Category: Injustice

Pro Se litigants offer suffer from injustice, aka the lack of justice.

FANNIE AND FREDDIE OF FORECLOSURE ABUSES

by nootkabear, posted in Court Cases, foreclosure, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

Original Message—–
From: Nye Lavalle

To: OIGhotline <OIGhotline@fhfa.gov>; DeputyDirector-Enterprises <DeputyDirector-Enterprises@FHFA.gov>;                      Director <Director@FHFA.gov>; DeputyDirector-FHLBanks <DeputyDirector-FHLBanks@FHFA.gov>;                    GeneralCounsel<GeneralCounsel@FHFA.gov>; Ombudsman <Ombudsman@FHFA.gov>
                                                                        Sent: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 10:28 pm
Subject: I AM THE FANNIE SHAREHOLDER NAMED IN YOUR OIG REPORTS THAT WARNED FANNIE AND FREDDIE OF FORECLOSURE ABUSES IN 2003 AND AFTER

Gentlemen,

By way of introduction, my name is Nye Lavalle and I am the shareholder/investor, referenced in your recent OIG reports that warned Fannie Mae’s board and CEO of foreclosure and legal abuses almost a decade ago. For over a year, I worked closely with Fannie Mae and Mark Cymrot of Baker Hostetler, who was the independent counsel appointed by Fannie Mae, to investigate allegations contained in my 2004 report. I also warned Freddie Mac and its board as well.

The attached letter will provide you more information and hopefully open a dialogue between us that will help us find solutions for our nation and its citizens as well as hold those responsible, accountable for their actions.

To that end, I stand ready and able to assist you each in your respective duties at FHFA and the OIG for FHFA.

Sincerely,

Nye Lavalle

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

DEKALB COUNTY GOES FROM BAD TO WORSE.  NOW, THE ELECTED ENTITIES, ARE STABBING EACH OTHER IN THE BACK, THEN WHEN THAT PERSON IS GONE, THE PREDATOR TAKES THE JOB, AND SHE BRAGS ABOUT WHAT SHE HAS DONE; What the hell is this county, and the state of GEORGIA coming to?

http://www.atlawblog.com/2011/04/former-dekalb-court-clerk-sues-successor/

Former DeKalb Court Clerk Sues Successor
9:16 am, April 20th, 2011

Former DeKalb County Superior Court Clerk Linda Carter has sued the woman who now holds that title, Debra DeBerry, alleging that DeBerry tricked her into resigning from the job.

Carter sued DeBerry in her official capacity and individually, and seeks unspecified damages. Carter also sued Gov. Nathan Deal, seeking a writ of mandamus to remove DeBerry from office and to compel official recognition of Carter’s “status as the rightful elected Clerk.” The complaint alleges that Deal accepted the letter of resignation without knowing it was “null and void.”

Carter is represented by A. Lee Parks and James E. Radford Jr. of Parks, Chesin & Walbert. The suit, filed in DeKalb Superior Court, does not list counsel for DeBerry.

DeBerry’s chief deputy clerk, Rick Setser, who also serves as her public information officer, said the county attorney had advised both him and DeBerry not to comment.

“It’s unfortunate,” he said. “I’ve spoken to Ms. DeBerry, and she is eager to clear her name.”

Parks, in an earlier conversation with the Daily Report, said Carter suffers from Alzheimer’s disease and would not have left willingly, as she was two years shy of vesting in her pension and medical benefits. The complaint alleges that on the afternoon of March 24, Deputy Clerk Lisa Oakley—who is not a defendant in the suit—“acting on instructions from DeBerry” and with knowledge that “Carter was suffering from a temporary episode of dementia,” asked her to sign a letter of resignation.

“The letter was presented to Carter as a routine business document … its contents were obscured from Carter’s view. Oakley, acting on DeBerry’s instructions, did not inform Carter that she was being asked to sign a letter of resignation. … Oakley, acting on DeBerry’s instructions, and knowing that Carter did not know or understand the document’s content … indicated some urgency in having Carter sign the document.”

