Dear Friends, Family, and Strangers,
Please share our story because it may be the only way that we can obtain Justice in the Civil Courts — the only reason that Rhonda Renee Sutton Bryant went to prison in the first place was because People and the Media were Watching the Criminal Justice System and Supported Us…and we THANK YOU, and we need your help again — fast —
this Monday, January 25, 2016, at 10 a.m. in the Cumberland County Courthouse, 117 Dick Street, Fayetteville, NC, 28301, Courtroom 3-B
— is the first time that we will face a Judge and the Defendants in Bruns v. Bryant et al. — if we can dig out of the DC snow to get there.
Please come if you can, and we would love to have lunch with you afterward before we head back to The District.
We apologize for the late notice, but it couldn’t be helped because filing this Lawsuit was very hard, and Jenny’s phone imploded in October and we haven’t had time to get the data, contacts, texts, calendars, etcetera, back yet, or if it’s even possible, sorry.
We don’t know if Court on Monday will be a 5-minute thing, or an all-day thing, or a no-thing that wastes everybody’s time. We presume it’s the first in a series of hearings that could last 10 years or more. We will be at the Courthouse by 0930 and hope to see some people make it despite the extremely late notice.
We filed a complex Civil Lawsuit, a Complaint, on November 6, 2015. All of the filings, papers, exhibits, responses, motions, etcetera, from that date through January 21, 2016, comprise 906 pages compiled in one redacted PDF here:
** It will take a bit of extra time to load this pdf because it is a fairly large file at 168.5 MB
For those of you who don’t know, Jeremy served more than 20 years in the Army and survived nine deployments unscathed only to suffer catastrophic and permanent injuries in our front yard by an intoxicated driver, who has been in the Courts charged with DUI at least four times.
Among the reasons that we are suing Rhonda Bryant is because she was the DUI driver who made a conscious and intentional criminal choice that resulted in maiming and nearly killing Jeremy in a painfully excruciating way while Jenny watched helplessly in our front yard; both of us obviously suffered Severe and Extended Emotional Trauma with consequences that lasted far beyond the hour that Jeremy was pinned between vehicles.
Among the reasons that we are suing Rhonda’s husband, Dalton Bryant Senior, is because he is the owner of the car, or so we have been led to believe, and entrusted it to Rhonda, knowing her history, character, and habit of addictions and that she was an incompetent driver, habitually careless and reckless, and a road hazard, which is easily ascertainable by her (incomplete and inaccurate but abundant) criminal records and chatter from our Neighbors and investigations.
Among the reasons that we are suing Rhonda’s son Dalton Bryant Junior is because we want a Permanent Restraining Order against him because we think that our Testimony and circumstantial evidence is enough to convince a Jury that he vandalized our mailbox and burglarized our house, for the message on our mailbox was one of vengeance, which was meant to cause fear and in fact does so. Make no mistake that circumstantial evidence is veritable evidence in the Courts. Who else would think we are a Dick and a Bitch for being victims of Rhonda Bryant and write such a thing shortly after she was sentenced to prison?
Among the reasons that we are suing Governor Pat McCrory is because he de facto commuted Rhonda Bryant’s prison sentence in a flagrant disregard of State Law and Policy. Rhonda owes the State and We the People four more months in Prison. The Governor wouldn’t budge from his bizarre interpretation of Law that Rhonda wasn’t in prison for DUI. We are all scratching our heads about that because the Law that she was sentenced to is a Felony DUI Law. The Executive’s interpretation is unnatural and nonsensical. We asked the Court for an injunction to return Rhonda to Prison immediately to fulfill her sentence as prescribed by Law.
We petitioned the Court about a couple of constitutional challenges, including the fact that it costs $2,600 plus significant burden to get a certified criminal background check for one person in North Carolina by having to write separate requests from each of the 100 counties and include SASEs, as compared to New York where it costs $65 using one form.
The State also argued that we don’t have the right to accurate and complete criminal background records of anyone. That’s absurd because of course the Public has those rights by virtue that they are Public records. Criminals have the right to accurate records, and likewise, law-abiding citizens have the right to accurate criminal records pursuant to the First Amendment of The United States Constitution.
We asked the Court to Declare that DUI is an intentional act. How is it not? Please educate us if you have a plausible and reasonable answer to how it is not.
We asked the Court to Declare that because DUI is an intentional criminal act then it should be excluded from coverage from automobile insurance policies. It doesn’t make sense that intoxicated drivers should expect coverage for the consequences of their choices to drive while intoxicated versus taking precautions and imbibing responsibly.
