Tennessee Supreme Court

Chief Justice Holly Kirby

100 Peabody Place
Memphis, TN 38103
United States
Phone: 901-543-6910
Fax: 901-543-6913

To: Chief Justice Kirby

Fax Number: 931-451- 4629

Regarding: Charges Filed to the DOJ, FBI, VA OIG, Notice to SECNAV

This Courtesy Notice to Honorable Chief Justice Kirby of the Tennessee Supreme Court for
charges filed against several parties with concrete evidence and proof for Corruption in the Courts,
Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, Fraud on the Courts, Violation of State and Federal Laws, and
Violation of the Plaintiff's / Appellant's Rights to Due Process of Law, and Deprivation of Rights
to Remedies as mandated by Law.

Note:
The Simpkins cannot receive US Mail to their home address and they have no other address to
send to. Only direct communication with a Courier Service or direct delivery to the Simpkins.
Their mailing address has been stolen by John Maher Builders, Inc. When we send mail out either
from Spring Hill or Franklin, TN, our mail is intercepted, it has been found on the desk of a US
Postal Worker where a communication directly to a Judge in the Chancery Court was…. Withheld.
The Manager of that US Post Office found it himself and delivered it himself to the Court the next
day. The Mahers and Judge Hood set this up so that the Simpkins would be extremely restricted.
See the P.O. Box setup by Judge Hood against the Simpkins, then switching email address and the
mailing address to the Simpkins home knowing John Maher Builders would intercept the mailings.

Chief Justice Kirby, this communication is to notify you of the copies of communications to Chief
Justice Page, which by law were required to be acted upon immediately upon notification. Which
we did not know that he was leaving the Office of Chief Justice, he may not have had time to
address the issues presented to him or he may have decided to not address it at all because you
were coming in soon. And we do not know if he informed you of our situation with the Courts
acting fraudulently against us for three (3) years now and it is all about delaying the case so that
John Maher Builders can finish their two projects before they are shut down which should have
happened four years ago when we provided several properties being built by John Maher Builders,
Inc., all the same code violations as ours and they are still doing the same exact thing for the new
Builds they are charging over a million dollars for currently. This is (Against Public Policy To
Allow The Public To Be Harmed Knowingly By The Very Authorities Who Are Supposed To
Hold The Builders Accountable To The Law). Would it interest you to hear Robert West’s
statements that the Attorney General will never hold the Builders in the State of Tennessee. He just
happens to be the Investigator for the Attorney General’s Office. I have the Audio Recording for
that as well.

Page 1 of 17
This is a 16 Page Summary of the 55 page Critical Update.

The Summary is minimal and does not include all issues. It does not cover the potential incendiary
bomb still sitting in the Simpkins’ garage for failure of the TBI or FBI to investigate the potential
bomb threat left in the Simpkins’ Mailbox.

It is primarily focused on the “Fraud on the Courts” perpetrated against the Simpkins, which does
not include all the phone, email, computer, hacking, nor the destruction of several computers, nor
the destruction and theft of all the legal files of the Simpkins, nor all the attempts to do all of the
above. It also does not cover the theft of the Simpkins’ IRS Tax Returns directly from the IRS
illegally, or the “theft” of the Simpkins Medical Records or perhaps someone within the VA
providing the Medical Records.

What is important is that my Wife died on me once, and I am not going to watch that again! I
myself am very ill blacking out again with the metallic tastes in my mouth which I now know
means that I am in a high state of ketoacidosis again, (high levels of acetone in my bloodstream)
due to kidney filtration rate dropping 40% in a single month which is alarming, which can cause
blackouts, and put a person into a coma. Adding to this is the high Ph levels in my bloodstream
recorded of 9.3, anything over a PH level of 10 and you will go into a coma and may not come out
of it if the Doctors do not do an Emergency Dialysis which is the procedure for this condition. That
was back in March of this year. All of this is caused by the mold and mycotoxins produced by the
mold causing damage to our organ systems and therefore disabling numerous processes relating to
amino acid building blocks and destroying the body’s immune system. Thus, robbing our bodies
of the required nutrients and amino acids for normal body function. My Wife has what is normally
called varicose veins, the difference is, you are not supposed to have it all over your body. That is
the amount of mold that has infiltrated into the skin and internal organs of her body. She is having
difficulty breathing and remembering to do the simple things. The health issues are stark and
numerous of which we will not get into here.

Mrs. Simpkins’(Near Death Experience) left us numb for weeks. To this day I cannot think of that
event without almost having a complete emotional breakdown, because I refused to look away
from her as I watched her life fade from her eyes. That horror plays over and over, and just two
days later, Judge Martin ignored the email to his assistant about the event, and dismissed our
Complaint to benefit his friend the Builder, His act was both unconscionable, heinous and beyond
anything acceptable in a normal society. This entire situation got out of control in the first three
months after filing our Complaint.