Oakley was not immediately available for comment.

The complaint alleges that on the evening that Carter signed her resignation letter, her husband, John Carter, came to pick her up from work and Oakley escorted her to the car. Oakley told Carter’s husband that “DeBerry had ordered that Oakley have Carter sign a letter of resignation.”

Also, allegedly on DeBerry’s instructions, Oakley said that Chief Judge Mark Anthony Scott “had ordered the Sheriff of DeKalb County, Georgia, to forcibly remove Carter from office.”

Scott said he did not even learn about Carter’s resignation until after it had been tendered and that he neither attempted to remove Carter from office nor ordered the sheriff to do so. He said he did not even have that authority. “I read those allegations. I do not know where they come from,” he said.

According to the complaint, when Carter’s husband called Setser, the chief deputy clerk, to discuss the circumstances of the resignation, Setser allegedly said he and DeBerry jointly created the letter and agreed to have Carter sign it “to avoid media inquiries into Carter’s medical condition.”

The case, Carter v. DeBerry, 11cv4584, has been assigned to DeKalb Superior Judge Daniel R. Coursey Jr.

Big Banks Save Billions As Homeowners Suffer, Internal Federal Report By CFPB Finds

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Injustice, law, Legal
Release Date: 
March 28, 2011
Source: Shahien Nasiripour, The Huffington Post

NEW YORK — The nation’s five largest mortgage firms have saved more than $20 billion since the housing crisis began in 2007 by taking shortcuts in processing troubled borrowers’ home loans, according to a confidential presentation prepared for state attorneys general by the nascent consumer bureau inside the Treasury Department.

 That estimate suggests large banks have reaped tremendous benefits from under-serving distressed homeowners, a complaint frequent enough among borrowers that federal regulators have begun to acknowledge the industry’s fundamental shortcomings.

 The dollar figure also provides a basis for regulators’ internal discussions regarding how best to penalize Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial in a settlement of wide-ranging allegations of wrongful and occasionally illegal foreclosures. People involved in the talks say some regulators want to levy a $5 billion penalty on the five firms, while others seek as much as $30 billion, with most of the money going toward reducing troubled homeowners’ mortgage payments and lowering loan balances for underwater borrowers, those who owe more on their home than it’s worth.

 Even the highest of those figures, however, pales in comparison to the likely cost of reducing mortgage principal for the three million homeowners some federal agencies hope to reach. Lowering loan balances for that many underwater borrowers who owe less than $1.15 for every dollar their home is worth would cost as much as $135 billion, according to the internal presentation, dated Feb. 14, obtained by The Huffington Post.

 But perhaps most important to some lawmakers in Washington, the mere existence of the report suggests a much deeper link between the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, led by Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren, and the 50 state attorneys general who are leading the nationwide probe into the five firms’ improper foreclosure practices, a development sure to anger Republicans in Congress and a banking industry intent on diminishing the fledgling CFPB’s legitimacy by questioning its authority to act before it’s officially launched in July.

 Earlier this month, Warren told the House Financial Services Committee, under intense questioning, that her agency has provided limited assistance to the various state and federal agencies involved in the industry probes. At one point, she was asked whether she made any recommendations regarding proposed penalties. She replied that her agency has only provided “advice.”

 A representative of the consumer agency declined to comment on the presentation, citing the law enforcement nature of the federal investigation into the mortgage industry’s leading firms.

The seven-page presentation begins by stating that a deal to settle claims of improper foreclosures “provides the potential for broad reform.”

 In it, the consumer agency outlines possibilities offered by the settlement — a minimum number of mortgage modifications, a boost to the housing market — and how it could reform the industry going forward so that investors in home loans and the borrowers who owe them would be able to resolve situations in which borrowers fall behind on their payments without the complications of a large mortgage company acting in its own interest.