We asked the Court to look into Edward Hall’s Hit-And-Run Killing of a veteran. Hall spent a couple of weeks in jail. Juxtapose it to Rhonda’s sentence because there is inherent unfairness with the pursuit and application of DUI Laws and Policies in North Carolina. The Executive said that if Rhonda had been in prison for DUI, then she wouldn’t have gotten Earned Time. But Hall was in jail for Misdemeanor DUI and got Earned Time, too. The Government can’t let both of them out of their incarceration terms when both of them should be incarcerated for their full sentences and were released against Law and Policy. Moreover, Hall’s sentence was inappropriate, inconsistent, and doesn’t lend faith to the Criminal Justice System.
We asked the Court to Declare that Negligent Entrustment is two Occurrences for the purposes of an automobile insurance policy because in our case, two separate people made two separate choices at two separate times and places, and North Carolina Law recognizes that driver and owner separately can be liable because there may be more than one proximate cause that results in injury and damage.
Among the reasons that we are suing USAA is because they tried very hard to pay us only $30,000 to cover both Jeremy and Jenny’s injuries to cover policyholders Rhonda and Dalton Senior, and for that and other reasons, USAA acted in Bad Faith toward us, as First- and Third-Party beneficiaries, and they quite vigorously and persistently dug into their position that we weren’t owed more than $30,000 from the Bryants’ policies and definitely not from our own, they insisted.
Our Complaint is 171 pages with 93 Exhibits and 3 references in the Appendix.
The State’s response was pathetic because among other offenses, they injected legal fiction into our Complaint and then defended what they made up. Irrelevance is like mootness in that it wastes everybody’s time. It would be funny, except that it is against the Rules that they as attorneys are especially expected to know and abide by, so we asked the Court to Sanction the Attorney General for his frivolous Motion and Strike it for lack of a true defense and then give us a Default Judgment for failure to Answer our Complaint.
USAA’s response was worse. They think they can cure Bad Faith 30-32 months later after much struggle to get them to pay us what we thought we were owed at a minimum? USAA were, ahem, from the beginning, and we were ongoingly naïve in the beginning and even throughout until this summer because for that long we thought that they would correct themselves and conduct themselves appropriately in our case. We spent many countless hours of research to realize that they truly tried to screw us over in a business-as-usual manner, perhaps more than we even realize legally now, and when we called them out on their ignorance and impropriety, they didn’t care because they didn’t do anything to correct their claims handling in a reasonable time or fashion. They caused us a lot of work and agony for Claims that are fairly straightforward. We asked the Court to Sanction USAA’s frivolous Motion and to Strike it for lack of true defense and then give us a Default Judgment for failure to Answer our Complaint. We asked the Court for a Default Judgment that USAA acted in Bad Faith as a Matter of Law, which can be Declared by Judge in a Clear Case of Bad Faith before the legal Judgment against the Bryants, though they may be tried in a particular sequence.
The Bryants’ Answer was even more unreasonable and exasperating. They made a Motion to Strike all of the Exhibits in our Complaint because they said that all of them are irrelevant, impertinent, and beyond the bounds of proper pleadings, which is false because our Exhibits provide the Court with information to make reasoned Judgments, and our Complaint and Exhibits were wholly within the bounds of the Rules, as we met the minimum requirements for everything that we allege, and our Complaint was sufficiently particular. All three of the Bryants were witnesses at the Calamity yet deny our evidence, testimony, and the obvious fact that Jenny experienced Severe Emotional Distress by anybody’s definition, and contrary to every other perception of the dozens and dozens of people on the scene. How do you fight opponents who completely deny clear Facts, Truth, Law, evidence, and Rules, and do everything in their power to avoid accountability? USAA denies injury to Jenny as well.
We pray the People and the Court have Common Sense. Please help us by putting your eyeballs on our case and/or sharing it as widely as possible. But WARNING if you do read it: there are some gory details and pictures laid bare for Judgment. A Personal Injury Lawsuit consists of some of the worst and yuckiest thoughts, feelings, memories, realities, vulnerabilities, etcetera, since the Calamity, so it may be difficult for you to read and see. Plus it is legally dense, so it is really hard to read even for a Lawyer or a Judge. But we understand human curiosity and invite you in to the most intimate moments of our lives that we have published thus far.
We hope to effect meaningful change in the enforcement of DUI Laws in North Carolina, and we hope that our case can effect meaningful change across the country and world.
Thank you for your support because we need Sunshine ☺
Sincerely, Jeremy and Jenny Bruns
"The success of any legal system is measured
by its fidelity to the universal ideal of justice."
-- United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren
