CourttreatmentofcasesagainstStateOfficials

ExecutiveSummary:
Nocourthaseverconsideredthefactualallegationsand
supportingdocumentation,orruledonthesubstantivelegalclaims
broughtinthisseriesofcasesagainsttheUSGBoardofRegents
andAttorneyGeneral.Instead,courtshavefoundvarious
proceduralmeanstoavoidboththesubstantivelegalquestions
andthedamagingandundisputeddocumentationthatstate
officialshavecommittedcrimesofevidencetampering,perjury,
knowinglyfalsifyingstateagencyreports,mailfraud,wirefraud,
computerfraud,theftofstateandfederalfunds,influencing
witnesses,extortion,andobstructionofjusticeinadditionto
breachofUSGcontractsandviolationofUSGpolicies.
Benedekv.Adams.ClaimsforfraudandviolationofFirst
Amendmentrights(Section1983)werefiledagainstPresident
MichaelAdamsandtheBoardofRegentsinFultonStateCourt,
February2013.Defendantsremovedthecasetofederalcourt
whereJudgeAmyTotenbergtreatedtheSection1983claimsas
employmentlawclaimsanddismissedthem,sayingBenedekhad
missedthetwoyearstatuteoflimitationsforemploymentlaw
claimsbyfourmonths.ThejudgedeniedBenedeksrighttoamend
hiscomplainttoaddfederalRICOclaimswhichhaveafouryear
statuteoflimitationsandremandedtheremainingstatelawfraud
claimsbacktostatecourt.
OncebackinStateCourt,Benedekamendedhiscomplainttoadd
detailedclaimsundertheGeorgiaRICOActandfiledamotionto
addRICOpartydefendants.JudgeSusanEdleinenteredanorder
denyingtheamendmenttothecomplainttoaddRICOclaims,
contrarytoOCGA91115.Thejudgealsodeniedthemotionto
addparties,withoutconsideringthegoverningfactorsunder
OCGA91121.Arguingthatstateagenciesandofficialsenjoy
sovereignimmunity,JudgeEdleindismissedthefraudclaims

undertheGeorgiaTortClaimsAct(GTCA),thoughtheGTCA
doesnotbarfraudclaims.JudgeEdleinalsosaidBenedekcould
notfileclaimsspecificallyauthorizedundertheRICOActinorder
tocircumventtheGTCA(whichwas,inturn,thecourtsmeans
ofcircumventingOCGA91115&21).

Benedekv.Olens.BenedekthenfiledacomplaintinFulton
SuperiorCourtthatconsistedonlyoftheRICOclaimsbarredfrom
thefirstsuitbyJudgeEdlein,namingonlythedefendantswho
werenevermadepartiestothefirstaction.JudgeJerryBaxter
dismissedthesecondcaseonclaimpreclusiongrounds,holding
thattheclaimsandpartiesinBenedekv.Olenswerethesame
claimsandpartiesthathadbeenbarredinBenedekv.Adams,and
thatBenedekshouldhavebroughthisRICOclaimsinthefirst
case.
JudgeBaxteralsoruledthathedidnothavejurisdictionto
considerclaimstheAttorneyGeneralcommittedfraudby
obstructingserviceonJaneGatewood,awitnesswhohasalready
testifiedunderoathtoevidencetamperingandsubornationof
perjurybytheAttorneyGeneral,untilshecouldleavethestateto
evadeservice.TheAttorneyGeneralclaimedGatewoodwasnota
partytothefirstsuit,topreventserviceonher,andthenclaimed
Gatewoodwasapartytothefirstsuitinordertogetthesecond
suitdismissedonclaimpreclusiongrounds.

