A judge shall be faithful to the Laws and maintain professional Competence in it.
- A judge shall be patient dignified and courteous to litigants.
- A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice, a judge must refrain from speech, gestures or other conduct that could reasonably be perceived as sexual harassment
- A PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD
A Judge shall NOT, while a proceeding is pending or impending in any court, make any public comment that might reasonably be expected to affect its outcome or impair the fairness of the trial (Fuge was said to have recusal Administrative Responsibilities. A judge shall diligently discharge the judge’s administrative responsibilities without bias, prejudice and cooperate other judges.
- D. Disciplinary Responsibilities
A judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that another judge has committed a violation of this code should take appropriate action. (Cely Brigmann, the other judge who followed Fuge’s ruling).
A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the Judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: Impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Or the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.
- A judge has belief that another judge or lawyer may be impaired by drugs, alcohol or mental or emotional condition must take action (Cely Brigmann did not take action)
CASE:9501276 civil against Fuge
Case:1990cp0700540 civil against Fuge
Case:1991cp0702048 common pleas against Fuge
Case: 1992cp0700492 common pleas
Case: 1995cp0701829 common pleas against Fuge
Case: mine 2016CP0700971 myself against Fuge
He also has 3 foreclosures on 3 different properties it looks like
You should get copies of these lawsuits and look them over.
- Went after me without having an order
- Followed me out of daycare at low country day to see if I buckled child in correctly. Stood and watched me. Harassment
Rule 1.11 Special conflicts of interest
(1) Since Marshall Horton is a magistrate judge in Beaufort s.c as I understand it, He should have been disqualified to represent a client within this jurisdiction without proper approval.
Rule 1.15 safekeeping.
(A)(b) A lawyer must keep your funds separate from others and my only place their own money in account for fees
Rule 3.3 candor towards judge
- Lawyer Marshall Horton lied to judge repeatedly
- Offer evidence that is known to be false. Facebook post was not mine. Facebook was cut and pasted in email to make look like a slender statement. Introduced evidence that was found to be false or before the date to the court order.
(4) legal arguments: lied to judge about Facebook post and past evidence that was found to be ungrounded. Also stated Fuge was recused when he wasn’t.
(5) offering evidence, can prove the evidence in Cely Brigman case was of past-dismissed claims and is double jeopardy in which Horton built his whole case around faulty evidence and the evidence was before the court order in question leaving it inadmissible evidence.
(8) lawyer must know evidence is false, yes Mr. Horton (Christopher Maddaloni’s) lawyer was providing evidence that was known to him to be false.
(12) lawyer must report fraud. Mr. Horton was part of the fraud with Peter Fuge.
Rule 4.4 respect the rights of 3rd party
Mr. Robertson was on my property to help keep me safe from Chris MADDALONI during exchanges. Mr. Horton harassed Mr Robertson by stating Robertson followed Chris Maddaloni when he had no proof and wrote letters to Mr. Robertson’s lawyer trying to file a restraining order against Mr. Robertson without cause.
Horton would write orders outside of verdict.
CASE: joseph sun v. Lyndsay Goodman (Horton’s partner lawyer), Mr. Sun gets a protective order against Goodman 2014
Joseph sun v. Rich Ulrich 2014 trespassing
Joseph sun v. Horton Trespassing 2014 ADR ending 2014-cp-0700238 case number
HORTON HAS A PATTERN OF HARASSING THE OPPOSING PARTY!!!
181 Bluffton Road, suite F-202, Bluffton, SC 29910
843 757 5500
Article 7, Private Guardians Ad Litem
Section 63-3-820 Qualifications
(D) upon appointment to a case, a GAL (Guardian ad Litem) must provide an affidavit to the court and parties attesting to compliance with the statutory qualifications. The affidavits must include, but is not limited to, the following: a statement showing training was met. Statement that the GAL has not been convicted of a crime. A statement that shows the GALhas never been on the dss registry for abuse or neglect.
Section 63-3-830 Responsibilties
!. MUST represent the best interest of the child
- Conducting an independent, balanced, impartial investigation to determine the facts relevant to the situation of the child and the family. Investigation must include: reviewing documents, meet and observing the child, visit home, interview parents and care givers. Obtain criminal history
She failed to call my witness, I had to write email after email to push her. I have them will send to you. She is in violation of both rule 63-3-820: I never received an affidavit and Brent did not either and rule 63-3-830. had to push her to call witnesses and witnesses stated she seemed annoyed and did not ask true questions and came across rushed.