 The presentation also details how much certain firms likely saved in lieu of making the necessary loan-processing adjustments as delinquencies and foreclosures rose. Bank of America, for example, has saved more than $6 billion since 2007 by not upgrading its procedures or hiring more workers, according to the report. Wells Fargo saved about as much, with JPMorgan close behind. Citigroup and Ally bring the total saved to nearly $25 billion.

The presentation adds that the under-investment far exceeds the proposed $5 billion penalty that has been on the table. People familiar with the matter say the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency wants to fine the industry less than $5 billion.

 The alleged shortchanging of homeowners has prolonged the housing market’s woes, experts say, because distressed homeowners who are prime candidates to have their payments reduced aren’t getting loan modifications and lenders are taking up to two years to seize borrowers’ homes.

 The average borrower in foreclosure has been delinquent for 537 days before actually being evicted, up from 319 days in January 2009, according to Lender Processing Services, a data provider.

 The prolonged housing pain has manifested itself in various ways.

 Purchases of new U.S. homes dropped last month to the slowest pace on record, according to the Commerce Department. Prices declined to the lowest level since 2003, according to the National Association of Realtors. About 6.9 million homeowners were either delinquent or in foreclosure proceedings through February, according to LPS.

 A penalty of about $25 billion — based on mortgage servicing costs avoided — would have “little effect” on the five firms’ capital levels, according to the presentation, since the five banks collectively hold about $500 billion in tangible common equity, the highest form of capital. Those numbers notwithstanding, banks and Republicans in Congress have complained that such a large penalty would have a disproportionate impact on bank balance sheets, hurting their ability to lend or pay dividends to investors.

 The presentation adds that given the extent of negative equity — underwater homeowners owe $751 billion more than their homes are worth, according to data provider CoreLogic — “we have gravitated towards settlement solutions that enable asset liquidity and cast a wide net.” The solution is an emphasis on reducing mortgage debt and enabling short sales, thus allowing borrowers to refinance into more affordable loans or to sell their homes and move on.

Top Federal Reserve officials and other economists have pointed to the large numbers of underwater homeowners as being one of the reasons behind high unemployment, as underwater homeowners are unable to move to where the jobs are. More than 23 percent of homeowners with a mortgage are underwater, according to CoreLogic.

The proposed settlement, as envisioned by the consumer agency, could reduce loan balances for up to three million homeowners. If mortgage firms targeted their efforts at reducing mortgage debt for three million homeowners who owe as much as their homes are worth or have less than 5 percent equity, the total cost would be $41.8 billion, according to estimates cited in the presentation.

 If firms lowered total mortgage debt for three million homeowners who are underwater by as much as 15 percent and brought them to 5 percent equity, that would cost more than $135 billion, according to the presentation. That would include reducing second mortgages and home equity lines of credit.

 In its presentation, the consumer agency said the new program, titled “Principal Reduction Mandate,” could be “meaningfully additive to HAMP” — the Home Affordable Modification Program, the Obama administration’s primary mortgage modification effort.

 The CFPB estimates that there are about 12 million U.S. homeowners underwater, most of whom are not delinquent, according to its presentation. Of those, nine million would be eligible for this new principal-reduction scheme born from the foreclosure deal. The new initiative would then “mandate” three million permanent modifications.

News of the level of the consumer agency’s involvement in the state investigation would likely be welcomed by consumer and homeowner advocates, who have long complained of the lack of attention paid to distressed borrowers by federal bank regulators like the OCC and the Federal Reserve.

But Republicans will pounce on the news, creating yet another distraction for a fledgling bureau that was the centerpiece of the Obama administration’s efforts to reform the financial industry in the wake of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Meanwhile, the banking industry will likely celebrate government infighting as attention is diverted away from allegations of bank wrongdoing and towards the level of involvement of Elizabeth Warren, a fierce consumer advocate and the principal original proponent of an agency solely dedicated to protecting borrowers from abusive lenders.