Tricoliv.Watts.TricolifiledGeorgiaRICOandbreachofcontract
claimsinDekalbSuperiorCourt,May2014.WhentheAttorney
General,inthefaceofextensivedocumentaryevidenceobtained
onlythroughathirdpartysOpenRecordslawsuitagainstthe
BoardofRegents,admittedthatUSGofficialscommitteda
2

numberofcriminalacts,includingknowingfalsificationofofficial
stateagencyreports,Tricolimovedforimmediateinjunctiverelief.
ThesamedayTricolifiledthemotionbasedonthecriminal
admissions,however,JudgeDanielCourseydismissedtheentire
action.
Theclaimsforknowingfalsificationofstateagencyreportsto
coverupmisappropriationoffunds,broughtundertheGeorgia
RICOAct,weredismissedasamatteroflaw,relyingon
immunitiesgoverningclaimsbroughtundertheGeorgiaTort
ClaimsAct(GTCA).Thecourtheldthatknowingfalsificationof
budgetreportstocoveruptheftoffundsbystateofficialswas
immunizedbytheGTCAssovereignimmunityprotectionforstate
officialsperformingtheirfinancialoversightduties.Thecourt
didnotaddressthecriminalnatureoftheconductwhichis
addressednotbytheGTCAbutbytheGeorgiaRICOAct.
Thecontractclaimsweredismissedasamatteroflawbasedon
Tricolissubsequentforcedresignation,andonUSGpoliciesthat
werechangedafterthefact(asadmittedbytheAttorneyGeneralin
faceofthedocumentation).
Thedismissalorderdidnotaddresstherequestforinjunctiverelief
basedonthecriminaladmissions,filedthesamedaythejudge
signedthedismissalorder,andthedismissalpreventedthe
AttorneyGeneralfromeverhavingtoevenrespondtothatmotion.

Caldonv.Regents,whistlebloweractioninFultonSuperiorCourt
ThepresidentofMaconStateCollegefiredDeniseCaldonnine
daysaftersheobjectedinwritingtohisfalsificationofhisleave
reports(onwhichhiscurrentpensionisbased)tocoverthefact
thathewasmentallyincompetenttoperformhisduties.Judge
3

DownsgrantedsummaryjudgmentagainstCaldonbecausethe
presidentsaidhehadadifferentreasonforfiringCaldonbesides
herwhistleblowingonhiscriminalactions.TheCourtofAppeals
affirmed,addingthatthetimeproximitybetweenthe
whistleblowingagainstthepresidentandhisfiringofthe
whistleblowerwasnotenoughtocreateajuryissue.Caldonfileda
Rule60motiontosetasidethejudgmentagainstherforfraud,
basedonadmittedmisrepresentationstothecourtbythe
defendants.ThemotionwasfiledinJuly2014andJudgeDowns
stillhadnottakenanyactiononthemotionby2015.Whena
reporterinquired,Downssaidthecasehadbeentransferredto
anotherjudge.OnMarch10,2015,itwasverifiedthatthisclaim
wasfalse,thatJudgeDownsstillhadthemotionandhadnot
lookedatit,andJudgeDownsenteredanorderdenyingthemotion
thesameday.

Brandenburgv.Regents.ToddBrandenburgwassummarilyfired
afterreportingaconflictofinterestinvolvingsalestoMedical
CollegeofGeorgiabyRegentDonaldLeeburnscompany.
BrandenburgwasaccusedofinsultingapatientsfamilybyaUSG
officialwhowasnotpresentattheincident.Thepatientsfamily
deniedtheaccusation.Brandenburgneverreceivedanyhearing,
andhaslitigatedforyearsovertheRegentsfailuretoproduce
documentsinresponsetoOpenRecordsrequests.

