The State of Nevada vs Kim Blandino, May 6, 2026

Added: 2026-05-12

[00:00:00]You have elected nominees.

[00:00:02]>> Sir, interrupt me again and we're done.

[00:00:04]As Judge Brown told you two weeks ago, you have a very bad habit of interrupting judges and we do our best to give you the opportunity to speak, but you make it extremely difficult. So, stop talking over me.

[00:00:23]Kim Blandino 2629641.

[00:00:26]All right. We are here on the petition for vacations litigant first. So I wanted to make a record talk about how I expect this to go forward and if there are issues with that what will happen um going forward. So first issue for is I have received a petition and a supplement from Mr. Jessup. I did not receive a response in reply to that from Mr. Blandina. So I want to put on the record that the controlling case law when it comes to vexacious litigance is Jordan v. state of Nevada 121 Nevada 44.

[00:00:54]In that particular case, they do cite some other cases in reference to whether or not an individual doesn't respond and whether or not that would result in the court considering it not be sufficient notice for the four factor analysis.

[00:01:07]Specifically, that was in Martin Triiona. So, in that particular case, the defendant received roughly a 30-day notice of the petition filing and then the setting of the date. It's very similar in time to this particular case.

[00:01:21]And so, I believe that Mr. Landino has received sufficient notice, you made a decision not to file a reply or response, which is absolutely fine. But since the date that that petition was filed, you have filed many documents in both of the cases in the city which shows the court that you have a great understanding of how that works. So if that was going to be an issue we're going to talk about, just know preemptively it's denied and that hearing will >> I'm sorry, what's denied?

[00:01:44]>> Sir, if you interrupt me, this will end.

[00:01:46]Okay? You're going to listen right now and I will give you an opportunity to respond. I don't know what you said was going to be.

[00:01:51]>> All right, hold on. Today I'm going to allow you both to talk and in deciding this, there's not a lot of case law that comes to vexacious litigates, although you've been deemed one before, sir. Um, and when that I looked into that, I wanted to get some guidance in reference to how to handle this particular hearing. And in doing so, I'm going to rely on what would be a oral argument standard, which is held in the Nevada Supreme Court. I know this is not the Nevada Supreme Court and I am not a Nevada Supreme Court justice, but I will combine the arguments to 15 minutes each. You will be given the opportunity, Mr. Jessup, to start. You can reserve time for rebuttal if you would like. And Mr. Blendino, >> can I enter an objection? Do not ruled.

[00:02:31]Thank you.

[00:02:32]>> You will be given the opportunity to give your argument as well.

[00:02:35]>> There is a motion to disqualify you and you cannot get there. We will get there in a moment. I have a time clock which we will go and you will see the 15 minutes that you have. I'm not I'm not I'm not I'm not proceeding in this. He's not a licensed attorney. He can't represent the city of Las Vegas.

[00:02:50]>> You are not going to talk over me. We've talked about this on the last date, sir.

[00:02:53]I'm outlining my expectations. Stop talking or the hearing will end and I will determine it based on the motions.

[00:02:59]>> Do you understand me?

[00:03:00]>> I have not had an opportunity to reply or make a motion to dismiss or a motion to disqualify or to have him declare.

[00:03:08]>> So, are you saying that you're not going to listen to the way that I handle this?

[00:03:11]Because if you're saying you can't, then it will end now.

[00:03:14]>> I'm saying right now, if you wish, >> yes or no, Mr. Are you going to listen to what I tell you to do and confine yourself to the way I am as the judge handling her courtroom or are you not?

[00:03:27]>> I don't think I can answer that question as asked.

[00:03:29]>> Then we can end this and I will make the decision on the motions.

[00:03:32]>> What about the motion? You said we're going to get to the motion.

[00:03:34]>> So issue a minute order in reference to that, sir. I received your two new motions and I can issue a minute order as to that or you can stop interrupting me and then you can be given your 15-minute opportunity to make a record.