63-3-830: G.A.L must do a report on parties and provide to parties 10 days before hiring.
Regina is in violation, a report was never done and my emails asking if Chris has done his therapy are not returned. PLEASE report her… Chris never did his therapy and is in Contempt.
She never wrote report on clients
She failed to call witness until I asked her every day
She failed to investigate
She ruled the way the judge wanted her too, with no true evidence.
Rich Ulrich Private Detective
Title 40 Professions and Occupation
Trustworthy, honesty business.
Rich, when he found out Mr. Horton was the opposing attorney, Rich stopped charging me claiming he wanted to help but in reality, Rich was not charging so he can use what he learned to sell and or give to opposing counsel. Sally Murphy has proof of this. I do not but Mr. Horton knew more than I ever told him when I realized it was Rich I stopped all communication. This put my child’s Life in jeopardy. He needs to be reported. SLED of SC
Mr. Hall prosecutor in state v Maddaloni
Rule 3.8 special responsibility of a prosecutor. The prosecutor must administer justice. Mr. He’ll shook Mr. Horton’s hand and Mr. Horton asked if they were going golfing. Then told the judge (Beth price, who was punished or having Mexicans do her legal work up) Mr. Hall lied to cover for Chris Maddaloni stating there was a shuffle that hurt the baby. The police reports that baby had knocked marks and Chris had 3 different stories to the cops to cover up his crime of child abuse and endangerment.
(5) prejudice statements… Mr. Hall told me I was changing my story when I protested
Rule 1.1 Competence: Brent was not prepared on the laws of Domestic Violence. He did not as the court to follow the law of abusers and visitation even though I screamed it at him. He chose to ignore me.
Rule 1.1 (5), would tell me that we would sit down and meet and he never allowed me to. Brent always called last minute to prepare and never followed through with his course of actions he was hired for. (filing my motion RTSC)
Rule 1.1 (6) Brent was not aware of the Domestic violence laws of 2008
Rule 1.2 (5) scope: refused to file suit against Maddaloni and Fuge
Rule 1.2 (10) Brent known the order against me were fraud and the opposing lawyer was fraudulent but never addressed it or stopped it out of unlawfulness.
Rule 1.3 Diligence: was not worried about working on my behalf, never followed through with motions and was always last minute with prep that we were hindered and I the client had to prepare the trial.
Rule 1.4 Communication
- Area of promptly informing client. I had asked Brent to appeal not do a motion 59
- Reasonable consult with client. Would never sit down with me a talk about decisions or outcomes nothing.
- Promptly reply for information. Still has not returned all evidence I have been asking for over the 6 months. Made an appeal process impossible
- No real explanation only his paralegal and I had to scream at her to get him on the phone when the law states the lawyer must explain to an extent to ensure the client understands. This was denied for me. Motion 59 was not something I wanted to do. I wanted a superseded but Brent was fraudulently working to help Mr. Horton because Mr. Hortons client was a millionaire and wanted the order not to be stopped.
The whole law Rule 1.4 was denied. I at one point have proof I thought my lawyer Mr. Kiker had dropped me and I reached out to other lawyers. Mr. Kiker, would not return calls nor emails or show up at office for lengths of time. Mr. Kiker withheld information at all times. As one example, Mr. Horton named Brent Kiker the trier of fact and I stated that’s the judge not a lawyer but neither lawyer would address what that meant.
RESPONSE: we need to go with something concrete such as changed transcripts, changed docket, exparte conversations. There is a rule that the client has the obligation to manage counsel and fire them when they don’t do their job.
Rule 1.5 FEES
(F) written agreement: Brent Kiker and I never had a written agreement and I have proof that I repeatedly asked for one and / or an invoice in which I never got but you better believe I was harassed for the money and when I was quoted a price for the filing
Of the RTSC motion (he never filed), Brent Kiker charged me $2,500 more than quoted and never filed my motion. I literally was running cash everyday to his door or checks so he would file it.
RESPONSE: Ask him for a detailed statement. Do you have proof you asked him to file a RTSC for the $2500 and he never did it? Then, you can go to the bar association and ask the money be returned.
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality
Brent allows Mr. Horton to know about my side of the case and repeatedly made it look like he, Brent was working when he would never ask certain questions that were contempts against Mr. Horton’s client during the trial, but Mr. Horton somehow knew everything about me. In my hearing with Judge Brigman, Horton admits to Brent telling all.