REVIEWOFTHECASES

Case#1Benedekv.Adams,Section1983andfraudclaimsfiled
inFultonStateCourt,filedFeb,2013
4

USDistrictCourt,JudgeAmyTotenberg
Thecasewasremovedbydefendantstofederalcourtonbasisof
thefederal1983claims,whereJudgeAmyTotenbergdismissed
theSection1983claimsonstatuteoflimitationsgroundsafterre
characterizingthemas"adverseemploymentaction"claims.
JudgeTotenbergsaidtherewasa2yearstatuteoflimitations,
ignoringthefactthatwemadealossofconsortiumclaimthat
extendedthestatuteoflimitationstofouryears(shesaidwedid
notpleadthatclaimproperlywhichisnotaproperlegalbasisfor
dismissal,whichrequiresthatthereisnowaytheclaimcouldbe
properlypledtocureanydeficiency)
TotenbergalsodeniedouramendmenttoaddfederalRICO
claims,whichalsoextendsthestatuteoflimitationstofouryears
(insteadofthe2yearlimitimposedbyTotenberg).Federallaw
allowspermissiveamendment,andamendmentonceasofright
within21daysofamotiontodismiss.TheAGfiledamotionto
dismissandwefiledanamendedcomplaintinresponse.TheAG
thenfiledanothermotiontodismissandwefiledasecond
amendmentincludingourRICOclaimswithin21daysofthat
secondmotiontodismiss.Totenbergsaidwewerenotallowedto
dothisbecausethefederalrulesaysweareonlyallowedtoamend
onceasamatterofrightwithin21daysofamotiontodismiss.
Evenifwewerenotallowedtoamendasofrightinresponseto
theAG'ssecondmotiontodismiss,federallawstillsays
amendmentshouldbe"permissive"inotherinstancesbasically
theissueisthatitdoesnotcomesolatethatitprejudicestheother
party(forexample,discoveryisalreadyover).Totenbergdenied
ouramendmentunderthatdiscretionaryprongofthelaw,though
thestatuteitselfsaysamendmentshouldbeliberallyallowed.
Sincewewerestillintheinitialstagesofthelitigation,andthe
5

amendmentscameinresponsetoDefendants'motionstodismiss,
andwithin21daysofthosemotions,theycouldclaimno
prejudice.
JudgeTotenbergalsodeniedourRICOamendmentsonthebasis
thattheywere"futile,"becauseaccordingtohertheydidnotaffect
thebasisherdismissalorder.However,thedismissalwas
expresslybasedona2yearstatuteoflimitationsandtheRICO
claimsbeara4yearstatuteoflimitationsmeaningthe
amendmentsactuallycompletelyobliteratedthebasisofthe
dismissalorder.
Ofcourseforstatuteoflimitationspurposes,theissueisnotonly
howlongyouhavetosue,butwhentheclockstartsrunning.By
recharacterizingitasanemploymentlawcase,thejudgesaidthe
clockstartedrunningwhenBenedekwasdemotedasheadofthe
Asianlanguagesprogramwhichofcourseisaminordelictinthis
case,andisnotevenbyitselfaRICOpredicateact.Underthe
RICOstatute,theclockwouldrunfromthelastpredicateact
committed,suchasSamOlens'knowinglyfalseclaimthatthereis
noevidenceanyofthesepredicateactsoccurredandthusnoneed
toinvestigate.
NotethatwhathappenedinfederalcourtisnotthatourRICO
claimswereconsideredbythecourtanddismissedas"frivolous,"
astheAttorneyGeneralfalselyclaims.Sincetheamendments
weredenied,theyneverbecamepartofthecase.
FultonStateCourt,JudgeSusanEdlein
OnceTotenbergdismissedallourfederalSection1983claimsand
deniedourRICOamendments,theremainingfraudclaimswere
remandedtoFultonStateCourt,wherethecasewasoriginally
filedbeforeitwasremovedtofederalcourt.
6