The mold levels of the eighteen (18) documented mold species which (are harmful to humans)
were present in the property on day one (1) that we have been exposed to at this juncture six (6)
years later are incomprehensible. By all known medical data on the effects of mycotoxins to the
human body, my Wife and I should be dead. But my training in the Navy to support the Corpsman
on the Submarine and then later in life going to college to learn Traditional Chinese Medicine, has
helped me to create diverse health programs that are required to be changed weekly due to the ever
changing circumstances in the property and living in the tent of 4 years in our driveway. This is
no way people should have been forced to live under any circumstances by a Builder nor a Court

Page 2 of 17
of Law which knows the laws for “Abandonment” by a Builder. Each offense is a Class A
Misdemeanor, and they accumulate monthly, and do not expire due to the “Fraud” per Tenn. Code
Ann. § 28-3-205(b), committed by the Builder, “Breach of Contract,” “Breach of Warranty
Express or Implied.” “Fraudulent Concealment,” “Fraudulent / Intentional Misrepresentation,”
“Fraudulent Inducement,” “Constructive Fraud,” and “Promissory Fraud,” and the “Theft” of the
Simpkins’ money, which falls under (Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-14-104 Unfair or Deceptive
Practices), which ties into (Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-154 for “Theft”) as well as committing
Mortgage Fraud against the Simpkins and the United States of America due to the Simpkins having
a VA Loan backed by the Federal Government which is a protected activity under Federal Law,
18 U.S.C. Section 245 Protected Activities. Other Federal Statutes listed on Pg 38 to 40 in the
(Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023). Judges, Martin, Clement, Hood and
numerous other Judges knew that due to the Mortgage Fraud, that neither the Chancery Court nor
the Appellate Court would have subject matter jurisdiction. Mr. Simpkins discovered this in May
of this year and presented the newly discovered Tennessee Statutes that both Judges knew about
for “Abandonment” but did not apply that law as is required by Law when a Judge is performing
his judicial duties, but in the Simpkins case, for their clear relationship with the Builder, Judge
Martin and Judge Hood both attempted to run circles around Mr. Simpkins knowing that he did
not know the law and abused their authority in the Court on behalf of the Defendants, unlawfully.

That is when the Simpkins learned the truth of what they could expect from John Maher with
harassment, threats, physical attacks against Mr. Simpkins (which there are those in the local
police that do his bidding) to send a clear message. We were told time and again to walk away
like everyone else does for John Maher, just walk away. The most recent person was Police
Officer Doorman of the Spring Hill Police Department. And now the latest message from August
3rd, 2023, a possible incendiary device left in our mailbox, which is now sitting in our garage
because the local authorities will not address the possible bomb for their friend by undue
influence. Or because they placed it themselves and know what it is or isn’t therefore no need to
come out and play the game…

A Court that aligns itself with a Builder for the obvious benefits a Billionaire Builder can provide
to a Judge is unethical and illegal. I do not need to tell you that.

You will see from the Transcripts alone just how corrupt the situation has been since day one for
my Wife and I.

Chief Justice Kirby, below is your Quote from the Press:

“I am honored to have been chosen chief justice by my colleagues on the Court,” Justice Kirby
said. “I have the highest respect for Justice Page, my predecessor as Chief Justice, Justice Bivins,
also a former Chief Justice, Justice Campbell, and now Justice Tarwater. Tennessee has the finest
judiciary in the country; our judges are dedicated public servants who serve with integrity. I am
grateful for the opportunity to work with all of them to strengthen public confidence in our courts,
access to justice for vulnerable citizens, and the rule of law in Tennessee.”

Page 3 of 17
Chief Justice Kirby, you may have the highest respect for your Peers, and I to as well for Chief
Justice Page from what I have read about him, but either you are unaware or know the truth of
how bad the Tennessee Judicial System really is but are required to state something different
publicly. Chief Justice Kirby, I can assure you the experience that my Wife and I have had is
opposite to your statement.

Either way, my Wife and I have abided by the rules and the law, and the Courts have manipulated
the entire process over the last three years against us on behalf of the Defendants due to his
unethical influence with several municipalities and the Government of the State of Tennessee. He
is integrated into the infrastructure of the State of Tennessee and is a large contributor to all of the
existing parties for their campaigns for Government Offices and Judicial Offices and much more.

Positive Note: ALL of the Simpkins’ case evidence was Judicially Noticed by Appellate
Court Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as (ACT), Presiding Judge, Judge Frierson, who
stated that Judge Hood did not have to convert a Rule 12.02(6), Motion to Dismiss to a
Rule 56 Motion for Summary Judgment. From the “Opinion” on Pg 19 Note 1:

“Plaintiffs attached a copy of their sales contract as an exhibit to their complaint. This contract
provides that the seller, JMB, was providing to the buyer, Mr. Simpkins, a “2/10 warranty.”
However, the contract does not provide any further explanation concerning this warranty or its
terms. We note that “exhibits attached to the complaint whose authenticity is unquestioned”
may be considered by the trial court without converting the Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure
12.02(6) motion to dismiss to a Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 56 motion for summary
judgment. Felker v. Felker, No. W2019-01925-COAR3-CV, 2021 WL 3507745, at *4 (Tenn.
Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2021).”

From Page 5 of Felker v. Felker, lines 14 to 28;

“Exceptions to this general rule exist, however, for "matters incorporated by reference or
integral to the claim, items subject to judicial notice, matters of public record, orders, items
appearing in the record of the case, and exhibits attached to the complaint whose authenticity
is unquestioned." W. Exp., Inc. v. Brentwood Servs., Inc., No. M2008-02227-COA-R3-CV,
2009 WL 3448747, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2009) (quoting Ind. State Dist. Council of
Laborers v. Brukardt, No. M2007-02271-COA-R3-CV, 2009 WL 426237, at *8 (Tenn. Ct.
App. Feb. 19, 2009) (stating that the above-listed items "may be considered . . . without
converting the motion into one for summary judgment.")).”

