William John Joseph Hoge,

Plaintiff,

IN THE

CIRCUIT COURT FOR CARROLL COUNTY

MARYLAND

v.

Case No. 06-C-16-070789

Brett Kimberlin, et al.,

Defendants.

PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO THE KIMBERLIN DEFENDANTS CORRECTED

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
COMES NOW William John Joseph Hoge and opposes the Kimberlin
Defendants Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Item 1055/0). In
opposition Mr. Hoge states as follows:
INTRODUCTION
The Court has already considered and denied a Motion for Summary
Judgment from the Kimberlins. Docket Items 85/0 and 100/0. Their Corrected
Motion is really a motion for reconsideration of the denial of their original Motion
to Dismiss. They cite no facts newly discovered since their original motion was filed
on 15 November, 2016. They also fail to cite any new law. Thus, they have failed to
give the Court a reason to reconsider its ruling, and the Court should deny their
Corrected Motion.
I. THE JURY VERDICT AND JUDGMENT IN WALKER V. KIMBERLIN, ET AL. CONTAIN
NO FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATIONS FOR STATEMENT OF
CHARGES FILED AGAINST MR. HOGE
The Applications filed by the Kimberlins against Mr. Hoge were never shown

to the jury in the Walker case.1 Mr. Hoge was not a party in that case, and the
Kimberlins have provided no evidence that Messrs. Walker and Hoge are in privity
with respect to that case, and Mr. Hoge denies that they are in privity. Therefore,
the Kimberlins may not rely on res judicata as shield, and Mr. Hoge is not estopped
from bring this suit.
Furthermore, the Kimberlins Corrected Motion misrepresents the Walker
jurys finding. The jury did not find that anything that the Kimberlins has written
in their Applications against Mr. Walker was true. Their actual findings were that
certain statement in those Applications were either knowingly false or failed to
include information that might have led a District Court Commissioner not to find
probable cause. See Exhibit A, 6, 13, 17, 24. Not only have the Kimberlins failed
to lay out any new facts, but also the facts they have presented are false. They
have provided no basis for the Court to reconsider its denial of their Motion for
Summary Judgment.
II. THE COURT HAS PREVIOUSLY RULED AGAINST THE KIMBERLINS LITIGATION
PRIVILEGE DEFENSE
The Kimberlins have already raised their argument for a litigation privilege
defense in their Motion to Dismiss. Docket Item 58/0. The Court denied that
motion during the hearing on 27 September, 2016. Thus, the Kimberlins were on
notice that defense is not applicable to them in this case. Yet, they submitted
another motion making the same argument. The law of the case is clear, and the

Walker v. Kimberlin, et al., Case No. 403868-V (Md. Cir.Ct. Mont. Co. 2016).
2

Court should not reconsider either its rulings on the Kimberlins Motion to Dismiss
or their Motion for Summary Judgment.
III. AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING FACTS REMAIN AT ISSUE IN THIS LAWSUIT
As noted in Mr. Hoges attached Affidavit (Exhibit A) the following material
facts are disputed with respect to the Kimberlins Affidavits attached to their
Corrected Motion:
a.

Mr. Hoge has never stalked or harassed Tetyana Kimberlin or any

member of her family. Hoge Affidavit, 3.

b.

Judge Creighton never told Mr. Hoge that he was engaging in child

abuse or could end up in prison. Hoge Affidavit, 4, 15.

c.

Mr. Hoge has never admitted to engaging in harassing conduct. Hoge

Affidavit, 5, 16.
d.

The Walker jury did not find that any statement made by Tetyana

Kimberlin was true. Hoge Affidavit, 6.

e.

Mr. Hoge has never engaged in cyberstalking. Hoge Affidavit, 8.

f.

Mr. Hoge has never falsely called Brett Kimberlin a pedophile. Hoge

Affidavit, 9, 19.
g.

Mr. Hoge has never told anyone to comment on Tetyana Kimberlins

daughters social media accounts. Hoge Affidavit, 10.

h.

Mr. Hoge has never supported any campaign against Tetyana

Kimberlins daughter. Hoge Affidavit, 11.

i.

Mr. Hoge has never attended a hearing involving the Kimberlin family

for any perverted purpose. Hoge Affidavit, 12.

j.

The Application for Statement of Charges filed against Mr. Hoge by

Tetyana Kimberlin contains statements that are false, and none have been found
to be true by a jury. Hoge Affidavit, 13.
k.

Mr. Hoge has never stalked or harassed Brett Kimberlin or any

member of his family. Hoge Affidavit, 14.

l.