Warren is standing up the agency on an interim basis. It formally launches in July, at which point it will need a Senate-confirmed director in order to carry out its full authority. One of those areas will be how mortgage firms process home loans for distressed borrowers.

A spokeswoman for JPMorgan Chase declined to comment. Spokespeople for the other four banks were not immediately available for comment.

Read the presentation attached.

GA Court of Appeals Does It Again!

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

GA Court of Appeals Does It Again!.

Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. Edited this Book on the Calling to Be A Lawyer? That Explains the Corruption

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law

New Title! A Life In The Law: Advice For Young Lawyers, edited by William S. Duffey, Jr. and Richard A. Schneider American Bar Association, 2009
Call Number: KF 372 .L54 2009

In this book’s nineteen essays, editors Duffey (U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Georgia) and Schneider (senior partner at King & Spalding in Atlanta) examine the calling to be a lawyer. Contributing authors include Griffin Bell, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge who was appointed by President Kennedy and served as Attorney General under President Carter; Paul Clement, former Solicitor General under George W. Bush; and Leah Sears, who at age 36 was the youngest lawyer and the first woman to sit on the Georgia Supreme Court, and later became its first Black female Chief Justice. These and many others write about the values of the profession, the responsibility of lawyers to their communities, and their duty of service to clients, to the public, and to each other. Also addressed are the troublesome issues of how hard lawyers are expected to work, and what sacrifices they should and shouldn’t make.

Georgia Citizens Rights to the Courts

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleFriendlyLTN.jsp?id=1202473818462

Page printed from: Law Technology News

Georgia Mulls Citizens’ Right to Access Courts via E-File
Greg Land
10-25-2010

A DeKalb County judge expressed surprise Tuesday when an attorney representing the parent company of LexisNexis asserted that the public has no constitutional right of access to the courts. The exchange came in a hearing before DeKalb Superior Court Judge Robert J. Castellani on a motion for summary judgment in a case that seeks to have Fulton County’s e-filing system declared unconstitutional.

The case is the fourth iteration of a potential class action against Fulton County and its e-filing system, and charges that the Fulton court’s requirement that documents be filed via the fee-based LexisNexis File & Serve system declared an unconstitutional violation of citizens’ right to access the courts. The suit also says the Fulton court’s requirement violates Georgia law that stipulates the method by which legal documents must be filed and constitutes an “illegal scheme” between the county and LexisNexis’ parent company, Reed Elsevier, to “impose an unlawful mandatory e-filing system upon litigants in Fulton County State and Superior Court and to charge excessive and unauthorized fees in connection therewith.”

In a series of orders beginning in 1999, approved by the Fulton County Board of Commissioners and signed by then-State Court Chief Judge Albert L. Thompson, cases must be e-filed if they involve asbestos, Fen-Phen, mercury or lead, silicosis, welding rods, medical or legal malpractice, personal injury, cases with four or more plaintiffs or defendants, cases in which more than $50,000 in damages is being sought, torts cases, and those in which no specific dollar figure is demanded.

In Superior Court, certain asbestos and silicosis cases must e-file, and all filings in the criminal case against convicted Fulton County Courthouse shooter Brian Nichols also are required to be e-filed.

The complaint says that LexisNexis charges administrative fees of between $7 and $12 for each document filed in addition to the courts’ statutory filing fees, according to the complaint. A public access terminal at the courthouse allows pro se litigants to register and file documents without paying the fee.

The plaintiffs include three attorneys; a non-attorney who, as administrator of his father’s estate, “has been subjected to the Lexis fees”; and a corporate entity, Best Jewelry Manufacturing, which was a party to a suit in Fulton County State Court in 2008.

At one point, according to the complaint, Best’s attorney “was ‘locked out’ of defendant Lexis’ e-filing due to counsel’s alleged failure to pay fees,” and was thus unable to file a motion in the case.

