📁 Federal Cases

Complete case records from SCOTUS, 11th Circuit, and S.D. Florida

No. 24-11481 U.S. Court of Appeals WJRIV and CHYR's Petition for Reheating DENIED (2025)

Yost-Rudge, et al v. City of Stuart, et al

Currently pending review in the Supreme Court of the United States

Petitioners

William J. Rudge IV & Caryn Lee Hall Yost-Rudge

Respondents

City of Stuart, Paul Joseph Nicoletti, Robert Lawrence Kilbride, and Michael Joseph Mortell

Case Summary

Constitutional challenge to property rights violations. Petitioners allege Due Process and Equal Protection violations over 16+-year period with ZERO evidentiary hearings.

Constitutional Questions Presented

Question 1

Whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause was violated when federal and state courts denied petitioners ANY evidentiary hearing or opportunity to challenge a purported settlement on which defendants' defenses rely, despite that settlement lacking any recorded documentary support in any jurisdiction.

Question 2

Whether petitioners were denied equal protection of the laws when courts applied different evidentiary standards to defendants' fradulent and unrecorded settlement claim versus petitioners' well documented property ownership AND HOMESTEAD claims.

View the Official SCOTUS Site →
24-11481 DENIED - Affirmed Lower Court

Rudge v. City of Stuart (Appellate)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Case Summary

The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the Rudges' meritorious constitutional claims and affirmed the US District Court's denial of their claims. US District Magistrate Judge Shaniek Maynard could not locate City v Rudge (09CA3586) for review even though the Rudges' jointly Requested Judicial Notice of City v Rudge, the genesis of all litigation. Judge Maniac relied on City Manager's Michale Mortell's perjury to grant the dimissal of Rudges' claims. It is very interesting to note that Mortell was the City Manager yet he drafted and filed the Motion to Dimiss with Prejudice. Federal and state law do not allow a "pro se" litigant to represent a municipality or corporation. Mortell is a defendant in the litigation and answered for himself (pro se) but then also represented the City of Stuart, Nicoletti and Kilbride??? Hinky shizz! The City's pitiful defense relies on the 2012 "alleged" settlement that was merely an instrumentation of fraud, "cooked up" by Commissioner Troy McDonald and Auctioneer KC Daniels. The Rudges recieved no proceeds, as promised by the City and the City NEVER recorded the "alleged" settlement in the 19th Circuit state court, according to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, The City through attorneys Nicoletti, Kilbride, and Mortell have not followed provedure or well established law, to date.

Counsel

WLC (Carri Leininger) for defendants

View 11th Circuit Records →
2:23-cv-14270 Dismissed/Appealed

Rudge et al. v. City of Stuart et al.

U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida

Case Summary

Federal constitutional claims regarding property rights, Due Process violations, and BLATANT institutional capture (bias) in Martin county Stuart, Florida judicial system(s)‼️.

View on PACER →
2:22-cv-14085 Related Proceeding

Related Property Rights Litigation

U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida

Case Summary

Companion case addressing property conversion and settlement enforcement issues.

View on PACER →

Public Record Sources

Supreme Court of the United States

supremecourt.gov →

U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

ca11.uscourts.gov →

PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records)

pacer.uscourts.gov →

19th Judicial Circuit of Florida (Official)

circuit19.org →