Mom Sues to Sell Property With 95 Legal Demands, Gets Shut Down By Judge

追加: 2026-06-02

[00:00:00]that you are here today and my understanding is that you have filed again representing yourself pro se in this case as well that you have filed a uh series of motions one of which is to establish a buyout procedure authorize a transfer of interest and to impose deadlines motion to compel responses to request for production of documents.

[00:00:23]>> Yes, sir.

[00:00:25]>> I'm going to allow you to have an opportunity to argue your motions if you want to address the first one which is the motion to establish buyout procedures.

[00:00:36]>> Yes, sir. Your Honor, I'm seeking disentanglement and finality in exiting this ownership relationship. I've been displaced for nearly a year and continue incurring approximately $2,500 a month in housing costs while my equity of over a quarter of a million dollars remains tied up and the timeline continues to expand. I'm requesting a structured path forward that allows resolution rather than continued expansion of timelines and uncertainty.

[00:01:00]The current processes involve multiple personal property auctions while the real property, the primary asset, remains without defined listings timelines or endpoint.

[00:01:09]I'm simply requesting a structured buyout process and the ability to transfer my ownership interest with successor recognition so a purchaser may step into my shoes without disrupting proceedings or prejudicing the proceedings at all. I also have a 13-year-old child and the prolonged uncertainty is directly affecting my ability to provide stability and move forward.

[00:01:29]>> But this is a case that the court has heard motions in before and I think there's already an order down that that ordered that the property be placed for sale and that uh it listed the method by which we're doing it. So, you're actually asking me to um change the prior order of the court.

[00:01:49]But so far all I've heard is you're asking to set some sort of structured transfer process that would be more expeditious, but how exactly are you proposing that that be done other than by selling the property by realtor?

[00:02:04]>> Um so judge, I'm asking that um I have if I'm able or I have I have the opportunity to sell my interest to an investor or third party so that I may exit the structure and the structure that you set forth for um selling the property can continue and someone simply step into my place.

[00:02:25]>> Well, I don't think there's anything that would prevent you from selling your interest to a third party, but the third party would have to be advised that there's ongoing litigation and that this case has already been This is a partition suit, which means that owners of property that no longer wish to be co-owners of the property have an absolute right to partition the property. There are are two [clears throat] methods by which the party uh the property can be partitioned. One is by partition in kind where you divide the property up equally in value and in real property is often times very difficult to do that with.

[00:02:57]This is a house, is that correct?

[00:02:58]>> It's a house.

[00:02:59]>> Yes, sir.

[00:03:00]>> So >> [clears throat] >> it's very difficult to to arrive at a partition in kind, which means the only other way is by selling the property.

[00:03:08]You have an interest in the property. If you want to sell your interest to a third person, then you can do so as long as it doesn't complicate or or restrict what happens in this case because we already have a court order that that sets in motion the sale and liquidation of this property.

[00:03:28]>> Yes, sir. Thank you. I just wanted clarity from the court that um that that process would would be allowed and um that those successor rights could pass.

[00:03:37]>> Let me hear from Mr. Osborne who represents the other parties. Mr. Osborne, you wish to You may need to The prior person was a little shorter than you are, so >> Thank you, judge. Um your honor, Ms. Huey's She's uh multiple motions that she has filed before the court, so I'll address both the motion to establish the buyout procedure as well as the motion to authorize the transfer of interest that she has filed. Judges, you have rightly pointed out uh the court heard a prior motion in this matter on February the 12th of this year.

[00:04:09]During that motion, which was a motion to authorize the auction of the personal property as well as the listing of the real property, uh the personal property being auctioned with Mr. Trice and the real property being listed for sale with Ms. Beth Thornton and Ms. Carrie Carrington as co-agents. Uh now at that time, Judge, there was no opposition stated by Ms. Huey. In fact, everybody announced that they were in agreement with this proposed course of sale. Uh that order entered, uh it became final.

[00:04:36]There again, there was no opposition, no appeal filed to that order. We would just ask that that order be left in place, that the process be allowed to carry out. Uh I did speak with Mr. Trice this morning. He said the first auction of the personal property took place this weekend. He said that it went very well.

[00:04:52]Uh had a great turnout. Several items were sold. Uh the second auction of the personal property is scheduled for July 11th, I believe, uh this summer. Once that is taken care of and personal property auction is completed, at that point, Ms. Carrington and Ms. Thornton can proceed with getting the property listed. Respectfully, Judge, we would ask that the parties just maintain the status quo and allow the sale to go ahead and take place.

[00:05:20]Marketable title has got to obviously include any co-owner signing off on the listing agreement. Ms. Huey had previously indicated she was fine to list the property with Ms. Thornton and Ms. Carrington.

[00:05:32]They've both spent a decent amount of time, as as I understand, going out, viewing the property, making recommendations on what needs to happen for showings. So, we would ask that again, the court just allow the existing order to stay in place, that the parties not make any transfer of the ownership interest and that whenever this personal property auction takes place in July parties can then immediately list the property with the agents and hopefully it will get sold pretty quickly. This is in a good area of the county. It's just off Spencer Mill Road. Um that area has historically done very well, especially here in the recent few years. I think the property will do quite well, but again, judge, we would ask that the process be allowed to play out as set forth in the February >> All right.