From Pg 11 of the “Opinion,” Judge Frierson states the following:

“We recognize that Plaintiffs are pro se litigants and respect their decision to proceed self-
represented. With regard to self-represented litigants, this Court has explained:

Pro se litigants who invoke the complex and sometimes technical procedures of the courts assume
a very heavy burden. Gray v. Stillman White Co., 522 A.2d 737, 741 (R. I. 1987). Conducting a
trial with a pro se litigant who is unschooled in the intricacies of evidence and trial practice can
be difficult. Oko v. Rogers, 125 Ill. App.3d 720, 81 Ill. Dec. 72, 75, 466 N.E.2d 658, 661 (1984).
Nonetheless, trial courts are expected to appreciate and be understanding of the difficulties

Page 4 of 17
 encountered by a party who is embarking into the maze of the judicial process with no experience
or formal training.”

Summary of Corruption in the Chancery and Appellate Courts against the Simpkins.

1. Regardless of Judge Frierson’s statement, Judge Hood criticized the Simpkins

relentlessly in almost every Order she wrote and even accused the Simpkins of
attempting to “Extort $45 Million dollars out of this good man John Maher,” in the
December 13, Status Hearing. The Simpkins claim that the Transcripts were
tampered with because the Simpkins wrote verbatim what Judge Hood actually
stated in Court that day. And she stated it not once, but two separate times, with a
final statement on that subject of, “That is not going to happen!” That is not a Judge
adjudicating the law in a hearing, which was not a hearing, but condemnation of
the Simpkins’ Motions to the Court.

2. Judge Hood unlawfully denied the Simpkins “Interim Damages” which Judge
Frierson pointed out in the “Opinion.” On page 20, in Bush v. Cathey, 598 S.W.2d
777, 783 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1979) and Bush v. Cathey cites Wilson v. Dealy 434
S.W.2d 835 (1968). See also in the Plaintiff’s response to the Chancery Court’s
dismissal of their complaint unlawfully, (Response to Court Dismissal of the
Simpkins Complaint 4-24-2023), Pg 33, Paras 56, 57, and 58, lines 1-46.

1) The Supreme Court of Tennessee stated that, “Once a builder undertakes a

construction contract, the common law imposes upon him or her a duty to
perform the work in a workmanlike manner, and there is an implied agreement
that the building or work performed will be sufficient for the particular purpose
desired or to accomplish a certain result. Thus, failure to perform a building
contract in a workmanlike manner constitutes a breach of the contract.”

“(The abandonment of a contract gives rise to a cause of action for breach. Gillespie v.
Broadway Nat’l. Bank, et al., 68 S.W.2d 479, 482 (Tenn. 1934)).”

2) The Appellate Court also stipulated that an injured party is (Not Required
To Prove A Breach Of Contract In Order To Recover Buyers Incidental
and Consequential Damages) which was also part of the Wilson v. Dealy
and Bush v. Cathey allowing payment of Buyer’s Incidental and
Consequential damages without finalization of a trial. See in Scott
Campbell, Et Al. v. William H. Teague, Et Al. No. W2009-00529-COA -R3-
CV (March 31, 2010);

“In addition to damages associated with diminution in value and cost of repairs, courts
may also award all damages that are the normal and foreseeable result of a breach of
contract. Holladay v. Speed, 208 S.W.3d 408, 415 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (citing Morrow
v. Jones, 166 S.W.3d 254 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004)). These types of damages include
reasonably foreseeable consequential and incidental damages. Id. In the present case,

Page 5 of 17
the parties stipulated that the Campbells did not need to prove a breach of contract in
order to recover consequential damages.”

2021 Tennessee Code

Title 47 - Commercial Instruments and Transactions
Chapter 2 - Sales
Part 7 - Remedies
§ 47-2-715. Buyer's Incidental and Consequential Damages

Universal Citation: TN Code § 47-2-715 (2021)

1. Incidental damages resulting from the seller's breach include expenses reasonably
incurred in inspection, receipt, transportation and care and custody of goods
rightfully rejected, any commercially reasonable charges, expenses or commissions
in connection with effecting cover and any other reasonable expense incident to the
delay or other breach.

2. Consequential damages resulting from the seller's breach include:

a. any loss resulting from general or particular requirements and needs of which
the seller at the time of contracting had reason to know and which could not
reasonably be prevented by cover or otherwise; and injury to person or property
proximately resulting from any breach of warranty.

3) The fact that an Officer of the Court, and a Court of Law sees no issue in any
respect to the Defendants unlawful treatment of the Plaintiffs, by violating the
Plaintiff’s Rights and the law, through “Abandonment with Willful Failure to
Perform, Without Justification,” (Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-512, Criminal
Penalty) is a Court showing alleged bias for the Defendants.