ThefirstthingBenedekdiduponremandtotheStateCourtisfile
anamendmentstatingoverahundredpagesofdetailedclaims
undertheGeorgiaRICOAct.Georgialawallowsamendmentof
claimsasofrightupuntilentryofapretrialorder(thatisinthe
advancedstagesofthelitigation,andinthiscasewenever
proceededpasttheinitialmotiontodismissstage).JudgeEdlein
DENIEDtheGeorgiaRICOamendmentsanactshehasnopower
todounderOCGA91115.
JudgeEdleinbasedherdenialoftheRICOamendmenton
sovereignimmunity,butstillshehasnopowertodenythe
amendment.Themostshecouldhavedoneisallowthe
amendments,makingthempartofthecase,andthendismissthem
onsovereignimmunitygrounds.However,again,similarto
Totenberg'sactions,Edlein'sdenialoftheamendmentkeptthe
RICOclaimsfromeverbecomingpartofthecase.Shedidnot
substantivelyaddressanddismissthemasfrivolousagain,
contrarytotheAG'sknowinglyfalseclaims.
AtthesametimeBenedekfiledhisGeorgiaRICOamendments,
inDecember2013,healsomadeamotiontoaddadditionalparties
thataresubjecttosuitundertheRICOclaims,whoasstate
officialscouldnotbesuedunderSection1983orordinarytort
claims.TheproposedaddedpartydefendantsincludedUGA
officialJaneGatewood,whosetestimonyatBenedek'stenure
hearingestablishedthattheAttorneyGeneralintentionally
concealedexplosiveevidencerefutingthechargestheAGbrought
againstBenedek,andtheAttorneyGeneralhimselfwasalsoadded
asapartyforthiscriminalRICOpredicateact.UnderGeorgialaw,
additionofpartiesisnotautomatic,butitissupposedtobe
permissiveandthereisnocaselawtobaritatthisearlystageof
litigation.Nonetheless,JudgeEdleindeniedthemotion,keeping
OlensandGatewoodfromeverbecomingpartiestothecase.

Edleinmadetheserulings,denyingtheamendmenttoaddRICO
claimsanddenyingthemotiontoaddRICOparties,underunusual
circumstances.WefiledtheRICOamendmentandmotiontoadd
RICOpartiesinDecember2013.Despiterepeatedprodding,by
April2014westillhadheardnothingfromthecourtinresponseto
ourmotion.Weneededanorderfromthecourttobeabletoserve
theadditionalparties.ThenweheardthatJaneGatewoodwas
quittingUGAandleavingthestate.Ofcourse,wewantedtoserve
herbeforeshecouldleaveGeorgiaforpartsunknown,sowe
broughtthismattertotheattentionofthecourtbywayofamotion
requestingthecourttoact.Wealsowroteandbroughtittothe
attentionoftheAttorneyGeneral,whorepresentedGatewood
whosetestimonyagainsttheAGforconcealingdocumentsand
suborningperjurywouldbedevastating(theAGdidnotrecuse
himself,oblivioustothisblatantconflictofinterest).TheAG
wrotebackclaimingignoranceandtotallackofresponsibility
concerningGatewood'splansorwhereaboutsonthegroundsthat
thisdevastatingwitnessofcrimescommittedintheAG'soffice
wasnotapartytothecivilcase.Edleinforherpart,respondedto
ournoticeaboutGatewoodleavingthestatebyMay9,atthe
latest,accordingtoourinformationbysettingaphoneconference
withtheparties.Edleincancelledthatphoneconferencewhena
CBSreporteraskedtolistenin.Instead,shesetahearingforMay
15,aweekafterwehadgivennoticethatGatewoodwouldbe
gone.Then,beforethescheduledhearingcouldoccur,Judge
EdleinenteredherorderonMay2denyingourRICOamendment
anddenyingourmotiontoaddRICOparties.Thisfulfilledlikea
prophecytheAG'searlierstatementthatGatewood,thewitness
againsttheAGforcriminalevidencetamperingandsubornationof
perjury,wasnotapartytothecivilcase.
Edleinalsoemployedthehighlyunusualrationalethatifsovereign
immunitybarredtortclaimsagainstthestateagenciesandofficials,
8