The original eight-count complaint included charging Fulton County and Reed Elsevier with violating Georgia laws that require any court to accept paper filings, and forbidding “usage fees, interest, finance charges, administrative fees and other assessments not authorized by Georgia law.” Other counts allege violations of the rules governing state courts, and of the Georgia Constitution’s guarantee of access to the courts.

An amended complaint in March added counts of conversion and money had and received, which pertains to the fees already collected from the system’s users.

Atlanta attorney Steven J. Newton previously filed two similar suits in federal court; he voluntarily dismissed the first one in 2007, and the court dismissed the second last year. He also filed and voluntarily dismissed a 2007 suit in Fulton County Superior Court where the current suit, with two additional plaintiffs, was filed in January. The Fulton bench recused, and the case was assigned to Castellani.

At Tuesday’s hearing, the court heard arguments concerning Reed Elsevier’s motion to dismiss the suit. Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker partner William K. Whitner, representing the company, argued that the dismissals of the earlier suits, and the submission of several amended complaints to them, indicated that the case has no merit and should be dismissed.

Further, he said, several of the allegations had no bearing on his client.

Reed “is a private party,” he said, and assertions that it could violate laws and regulations relating to the behavior of courts, clerks, or state agencies “have nothing to do with a contractual supplier like Reed Elsevier.”

Whitner pointed to the March 23, 2009, order dismissing the second federal case authored by U.S. District Judge William S. Duffey Jr., which includes the statement that “[p]laintiffs’ state law claims, to the extent they can be discerned at all, repeatedly allege violations of Georgia statutes and court rules that could be broken, if at all, only by the government defendants in this case.”

That order, said Whitner, “while not binding on this court, is certainly instructional.”

“It’s clear that, even if the e-filing were instituted improperly — which we do not believe — Reed has no control,” he said.

But it was Whitner’s statement on the constitutional claims that got Castellani’s attention.

“On the constitutional claims,” said Whitner, “they repeatedly refer to it as a ‘right to access to the courts.’ … The Georgia Supreme Court has repeatedly held that there is no constitutional right to access to the courts.”

“Did you just say there’s no right of access to the courts?” asked Castellani.

“No constitutional right,” said Whitner.

“So a court could establish a filing fee of $1,000, and if somebody didn’t have it, that would be OK?” asked the judge.

“It’s not even a close call,” said Whitner, citing Article 1 of the state Constitution, which states that “no person shall be deprived of the right to prosecute or defend, either in person or by an attorney, that person’s own cause in any of the courts of this state.”

“This provides a right to representation,” he said. “That’s the what the case law says; I’m not saying it’s right or wrong.”

“I hope that’s not what your case rests on,” replied Castellani.

Newton’s co-counsel, associate Shuli L. Green, rose for the plaintiffs, first arguing that Georgia’s voluntary dismissal doctrine clearly allows a case to be voluntarily dismissed and refiled, and that the addition of the new plaintiffs meant that they should certainly have their chance in court.

“Does that mean that no class action could ever be subject to the voluntary dismissal doctrine” as long as new plaintiffs were added? asked Castellani.

“Not until the putative class members are certified by the court,” Green replied.

“That makes sense,” she added, “since we don’t even know who the class members are yet.”

As to Reed’s assertions that it could not be held responsible for the actions of state actors, Green replied that the company is “the functional equivalent of Fulton County as far as setting these filing fees.”

But she saved her harshest critique for the defense argument that the state Constitution affords no right to access to the courts.

She cited the Georgia Supreme Court’s ruling in Nelms v. Georgia Manor Condo Association (253 Ga. 410), which held that while the right to access to the courts is not unfettered, “it is axiomatic that an individual must have access to the courts in order to assert the right of self-representation provided by [the right to the courts provision].”

