Jim Hall’s Court Appeal Fails to Get His Name back on Ballot, Asks for County to Pay for his Next Lawsuit & Emotional Damages
October 13th, 2016 by iPhone
Drew County circuit court held a hearing, Tuesday, with Jim Hall’s 2nd special appointed judge, after he threatened to sue Judge David Laser, the last special appointed judge, last week.
After failing to receive the endorsement of the Ashley or Drew County Republican parties, Jim Hall filed, unopposed for State Representative for District 9, as a Republican, at the state office, earlier this year.
Hall later pled guilty to an “intent to defraud” hot check, during the “relevant election time period,” as described by the plaintiff’s attorney (representing Johnnie Bolin), a Democrat who is trying to get Hall disqualified from the election.
In a September 12 hearing, Judge Laser declared Hall ineligible to be a candidate, because at the time of his filing, he had an “infamous crime” on his record.
On September 23, Judge Laser held another hearing for Hall, who was asking for reconsideration of the case, but was denied, since no new information was presented.
Tuesday’s appeal was heard, based on Hall’s request for a “writ of mandamus”, which would order the county clerk to put Hall’s name back on the ballot and count his votes.
The hearing became heated at several points, mainly when Hall tried to refuse to answer attorney Chris Burks’ questions.
Again, Hall’s attempt to have his votes counted failed, as special Judge Mark Hewett was updated on the case, including the detail that sealing of “the Faulkner County hot check case was filed improperly, based on time frame requirements.”
Burks continued, “It should take 90 days from the filing of the sealing, until it becomes an order, and it was done in only 13 days,” which makes it improper and non-binding.
Judge Hewett ruled that the court records that Hall presented at the beginning of the hearing should’ve been presented at the last hearing. So the “finding of fact” motion was denied.
Hall responded, “The timing of when I filed the motion to seal, and when it was sealed, is not an issue for this court to address. It should be dealt with in Faulkner County.”
——
Local attorney Cliff Gibson addressed the court, reporting that Hall has attempted to file a new lawsuit against the county, including charges for emotional distress, and also listed Special Judge David Laser as one of the defendants being sued in the case.
Gibson told the judge, “Hall has delivered a copy of his next proposed lawsuit to the County Clerk, but was waiting to file it until after he was again declared indigent or pauperous.”
Burks continued to question Hall about details of his finances, in order to prove that the county should continue to pay for his multiple lawsuits. Hall replied that he had provided that information to the court, but did not want it provided to the public or to Burks (“since you have friends at the Democrat – Gazette”).
Hall explained that his indigent status should continue, as it has since his June 2015 divorce case.
After being instructed by the judge to answer the attorney’s questions, Hall finally disclosed his income.
Basically, Hall stated that he has no personal income, except for food stamps. “In my opinion, food stamps is not an earned income.”
He then explained his financial situation as, “No one will hire me, based on my history of workman’s comp history.”.
Hall- “I personally earn $0.00/month.”
Burks- “What other gov. benefits do you receive?”
Hall- No reply.
Burks- “What do you receive, on behalf of your children?”
Hall- “That is filed under seal.”
Burks- “Your honor, please instruct him to answer the question.”
Hall- “You have no right to know!”
Judge-“Any income he has is relevant to this hearing.”
Hall- “Judge, I ask for the courtroom to be cleared,” which was denied.
Hall then told the court how much he receives in SSI, each month, on behalf of his two children.
The next questions dealt with his campaign expenses, to which Hall said he really couldn’t remember specific details. When prompted with specific questions, he remembered spending $75 on a fair booth and $30 for a booth at the fall festival.
Gibson asked Hall if he had spent more than $165 on his campaign, because that is how much it would cost to file the case with the circuit clerk, instead of asking the county to pay for it.
Gibson then asked who paid his $2,500 cash bail bond to stay out of jail last year. Hall responded that a friend of his mother’s loaned her the bail bond money.
Based on the amount of income that Hall received on behalf of his children, even though he has no personal income, the court ruled that he does not qualify as “pauperous”, and must pay his own legal expenses.
In summary, the writ of mandamus, directing the County Clerk to count his votes, was denied. During the hearing, Hall commented, “I am doing all I can to support the voters of District 9, who have asked me to.”
The motion for a new trial was denied.
The “findings of facts” motion was denied, because Judge Laser had already dealt with those issues.
One point of clarification from an earlier hearing was repeated, Tuesday. On September 23, Hall admitted the he underlined “nolle contender” (no contest) on his hot check expungement form, which may be considered “tampering” with a legal document, in the Conway District Court. Hall continues to state that he did this before filing the documents to be signed, which no one disputes.
