SCOTUS Agrees to Hear 2 Pro Se Appeals; One Written in Pencil by Inmate off of Website Form

SCOTUS Agrees to Hear 2 Pro Se Appeals; One Written in Pencil by Inmate off of Website Form
ABA Journal Law News Now
By Martha Neil
September 25, 2012

In a highly unusual move, the nation's top court on Tuesday agreed to hear two pro se appeals, both of which apparently involve sovereign immunity issues.

One was written in longhand, in pencil, by an inmate at a federal prison in Pennsylvania, using a boilerplate form that can be downloaded from the U.S. Supreme Court's website, reports the Associated Press. Appellant Kim Lee Millbrook is seeking to revive a dismissed lawsuit he filed alleging sexual assault by Special Management Unit guards. Prison officials called his claim unsubstantiated.

The other pro se appeal, for which a $300 filing fee was paid by appellant Steven Alan Levin, seeks to revive a medical malpractice and battery claim over unsuccessful cataract surgery performed at a U.S. Navy hospital in Guam.

Appellate attorney Tom Goldstein, known for his work on SCOTUSBlog, said it was "unheard of" for the Supreme Court to accept two pro se appeals at the same time, the article reports. It also notes that the Supreme Court routinely appoints counsel to help pro se parties. Read more here

‘Huge’ Number of Lawyers Accused In Civil and Criminal Mortgage-Related Fraud Cases

‘Huge’ Number of Lawyers Accused In Civil and Criminal Mortgage-Related Fraud Cases
ABA Journal Law News Now
By Martha Neil
September 20, 2012

There is a disturbing trend among the proliferation of mortgage-fraud prosecutions and civil cases that followed the meltdown of the real estate market in recent years.

Many of the defendants are lawyers, reports the Wall Street Journal (sub. req.).

Joseph Dunn, who serves as executive director of the State Bar of California, calls the involvement of lawyers in perpetrating mortgage-related scams a "huge" problem. Since 2009, the group has gotten over 11,000 mortgage-related complaints about attorneys. Over 100 California lawyers have been disciplined and another 200 or so are either facing legal ethics charges or being investigated.

Senior counsel Yolanda McGill of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, in Washington, D.C., says a national database of 25,000 complaints about suspected mortgage-related fraud includes more than 6,000 complaints against attorneys and law firms.

An attorney is a key participant in a mortgage scheme, says Craig Howland, chief of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's financial institutions fraud unit. That's because being able to point to a lawyer, who is sworn to uphold the law, "adds legitimacy" to the scam and thus can help ensnare potential victims. Howland says there are a number of pending FBI probes concerning lawyers. Read more here

6th Cir. OKs Civil RICO Class Suit Against Edwards Wildman, Client Insurer re Tax-Shelter Marketing

6th Cir. OKs Civil RICO Class Suit Against Edwards Wildman, Client Insurer re Tax-Shelter Marketing
ABA Journal Law News Now
By Martha Neil
September 20, 2012

Reversing a lower court's dismissal of a civil racketeering class action against a law firm and a client insurer, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati on Wednesday gave the lawsuit a green light.

The suit was filed because of the defendants' marketing of a tax shelter later determined by the Internal Revenue Service to be abusive. It alleges that Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge, a law firm now known as Edwards Wildman Palmer following a merger, and its client, John Hancock Life Insurance Co., violated the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, reports Reuters.

Several state-law claims are also included in the suit, which contends that the plaintiffs, who own a family company, Stoney Creek Fisheries and Equipment Inc., in Michigan, relied on legal opinions from the law firm concerning the tax they would owe as a result of participating in the Benistar 419 Plan promoted by the defendants. It asserts a state-law negligent misrepresentation claim against all defendants and additional state-law claims against the insurer only.

While the plaintiffs have not yet proven their case, U.S. District Judge Janet Neff erred by granting a defense motion to dismiss in 2010 rather than allowing the plaintiffs a chance to obtain potential evidence in discovery, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a written opinion (PDF) on Wednesday.