[00:03:45]So, can you control yourself going forward?

[00:03:48]>> I'm not waving any of my rights, judge.

[00:03:50]>> No one's asking you to, sir. I'm asking you to comply with the decorum of this court. And if you can't do it, just like any other defendant, >> you're trying to bully me again, judge.

[00:03:57]>> All right, then. It's going to be very simple. As I said, I'll make the record again. Um, you didn't file a reply in reference to the petition for vacation.

[00:04:05]You just got to supplement three days.

[00:04:07]>> Based on that, sir, pursuant to Jordan versus state and pursuant to the case that I previously outlined in Ray Martin Traona, whether or not you make an argument that you should have been given time or an asking for a continuence, those requests will be denied. You have ample opportunity and you know how the system works. So, you have elected non sir, interrupt me again, and we're done.

[00:04:29]As Judge Brown told you two weeks ago, you have a very bad habit of interrupting judges and we do our best to give you the opportunity to speak, but you make it extremely difficult. So, stop talking over me. Do you understand me?

[00:04:44]>> Yes or no?

[00:04:46]>> Yes.

[00:04:47]>> But I need time to make a record.

[00:04:49]>> You will be given a record if you can behave, which so far you have not exhibited the ability to do so.

[00:04:57]>> Oh, I'm sorry. You're being serious.

[00:04:59]>> I am being very serious.

[00:05:00]>> Okay. I thought you might have been making a little joke.

[00:05:03]>> There's no jokes here, sir. Stop talking. Mr. Jess, you have 15 minutes.

[00:05:09]Would you like to reserve any time for >> Yes, Judge. I I will be brief in my opening and I'll I'll reserve the remaining my time for >> All right. Let me figure out this.

[00:05:22]>> And you said, I'm sorry. How would you like to reserve a rebel? Um I I think I'll probably be Yeah, I think I'll probably be about five minutes uh use of time. So I'll reserve the remaining 10.

[00:05:32]>> All right. So again, you can see this correct?

[00:05:36]>> Actually, yes, I can see it now.

[00:05:37]>> Is it breaking? Go down.

[00:05:38]>> Go ahead, Mr. Jessup. Have a seat. Mr. Blandino, if you interrupt him, we end.

[00:05:42]>> Uh I need to stand.

[00:05:44]>> Sit down. We are done talking to you.

[00:05:46]You'll have 15 minutes in a moment.

[00:05:48]>> It's not your turn to talk. I'm sorry.

[00:05:50]Have a seat.

[00:05:50]>> I have a problem. I need to stand.

[00:05:52]>> Then stop interrupting.

[00:05:53]>> Can I stand? so hard. Of course, but don't speak again.

[00:05:56]>> Hey, that's all.

[00:05:58]>> Your honor, the time clock just turned off.

[00:06:02]>> Charging. All right, I'm going to have my clerk do it. Um, and I'll let you know when it gets close.

[00:06:08]>> As I said, my my opening statements will be brief. Judge, uh, you you made a correct record and noted kind of how we got here, but I want to take just a moment and make sure that that that is clear. I did file I did file the petition to have Mr. Planino declared vexacious and as you noticed he did not reply to that. However, um how we got here is based upon actions that occurred in a criminal matter where we received a uh criminal complaint that was filed and a case was open in this court on January 16th on February 26th. After a couple proceedings, the city attorney's office filed a notice of dismissal which is proper under Nevada Revised Statute NRS174.08.

[00:06:51]085 that process triggers something for the court and for what I have the responsibility doing as court administration which is making sure cases are processed correctly and that trigger the ability for us to dismiss the action. Um there is no dispute of that not even in the defendant's pleadings. Um, however, after that notice of dismissal was filed and the case was dismissed, and your honor, in that instance, I don't even know if if we have jurisdiction, in fact, I'm fairly certain we don't have jurisdiction over the criminal matter any longer. The defendant filed, at any rate, on March 2nd, a motion to reopen the case.