The Walker jury did not find that any statement made by Brett

Kimberlin was true. Hoge Affidavit, 17.

m.

Mr. Hoge has not filed multiple legal actions against Brett Kimberlin

in multiple jurisdictions. Hoge Affidavit, 20.

n.

Mr. Hoge has never tried to manipulate Tetyana Kimberlin while she

was having a mental health crisis (or at any other time). Hoge Affidavit, 21.
o.

Mr. Hoge has never cyberstalked Tetyana Kimberlins elder daughter.

Hoge Affidavit, 22.

p.

The Application for Statement of Charges filed against Mr. Hoge by

Brett Kimberlin contains statements that are false, and none have been found to
be true by a jury. Hoge Affidavit, 24.
q.

The email referenced in Count VI of the Complaint contains a false

statement. Hoge Affidavit, 25.

r.

The email referenced in Count IX of the Complaint contains a false

statement. Hoge Affidavit, 26.

4

s.

Mr. Hoge has never present fabricated evidence to any law

enforcement officer or agency. Hoge Affidavit, 28.

t.

The second sentence of paragraph 13 of Brett Kimberlins Affidavit

relates to a discovery material which is under a protective order issued by the

United States District Court for the District of Maryland in Kimberlin v. Frye,
Case No. 13-CV-03059-GJH. Because Mr. Hoge is bound by that protective order,
he can only say that Kimberlins characterization of the evidence is false. Hoge
Affidavit, 29.
u.

Mr. Hoge has never stated that he believes he has the right to harass

Brett Kimberlin. Hoge Affidavit, 30.

A dispute over any one of these facts should be sufficient to cause the
Kimberlins Corrected Motion for Summary Judgment to fail. Additionally, the
material facts cited in Mr. Hoges Opposition to the Kimberlins original Motion for
Summary Judgment (Docket Item 94/1) are still in dispute. Thus, the Court should
deny the Corrected Motion.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, Mr. Hoge asks the Court to deny the Kimberlins Corrected
Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Item 105/0) and to grant such other relief
as the Court may find just and proper.

Date: 4 January, 2017

Respectfully submitted,

William John Joseph Hoge, pro se

20 Ridge Road
Westminster, Maryland 21157
(410) 596-2854
himself@wjjhoge.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on the 4th day of January, 2017, I served copies of the foregoing
on the following persons:
William M. Schmalfeldt by First Class U. S. Mail to 3209 S. Lake Drive, Apt. 108,
St. Francis, Wisconsin 53235.
Brett Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817.
Tetyana Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817.

William John Joseph Hoge

AFFIDAVIT
I, William John Joseph Hoge, solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury
that the contents of the foregoing paper are true to the best of my knowledge,
information, and belief.
Date: 4 January, 2017
William John Joseph Hoge

Exhibit A

William John Joseph Hoge,

Plaintiff,
v.
Brett Kimberlin, et al.,
Defendants.

IN THE

CIRCUIT COURT FOR CARROLL COUNTY

MARYLAND
Case No. 06-C-16-070789

AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM JOHN JOSEPH HOGE

I, William John Joseph Hoge, depose and say:
1.

I am over eighteen (18) years of age, have personal knowledge of the

facts contained herein (except as noted), and am competent to be a witness.

2.

On or about 19 December, 2016, Tetyana Kimberlin and Brett

Kimberlin signed Affidavits which Brett Kimberlin included in a paper styled

Defendants Brett and Tetyana Kimberlins Corrected Motion for Summary
Judgment and Request for a Hearing.1 The Kimberlins made the following false
statements in their Affidavits:
3.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: William Hoge has been stalking

my minor daughter, my husband and me for years. We have asked him

repeatedly to stop, but he continues on an obsessive, depraved and
relentless manner. TK Affidavit, 1. In fact, I have never engaged in stalking
any person. Therefore, I have never continued an activity in which I have never
engaged.
1

Although Brett Kimberlin is not licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction, he has
filed this and other court papers on his wifes behalf.

