Background
The Masseys appealed two trial court orders: (1) a Revised Judgment and Order of Sale in a foreclosure action brought by Wilmington Savings Fund Society, entered January 16, 2025; and (2) a Final Order Granting Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss, entered February 3, 2025. The Masseys proceeded pro se on appeal, though one Massey appears to be a licensed attorney formerly admitted to practice in multiple jurisdictions.
The appeals raised issues concerning the foreclosure judgment and the dismissal order. However, both appellant briefs exhibited substantial procedural deficiencies and contained numerous unfounded accusations against the trial courts, opposing counsel, and the appellees.
The Court’s Holding
The Kentucky Court of Appeals dismissed both appeals and struck the briefs without reaching the merits. The court found that the Masseys failed to substantially comply with the Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP). Specifically, their briefs lacked required citations to the trial record, failed to properly state points and authorities, contained no support for factual assertions, and did not demonstrate that issues were preserved for review.
Beyond procedural deficiencies, the court imposed sanctions under RAP 10(B) and RAP 11 for sanctionable comments in the briefs. The Masseys made unfounded accusations that the trial courts and Wilmington engaged in “fraud,” “lies,” and “deception” without evidentiary support. Most egregiously, the Masseys baselessly accused trial judges of racial discrimination, arguing that Kentucky’s nineteenth-century anti-miscegenation statutes influenced judicial rulings against them—a claim the court found “fallacious and entirely unsupported by the record.” The court had previously admonished the Masseys for similar unfounded accusations and warned that continued use of such language would result in sanctions.
The trial court’s foreclosure order and dismissal order were affirmed based on res judicata principles, with the court declining to address the merits given the procedural violations and sanctionable conduct.
Key Takeaways
- Appellants must substantially comply with Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure, including citing the trial record and properly stating points and authorities.
- Failure to cite the record, unsupported factual assertions, and vague legal arguments can result in dismissal of an appeal without reaching the merits.
- Courts will impose sanctions under RAP 11 and Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure 11 for frivolous arguments and unfounded accusations of fraud, dishonesty, or judicial misconduct.
- Pro se litigants, particularly those who are licensed attorneys, are not exempt from appellate procedure rules and cannot expect leniency for noncompliance.
- Baseless accusations of racial discrimination as a substitute for substantive legal argument constitute sanctionable conduct.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces Kentucky appellate courts’ commitment to enforcing procedural compliance and disciplining frivolous and abusive litigation tactics. The court’s willingness to dismiss appeals without reaching the merits—and to impose sanctions for unfounded accusations—establishes clear consequences for litigants who fail to adhere to appellate procedure rules or who level baseless claims of fraud, misconduct, and discrimination against judicial officers. The court’s particular attention to the Masseys’ pattern of unfounded racial discrimination accusations signals that such tactics will not be tolerated, regardless of whether the litigant is represented or proceeding pro se.
The decision has significance for pro se litigants and attorneys representing themselves in Kentucky appeals. The court made clear that pro se status does not excuse noncompliance with procedural rules, and that licensed attorneys proceeding pro se face even higher expectations. The decision also illustrates that courts will sanction parties who make accusations of judicial bias or misconduct without evidentiary support grounded in the trial record.