thenBenedekcouldnotemployanotherlaw,theGeorgiaRICO
Act,tobringclaimsallowedbytheRICOstatuteonthat
alternativetheory.Ofcourse,asanyfirstyearlawstudentknows,
theonlyissueiswhethertheRICOstatuteallowstheclaimsnot,
asEdleinstated,whetherthatotherstatuteisbeing
"impermissibly"usedto"circumvent"theTortClaimsAct.Edlein
focusedontheintentoftheattorneytoavoidtheGTCA,insteadof
thelegislature'sintentinpassingtheRICOActtoallowclaimsfor
thecriminalpredicateacts.
EdleinenteredherMay2orderdismissingourcase,13daysbefore
thescheduledhearing,afterwegavehernoticethatwewould
dismissthecasebeforeherandfileanewactionnamingGatewood
asapartyallowingustoserveGatewoodwithoutwaitingforan
orderfromthecourtaddingherasapartyifJudgeEdleinwould
notactintime.OfcourseJudgeEdlein'sorderdismissingourcase
13daysbeforethescheduledhearingpreventedusfromfilingall
ourclaimsagainstallthedefendantsinasingleaction.
Whenallwassaidanddone,bythetimewesoughtactionthrough
anothercourtinordertoserveGatewood,shehadleftthestateand
evadedservice.
Case#2,Benedekv.OlensinFultonSuperiorCourt
WhenJudgeEdleindeniedtheRICOamendmentanddeniedthe
motiontoaddRICOpartiesonsovereignimmunitygrounds,
statingthattheseclaimswerebarredbytheGeorgiaTortClaims
ActBenedekfiledtheRICOclaimsagainsttheRICOpartiesin
FultonSuperiorCourt.Thisactionconsistedonlyoftheclaimsand
partiesthatweredeniedbyJudgeEdlein,andthusneverbecame
partofthefirstcase.TheAGalsodeniedinthefirstcasethat

Gatewoodandotherswerepartiestothatcaseforpurposesof
obstructingserviceonGatewood.
Incase#2,however,theAGurgeddismissalonclaimpreclusion
grounds,arguingthatitwasthesamecaseagainstthesameparties
astheoneEdleindismissed.
JudgeJerryBaxterdiddismissthecaseonclaimpreclusion
groundsinAugust2014,concludingthatthoughtheclaimsand
partiesinthetwocaseswerenotthesametheclaimsandparties
werelegallythesamebecauseBenedekhadallegedaconspiracy
betweenthedifferentparties.Thecourtdidnotexaminethe
hundredsofpagesofclaimsincludedinthetwosuitstodetermine
thattherewasnoclaiminthesecondsuitthatwasnotduplicated
inthefirstsuit,ortoverifythattheconspiraciesallegedwere
similar.
BenedekmovedunderRule60tohavethatorderofdismissal
vacatedbaseduponthefraudbytheAGinclaimingthatGatewood
wasnotapartytothefirstsuit,inordertopreventherfrombeing
served,andthenclaimingshewasapartytothefirstsuitinorder
togetthesecondsuitdismissed.Sincethejudgedidnotdecidethat
motionwithinthe30dayperiodinwhichanappealmaybefiled,
Benedekfiledaconditionalnoticeofappeal,contingentonthe
judge'srulingonthefraudmotionwithrespecttotheAG's
duplicitousstatementsregardingGatewood,awitnesswhocan
confirmcriminalevidencetamperingandsubornationofperjuryin
theAGoffice.JudgeBaxterthenruledthathehadnojurisdiction
todecidetheRule60fraudclaimagainsttheAGbecauseBenedek
hadfiledanoticeofapeal(ignoringthatitwasconditionedinthe
motiontosetasidethedismissalforfraudbytheAG),depriving
thetrialcourtofjurisdiction.