The judge found that the plaintiffs had not adequately pleaded "conduct" and "enterprise" elements on the RICO claim. However, an amended complaint "delineates the specific roles and relationships of the Defendants, alleges the enterprise functioned at least five years, and alleges it functioned for the common purpose of promoting a fraudulent welfare benefit plan to generate commissions and related fees. That pattern of activity is sufficient to permit a jury to infer the existence of an enterprise," the 6th Circuit writes. Read more here

Circuit Splits on Relief for Innocent Man Imprisoned for 19 Years

Circuit Splits on Relief for Innocent Man Imprisoned for 19 Years
The Recorder
By Scott Graham
September 24, 2012

SAN FRANCISCO — Harold Hall has suffered one injustice. On Monday, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel bent over backward to make sure he wasn't hit with another.

Stretching to avoid a "manifest injustice," a 2-1 panel of the court revived a long-abandoned theory of liability that could compensate Hall for spending 19 years in prison for a murder he didn't commit.

"The extraordinary circumstances here convince us that we must remand this matter for amendment of the complaint in order to prevent a woefully unjust result," Senior Judge Dorothy Nelson wrote in Hall v. City of Los Angeles. Judge Ronald Gould concurred.

Dissenting Judge Sandra Ikuta said that while the majority's heart might be in the right place, its reasoning was way out of bounds. The majority "begins by creating a novel argument for Hall, and then, having concluded that its own argument has merit, it proceeds to resolve the case on those grounds," Ikuta wrote.

Hall witnessed a 1984 gang shooting in which five people were killed and five others shot. Hall cooperated with police, leading to such intense police protection of his home that a police detective, Wayne Dufort, became like a father figure to him, according to Nelson's opinion. A year later, when Hall was arrested for robbery, Dufort arranged for him to be housed with police informants to protect him from a revenge killing. Read more here

Equal Access Advocates, Dr. Karin Huffer

Dr. Karin Huffer

Equal Access Advocates, Mission Statement

Our Mission is to ensure equal access to the judicial system, by moving toward a social model over medical model for providing accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

We promote a fair court process with an attitude of inclusion and tolerance. Our advocates enhance security, dignity and respect for every person. We support the economy of the court by improving communication, and acting as liaisons. LVAALLC helps the courts to better assist and serve those with special needs according to ADAAA mandates.

Our mission is affirmed by the universal declaration of human rights, 1948, the convention on the elimination of discrimination against women of 1979, The ABA Resolution of 2002, The Americans with Disabilities Act Titles II & III, of 1990, the ADAAA of 2008, and the International Treaty for the Disabled of 2009.

Equal Access Advocates
Dr. Karin Huffer
Associate Professor King's Univ.
Counseling and Forensic Psychology
NV lic Marriage Family Therapist
ADA Title II and Title III Specialist
http://www.equalaccessadvocates.com/

Equal Access Advocates Next Webinar

Equal Access Advocates Next Webinar

U.S. Supreme Court GRANTED my Rule 13.5 Application!

Justice Thomas granted my Rule 13.5 Application to extend time to file a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in C.A.11 cases 12-11028 and 12-11213. On September 13, 2012, Application 12A215 was granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until December 10, 2012. Link to the decision.

My Rule 13.5 Application is posted on Scribd.

Two Year Anniversary: YouSue.org to NoSue.org

Two years ago I launched The Justice Network with the domain name YouSue.org. This name was chosen in the spirit of YouTube, the video-sharing website that empowered ordinary people to produce and share video.

The Justice Network is engaged in advocacy, education, news gathering & dissemination, and helping people fight injustice. This site is also part of my therapy as a survivor of legal injustice.

Documents in my case are posted on Scribd

Over two hundred thousand people visited YouSue.org, and I have met people from all over the country. Some of their stories are profiled on The Justice Network website. Many have reached the conclusion that America’s justice system is broken.