[00:07:33]um this court correctly ordered and and found that the notice of dismissal was proper and the motion was denied. The defendant since that time has subsequently filed additional motions and pleadings essentially asking for some of the same reling for the court to be disqualified.

[00:07:53]They've been repetitive quite honestly.

[00:07:55]Some of them have >> I object. I didn't ask the court.

[00:07:58]>> Overruled. Be quiet.

[00:08:00]>> Can I state the reason for my objection?

[00:08:02]>> Overruled. You will have your opportunity to speak. You can deal with it then. Mr. Jessup, continue.

[00:08:06]>> So, as a part of that effort, your honor, uh, the defendant has filed multiple pleadings and processes with the court. And that in and of itself isn't the challenge. The challenge is how repetitive that they are. and they they seek to seek the same type of redress that he already has been given uh which is that his case is dismissed.

[00:08:27]Uh he seeks uh additional redress.

[00:08:30]However, the judicial system is set up to handle uh issues of mistakes and issues where a person feels they need redress and that's through the appel process. This defendant has not chosen to do that. However, instead what he has done with his repetitive motions and pleadings as he has come to the court to file documents has repeatedly interrupted the other customers interactions with the court. Uh in addition >> has nothing I will just note that you have a standing objection for the record. Okay, that will make stop. You'll have the opportunity to present your case when it's your turn, sir. So, please let Mr. Jess finish.

[00:09:06]>> They'll be timely to be fatal. Um, in addition to that, he's asking staff personal questions that have no bearing on the cases here.

[00:09:14]>> Objection that has nothing to do with litigation.

[00:09:16]>> Mr. Blandino, if you interrupt again, you will not have the opportunity to respond. I gave you a standing objection. I presume, and the court will just assume that you don't agree with anything Mr. Jessup says. Makes it a lot easier.

[00:09:26]>> I have particular objections.

[00:09:28]>> You will have an opportunity during your 15 minutes. So, stop.

[00:09:33]>> Your your honor. In addition to that, he's taken up court resources and time asking for copies of his documents and records, which really are just a copy of the documents and records that he's been filing. Um, since that has occurred, I felt it has been necessary to file a petition to declare Mr. Blend's.

[00:09:53]Um, this is something where he again, he has a legal remedy and that remedy is on appeal. The defendant uh since I have filed a petition for him to be declared vexacious has filed seven additional civil matters or seven additional civil motions or motions in his civil matter rather including a motion disqualified.

[00:10:13]That motion was heard by Judge Brown.

[00:10:16]Judge Brown denied that motion after a hearing and again the defendant even as of today filed a repetitive motion for this court to again be disqualified. Um he doesn't add new arguments. It is simply a repetitive motion and process which is meant to delay the actions that we need to do as a court to provide services to the community. We are using our judicial time and resources to address matters that are repetitive and that have been answered instead of just going through the normal course of process and using his his his rights to appeal. Um even as I indicated uh or as you noted rather uh he has a pattern of history as a vexant. He was found to be vexacious at the a judicial district court and that was found in 2018 and even since then as recently as January 2026 additional orders were entered in at the judicial district court limiting Mr. Blandino's actions at that court. So due to his repeated behavior, his continually filing actions even after they have been answered or resolved, he continues to interrupt the court. The court processes and use judicial resources and time in a matter that is not intended. They are frivolous in my opinion and I believe that he should be deemed a vexacious litigant. And I've reserved the remainder of my time for any results.

[00:11:50]All right, Mr. Hold on. I want to be very clear of my expectations for you during this 15 minutes. Um, you get to make your record, sir. That is your right. You get to make that record. As long as what you are saying is not negative, threatening.

[00:12:04]>> I'm sorry. Negative. I don't understand what you mean.

[00:12:06]>> I will make the decision of that, sir.

[00:12:07]It's If it's threatening, if it's argumentative, if it's degrading, I will stop your argument. Okay.

[00:12:13]>> Wait a minute. You >> I thought you said it was an argument.

[00:12:16]I'm allowed to argue. And I get to stop people when I think the content is irrelevant. And if you touch on any of those things, I will determine it to be irrelevant.

[00:12:23]>> One of those things you said is I can't be argumentative. I'm arguing.

[00:12:27]>> Sir, some of the things you say, certainly in your motions and absolutely in court, can at times be absolutely inappropriate. And Judge Brown admonished you to that fact on the 20th.

[00:12:36]If you maintain that in my court, I will stop you. Plain and simple. So you can smile and laugh all you like, but it is I'm not laughing and I have the opportunity to stop and not listen to things that I find completely irrelevant and inappropriate and threatening. So just know that.

[00:12:50]>> So you made a mistake when you said argumentative earlier.

[00:12:52]>> No sir, I did not.

[00:12:54]>> I can't argue 15 minutes. I will stop 15 minutes to argue my position.

[00:12:58]>> You do. As long as it's none of those things.

[00:13:00]>> So I can be argumentative.

[00:13:01]>> If you're going to interrupt me, as I told you many times already, then you don't have the opportunity, sir. So, what I'm telling you is if you say anything that's inappropriate or that I deem threatening or any of those things, I will stop you and your argument will end. Okay?

[00:13:14]>> Can I see the timer, though? I have trouble uh picking up the time. You got a battery in there.

[00:13:19]>> I don't.

[00:13:21]>> So, I will tell you when 5 minutes pass at each time and when you have 1 minute remaining. Does that sound?

[00:13:25]>> So, I don't get to see it then.

[00:13:26]>> You don't. You may start now.

[00:13:30]>> All right. This case started with a criminal case. He's correct on that and he's not disputing that. But the thing is there's been a first motion to disqualify you filed by me. You filed no response. You didn't file a challenge.

[00:13:44]The statute requires you to challenge it or arrange for another thing. In fact, it says that you have to arrange for another judge to hear the matter. And then as a side note, it says the judge may challenge it, but you refuse to do it and you had plenty of time to do it.

[00:14:00]So that when I filed to try and get the case reopened or disqualification, I filed four separate things. You ruled four separate times. Deon Bashard is a key case in that. It says once a motion to disqualify is filed, the judge can proceed no further. And if they're later found to have been disqualified, any order they issued was void. Now, I filed a second motion to disqualify you based on new circumstances, new facts, new grounds, and it was completely unvexious, if that's a word. And so, the situation is that was filed yesterday. You got served because I've been told that your the clerk's office or the clerk's counter is an extension of your chambers and it's rule requires it to be served on union chambers. And that's what I did just as I did the first one. So, as to the first or second motion, Judge Brown is did not issue a written sign and filed order. All you're going by is hearsay in fact of saying that he denied it. Russ versus Clark County School District is absolutely clear in the second motion to disqualify.

[00:15:11]And you are committing a criminal act. I am 70 years old plus.

[00:15:16]And you're not supposed to oppress elderly people. As vigorous as you might find me, I am an elderly person. I am suffering from age and the related consequences of that. In Russ versus Clark County School District, it says clearly that no uh well, I'll get to Devon Pashard first.

[00:15:41]This is from case law. It's Death Pashard for the safe pay site versus 8th judicial district court in and for the clowning clerk. This is a 2021 decision.

[00:15:51]We conclude that once a motion to disqualify is filed by a party, and I am a party, the subject judge can take no further action in the case until the motion to disqualify is dissolved. Mr. uh Jessup is totally off his rocker when he says, "I move to disqualify the court." No, you judge. If they put in a substitute judge here, I'm not trying to disqualify the court. It shows his ignorance as a matter of law in that respect. Russ versus D Clark County School District. It's worth quoting.

[00:16:21]It's on page 10 of the second motion to disqualify.

[00:16:26]And I'm just going to cut to the highlight. Prior to the entry of a final judgment, the district court remains free to reconsider and issue a written judgment different from its oral pronouncement. which means Judge Brown still could be reconsidering it unless I get a written signed filed order. It's of no consequence which they say here, here's the big money quote to that. And Russ versus Clark County School District citation 747 Pacific 2 1380 1382. An oral pronouncement of judgment is not valid for any purpose. the district court's oral pronouncement from the bench, the clerk submitted order, which you are threatening to to uh to issue in this and even an unfiled written order.

[00:17:13]That's an unfiled written order are ineffective for any purpose and cannot be appealed. So even while he says that my remedy is appealed, there hasn't been any any final written order on anything because the apparently the municipal court which used to be named a police court wants to be still a police court.

[00:17:33]Not really a court of record cuz you don't like giving written orders.

[00:17:37]Matthew Walker, if you viewed the tape, I asked for a written order on his determination. He said, "Well, we don't really need to do it, but I'm going to grant you request."

[00:17:46]So that's why when it came over to here, he said it was for calendaring. But then you Sue Esponte said, "I'm assigning it to me." And by the way, there never was any arraignment at that hearing. There was never asked for a plea. There was never a plea entered. And neither did you enter any plea. You are just uh worthy of being disqualified. You said, "And you did not. you were I'll use the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline language in this regard. When they disciplined Michelle Levit in 2015, they said she failed to be honest. In your affidavit, judge, you failed to be honest. And this is some of the basis for disqualifying you. You say you didn't have any memory of it on February 18th of the interaction we had as prosecutor and everything. Then all of a sudden the on the affidavit that you uh set forth, is there any way I could get some water?

[00:18:42]I've got a little bit of cotton mouth.

[00:18:45]>> Keep going, sir.

[00:18:46]>> Okay. Anyway, so uh uh when you when you uh when Suis Fonte asked for that uh or signed it, there was there was nothing done as far as an arraignment. So the record is even incorrect on this. These records are really a mess. And so, but the main thing here today is that again, you're trying to bully and get me to actually wave rights by acquiescence to to this farce that is going on here.

[00:19:19]It's ridiculous. He's not a licensed attorney. He cannot represent the city of Las Vegas or any corporate entity.

[00:19:25]He's actually engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.

[00:19:30]>> Talk to the court.

[00:19:31]>> I'm sorry. Mr. Jessup is acting uh on the unauthorized practice of law because it's well established through all the case law that a corporate entity cannot be represented by an individual person.

[00:19:44]The only person Mr. Hinch Jess could represent prosay is himself if he was a plaintiff or a defendant in the case. So this thing about just jumping over this again. I mean you are committing a crime judge right now because you are oppressing me under color of office. The law is so clear. Erica Belaloo just finished her suspension. She's left the state now. Apparently she's a district court judge. She did exactly what you did. Only she didn't do it four times in a row. She had a motion to disqualify and still continue to make rulings in the case. Something is absolutely forbidden by statute, by case law, and now the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline say that proceeding forward a motion to disqualify is pending is they cannot proceed forward whatsoever. And so when Judge Brown I agree that he orally pronounced that but under Russ versus Clark County School District there can be no uh that can have no force whatsoever in law I am entitled to a written and a written order signed filed with the court. And furthermore, if I went to and I intend to go uh to mandamus either the district court or the Nevada Supreme Court or some extraordinary remedy even if I have to get an extraordinary remedy to order this court to file the written filed order because if I go now with just what you've given me as a record quote record which really isn't a record they would say hey we got to have a written signed order. you can't uh what are we supposed to rule on? So, we want to answer. We want uh we're going to direct, you know, an order to be uh written and filed because all you've got is these tapes. They're not going to look at ordinarily. They don't look at audio video tapes. Very rarely. When Judge Scotty was on the hook for that, throwing that juror book against the wall, that doesn't show up on a transcript. So they asked I mean they said they granted the motion to have those tapes when he he showed that anger and the jury was intimidated by this.

[00:22:01]What's my time?

[00:22:02]>> 6:25 6 minutes and 25 seconds >> left.

[00:22:06]>> Yes.

[00:22:07]>> Okay. So you sitting up there judge I mean your refusal steadfast refusal to follow the law. That's why I wasn't laughing, but I'm smiling and I thought you were telling me a joke because, you know, you say, "I refuse to follow your directions." And D, you're refusing to follow clear law, but a judge just got uh removed basically from the bench and they are not fulfilling what the Commission on Judicial Discipline did.

[00:22:37]And you did it four times. You've done it four times. And now this represents a fifth. So your your position and and Mr. Jessup's position is because I'm trying to get a dismissal. A dismissal without prejudice is not a dismissal with prejudice. There is nothing in that statute to get a little bit to the merits, which I hesitate to do, but I wanted to, you know, at least try and find some reasonable position that you could take. I would my my neck would be under a sort of damic lease for an entire year if I let the motion to dismiss without prejudice stand. And so there is nothing in that statute nor any of the statutory scheme to say that even though a dismissal with without prejudice is given that one can't come back and ask to have it dismissed with prejudice. Nothing in there. There's nothing at all. And so I tried to talk to the city attorney. I was in here this morning to try and talk to him because in the other case I filed an unopposed motion to uh dismiss without prejudges because that's another violation of the code that you did. You you vacated those orders. You vacated those emotions that I four separate motions I had and you did not even allow the city to respond in any way which points up to what my position is that you want to act as a prosecutor judge up on the bench with a predisposition toward uh prosecution.

[00:24:05]Now I know judges come from both the defense bar and the prosecutorial bar.

[00:24:11]But you do not want to let go of that prosecutotorial bar. I've seen you in court. I've witnessed you and you even with me now. Oh, I'm in charge. You You're letting me make a record now only because you have to. In the past, you've cut me short. If you look at the citation, if you want to look at that, you had no jurisdiction. All taken with two minutes with Matthew Walker. Or you to say, "Wait a minute. There's no municipal code violation charge. It was an NRS statute." the any judge could have said, "Well, we're transferring it to justice court because you don't have jurisdiction over the Nevada right statute except through the municipal ordinance that adopts those, but that municipal ordinance has to be charged on the citation." Besides which, every signature on that citation, and I've got the pink copy and the uh original was in your file, that is the complaintant signature promising to appear, not mine.

[00:25:12]I signed nothing on this. Her her she's a complainant and she's not an official.

[00:25:17]She's not an officer. She signed as a complaint. This violates the statute as the complaint has to be filed or citation has to be filed by a law enforcement officer. She's a clerk over at the district court. And coincidentally and god winking at me, her name happens to be Karen who is a Karen if you know the current uh urban linguistics.

[00:25:42]A Karen is a meddling person of female uh gender. Your honor, I object to the disparity comments.

[00:25:50]>> Give it the way it's due. Keep going.

[00:25:52]ML, you know how much time do we have?

[00:25:54]>> How much time?

[00:25:55]>> 2 minutes and 32 seconds.

[00:25:56]>> Wow. Good. Uh, I really normally a real court will have some water. Is there any way I could borrow some water from someone?

[00:26:03]>> Sir, keep going.

[00:26:04]>> I can't borrow from somebody in the audience.

[00:26:06]>> Should have come prepared.

[00:26:07]>> Huh?

[00:26:07]>> Should have come prepared.

[00:26:09]>> Finish your >> I don't court. They have water. It's a real courtroom. This uh is is somewhat of a as I said he's doing the unauthorized practice of law.

[00:26:18]>> Stop looking at Mr. Jess.

[00:26:20]>> I'm sorry.