3. Judge Hood was only supposed to determine the amount of award of damages,
instead she decided to ignore the higher Court, Appellate Court Mandate and do a
full blown 14 to 16 month new trial on behalf of the Defendants even though The
Builder Abandoned The Plaintiffs After The First Month Of Ownership Of The
New Property, in violation of the pre-existing but newly discovered Tennessee
Statutes by the Plaintiffs and presented to the Chancery Court in (Response to
Court Dismissal of the Simpkins Complaint 4-24-2023), Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-
510. Prohibited acts. For; Abandonment or willful failure to perform, without
justification. Therefore, Judge Hood was required by law to Order the Builder to
pay for “Interim Damages” prior to an unwarranted trial against the Mandate of
“Judicial Notice” of “All of the Simpkins’ Exhibits and Evidence” as Judge Martin
stated he had gone through all of the Simpkins’ “Evidence” before making his
ruling. The Simpkins had already presented their evidence to the Chancery Court,
Judge Martin, he looked at the evidence but still made a so called errored ruling
when the truth is now out that it was an intentional ruling to support JMB in
violation of the laws both State and Federal.

Page 6 of 17
 4. Judge Martin knew that JMB abandoned the Simpkins but also made the false
statement that the Simpkins could have filed a lawsuit at any time during the
warranty period. Mr. Simpkins had already discussed that issue with the Justice of
the Peace in Frankling, TN and the Justice stated that you could file a lawsuit, but
the Court will more likely dismiss it on the grounds that you have a 2 year warranty
and the Builder is allowed the warranty period to address any and all issues.
Therefore the lawsuit would be moot. He stated that the Simpkins would have to
wait the 2 years before a Court would be willing to address any issues of Breach
of Contract and Warranty AFTER the warranty had expired. The Laws of the State
of Tennessee do not support properly the public with respect to the Warranty. I
have already written a new law that would the issue of the law, property, warranty
and the standard 10 year State warranty on the structure, which 90% of the issues
with the Simpkins’ property were STRUCTURE RELATED as defined in the eight
(8) Expert Reports proving fifty-eight (58) documented code violations.

5. Judge Martin’s and Judge Hood’s unlawful acts cost the Simpkins six (6) years of
their lives, with another six (6) to eight (8) years to clear the mold from their bodies.
Not to mention they have current serious life threatening health issues that have to be
dealt with now! Not days or weeks or months later! Now! And they need the “Interim
Damages” in order to address all of their property and health issues now!

6. Please understand that the Simpkins have already lost six (6) years of their lives
already with a bleak future of trying to correct their health issues for another six (6) or
more years. The Simpkins will have lost a quality of life for 12 years! The Simpkins
are being punished by the very Court System that was supposed to punish the
Defendants! It could not be more clear of the unlawful and severely prejudicial acts
against the Simpkins without any justification whatsoever!

Note:
(The Mandate is believed to have been changed by the Nashville Appellate Court because
the Original Judgment that the Simpkins saw, was more than one page, (it could have been
an error of the wrong Judgment or additional pages added that did not belong), then became
only one page and only four (4) of the remaining (8) claims were listed in the new version).
See the (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023) which briefly covers
most, not all of the issues).

Summary of Several Transcripts from the Chancery and the Appellate Courts:

I) Transcripts - Appellate Court Clerk Elizabeth from Page 8 to top of Page 11 in the
(Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023).

1) Clear “Conspiracy to Commit Fraud on the Court,” is doesn’t get any more real than this.
I hope you are just as astonished as I and my Wife were. And I truly apologize for the
profanity in the transcripts, I was not sure if I was allowed to take that out, so I didn’t, and
it is embarrassing. Again my sincere apologies to the Court. I am human after all.

Page 7 of 17
 Transcripts number 1: (Transcripts App. Ct Elizabeth 9-22-2022) – Admission by
Elizabeth that they have a working relationship with Attorney Brewer to hold the Mandate
until he is ready to file his “Motion” and the 300 Interrogatories and Admissions which he
had 5.5 month to do because that is how long the Appellate Court illegally withheld the
Simpkins Mandate in the Appellate Court.

Pages 9 – 11: Pg 9, lines 5-7, 8-11, 14, 15 – 16, 17 – 19:

5 – 7: Elizabeth: Your not, this was, this was over and done with back in July. So, you're
not in the Appellate Court anymore?1 If you want, I can send you a copy of the order if
you didn't get it. It was issued, uh July 6.

8 – 11: “The replies from Appellate Court Clerk Elizabeth get even more outrageous from
here on, but Mr. Simpkins is only going to put her statements in here so that the Authorities
can see how the Appellate Court was intentionally and unlawfully delaying the Mandate
back down to the Chancery Court for 5.5 months without any legal or otherwise
justification.”

12 – 13: David Simpkins: Your, but I’ve not been, okay, so I'm not in the Appellate Court
anymore, but I’m not, it has not been remanded back to the Chancery Court, correct?

14: Elizabeth: I can't speak for the Chancery court. You would have to call them.

15 – 16: Elizabeth: Because the order says, uhm, that the mandate does not start due to
untimeliness of the petitioner rehear. The 60 day mandate runs from the opinion date
at 07-08 of 22.

17 – 19: Elizabeth: It's just not been mandated yet. It might just be that the mandate
clerks are busy, and they haven't gotten around to it because the time is, I think it should
be by now. So, it just has not been mandated yet2.