The official Internet address of The Justice Network is now NoSue.org. This reflects the sad truth that for most Americans the justice system is broken, just a parody of justice. My advice is to avoid American courts. Your life, health and wealth is at risk. But don’t just take my word, listen to the experts profiled on The Justice Network at NoSue.org 

So what have you learned as a legal intern?

 

Testilying (a portmanteau of "testify" and "lying") is a United States police slang term for the practice of giving false testimony against a defendant in a criminal trial. It is typically used to "make the case" against someone they believe to be guilty when minor irregularities during the suspect's arrest or search threaten to result in acquittal on a technicality. Defendants who embellish their own testimony, particularly when no evidence contradicts them, can also be said to be testilying. Read more on Wikipedia

Florida Bar Complaint against Ryan Christopher Rodems, No. 2013-10,271 (13E)

Mr. Rodems has committed multiple violations of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar while representing his law firm and partner in civil litigation against me, a former client on the same or "substantially related" matter, contrary to Bar Rules 4-1.7, 4-1.9, 4-1.10 and the holding of McPartland v. ISI Inv. Services, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 1029, M.D.Fla., 1995...

Lying is a habit for Mr. Rodems, and he is guilty of misconduct related to lack of candor, which rules and standards are contained in a publication by The Florida Bar Ethics Department, the Informational Packet entitled "Candor Toward The Tribunal". Rodems is guilty of dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Rodems also knowingly disparaged, humiliated, and discriminated against me on the basis of disability. Mr. Rodems’ partner and law firm previously consulted with me on disability and the Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation...

Mr. Rodems continued his misconduct in my related federal ADA and Civil Rights lawsuit, Gillespie v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida, et al., 5:10-cv-503, U.S. District Court, M.D., Fla. A list of twenty (20) related cases appears at Exhibit 1. Currently I am preparing a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. My Rule 13.5 Application to extend time to file a petition for writ of certiorari was docketed August 31, 2012, Docket No. 12A215...

Florida Bar Complaint, Ryan Christopher Rodems, Sep-13-2012

Candor Toward the Tribunal - The Florida Bar

actor portrayal

The Florida Bar’s Ethics Department Information Packet Candor Toward the Tribunal notes:

To permit or assist a client or other witness to testify falsely is prohibited by section 837.02, Florida Statutes (1991), which makes perjury in an official proceeding a felony, and by section 777.011, Florida Statutes (1991), which proscribes aiding, abetting, or counseling commission of a felony. (page 6, 4)

Florida caselaw prohibits lawyers from presenting false testimony or evidence. Kneale v. Williams, 30 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1947), states that perpetration of a fraud is outside the scope of the professional duty of an attorney and no privilege attaches to communication between an attorney and a client with respect to transactions constituting the making of a false claim or the perpetration of a fraud. Dodd v. The Florida Bar, 118 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1960), reminds us that "the courts are . . . dependent on members of the bar to . . . present the true facts of each cause . . . to enable the judge or the jury to [decide the facts] to which the law may be applied. When an attorney . . . allows false testimony . . . [the attorney] . . . makes it impossible for the scales [of justice] to balance." See The Fla. Bar v. Agar, 394 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 1981), and The Fla. Bar v. Simons, 391 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 1980). (page 6, 5)

Ex parte proceedings. Ordinarily, an advocate has the limited responsibility of presenting 1 side of the matters that a tribunal should consider in reaching a decision; the conflicting position is expected to be presented by the opposing party. However, in an ex parte proceeding, such as an application for a temporary injunction, there is no balance of presentation by opposing advocates. The object of an ex parte proceeding is nevertheless to yield a substantially just result. The judge has an affirmative responsibility to accord the absent party just consideration. The lawyer for the represented party has the correlative duty to make disclosures of material facts known to the lawyer and that the lawyer reasonably believes are necessary to an informed decision. (pp 6-7)

Candor Toward the Tribunal - The Florida Bar