Randall Kendra Jolivet Randall Kendra Jolivet, Esquire Failure to address my complaints. This is her job! She is unethical. Linthicum Heights Maryland

BEWARE OF KENDRA RANDALL JOLIET AND THE STATE OF MARYLAND COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL DISABILITIES. She essentially ignored my complaint. By doing so, she has obstructed justice, and she is guilty of dereliction of her duties. Rather than being part of the solution, she is part of the problem.

My complaint has very little to do with money, but rather with getting justice. Once again, a judge is not held accountable for his illegal actions.

You be the judge. Please read the following letters regarding my complaint. The District Court is pitiful, as is this employee of this commission.

ANTHONY RAYMOND

(((REDACTED)))

Baltimore, Maryland (((REDACTED)))

(((REDACTED)))

______________________________________________________________________________

August 21, 2019

Judge Waxman

Administrative Judge

District Court of Baltimore City

5800 Wabash Avenue

Baltimore, MD 21215

Anthony Raymond vs. Michael Lang Case Number#: 0101-0010918-2019

Dear Judge Waxman:

Your assistant instructed me to forward my complaint to you. This complaint is outlined in the letter I have sent to Judge Scurti. I believe he is guilty of judicial misconduct and malpractice.

I have also included the two letters which should have been used at the so-called trial. It is pitiful that one is not allowed to present evidence at trial, just because my adversary has a corporate lawyer known by Judge Scurti. He even ignored my reference to Maryland Transportation Rule 21-1-003 (d), and took no appropriate action in that regard.

The following is taken directly from my complaint entered with your court:

3. On December 14, 2018 I was exiting from a parking space on Thames Street at the intersection of Wolfe Street. I was the very last spot on the right. The only way for me to legally reverse was to back up to Wolfe Street. When I began my exit, there were no cars visible in either direction. As I completed my reversal, a vehicle drove into my driver’s side fender, and broadsided me. He backed up a bit, enough to allow me to exit my vehicle. I expected an apology as he apparently drove through the stop sign at the intersection. Instead he proceeded to scream at me, saying I struck his car. I asked him if he was crazy, since my car had completed my exit. He continued yelling at me. Then his girlfriend started to yell at me. I said I wanted his insurance card. He refused. He said that I have two choices. I should leave and forget about the accident, or he would call the police. I told him I have his license plate number, and I now I wanted the police to address the issue, especially since he had been so belligerent and confrontational.

6. On December 19, Laura Terry called me from Geico and informed me that I was responsible for the accident. I asked her how I could be at fault when the other vehicle broadsided me. She said first that I should have reversed me car completely and backed up across the intersection. I told her this was illegal, and should a police officer see me I would surely be ticketed, since this was against the law. She also said the other driver was waiting for my parking spot to pull in after I left. I reminded her that first this was not true, and the evidence clearly shows I had already exited from the spot. If he was parked in the intersection as she indicates, I could not have reversed my car. Also, if that were true, he should have given me enough room to exit my space. Secondly, his car was not even lined up with my spot. Lang’s vehicle apparently had driven through the intersection. The videos clearly show that had my car not been struck on Wolfe Street, it is probable that a parked vehicle adjacent to me would have been struck in the same area. Thirdly, if that were true, and I somehow drove into him, this means that he was parked in the intersection which is again illegal.

7. On December 29, I received a letter from Emera Sullivan, the Geico representative assigned for Michael Lang. Her letter states “Mr. Lang was waiting in the intersection for you.” This letter confirms that this is what he reported to Geico. She states that I stated “Mr. Lang’s vehicle struck the front driver’s side of your vehicle from an unknown direction.” If he struck the side of my vehicle head on, then it is obvious which direction he came from, and he was coming at me from a perpendicular direction. I told Geico that Lang was not in sight when I was backing up, but apparently ran through the stop sign. How could it be an “unknown direction?”

8. If Lang had driven through the stop sign, as I suspect then that is illegal and caused the accident. If Lang was “waiting” in the intersection, as he alleges, then that is also illegal, and caused the accident. He struck my automobiles side with the front of his vehicle.

My trial was more than just a complaint against Lang. I also have a complaint against Geico with the Maryland Insurance Commission. There will be a hearing. I am very upset. Judge Scurti has compromised both cases by his conduct.

When one initiates a complaint one should expect impartiality, even if the judge is familiar with or friends with the other attorney. I really resent the way I was treated in this courtroom, and I trust that you will take appropriate actions so this judge, or for that matter any judge does not treat someone this way. I also think Scurti should be responsible for all of my court fees and damages.

Sincerely,

Anthony Raymond

ANTHONY RAYMOND

(((REDACTED)))

Baltimore, Maryland (((REDACTED)))

(((REDACTED)))

traymond51@hotmail.com

________________________________________________________________________

August 19, 2019

Judge Mark Scurti

District Court of Maryland for Baltimore City

501 E. Fayette Street

Baltimore, MD 21202-4092

Case Number#: 0101-0010918-2019

Dear Judge Scurti:

You should be ashamed of yourself! Judges are supposed to act in an impartial way. You did not.

My complaint was originally scheduled to be heard in the District Court of Baltimore County. Without my knowledge, Ms. Britton, the Geico attorney changed the venue to Baltimore City. She was smart to do so.

It is a common perception that without a lawyer, a person cannot expect to get a fair trial in Baltimore City. My adversary was not just the defendant who never spoke in the trial, but his attorney as well. Ms. Britton is well known to your court. She said nothing at trial that I had not already said. You said I could not ask her questions about her client’s statements to Geico, yet the Geico attorney was allowed to question me about my statements to Geico

Initially I gave you photographs of my damages. You refused to even look at them, and directed me to give them to the clerk. I knew immediately that my case was lost before it began. I had still hoped that my case would be tried on a level playing field. It was not. I believe you said my photographs would be returned to me. My photographs were not returned. When you keep another person’s possessions without their permission that is stealing.

Your instructions to me stated that I could not refer to Geico, nor present my letters as evidence. You did not allow me to present to the court my letters from Geico dated 12/21/18 and 2/28/19, both of which clearly indicated that the defendant’s admitted he was parked in the intersection. As I mentioned in the court he clearly violated Maryland Transportation Rule 21-1003 (d) which states “a person may not stop and park in an intersection.” How can the defendant t-bone and broadside my car and not be responsible? You ignored my reference to this rule, and refused to act on it.

You did not allow me to question my adversary because I couldn’t talk about Geico. Never once did you ever ask either me or the defendant, or his lawyer questions about the accident. You never questioned me about the diagram I presented to the court. You never looked at the photographs. You did not care what I said, and refused my evidence. Your decision was made before I ever spoke. No wonder Ms. Britton was so confident before our 15 minute trial. It was all preordained.

How dare you chastise and humiliate me in court by stating I did not having evidence. Without using the Geico letters, I could not prove the defendant either drove through the stop sign, or violated the law by parking in the intersection. You knew this. You did not care. You would not allow me to use the evidence I had. I remind you that both the defendant and I are both clients of Geico. I also remind you that Ms. Britton was appointed by Geico, and she was allowed to ask me questions regarding my initial complaint to Geico, yet I could not discuss Geico. Your actions discriminated against me. My case was lost before I even spoke.

As you know, it is not necessary to pay for an attorney in a small claims court. Apparently in your court he or she with a lawyer automatically wins, particularly if it is a corporate attorney.

In our judicial system you should be part of the solution. Instead you a part of the problem. Try dealing with people with integrity and ethics. It’s pitiful the way you have treated me. I did not receive a fair and impartial trial from you. It was preordained and a farce. Please refund my $44