Page 10, lines 3 – 5, 6, 7, 8 – 10, 14 – 16,

Appellate Court Clerk, Elizabeth has just made a clear statement that the Simpkins are not in the Appellate Court
anymore and further that “this was over and done with back in July.” Mr. Simpkins went from panic to an anxiety
attack causing difficulty in breathing.
2
Mr. Simpkins called back later and talked to a different Court Clerk who handled the entry of Appeals and Briefs
and issuing the Mandate back down to the lower Court. When Mr. Simpkins asked how large the backlog on the
Appellate Cases were after an Opinion and Mandate had been issued, the Clerk asked, what do you mean. When Mr.
Simpkins clarified, she stated, we don’t have back logs for remanding cases back down, it is a simple matter of
taking the information from the Tribunal and creating the documents and issuing the Mandate to the lower Court.
Mr. Simpkins asked how long that usually took. The Clerk stated it goes by the rules usually within thirty days. Mr.
Simpkins asked why his case was there for 5.5 months. The clerk looked at the record and stated that someone had
incorrectly or intentionally set it that way from the looks of what she was reading, because if you file for the same
rule with an amended filing, the additional time is not implemented twice for the same issue. She said that the entry
was a separate entry by someone else after the entry was created, she stated this is all wrong here and your mandate
should not have taken more than thirty days at most.

Page 8 of 17
 3 – 5: Elizabeth: And it is automatic, it just hasn't been done yet. I mean, there's a tickler
in here, just, I think they just probably have a lot of them. They get a little bit backlogged.
So, its uh, it just has not been mandated yet3.

6: Elizabeth: But the petition to be here was denied back in July, and it is set to be
mandated.4

7: Elizabeth: There's nothing for you to do right now, but just, just sit and wait.

8 – 9: Elizabeth: But, yeah, um, but yeah you're done here. It just has not been mandated
yet, so it's not in the Chancery Court yet. Uh, I would think that just in the next couple
of days, they'll probably get it done, but, but not yet.5

14 – 16: David Simpkins: Okay, well Attorney Brewer filed a Motion and some other
documents to the Chancery Court which is why I was trying to determine if the Appellate
Court had sent the Mandate and I was not notified.

17: Elizabeth: Oh, he filed his motion then? Already?

David Simpkins:: Uh, well, uh, yeah, yesterday. Why?

Elizabeth: Well, we will put a rush on the Mandate and get it right down to the Chancery Court.

David Simpkins: Wait, were you aware he was filing a motion?

Elizabeth: Yes, we were waiting for him to tell us he was going to file it and we were going to
send the Mandate down before just before he did that.

David Simpkins: Oh, you can do that?

Elizabeth: Yes.

David Simpkins: Oh, I was not aware of that. Hmm. Uh, okay I guess. But is that allowed that
you are in communication with the Attorney and know what his intentions are and that
you were holding the Mandate all this time until he was ready to file his motion.

Appellate Court Clerk Elizabeth is now making statements 180 out from what she was stating before, bringing into
question as to whether or not she had been playing Mr. Simpkins all along to get him to make derogatory comments.
She has proven that she has been manipulating Mr. Simpkins all along.
It is crystal clear at this time that Mr. Simpkins is being played and that there is no “petition,” it is an Opinion, with
a Judgment waiting to be mandated back to the Chancery Court.
So, after 5.5 months of unlawfully holding the Simpkins’ “Opinion, Judgment, and Mandate” hostage all of a
sudden it will be sent down within a couple of days! This is clear manipulation by the Appellate Court against the
Simpkins violating their Constitutional Rights to “Due Process of Law,” and a “Deprivation of those Rights to
remedies.”

Page 9 of 17
Elizabeth: We will get the Mandate down tomorrow morning. Thank you.6 **Click.**
Mr. Simpkins apologizes to the Court for the profanity below, but Mr. Simpkins wasn’t sure he
was allowed to modify or delete it. Again, sincere apologies for the profanity. Mr. Simpkins
was in slight shock at what he just heard.

David Simpkins: Well shit. What the fuck was that about? Oh my God, they are fucking working
together. Unbelievable. The corruption just keeps going on and on and on.

“Image of Date Mandate was issued upon Appellate Court Clerks learning that Attorney Brewer
had filed his motion. The Appellate Court Clerks rushed the Mandate down to the Chancery Court
the very next morning, after holding the Mandate, “Opinion and the Judgment” unlawfully for 5.5
months with no legal justification to do so.”

Chief Justice Kirby, we do not know the law very well at all, but we do know what corruption and
conspiracy to commit fraud looks like when I was told in no uncertain terms that I could not do
any of the things that are going on within the Court system between the Defendants Attorney and
the Appellate Court Clerks, nor communications between Chancery Court Clerk and Master, Jakob
Schwendimann and Mr. James Hivner of the Appellate Court. The fact that we kept sending the
documents several times, but the Court kept claiming they were not receiving them is too much
for anyone, These were simple documents sent on May 5th, 2023 and again on June 12th, 2023, and
then again on July 28th, 2023. Then we learned why the documents were not in the system from
Kara.