Did he betray and client/attorney secrets? Basic facts about your case already in the record don’t count.
Rule 1.7 Identifying Conflicts of interest: Material Limitations
A conflict of interest exists when something holds back the lawyer from doing his job. Brent Kiker would not follow through with certain issues, like domestic violence laws or filing my suite or report Horton for acting unlawfully or Judge Fuge due to his career.
Rule 1.9 Duties to former clients
Rule 1.10 imputation of conflicts of interest
(3) When loyalty to the client is in question. Due to Mr. Kiker not addressing me when contempt motions were sent to Kiker law firm when Brent was not retained and then sent to me when it was too late. Even though I was not in contempt. This was also a violation of Marshall Horton.
An attorney has a duty to provide the client promptly with all communications sent or received regarding the case, did he do that?
(4) Would not use the Domestic violence 2008 laws not 2015 in later court dates. If fact steered around certain questions. That was done by Brent.
1.16 declining or terminating representation
Brent failed to give me motions, letters from Fuge and letters sent from Marshall Horton stating contempt. This directly impacted my case by getting my appeal dismissed and being lead to believe a recusal had occurred.
Make a list of these and how he didn’t send them promptly to you (within a few days) and file a bar complaint
(9) Brent was fired nervous times and refused to remove himself
Rule 3.3 candor laws
(2) refused to push laws of domestic violence 2008. Law states the lawyer must fight for the client.
Rule 3.4 fairness to opposing counsel, a lawyer must not block clients right to evidence. Brent Kiker would not give me the motion 59. I asked all evidence be given back and I have yet to receive the 2014 transcripts of state v. Maddaloni and the cd of Chris admitted violence. I had to over and over call, text, beg, stop by and was met with no response.
That is definitely a bar complaint. Document the day the pleading was filed and all attempts to get the document from you lawyer.
CASE: LEGAL MALPRACT. 2011 #2010-CP-700362 AGAINST BRENT KIKER
LEGAL MALPRACT 2011 # 2010-CP-700362 AGAINST KIKER’S PARTNER MERRYFIELD…this led to their split as partners.
Case 2014-cp-0702011 judgement 799 against Brent Kiker
Case 2015-cp-0700290 same
Case 2015-cp-700848 same
Please add in: changed transcripts, blocked transcripts, changed or altered documents and evidence; exparte conversations; OC going into judge’s private area with you or your counsel
I also understand you cannot get transcripts, that the Clerk of Court is in charge of the court reporters in the court and she has told you verbally she will not give you the names of the court reporters. Please write her a letter, certified mail, and ask her for the names of all court reporters and their contact information for every transcript you do not have, then report that to the FBI.
Reblogged this on Justice for Everyone Blog.
You sound like a bitter ex ..
The point of Ms. Piddanick’s listing was not to sound like a bitter ex. The corruption involved is the fact she is being consistently denied her transcripts from the court, she notes that many transcripts are changes and she notes that she cannot get her Record on Appeal to write an effective Appeal Brief–all of these issues go to her Constitutional and Due Process rights. This blog is not necessarily about the merits of the case because that is for the trier of fact. It is rather so that people know their rights in court, that they have a right to timely, accurate transcripts that are not changed, and that they are treated with all due respect in court. Ms. Piddanick also reports she was repeatedly told not to speak, while opposing counsel was allowed to put on his full argument. There are some serious problems with that.
One would hope the courts are fair and impartial and see justice. Her grievance, on its face, appears to be a valid one. And when one is repeatedly denied their Constitutional Rights, bitterness is the least to be expected–most people experience rage and anger. I hope you better understand now.
Bob, she is not a bitter ex. If not for the willful bad behavior of her ex, his flagrant disregard for the Court’s Orders, and his documented abuse, there would be no conflict. I have personally witnessed his failure to exercise visitation and I have personally seen his Facebook posts documenting his prioritization of vacations with his new girlfriend over time with his child. I have been hassled by him through his attorney, presumably to force me out of the situation that I was asked to participate in by Ms. Pidanick. His attorney has falsely claimed I stalked his client, and attempted in a Hearing to characterize me as an armed bully.
I have seen the clear evidence of his physical abuse. He has been convicted of domestic violence previously, and with good cause. He is not in any way a good person, nor is he a good father. I’m no psychiatrist, but if someone were to ask me to describe him in one word, I’d call him a sociopath.