On September 30, 2015 I was in front of Rebecca Adams for the first time. It was an experience like no other. The Plaintiff got to finish telling his side of things with no evidence to back up what he was even saying. When the Defendant, that is me, started to explain what was happening in the situation, the judge stated, "I see what is going on here!" She proceeded to ask me when I was moving out. When I mentioned that day, she got all emotional and started, "Then why are you here?" My response was that I was served with an order to be evicted in 24 hours or respond to the court so I responded. I mentioned that I was going to be counter suing the landlord/plaintiff. Rebecca stated, "You can not counter sue, and I will not let you!" I stated that I would be suing the landlord an at that point I had enough of the crazy chick. I got up and gathered my evidence and stating I would see her in about 30 days and walked out of her court room.
Upon researching information with the Judicial Disciplinary board it was discovered that Rebecca actually violated Rules of Professional Conduct 407, SCACR and that she violated her oath of office known as Rule 502.1. Did you know if a judge violates this rule they have no jurisdiction over the case? I filed a complaint and The Judicial Disciplinary Board denied the case based on a letter sent in by Rebecca. No I did not receive a copy of this letter, but will respond with the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) for the information. My experience in requesting this type of information usually leads to a dead end. Also if there is corruption they will have a huge amount you need to pay for the FOIA, but you will never receive the document if you pay the money. Just BEWARE of this kind of practice.
I was to appear in court in October 26, 2015. I did not go to the hearing thinking I should be back in front of such a crazy, emotional judge and the response of the Disciplinary Board should be responded to before a hearing. I responded with a motion to reserve my rights for further actions pending the Disciplinary Boards outcome. No response was given by the courts.
October 26, 2015 I tried to call the courts, but the phone line were down, and I wrote a letter and responded to why I was not in court stating a conflict of interest with the judge and an illness keeping me form preparing for trial.
After not hearing from the court for a month, I called the court to find out where the case stands. I was told the case had been dismissed. I advised that no noticed was sent stating such things had taken place. After not receiving such notice I responded to the courts.
January 4, 2016 I petitioned the courts with several request.
1) Case be reopened and transferred to another county
2) Copy of the response to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel be sent to the plaintiff.
3) The contact information as to who hold the judges bond be provided to the plaintiff.
February 16, 2016 a letter was sent summoned me to appear in court. Over five weeks later I get a summons to appear in court. No reason for the summons to appear. When I appear, Judge Gary S Morgan was sitting on the bench an states that we were in court in regards to reopening to the case. Being a pro se litigant and not knowing why I was in court, I could not give the laws or case law as to why the case should be reopened. I did mention the court rules that Rebecca violated and her oat of office as I had stated in the letter.
February 23, 2016 The case was once again dismissed stating that on October 26, 2015 a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant by dismissal of the complaint for failure to prosecute. That plaintiff filed a motions to reopen the case and to recuse Judge Adams from the case. February 23, 2016 the judge considered the motion to reopen with both parties being present pro se and the court found that the motion was not filed timely as required by Rule 19(b), Magistrate Civil Rules. The plaintiff failed to provide any justified cause for such delay in making the motion or additional cause for a reopening of the case.
The judge has now made it that you can not have a cell phone in the office. I am sure they do not want anyone to record the judges craziness. If I would have recorded that hearing, I would not have to go through all of this. Please be aware when you walk into this court, just how they do things.