[00:06:23]Mr. Weaver, the the problem is that that there's already an order down that that uh establishes how this property is to be sold and liquidated and how the partition is to go forward and that uh order went down and more than 30 days have elapsed from the entry of the order. So, therefore, under the rules, that becomes an order that's that's uh a final order. As a result of that, I am not going to make any changes in that procedure because of the fact that making a change in it would simply delay the process that we've already entered into and I think that the process that we're engaging in right now is the best and most efficient way to liquidate this property and to try to obtain the best and uh most valuable uh price for the property for all concerned.

[00:07:11]Now, Mr. Osborne raises a a point because Mr. Osborne's firm deals with title searches and so forth and he's well aware um that while I indicated that there was nothing that would prevent you from liquidating your interest and transferring it to some other party, the problem is is if you were to do that and it were to interfere with a transfer of the of the sale of the real property because it complicates the title, then by allowing you to liquidate your interest, it complicates and and restricts uh and makes more difficult and more expensive that interest that the or that the process that we're engaging in to try to liquidate this property.

[00:07:50]Um for that reason I'm I am ruling that the prior order of the court as far as how this property is to be sold is going to be the order of the court that will take full force and effect and that there will be no changes and that no party will be allowed to transfer any interest in the property until such time as the real estate property is in fact um under contract to be sold.

[00:08:17]What that does I think if we have a auction of the personal property then the real property becomes much more marketable and then I think that you will see that there's a much better price that is. I understand your economic situation but your economic situation does not uh require the court unfortunately to restrict any the rights of the other parties that are involved in order to perhaps um aid you in your situation would be detrimental to the remaining parties of this lawsuit. And for that reason I cannot grant your request to allow you to liquidate your interest uh transfer your interest to some third party that would then complicate the transfer of title at the sale of the property.

[00:09:02]Um there is a motion to compel responses to request for production of documents.

[00:09:06]Is there >> Judge, if I could just address that briefly. Um this is Ms. Shirley's second set of discovery requests that she has sent to us. She does have a set of discovery requests from us that still needs to be sent. Um the pending discovery from us uh includes a set of requests for admissions, her second set of requests for admissions. I believe that was 95 that she sent on the second request.

[00:09:31]>> 95 requests for admissions?

[00:09:33]>> Yes, sir. Um that she sent to us. We have coordinated with Mr. and Mrs. Sproles. We've compiled answers to those. We had made efforts to get those executed electronically via DocuSign.

[00:09:45]Mr. and Mrs. Sproles were having issues with their email. Ms. Huckabee, one of their other daughters who is also their attorney in fact, has met with me this morning right before court. She has executed those requests for admissions.

[00:09:57]I will be getting those over to Ms. Huey following court today.

[00:10:03]There is also a pending set of requests for production of documents.

[00:10:08]Judge, this is a pretty voluminous file.

[00:10:10]That box contains all the documents we are trying to go through and compile, but again, given the volume of documents, we have not been able to get those over yet. We anticipate getting those done in the upcoming weeks. Mr. Belmares did file a response proposing a scheduling order if the court thinks that's necessary. But again, the other set of discovery requests, we intend to get those out to her as soon as we can.

[00:10:35]>> Well, Ms. uh Pardon me, Ms. Huey, your request for production of documents, the second set of production of document requests that entailed the 90 some odd um there is a point where both sides have the right to obtain information that necessary in, you know, preparing [clears throat] their case for Excuse me, for hearing.

[00:10:59]But there is a point where the court finds that that the discovery process can be abused. And as a result of that, um I'm going to give the um petitioners 30 days to respond to your discovery requests.

[00:11:14]And if they have an objection to it, then they may do so. Any further discovery requests, um if Mr. Osborne and the petitioners find that that is excessive, then they will be able to file a motion to quash those discovery requests.

[00:11:32]Discovery requests are intended not to be punitive in nature. They're intended to allow you to obtain information, but 90-some-odd requests for admissions or request for admission is just basically saying you admit that the following to be true or false or deny it.

[00:11:49]And it's often times used in a method to try to um force the issues, but I am of the opinion that 90 requests for uh request for admission, is that what it would they were request for admission?

[00:12:03]>> Yes.

[00:12:04]>> may be excessive under the rules, but in any event, we'll give them 30 days to file a response and either object or provide the information requested.

[00:12:12]>> Your Honor, if I may, I just want to clarify they were not meant to be excessive. They were directed toward issues that the plaintiffs themselves had placed on issue, including offsets, reimbursement claims, property expenses, accounting issues, ownership issues, and factual ascertainment. So, I was simply seeking clarity. I was not intending for them to be overbroad or excessive.

[00:12:31]>> All right. I'm not saying that they were excessive, but I'm just saying that there is a point where you become uh it becomes excessive when you're in a discovery process. So, just be careful to make sure that that doesn't arise.

[00:12:44]And Mr. Osborne, being a good lawyer he is, will file an objection to them if he believes that it has become excessive.

[00:12:51]All right.

[00:12:52]Then 30 days to respond to the discovery respond responses, the court finds that the uh motion to establish about uh procedure, authorize transfer of interest, impose deadlines is denied.

[00:13:04]>> Thank you, Judge.

[00:13:05]>> Thank you, Mr. Huey.

[00:13:07]>> Thank you.