This is clear;
1. “Unlawful Manipulation of Court Proceedings,”
2. “False Documentation,”
3. “Manipulation, Holding, or Deletion of Documents Filed with the Appellate Court,
”
4. “Pre-mediated Fraudulent Acts in a Legal Proceeding,”
5. “Manipulation of Address Switching to Ensure Failure of Notice to the Simpkins of
Upcoming Hearings,”
6. “Refusing to address Subject-Matter-Jurisdiction,”
7. “Refusing a Change of Venue” which cannot be denied but was twice by Judge Hood
8. “Conspiracy to Commit Fraud Upon the Court,”
9. “Unlawful Intentional Delay of a Legal Proceeding,”
10. “Obstruction of a Legal Proceeding,”
11. “Obstruction of Justice,”
12. “Violation of the Court Rules and Tennessee Statutes7,”
13. “Violation of the Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s Tennessee Constitutional Rights to Due
Process of Law,”

6
After hearing that Attorney Brewer had filed “his motion” to the Chancery Court, the Appellate Court sent the
Mandate down to the Chancery Court the very next morning just like Appellate Court Clerk Elizabeth stated. See
image on the same page.
7
There are too many Tennessee Statutes and Federal Laws that come to the forefront due to the “Conspiracy to
Commit Fraud Upon The Court.”

Page 10 of 17
 14. “Violation of the Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s Tennessee Constitutional Rights to
Remedies as allowed by Law, but Unlawfully Denied by the Courts.”
15. “Violation of the Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s United States Constitutional Rights to Due
Process of Law,”
16. “Violation of the Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s United States Constitutional Rights to
Remedies as allowed by Law, but Unlawfully Denied by the Courts.”
17. Any and all other State or Federal Statute violations that apply.

See in (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023), Pg 10 lines 1-27, pay
specific attention to line 21….

Go to Pg 11, lines 1 – 12, then look at the image and date. I spoke to Elizabeth on
September 22nd, 2022, the “Mandate” with the “Opinion” and one (1) Page “Judgment”
were sent to the Chancery Court just as Elizabeth stated she would, on September 23rd,
2022, for Attorney Brewer.

II) Transcripts – Kara True Filing System Tech Support Representative - from Page 17
to Page 18 in the (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023).

Only key statements are provide for this summary below.

Page 3 Line 129: K - You do have an unsubmitted bundle within the history section in your
account. (What Kara was referencing as stated in the transcripts is that some files did not
get filed. And since the Defendants have access to the Simpkins’ computers, phones, and
email, that means the Defendants have all of the Simpkins’ passwords, and each time the
Simpkins change their passwords, the perpetrators have the new passwords immediately.
Therefore, they have access to the Simpkins True Filing System Account and can delete,
add or modify anything they choose).

“Page 5 – Lines 201 – 204: K – Okay I just checked everything and none of the exhibits
on the 28th are not filed, the Motion itself is filed. See that status there, if you
click on the status it will bring up more information and on the top right you
will see they are showing paid, but not filed. That means the files are not
viewable by the Court or the public.”

Page 5 Lines 208 – 210: K – It seems a lot of them are only saying paid,
(undecipherable speech), there are certain documents here that, all on the 7, 7
28 that are still within the page status that are within the workflow of the
Court, the Court never officially filed any of those.

Page 6 Lines 236 – 237: K – Yeah, paid means it’s in the last status within the workflow
of the Court, the Court hasn’t officially filed those docs.

Page 11 of 17
Page 6 Line 247: K – The ones that you submitted on the 28 of July are not filed and
they are in the paid status within the workflow of the Court.

Page 6 Line 250: DS - Which means what?

Page 6 Line 252: K – That the Court never filed your documents.

Page 7 Line 308: K – Yeah, so your motion is not officially filed.

Page 16, lines 33 - 37

“This shows and proves that the Simpkins July 28th, 2023 Motion and Exhibits were intentionally
not filed so that Mr. Hivner could dismiss the case by making a false claim to the Judges that the
Simpkins did not file the “Statement of Evidence” as required nor any supporting evidence for the
Motion, therefore the Court dismissed the Simpkins’ case illegally due to “Fraud on the Court” via
“Tampering of the Filing and Evidence.””

III) Transcripts – Jakob Schwendimann Calling Mr. Simpkins - from Page 15 to Page 16
in the (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023).

Only key statements are provide for this summary below.

Page 1 Lines 22 – 25: “JS - Well, let me tell you, let me tell you, Mr. Simpkins, and I apologize, I don’t feel
good about it, but I have to do my job okay, when, when we have an appeals, the Court of
Appeals expects us to send them a notice about these certain items on there and we sent that
to them, they sent uh, another order granting some more time ..click silence…”

“JS - I called them and told them and they said go ahead and send the notice like you normally would,
so that’s what I did. And I have to do that, it is not anything against you, it’s just what…”

Page 17 – lines 30 - 33
“The first question is this, should there even be direct communications between the Chancery
Court and the Appellate Court and secondly should the Clerk and Master of the Chancery Court
be clearly coordinating with the Appellate Court about the Simpkins? Because Mr. Schwendimann
openly admits to calling the Appellate Court and discussing exactly “what?” with the Appellate
Court?”

