THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Hillsborough County Superior Court In the Matter of Robert Roy and (XXXXX) Case Number: 07-C-733 MOTION TO RECONSIDER NOW COMES Robert Roy, Plaintiff in the above matter, and hereby moves this Honorable Court to immediately reconsider its Orders of March 10th, 2008 that state: RE:   Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment. Denied.   The Court treats the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss as a Motion to Strike Default. And in support thereof states, avers and swears under oath the following: 1.  Superior Court Rules are very clear that the Defendant MUST follow Superior Court Procedure Rules.   The Defendant has not followed the Court’s own rules and Plaintiff certainly has every right to be confused as to the unbelievable act of this court to “treat” Plaintiff in the way it has with its March 10th orders.  Said “treatment” violates Plaintiff’s due process rights and raises the Defendant above the rules of the court. Defendant has not filed an appearance in this case and is in default.  The rules regarding default are very clear.  Defendant has not filed a Motion to Strike or remove the default, let alone an accompanying affidavit of defense, specifically setting forth the defense and the facts on which the defense is based, no matter how the court wishes to “treat” Defendant’s inadmissible and completely unrelated Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment. 2.  Why didn’t the court fully state completely that it was “treating” Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment, hereto attached as a Motion to Strike Default?  Perhaps because a Motion to Dismiss a Final Judgment certainly IS NOT a Motion to Strike Default. 3.  Plaintiff would very much like this court to explain even its remotest possible translation of Defendant’ s Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment that compels  “treating” it as a Motion to Strike Default.  Said motion never mentions default in any way, shape or form nor does it come close to complying with the rules of superior court even with this court’s “treatment” to anything remotely close to a Motion to Strike Default. Defendant’s motion never even addresses this case relative to the facts, the evidence attached right to the Writ or any semblance of a defense to the matters at issue. 4.  The return date for this case was January 1st, 2008 and the Defendant was properly served. 5.  Defendant did not file an appearance and has not filed one to date nor followed even remotely the rules and procedure to change Defendant’s default status.   6.  The ONLY Motion to Dismiss as quoted in the court’s recent orders that the Defendant has filed was filed at about the return date and the court followed the rules and completely ignored and did not even respond to it at that time. 7.  This court then issued orders January 10th, 2008, after Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, as attached and quoted here: Notice of Default Judgment  Defendant, having been duly served and having failed to enter an appearance in accordance with Superior Court Rule 14, a default is hereby entered against said defendant as provided for in RSA 514:1.  The case shall be marked final default entered, continued for entry of judgment or decree upon compliance with Superior Court Rule 75. Damages will be assessed and judgment entered upon receipt of the following:  Motion for Entry of Final Judgment and an Affidavit of Damages-see copy of New Superior Court Rule 75 which is attached hereto. Military Affidavit NOTE:  Failure to file above by February 11th, 2008 will result in the case being closed. 8.  Plaintiff throughout this case has completely abided by the court rules and did so when Plaintiff filed his Motion for Entry of Final Judgment with Military Affidavit and Damages Affidavit on February 11th, 2008 and according to the court rules waited for either a Notice of Hearing as to Final Judgment if the Defendant requested one which the Defendant did not, or orders of entry of Final Judgment.  Those are the only two (2) options at that time per court rule 75 as attached and referred to in the court’s orders of January 10th, 2008 9.  The rules of court regarding Appearance Default clearly state: RULES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APPEARANCES --  GENERAL, SPECIAL, AND LIMITED  14. (a)  The names of the attorneys or parties, who conduct each cause, shall be entered upon the docket; and if the defendant shall neglect to enter an appearance within seven days after the return day of the writ, he shall be defaulted, and judgment shall be rendered accordingly; and no such default shall be stricken off, except by agreement, or by order of the Court upon such terms as justice may require, upon motion and affidavit of defense, specifically setting forth the defense and the facts on which the defense is based. 10.  Defendant has not abided by court rule 14 above in any form, fashion or manner.   11.  Defendant has not abided by court rule 75 attached and referred to in the court’s January 10th, 2008 orders in any form, fashion or manner. 12.  Since the court’s orders of January 10th, 2008 the Defendant has not filed anything admissible to this court under the court’s own rules let alone a Motion and affidavit of defense specifically setting forth the defense and the facts on which the defense is based, according to the rules. 13.  Plaintiff filed a Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment, hereto attached, on or about February 20th, 2008   (The copy Plaintiff was emailed February 18th is dated February 22nd) Plaintiff could not have been reasonably expected by this court at that time to respond to such a filing considering the court’s own actions regarding defendant’s previous and only filing. 