10

BenedekthenfiledamotionforsanctionsagainsttheAttorney
GeneralforfraudsinceitwasheldintheKalbermancasewhen
theAGwasfinedforwithholdingdocumentsinthatwhistleblower
actionthataSuperiorCourtalwayshasjurisidictiontoconsiderthe
conductofthepartiesappearingbeforeit,evenwhenthecaseis
over,asintheKalbermancase.TheAGdidnotrespondpriorto
thescheduledMarch10hearingtowrittendocumentationofthe
fraudfiledwiththecourt,andtheAGaskedforapostponement
themorningofthehearing.
Case#3,TricolivWatts,RICOandbreachofcontractclaims,
filedMay2014
TheAGarguedthattheGeorgiaTortClaimsActbarredTricoli's
claimsundertheGeorgiaRICOAct,andthattheGeorgia
ConstitutionbarredTricoli'scontractclaimsbecausehedidnot
haveawrittencontract.
Inresponsetothecontractdefense,TricolifiledOpenRecords
requestsandalsodidresearchonchangesinUSGpolicyandfiled
evidencewiththecourtthatTricolididhaveawrittencontractthat
wasgovernedbyUSGpolicy,andthattheRegentshadgoneback
afterthefacttoaltersomeofthepoliciestheyhadviolatedbytheir
actionsagainstTricoli.
BasedonthisandotherdocumentationfromOpenRecords
requestsbythirdparties,TricoliservedtheAGwithrequestsfor
admissionsthatTricolihadawrittencontractandthattheUSG
defendantshadalteredpolicesafterthefactandknowingly
falsifiedstateagencyreportsrelatedtotheTricolicase.TheAG
continuedtodenythatTricoli'swrittencontractgovernedbyUSG
policywasacontractgovernedbyUSGpolicybasingthedenial
ontheveryafterthefactalterationsofUSGpolicy.Inthecourse
ofthatexchange,andinfaceofirrefutabledocumentation,theAG
11

admittedthatstateofficialshadengagedincriminalRICO
predicateactsbyknowinglyfalsifyingGeorgiaPerimeterCollege
budgetreportsandotherofficialdocumentsandstateagency
reportsinviolationofOCGA161020.Confrontedwiththe
documentation,theAGalsoadmittedthattheRegentshadgone
backandchangedUSGpoliciesrelevanttothecaseafterthefact.
Basedonthoseadmissions,Tricolifiledamotionforan
interlocutoryinjunctionremovingoneoftheadmittedviolatorsof
theGeorgiaRICOActfromofficeandrestoringTricolitohis
positionasGPCpresident.ThatmotionwasfiledonNovember19,
2014,justbeforetheclerk'sofficeclosedat5pm.OnNovember
21,theclerkofthecourtofficiallyenteredanordersignedby
JudgeDanielCourseydismissingtheentireaction.TheRICO
claimsweredismissedbyJudgeCourseyonsovereignimmunity
grounds.Thecontractclaimsweredismissed,notonsovereign
immunityforlackofawrittencontract,butbasedonthefactthat
Tricolilaterresignedhiscontractignoringthefactthatthe
resignationwascoerced,andthatthebreachesofthecontractand
violationsofUSGpolicyoccurredbeforetheforcedresignation.
Thecourtcompletelyignoredthemotionforinjunctiverelief(not
barredbysovereignimmunity)thatwasfiledtwodaysbeforethe
orderwasenteredbytheclerk.Theorderstatedonitsfacethatit
wassignedbyJudgeCourseyonNovember19,accordingtothe
handwrittendatethesamedaythemotionbasedonthe
admissionsofcriminalconductwasfiledat4:54p.m.andfiled
withtheclerktwodayslater,accordingtotheofficialfilestampof
theclerk'soffice.
Tricolisentcorrespondenceandfiledmotionstohavethecourt
addresstherequestforinjunctivereliefthatwasbypassedand
ignoredinthedismissalorder.Thecourtdeniedthosemotions
withoutexplanation.