Page 18 - lines 3 - 8
“Page 1 Lines 34 – 39: DS - I, I, no, I get that. But the, the, the issue that I'm having, my biggest
struggle, is we're mailing things to you via US Mail because the last time we sent it digitally in
to the Appellate Court, they didn't like the digital, they liked the digital, but they don't want the
digital, which I don't understand. So, we were just sending the documents. Now, I will tell you,
the, for the first time ever, we received a notice from the Appellate Court on the 20th. We've not
received any notices from you, and I've told you this since January of this year. (2023"

IV) Transcripts – Judge Hood December 13th, 2022 Status Hearing - from Page 15 to Page
16 in the (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023). Pg 9, lines 12 – 26.

Page 12 of 17
(Transcripts of Proceedings 12-13-2022), Pg 20, lines 6 – 16

“You can -- you file about how John Maher Builders is doing all sorts of illegal activities.
None of that has been proven to the Court. I'm not going to tell you that you can't allege that
they've done illegal things; I'm just telling you until it's proven in court, I'm not finding that
they've done anything illegal. You have to prove it in court. I'm not telling you, you can't
allege it, but it has not been proven. It is just an allegation, just an allegation.”

From the (Transcripts of Proceedings 12-13-2022), Pg 19, lines 9 – 13,

“From here on out, anything that is sent to you on this address that's listed on this
document and this e-mail address, I don't care whether you received it or not.”

Further Issues by Judge Hood

Judge Hood Refused the Simpkins a Change of Venue

1) In January of 2023 the Simpkins filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Hood, she refused to
recuse herself even when the Simpkins provided eighteen (18) reasons with ties to the Builder,
John Maher Builders, Inc. She does not disagree that she has had several social interactions with
John Maher, she downplays her actions as simple social interactions. When a Judge sits and has a
meal with John Maher and his Wife and family, she is not having a simple social interaction. She
is clearly involved and should have recused herself. When Judge Hood walks into a Court Room
and waves at the Defendant and gives him and his Wife a personal smile, that is clear bias for the
Defendants. When a Judge speaks favorably of the Defendant, defending him in a Court of Law
with a character reference on his behalf, that is not a Judge who is impartial. See (FINAL -
Plaintiff's Rule 10B Motion for Recusal 1-11-2023).

2) Judge Hood preemptively stated she would not reconsider the issue concerning the
Simpkins’ mail being stolen, that their argument was without merit because the image of the United
States Postal Service. See (Critical Update to DOJ FBI SECNAV VA OIG 8-18-2023). Pages 18
and 19, with the image of the U.S. Postal Service Website on Pg 19. See summary above on Pg 12.

Judge Hood violated Rule 2.1, 2.4, and several others listed in the Motion for Recusal.
Judge Hood also violated Rule 3.3.

Rule 3.3 Testifying as a Character Witness

A judge shall not testify as a character witness in a judicial, administrative, or other adjudicatory
proceeding or otherwise vouch for the character of a person in a legal proceeding, except when
duly subpoenaed.

[1] A judge who, without being subpoenaed, testifies as a character witness abuses the prestige of
judicial office to advance the interests of another. See RJC 1.3. Except in unusual circumstances

Page 13 of 17
where the demands of justice require, a judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge
to testify as a character witness.

NOTE: To this day, sitting in the Simpkins’ garage is a possible (Incendiary Device) that was left
in the Simpkins’ mailbox on August 3rd, 2023. The local Spring Hill, TN Police responded, but
stated that they could not do fingerprints. Mr. Simpkins stated he would notify the FBI and request
they handle it.

The tiny wire filament that was tied to the jar broke when Mr. Simpkins pulled the door to the
Mailbox open, the door sticks sometimes, so you have to yank hard to get it to open. According to
an Army person off of Facebook, it could very well be a phosphorus incendiary device, since it
has been sitting in my garage, it turned violet color. He stated that it means the phosphorus was
originally violet colored and that it is the most volatile of the various types. It goes through a
process to take the color out. In the Army it is called Willey Pete. The spring in the bottom he
stated is possibly magnesium. He stated that the phosphorus is the explosive to ignite the
magnesium while imbedding it into the chest or abdomen cavity, and once magnesium is burning,
it cannot be put out. It has to finish consuming itself. He stated it would have burned in and down
through the body burning everything in its path. And neither the TBI nor the FBI have come out
to investigate. This is not surprising since they suppressed the Simpkins Mortgage Fraud Case
presented to them in 2018 and two three ring binders in 2019.

The charges were filed with the Washington, D. C. DOJ, Lisa A. Monico and Director of the FBI,
Christopher Wray, as well as the VA Office of Inspector General and notice to the Secretary of the
Navy, Carlos Del Toro, and a request for investigation into the Judiciary of the State of Tennessee
was sent to several congressional members of both the United States Senate and House of
Representatives due to the nature of the impact to not just everyone in the State of Tennessee and
the irresponsible and disgraceful and malicious violation of Public Policy the likes which are so
heinous it disturbs a person’s Soul, but in the entire Country but most especially the impact on
Veterans due to the clear and concise manipulation of the LAW by numerous Judges and failure to
(Notify The United States District Court) for the clear (Fraud on the United States of America) for
the clear and (Unmistakable Mortgage Fraud) which the local FBI buried intentionally due to
unethical influence.

This Pro Se Litigant and his Wife who had already won in the Appellate Court in May of 2022 and
the case was held hostage for 5.5 months by agreement between the Appellate Court Clerk’s Office
and the Defendant’s Attorney, J. Paul Brewer. See Transcripts (Audios Available for those which
have not been tampered with or destroyed when the Simpkins Computers have been hacked several
times and all legal files related to this case were deleted illegally).

