IN THE SUPERIOR COURTNORFOLK COUNTYCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D.A/K/A KINGCAST AND MORTGAGE MOVIES JOURNAL)CASE No. 15-0139217006 11TH Avenue Shoreline, WA 98155

Plaintiff,)JUDGE______________________v.)

CITY OF QUINCY)ANDJAMES S. TIMMINS, Esq.In his Individual and Official Capacities,)1305 Hancock St., Quincy, MA 02169)

Defendants.)

PLAINTIFFS REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO SWORN COMPLAINT IN DECLARATORY JUDGMENT PER MGL 66 10

A. General Issues.1. The Defendants have replied with an opposition Memorandum that fails to address the meat of the matter, the heart of the issue. The Defendants prattle on about misunderstandings about what documents that State Actors sent to Plaintiff, but in reality there is and was no ongoing dispute over any documents received to date.2. No, the issue concerns that which is identified by Defendants own Exhibit E, an email from Plaintiff in which he specifically tells Defendants, by and through Counsel:

2. I expect an update including any and all emails that Mr. Berlo has sent to you or any other city official since 1 September 2015..3. Again, the heart of the Complaint is readily discernable at paras 13 and 17 of the Complaint that read:

****************13: Since that time, on or about 19 October, 2015 Defendant Timmins willfully violated the Statute, in an action that is at once clearly ultra vires and arbitrary and capricious in nature, by demonstrating his contempt for the Statute:[footnoteRef:-1] [-1: For more proof of this assertion see further his attitude in condemning Mr. Berlo in Appendix C without ever even discussing the matter with him.]

.Here is my response to your email, to the extent a response is warranted:

The material you want from Jay Duca will cost a total of $55.60. A check payable to the city of Quincy should be mailed or delivered to Jay Duca, Quincy Building Department, 55 Sea Street, Quincy MA 02169; and he will then produce the requested copies.

I will not be providing any updates on any matters.. (emphasis added in case the Court cant smell how foul this is to start with, see generally Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp. v. Chief of Police of Worcester,436 Mass. 378 (2002))

17: Further, they have refused to provide Plaintiff any updates to his Public Records Request when all he wanted was updates from 1 September, 2015 to 20 October, 2015. (emphasis added)

The facts of paras 13 and 17 are not materially in dispute: The Defendants object to the characterizations in para 13 but cannot dispute the material facts involved, i.e. that Defendant Timmins wrote I will not be providing any updates on any matters.. and that they refused to provide updates. Because otherwise we would not be here, would we? Of course not. [footnoteRef:0] [0: For some reason Defendants Answer and Affirmative Defenses failed to address paras 14-21 in their entirety. Matters not denied are deemed admitted, but even if they were not, the Defendant cannot deny what Attorney Timmins wrote, i.e. no updates. Thats really all the Court needs to know in order to make its judgment on the law; the rest of the facts and the Thyng case all go to bad faith and punitive damages that will be assessed by the Jury as contemplated by Plaintiffs Jury Demand attached hereto.]

****************As we all know, Plaintiff then went on to cite relevant law on the matter including: Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp. v. Chief of Police, 436 Mass. 378, 382-383 (2002). The statute expresses the Legislature's considered judgment that [t]he public has an interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in an efficient and law-abiding manner. Attorney General v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 158 (1979). Greater access to information about the actions of public officers and institutions is increasingly . . . an essential ingredient of public confidence in government. New Bedford Standard-Times Publ. Co. v. Clerk of Court, 377 Mass. 404, 417 (1979). Again, against that backdrop let us move on to the indicia of Bad Faith where the laymen in their purported expertise lied to their counselor about just about everything and to Mr. Berlo by not providing a relevant email from a FEMA employee about the Velocity Zone (App B)(Appendix A herein) and by continuing to assert that a distinguishing issue is based on assessed value when it is in actuality MARKET VALUE. As Mr. Berlo wrote recently in an email shared with Plaintiff:

From:James Berlo Date:November 4, 2015 at 5:55:48 AM PSTTo:"mlaforest@quincy.gov" Cc:Christopher King Subject:"Substantial Improvement"Dear Councilor for you & your friends information FEMAs 50% substantial improvement is based on the MARKET value NOT Assessed value , I Paid $172,000 therefore $86,000 would be the cost I would have to exceed and is over a third more than even Mr. Ducas personal arbitrary estimate ( doubling my own) I would have to be quite extravagant to reach $86,000.Also My Neighbors did not express concern over my House being a Blighted Property ( maybe only two did who both work for & have benefitted by their association with this administration) In fact they approached me wanting to start a Petition against City Officials that have been determined to make & keep it a Blighted Property.