[00:26:20]>> He cannot he cannot represent the city of Las Vegas or the municipal court which is a part of the city of Las Vegas. I mean what you're doing here is just absolutely he told me at the window that he was prosecuting me. I mean he was prosecuting me. He's allowed to sit uh as where an attorney would sit in this matter or if this was a civil case, he'd be representing himself. But he certainly in no stretch of the imagination can represent a corporate entity. That's the if I tried to do anything like that, I'd be run out so fast for the unauthorized practice of law to make anybody's head spin. And you're going to allow this because he just happens to be a court administrator. I mean clearly he doesn't have a grasp on the fact that when you move to disqualify you don't disqualify the court you might ask for a change of venue or something but the disqualification motion is directed at a particular judge for particular reasons and I did that both with the first aid first uh uh motion to disqualify and with the second >> you have one minute >> so you know you know you're going to do what you want to do and then I'm I'm going to go to uh I don't have the time to do it I Uh, but I'm going to have to make time and it's going to be an incredible injury to me because of this oppression, this criminal oppression that you are doing upon me. And you do it with a smile and a smiling face. But that doesn't negate the evil and wickedness beyond be behind this.

[00:27:53]Especially when you have Erica Blue just coming off uh doing exactly the same thing, but only one time. You've done it multiple times.

[00:28:03]Multiple times. How much time? 30 seconds.

[00:28:06]>> 30 seconds. Well, no, I wasn't going to uh I wasn't going to address that. And for the most part, I hadn't addressed what his sum the summons was, but I have to say I went to his window and he said, "You can ask to reply on that date of May 6th." So, he I know it was unauthorized legal advice or whatever, but when normally you get a summon in a case, they say you must reply or otherwise respond in 20 days.

[00:28:32]>> Thank you, Mr. Blandino. Mr. You have 9 minutes and 30 seconds to give a >> Thank you, your honor. I'll be brief again. Couple of things. Even here today, I'm not sure the defendant even responded to the petition and his arguments. Um there he really did not dispute the allegations and the statements that I made. Um he his pattern is there.

[00:28:59]>> Do you have a standing objection?

[00:29:01]>> His pattern is there. Um, one of the things I would note even though he's trying to relitigate the criminal case, this is a petition for like laxataceious litigant and that petition is filed in a civil matter and this court has jurisdiction over civil matters and so as standing I do have standing as a court administrator to help make sure that this court is operating in an appropriate manner. Um, in addition to that um, what I would note here is that in his criminal matter there is a notice of dismissal. It is permissive in law.

[00:29:34]That does not >> that does not negate the defendants's ability to go to the appela process. But continuing to file pleadings and motions when there is a notice of dismissal and the jurisdiction of the court is lost is problematic. It creates vexacious. It's not uh it's not proper procedure. Um, and so for us to continue to continue to have hearings and pleadings and go through the process of adjudicating all those things when they're very repetitive is takes up the court's time and resources when I would note that we've increased our case load by over 100% the last two years. Uh, in addition to that, the defendants pleadings are almost 700 pages all in themselves.

[00:30:22]Again, all very repetitive. um in that process. So with that, I would ask that the court do find that the court does find Mr. Blending to be vexacious and that they would the court would limit his actions and and give and I would even go so far as to say limit the type of pleadings that he can file with the court.

[00:30:42]>> Thank you.

[00:30:44]>> Correct. So just to make a clear record, um the petition was filed under a civil case number 26-29641, which is different than the criminal case that Mr. Landino has referred to during after that petition was filed.

[00:30:56]You did file a motion to disqualify me which was then sent down to Judge Brown which complies with statute. Judge Brown heard it on April 20th and he made an oral denial of that motion which you admitted in your own particular argument. Additionally, um you obviously have seen it since you commented on the YouTube video at least 48 times by my count last night. So, um you've heard it. You have the opportunity to review it if you would like to. Um, I don't believe there's any requirement that it must be written in uh or given to you in a written order for it to be valid. And so it stands as it is, which allows me the opportunity to hear this.

[00:31:27]>> Look at what judge under submission based on the arguments I've heard and the moving documents that I've received.

[00:31:33]And I will issue an order that will also touch on all of the pending motions that were put on hold that judge Brown did in both the criminal and civil case. We are offer. All right.