Note: The documents as Mr. Simpkins works on them are changed while he is in the document
without Mr. Simpkins being aware of anything happening within the document. This entire section
below was completely missing. Please note that most references deleted have something to do with
Attorney Brewer.

“See the term “Abandonment” in the Complaint on Pg 12 lines 8 - 12,

(“E) the Builder’s abandonment of the Plaintiff’s one month after purchase, which was malicious
Retaliation against the Plaintiffs for reporting warranty issues in accordance with JMB’s own

Page 14 of 17
instructions to its customers (See Exhibit SIMP-00A37 – JMB Required Notification of Safety
Issues);)

Pg 16, line 3, Pg 20, lines 12 – 15, Pg 29, line 18, Pg 8, line 18, Pg 9, line 6, Pg 12 line 8, Pg 15,
line 11, (Pg 17, lines 34 – 36, and Pg 18, lines 1-6), Pg 19, line 23, Pg 20 line 8, Pg 35, lines 9-
19, Pg 34, lines 20 -27, Pg 36, lines 1-8, Pg 41, lines 25 & 26, Pg 42 lines 14 & 15, Pg 47, lines
20 – 27, Pg 53 lines 5 – 17. There are forty-nine (49) pages within the one hundred and twenty-
six (126) page Complaint referencing “Abandonment” and “Stonewalling” by John Maher
Builders, Inc, CEO John Maher and COO Tony Maher.”

Please read the full Critical Update which contains all the information concerning all the issues
with the fraudulent acts including Mr. Hivner deleting evidence last year which Presiding Judge
Clement did nothing about it. At the time Chief Justice Bivens through his Administrative
Assistant, stated that I needed to file charges against Judge Clement. The Simpkins did so and
nothing happened and there was no response from the DA’s Office in Nashville, TN.

As you can see, the Simpkins’s rights have been violated over and over. Will you provide the lawful
Justice that the Simpkins are entitled to by Law, or will you bury our case as well.

Chief Justice Kirby, due to the massive fraud that has occurred against the Simpkins, and that six
(6) years of the Simpkins’ lives have been shattered by a corrupt Court System in the State of
Tennessee, the case is now in your hands as Chief Justice to address the “Frauds on the Court” and
the abuse of power and authority by all parties and to notify the United States District Court of the
Mortgage Fraud and the violations of the Simpkins’ United States Constitutional Rights, to notify
the DOJ and the FBI in Washington, D. C. since the local authorities have suppressed our case.
And further to get a bomb squad to determine if what was left in the Simpkins’ United States
Mailbox (which is a clear Federal Offense).

And finally, there is truly NO JUST CAUSE FOR ANY DELAY in Ordering either “Interim
Damages” of no less than $100,349,572.39 or full damages for $629,421,793.27. to the Simpkins
to be paid immediately. The Simpkins by law are entitled to a “Default Judgment” based on the
“Fraud on the Court” by the Officers of the Court including Attorney Brewer and the Court Clerks.

Chief Justice Page could have ordered the “Interim Damages” as a stop gap by the proven laws
and “Binding Authorities” but most especially by the Tennessee Statutes that the Builder clearly
violated which was the “Abandonment” and “Stonewalling” of the Plaintiff’s / Appellants from
the after the first month of ownership. That is a clear violation of Tennessee Statute;

Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-510. Home Improvement Contractors, Prohibited acts.);

1. Abandonment or willful failure to perform, without justification, any home

improvement contract or project engaged in or undertaken by a contractor or willful
deviation from or disregard of plans or specifications in any material respect without
the consent of the owners;

Page 15 of 17
 2. Making any substantial misrepresentation in the procurement of a home improvement
contract or making any false promise of character likely to influence, persuade or
induce;
3. Any fraud in the execution of, or in the material alteration of, any contract, mortgage,
promissory note or other document incident to a home improvement transaction;
Willful or deliberate disregard and violation of the building, sanitary and health laws of this
state or of any political subdivision of this state or of the safety, labor, or workers' compensation
insurance laws of this state;

Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-511

Any person who accepts or receives a completion certificate or other evidence that
performance of a home improvement contract is complete or satisfactorily
concluded, with knowledge that the document is false and that the performance is
not completed, or who utters, offers or uses the document in connection with the
making or accepting of any assignment or negotiation of the right to receive any
payment from the owner, under or in connection with a home improvement
contract, or for the purpose of obtaining or granting any credit or loan on the
security of the right to receive any payment, as mentioned in this section, knowing
or having good reason to know the document to be false, commits a Class A
misdemeanor.

Tenn. Code Ann. § 62-6-512, Criminal Penalty

“Any person who owns, operates, conducts a home improvement business or

procures a home improvement contract without a license pursuant to this part or
who violates any of the provisions of this part, or having had a home improvement
contractor's license suspended or revoked continues to engage in the business,
commits a Class A misdemeanor. Each violation is deemed a separate offense.”

Thank you.

Sincerely,

David and Sally Simpkins

United States Naval Warfare Submarine Veteran
USS Will Rogers SSBN 659 (GOLD) Crew
Phone: (931) 398-4085
Email: [email protected]

Page 16 of 17
Page 17 of 17