12

TheNov.21orderdismissingtheRICOclaimsstatedthatstate
officialswereimmuneundertheGeorgiaTortClaimsAct,under
theirdiscretionaryandfinancialoversightfunctions,forthe
admittedcriminalRICOpredicateactsofknowinglyfalsifying
GPCbudgetreportsandotherofficialagencyreportsevenifthe
knowingfalsifications(acriminalviolationbythemselves)were
forthepurposeofcoveringuptheftoffundsorothercriminalacts.
Thisorder,thoughmorethanalittledisturbinginitsimplications,
istheonlyorder,throughoutthisseriesofactionsagainststate
agenciesandofficials,inwhichthejudgeactuallyaddressedthe
substantiveclaimsandheldthatstateofficialscouldnotbesued
fortheseadmittedcriminalacts.
Case#4,Caldonv.Regents,Rule60motionfiledinJuly2014
DeniseCaldonwasfiredforinsubordinationbythepresidentof
MaconStateCollegetheweekafterCaldonrefusedinwritingto
falsifythepresident'sleavereports(onwhichhisstatepensionis
basedtoday)tocoverupthefactthathewasmentallyunfitto
performhisdutiesandabsentmorethanhewaspresent.
TheBoardofRegentsdismissedherapplicationforreviewofher
termination(lateradmittingtheydidsowithoutconsideringor
investigatingherwhistleblowerclaims).Shefiledsuitunderthe
GeorgiaWhistleblowerActandFultonSuperiorCourtJudgeDoris
DownsgrantedsummaryjudgmentagainstherbasedontheMacon
Statepresident'sargumentthathefiredhernotbecauseofher
whistleblowerclaimsagainsthim,exposinghiscriminalactions,
butbecauseshecalledhimoutforbeingrudetohissonninedays
later,whichCaldoncouldnotdisprove.InthiscasetheRegents
representedtothetrialcourtthattheyhadinvestigatedthe
whistleblowerclaimsandfoundnoevidencetosupportthem.
13

TheGeorgiaCourtofAppealsupheldthisdecision,statingthatit
didnotmatterthatthefiringoccurredshortlyafterthe
whistleblowingactivity,andalsothatthewhistleblowingwas
trumpedbythepresident'sevidencethathehadadifferentreason
forfiringCaldonbesidesherwrittenobjectionstohiscriminal
activity(thecaselawonalternategroundsforfiringonlyallowsit
whenthepersondoingthefiringhasnoknowledgeofthe
whistleblowingactivity).
Theevidenceinthecaseconcerningthepresident'sfalsifiedleave
reportswasfiledunderseal.Sincethedismissalofhercase,
Caldonhasfiledseveralprosemotionstounsealtheevidence,all
ofwhichhavebeenopposedbytheAttorneyGeneral.
InJulyof2014,CaldonfiledaRule60motiontosetasidethe
orderdismissinghercaseforfraudbythedefendantsbasedinpart
onarecentadmissionthat,contrarytowhatwasrepresentedtothe
trialcourt,theRegentshadneverinvestigatedCladon's
whistleblowerclaims.
By2015,JudgeDownshadstillnottakenanyactiononthat
motionfiledinJulyof2014.WhenaCBSreporterinquiredabout
thestatusofthemotion,JudgeDownsfalselyrespondedthatthe
casehadbeentransferredtoanotherjudge.OnMarch10,2015,
CaldonconsultedtheFultonCountySuperiorCourtdocketand
foundthatthecasewasstillassignedtoJudgeDowns.Caldon
calledDownsofficetoinquireaboutthestatusofthemotion.
Downs'legalassistantconfirmedthatDownsstillhadthecaseand
theassistanttoldCaldonthatshewouldtakethefileandgiveitto
JudgeDowns.Thesameday,JudgeDownssignedanorder
denyingthemotionwithoutholdingahearingontheevidenceof
fraudsubmittedtothecourt.

14

Case#5,Brandenburgv.Regents.ToddBrandenburgwasa15
yearXraytechwhowassummarilyfiredafterreportingaconflict
ofinterestinvolvingsalestoMedicalCollegeofGeorgiaby
RegentDonaldLeeburnscompany.Brandenburgwasaccusedof
insultingapatientsfamilybysayinghisfeetweresmellybya
USGofficialwhowasnotpresentattheallegedincident.The
patientsfamilydeniedtheaccusation.Brandenburgneverreceived
anyhearing,andhaslitigatedforyearsovertheRegentsfailureto
producedocumentsinresponsetoOpenRecordsrequests.

15