4.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Judge Creighton told Hoge that

he was engaging in child abuse and could end up in prison because of his
online bullying of my daughter. TK Affidavit, 2. As the partial transcript
submitted by the Kimberlins shows, Judge Creighton said no such thing during the
de novo peace order hearing on 14 May, 2015.
5.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge testified at the Aaron

Walker trial on October 13th, and he admitted that he engaged in

unwanted harassing conduct toward my husband, my minor daughter and
me. TK Affidavit, 3. In fact, I made no such admission during the Walker v.
Kimberlin, et al. trial.
6.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: After a full jury trial, the jury

found that 99% if what I said in my complaints against Walker and Hoge
were true. TK Affidavit, 4. In fact, the jury made no finding that any of the
statements made by Brett Kimberlin or Tetyana Kimberlin in the Applications for
Statement of Charges at issue in the Walker case were true. The jury found that
some of the statements were either knowingly false or failed to include information
that might have led a District Court Commissioner to find that probable cause did
not exist. The Walker jury made no findings with respect to the Applications for
Statement of Charges filed against me.
7.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Even after the Walker jury

found in my favor, and Judge Mason told Walker he wasted the court and
jurys time with his revenge suit, and could not file another pleading in
2

Montgomery County without an attorney TK Affidavit, 6. Judge Mason

did not tell Aaron Walker that he had wasted the courts or the jurys time. While
he did say that he was contemplating a show cause order preventing both Mr.
Walker and the Kimberlins from filing further pro se suits against each other, he
has not issued such an order. In any event, Judge Mason never said that he was
considering an order preventing Mr. Walker from filing any pleading except through
counsel.
8.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has cyberstalked my

daughter TK Affidavit, 7. In fact, as Judge Williams in the District Court and

Judge Creighton in the Circuit Court found as a result of the Kimberlins peace
order petition, I have not stalked Tetyana Kimberlins daughter.
9.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has falsely call[ed] my

husband a pedophile TK Affidavit, 7. Brett Kimberlin sued me for

defamation, complaining that I had called him a pedophile. He lost that lawsuit on
the basis of truth.
10.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has [told] his readers to

comment on my daughters social media pages and articles about her

TK Affidavit, 7. In fact, the opposite is true. I have encouraged my readers to
leave Tetyana Kimberlins children alone.
11.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has financially

support[ed] Walkers perverted campaign against [Mrs. Kimberlins

daughter] TK Affidavit, 7. I am unaware of any such campaign by Mr.
3

Walker. Indeed, from what I have read of his work, he also encourages his readers
to leave the Tetyana Kimberlins children alone. I have never given any support,
financial or otherwise, to any campaign to harass a child.
12.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has attend[ed] hearings

involving private family matter [sic] and then exploit[ed] those for his own
perverted agenda. TK Affidavit, 7. I have attended hearings in open court
related to domestic difficulties between Brett and Tetyana Kimberlin, but my only
involvement other than reporting what had happened was to arrange legal counsel
for Tetyana Kimberlin for a hearing on dueling protective orders between her and
her husband.
13.

Tetyana Kimberlin falsely states: All the statements I made in my

complaint against Mr. Hoge were found to be true by a jury and are in fact
true. TK Affidavit, 8. No jury has ever considered the statements made by
Tetyana Kimberlin in her Application for Statement of Charges against me and
their truthfulness with respect to me.
14.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: William Hoge has been stalking my

minor daughter, my wife and me for years. We have asked him repeatedly
to stop, but he continues on an obsessive, depraved and relentless manner.
BK Affidavit, 1. In fact, I have never engaged in stalking any person. Therefore,
I have never continued an activity in which I have never engaged.
15.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Judge Creighton told [Hoge] that

his cyber bulling of [Tetyana Kimberlins elder daughter] was

4

heartbreaking and could land him in prison. BK Affidavit, 3. As the

partial transcript submitted by the Kimberlins shows, Judge Creighton said no such
thing during the de novo peace order hearing on 14 May, 2015.
16.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge testified at the Aaron Walker

trial on October 13th, and he admitted that he engaged in unwanted

harassing conduct toward my wife, my minor daughter and me. BK
Affidavit, 4. In fact, I made no such admission during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et
al. trial.
17.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: After a full jury trial, the jury

found that 99% if what I said in my complaints against Walker and Hoge
were true. BK Affidavit, 5. In fact, the jury made no finding that any of the
statements made by Brett Kimberlin or Tetyana Kimberlin in the Applications for
Statement of Charges at issue in the Walker case were true. The jury found that
some of the statements were either knowingly false or failed to include information
that might have led a District Court Commissioner to find that probable cause did
not exist. The Walker jury made no findings with respect to the Applications for
Statement of Charges filed against me.
18.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Even after the Walker jury found

in my favor, and Judge Mason told Walker he wasted the court and jurys
time with his revenge suit, and could not file another pleading in
Montgomery County without an attorney BK Affidavit, 7. Judge Mason
did not tell Aaron Walker that he had wasted the courts or the jurys time. While
5