14.  Almost 30 days after Plaintiff’s proper filing of his Motion and Affidavits, and roughly 3 weeks after the Defendant’s filing of a Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment, and after completely ignoring Defendant’s ONLY Motion to Dismiss filed near the return date, this court, by a different judge than the existing orders now writes in its orders of March 10th, 2008: Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment. Denied.   The Court treats the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss as a Motion to Strike Default. 15.  Plaintiff would aver that it is perfectly clear in the wording of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment that it is very similar to Defendant’s first Motion to Dismiss and this court did not “treat” that first motion as an appearance nor did it “treat” it as a Motion to Strike the Default at that time. 16.  The court’s order’s of March 10th violate Plaintiff’s right to due process and the orders he is properly due as well as throw out the Rules of Superior Court. 17.  Plaintiff would aver that by the court’s own wording of the March 10th orders, Plaintiff would have no idea whether the court is speaking of the Defendant’s only (1) Motion to Dismiss which the Plaintiff filed an objection to, which the court then completely ignored and when the Plaintiff contacted the court he was told of the procedural rules of Superior Court and how the Plaintiff did not have to respond with an Objection because the Defendant could not file a motion to dismiss at that time because she was in default. OR 18.  The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment which the Plaintiff did not respond to because Superior Court procedural rules clearly state that the Defendant could not file a Motion to Dismiss the Final Judgment and since the court did not accept the Defendant’s previous Motion to Dismiss there was no way it would accept Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment that was just as well inadmissible.   The Plaintiff certainly did not expect nor could be or should be expected by this court to have been prepared for the court to violate the rules of court and grant such unbelievable “treatment” to the Defendant. 19.  The Plaintiff would very much aver, vow and swear under oath  that the Defendant is an educated person currently enrolled in college who works for CASA and is familiar with the courts and has spent around $100,000 in attorney fees in recent years with the most powerful law firm in the North Country destroying the Plaintiff in family and bankruptcy courts.  The Defendant is in no need of any special “treatment” due to mental capacities in order to communicate nor does the court or anyone else need a translator to understand the Defendant’s written communications.  The Defendant was served properly and is very capable of reading and understanding any and all court information and is familiar with the workings of the court.  Defendant also knows how to retain counsel.  Defendant has received her proper notifications from the court at each stage of this case.  The Defendant has chosen to blatantly disregard the jurisdiction, power and authority of this court and it is beyond reason for this court to even attempt to validate its “treatment” of the Defendant as relative to the court’s orders of March 10th, 2008 other than a complete miscommunication internally at the court.   Wherefore the Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court: A.  Reconsider its orders of March 10th and: B.  Issue orders of Entry of Final Judgment according to the Rules of Procedure for Superior Court, this court’s own orders of January 10th, 2008, Rule 14 and Rule 75. OR C.  Immediately hold a hearing to explain this court’s complete disregard in this case for the Rules of Superior Court and its “treatment” of the Defendant and her written communications to the court.  At which hearing Plaintiff may read out loud the rules and maybe the Defendant can assist the court with its “treatment” by decoding the Motion to Dismiss Final Judgment into a Motion to Strike Default on the record. OR D.  Inform the Plaintiff of his rights as to this court violating the court rules and Plaintiff’s right to due process as well as the procedure for the Plaintiff in this situation should this court fail to abide by the law and the court rules and not reconsider its orders of March 10th, 2008.  Does Plaintiff motion in this court?  To the Chief Justice of this Court?  The Appellate Court?  State Supreme Court?  Or must the Plaintiff immediately file in Federal Court to correct such a great injustice?  The damages to the Plaintiff due to the actions and “treatment” of the Defendant by this court with its orders of March 10th, 2008 are massive, all documented and easily evidenced. Does the Plaintiff continue under protest while pursuing any of the above?  How can the court demand that the Plaintiff now know what to do by properly following the rules to properly address the situation created by this court after such an order when the Defendant is allowed to by choice completely ignore the court rules and gets special “treatment” by the court? C.  For such other relief as the court deems right and just. Respectfully submitted: _____________________        _________________________________________________ Date                                        Robert J. Roy                                              C/O  1208 Hanover Street                                              Manchester, NH  03104 I certify that on this date I mailed a copy of the document to (XXXXX). _____________________                ________________________________________________ Date                                                Robert J. Roy