They only complain to me about, for example a Neighbor who has built an Out-House ( Cabana)with Utilities without Zoning, Permits or Notifications , and has taken large tracts of Public Land and filled in a Marsh (Wetland) I do not care about this but you should , But what is so concerning is the inordinate attention My House has gotten since day one where there is and has been others with Sea Side Property subject to harassment & abuse by City Officials that ended in Litigation.

There seems to be a Pattern here which should concern you and warrant more attention than trying to prevent me from Living in the House that I own entirely.Like basic City services, why should I have to clean up the Garbage from Illegal Dumping next to My House that went on for years?which would include the deliberate miscalculation that Margaret LaForest and Jay Duca and others used when calculating whether Mr. Berlos property was subject to FEMA regulations. They used Appraisal Value when it is clearly Market Value.

From the Complaint:Defendant LaForest failed to send Mr. Berlo an email from FEMA Director Jeb Killion to her, that explained that Mr. Berlo is not subject to FEMA regulations because he owns his own home outright and he is not in a velocity zone and does not meet substantial improvement criteria. Appendix B.

Margaret LaForest knows as much and she told the general populous that much in a letter dated but yet she told Plaintiff a different story as once can see in movies #1 and #2 in para 18 and at Appendix B (omitted in this Reply)

B.The Timmins Affidavit.Plaintiff has reviewed the Timmins Affidavit and notes that it fails to address the fact that there are undoubtedly responses still owed. The Affidavit swears that Plaintiff sought documents on 3 September 2015 (Timmins Aff para 3). The Affidavit states further that there was clarification made on September 10, and that Jay Duca responded (Timmins Aff paras 4-5).The Affidavit is silent as to the date of Ducas response however, and therein lies the crux of the matter: The Duca response, identifying which documents response was issued by Jay Duca on or about 21 September, 2015, with Plaintiff responding to him on or about 23 September, 2015. See Appendix B. That means that any documents or emails relating to these matters after 21 September, 2015 never were provided to Plaintiff, despite his repeated attempts to collect such documents, i.e. I expect an update including any and all emails that Mr. Berlo has sent to you or any other city official since 1 September 2015..[footnoteRef:1] [1: Obviously if there are duplicative emails between 1 September and 21 September there is no need to resubmit those. But any documents after 21 September to October 20 must be produced, and documents missed -- such as possible responses from the Mayors office as Mr. Berlo specifically requested to speak with him must be must be produced. Plaintiff submits that it is fairly simple indeed.]

Moreover, it is worth noting that James Fatseas incorrectly stated he did not have responsive documents not once but twice, one such occasion being memorialized on 16 September 2015 in this YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkCDlVmr6XEQuincy Officials, Margaret LaForest Withheld FEMA Email from Homeowner in Build Permit Abuse.

It turns out however that Mr. Fatseas was specifically copied on an email in which he demanded to speak to the Mayor, and was denied:

Also relevant is the October 26 2015 email to Defendant Timmins in which he clarifies what he wants and notes that Jay Duca was slow to provide the first set of sought materials:

From:Christopher King Date:October 26, 2015 at 8:07:53 AM PDTTo:jtimmins@quincyma.govCc:amahoney425@hotmail.com,jeb.killion@fema.dhs.gov,Jduca@quincyma.gov,Nbrienzi@quincyma.gov,cwalker@quincyma.gov,jfatseas@quincyma.gov,kpowers@quincyma.gov,jfinn@quincyma.gov,mlaforest@Quincyma.gov,koch4quincy@gmail.com,bpalmucci@Quincyma.gov,khughes@Quincyma.gov,bmcnamee@Quincyma.gov,dgutro@Quincyma.gov,Camco59@hotmail.com,info@ldnllp.com,koozlaw@juno.comSubject:Final email on outstanding Public Information Requests before litigation.Dear Attorney Timmins:I see you are apparently standing your ground on not providing any of the sought materials since September 1, 2015. Suit yourself, pun fully intended.I look forward to flying out there to run video when we have our first court hearing, as well as Mr. Berlo's litigation. Stay tuned for the lawsuit you'll have a copy of this in a day or two and then it will be filed.Because as I told you before, I'm not here to, ummmm,playaround. Just ask the Boston Herald after I found Joanna Marinova her Counsel. Herald. lawyers said they liked my blog. It's all in the video but below I've got it closed-captioned for the hearing impaired.http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2014/03/kingcast-cheers-joanna-marinova-and.htmlhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_kb8JS-Lk0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlaHj9QN9ycAlso, it has been a week or so since Mr. Berlo tendered his monies for the first Public Information Request.

He still doesn't have anything from Jay Duca.Ciao.

CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D.kingcast955@icloud.commortgagemovies007@gmail.comhttp://affordablevideodepo.comhttp://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com617.543.8085m206.299.9333f

CONCLUSIONPlaintiff submits that it is and was always fairly clear where he is coming from, and further asserts that Attorney Timmins is waking up to smell the coffee as well, after years of the sort of deception that landed the City in so much disfavor in Thyng: This truly is a simple matter. Plaintiff asked for public documents, principally a series of emails produced by employees who have the power to unlawfully withhold build permits. employees who have been highly questioned and found liable in their individual capacities for exactly such conduct in the Thyng case.In return, he got dilatory responses and no documents responsive to any and all emails that Mr. Berlo (or Plaintiff) has sent to you or any other city official since 1 September 2015.. and their internal emails relative thereto (subject to the demarcation set forth in Fn3, supra). He now demands production of same and all fees, costs and punitive damages to be assessed by a Competent Jury of appropriate composition..Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________________CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D.kingcast955@icloud.commortgagemovies007@gmail.comhttp://affordablevideodepo.comhttp://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com617.543.8085m206.299.9333f

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

On Sep 23, 2015, at 11:11 AM, Christopher King wrote:

Dear Mr. Duca:

I will advise you by Monday as to what documents we are ordering.

Also in addition to these documents, surely you have emails and other correspondence and notes as Mr. Berlo, Ms. LaForest and others emailed you and vice versa I'm sure. And I've still heard nothing from the Mayor's office, which is problematic of course because in the email that Mr. Fatseas did not find, Mr. Berlo clearly demanded to speak with the Mayor.

Please advise on or before Monday.

**************

Hi Mr. King,

We looked through our ISD file system including archives and emails andfound the following documents for the 46 Terne Street Property (Breggren) and 20 Prescott Terrace property (Berlo)as follows:

46 Terne

15 emails250 8.5 x 11 pages13 large 2'x3' pages

20 Prescott78 8.5 x 11 pages80 emails

I estimate the cost for our lowest paid individual to prepare the documentsfor copying (pulling files, removing staples etc) is $19.32 x 4 hours = $77.28 328x .20 pp (small) = $65.60105 emails (printed)x.50= $52.5013 pp (large) x $3.00 = $39.00

Total Estimate to produce copies = $234.38

You or an attorney or designee may also choose to review the files at ouroffice during regular business hours at no cost.

Please advise

Sincerely,

Jay DucaDirector

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I the undersigned, swear that a true and accurate copy of this Reply was served, via tracked U.S. Mail, to Defendants at:

JAMES S. TIMMINS, ESQ.City Solicitors OfficeQuincy Town Hall1305 Hancock StreetQuincy, MA 02169

with a Courtesy Copy in the name of Justice, Public Decency and Transparency to:

Hon. Paul D. Wilson Suffolk County Courthouse 13th Floor Three Pemberton Square Boston, MA 02108

and to

The World Wide Web

This 19th day of January 2016

_____________________________ Christopher King, J.D.

5