he did say that he was contemplating a show cause order preventing both Mr.
Walker and the Kimberlins from filing further pro se suits against each other, he
has not issued such an order. In any event, Judge Mason never said that he was
considering an order preventing Mr. Walker from filing any pleading except through
counsel.
19.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has harassed me for years,

falsely calling me a pedophile BK Affidavit, 8. I have never engaged in

harassment of Brett Kimberlin or any member of his family. Further, Brett
Kimberlin sued me for defamation, complaining that I had called him a pedophile.
He lost that lawsuit on the basis of truth.
20.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has fil[ed] multiple legal

actions agains me in multiple jurisdictions that have all been dismissed,

filing criminal charges and peace orders against me based on false
statements that were all denied BK Affidavit, 8. These false assertions
were previously before the Court in the Kimberlins motion to have me declared a
vexatious litigant. See Docket Item 47/0 and 47/1. The Court denied that motion
based on these unfounded assertions.
21.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has [come] to private

family matter hearings and then exploit[ed] those for his own personal
agenda, approaching my wife during a mental health crisis and then
manipulating that situation to try to harm me BK Affidavit, 8. I have
attended hearings in open court related to domestic difficulties between Brett and
6

Tetyana Kimberlin, but my only involvement other than reporting what had
happened was to arrange legal counsel for Tetyana Kimberlin for a hearing on
dueling protective orders between her and her husband. As to Brett Kimberlins
assertion that his wife was having a mental health crisis, I will note that he filed a
petition for an involuntary examination of her which was denied by the District
Court in Montgomery County.
22.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has cyberstalk[ed] my

daughter BK Affidavit, 8. In fact, as Judge Williams in the District Court

and Judge Creighton in the Circuit Court found as a result of the Kimberlins peace
order petition, I have not stalked Tetyana Kimberlins daugher.
23.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has financ[ed] Aaron

Walkers depraved and perverted campaign against me and my family. BK

Affidavit, 8. I am unaware of any such campaign by Mr. Walker. I have never
given any support, financial or otherwise, to any campaign to harass Brett
Kimberlin or any member of his family.
24.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: All the statements I made in my

complaint against Mr. Hoge were found to be true by a jury and are in fact
true. BK Affidavit, 9. No jury has ever considered the statements made by Brett
Kimberlin in his Application for Statement of Charges against me and their
truthfulness with respect to me.
25.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states with respect to the email referenced in

Count VI of the Complaint that [t]here is nothing false in that email. BK

7

Affidavit, 10. However, at the time Brett Kimberlin sent the email he knew or
should have know that stalking had be denied as a basis for the temporary peace
order.
26.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states with respect to the email referenced in

Count IX of the Complaint that [t]here is nothing false in that email. BK

Affidavit, 11. My recollection from having seen the email when it was offered into
evidence at the 14 May, 2015, peace order hearing is that it contains a false
accusation that I engaged in targeted harassment of Tetyana Kimberlins elder
daughter.
27.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states concerning me: Every judge, law

enforcement official and states attorney has condemned his conduct,

either by rejecting them outright or telling him in person. BK Affidavit,
12. While I will admit to being on the receiving end of sharp criticism in traffic
court in my youth, no judge, law enforcement official, or states attorney has ever
spoken or written words of condemnation to me for any matter regarding Brett
Kimberlin.
28.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge has presented files of

fabricated evidence to the Carroll County States Attorney and Sheriff to

attempt to have me arrested for crimes that never occurred. BK Affidavit,
13. I have never fabricated evidence for any civil or criminal matter. Thus, I
could not have presented to such evidence to any law enforcement agency.

29.

The second sentence of paragraph 13 relates to a discovery material

which is under a protective order issued by the United States District Court for the
District of Maryland in Kimberlin v. Frye, Case No. 13-CV-03059-GJH. Because I
am bound by that protective order, I can only say that Kimberlins characterization
of the evidence is false.
30.

Brett Kimberlin falsely states: Hoge portrays himself [as an]

online sheriff who has the right to harass me because he believes that do
things of which he disapproves. BK Affidavit, 14. In fact, it was Breitbart
Unmasked that initially portrayed me as the Internet Sheriff of Blogsmoke. Since
then, I have posted on my blog a recurring feature of radio scripts parodying the
radio version of Gunsmoke under the title Blogsmoke. The scripts do usually make
fun of Brett Kimberlin and/or his associates. Of course, I do not have the right to
harass anyone, but I do have a First Amendment right to make fun of someone who
has engaged in multiyear campaign of lawfare aimed at silencing me.
I, William John Joseph Hoge, solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury
that the contents of the foregoing paper are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief.
Date: 3 January, 2017
William John Joseph Hoge