The requirement that all attorneys pay the fees and may not file by mail or in person is onerous enough, she said, but the burden on pro se filers — who have to either sign up with Lexis to pursue their case, or make their way to the Fulton County Courthouse, perhaps at considerable expense, to use the free PAT terminals creates a hardship that breaches constitutional strictures, she said.

Further, she said, the necessity to make that choice itself impacts a citizen’s right to select his or her choice of representation.

She also noted that, under the defense interpretation, there is no limit as to what fees can be charged.

“That proposition does concern me a little bit,” said Castellani, although “I don’t think it’s relevant here. There are alternatives available.”

“Their argument is that you don’t have to pay [to use the PATs],” she said, “but if you do have a lawyer your only option is to either have your lawyer file orders and pay him for his time, or pay a lawyer to use the free terminal, so it’s not free.”

Castellani did not issue any rulings, nor did he indicate when he might do so.

In response to an inquiry, a Reed Elsevier spokesman provided an e-mailed statement.

“LexisNexis has worked with the Fulton County courts since 1999 to provide court personnel and legal professionals with an efficient way to handle the exchange of legal documents through File & Serve,” it said. “The service allows for increased control over case file management, quicker and more cost effective filing and service, improved access to information and enhanced case monitoring. We believe the residents of Fulton County also benefit by the Court’s ability to more efficiently manage documents and reduce costs for document storage and administration.”

The case is McCurdy v. Fulton County, No. 2010CV179757.

A similar case is proceeding in federal court in Texas, where a class action was filed earlier this year against a judge, court clerk and county. In 2003, Montgomery County District Court Judge Frederick E. Edwards issued an order requiring that civil case documents be filed only through LexisNexis, exempting only filings filed by the state, Child Protective Services, adoptive actions, and new divorce and annulment cases that are resolved within 90 days, according to the complaint.

The Texas suit alleges constitutional equal protection and due process violations, and asserts that the arrangement between the company and county constitutes a violation of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations law.

The case in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas is McPeters v. Edwards, No. 4:10-CV-1103.

Beware of Court’s Clerks

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, law, Legal

Order on Appeal from Probate Court

by nootkabear, posted in Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal
After waiting for almost four years for an Order on Appeal/Void Judgment from DeKalb County Probate Court Judge Rosh’s Order. The Court had set three peremptory hearings, and a jury trial hearing. This morning another peremptory hearing was scheduled. Judge Elliott A Shoenthall replaced Judge Scott. When he performed roll call, he informed James that the case had been dismissed March 2006 by Order. He stated that something must have been filed wrong. Judge Shoenthall announced a two minute recess. The Judge and clerks were gone about twenty minutes.
Judge Shoenthall obviously read the file and read the Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law James filed in January before the jury trial hearing date.
Judge Shoenthall promised James if he would wait, he would get the Order. Not only did James receive the Order from Judge Scott’s 2006 Ruling, he presented us with an appealable Order dated today. The clerk made sure to inform James that the Order would be appealable.
Judge Shoenthall must have realized all that James had ever wanted was the Right to Appeal the Order, but without an Order, you cannot Appeal. Notice of Intent to Appeal had been filed with Judge Scott before he Ruled, and two Motions for Orders had been filed, but no Order was forthcoming.

Thanks Judge Shoenthall!

View Original Article

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Georgia Supreme Court Opinions Database: Direct Appeal Opinions

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Injustice, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

Georgia Supreme Court Opinions Database: Direct Appeal Opinions.

Georgia Supreme Court Opinion: Smith et al. v. Baptiste et al.

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Injustice, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law

Georgia Supreme Court Opinion: Smith et al. v. Baptiste et al..

Georgia Supreme Court Opinion: State of Georgia ex rel. Doyle v. Frederick J.Hanna

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Injustice, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

Georgia Supreme Court Opinion: State of Georgia ex rel. Doyle v. Frederick J.Hanna.

Court Thwarts Governor’s Attempt to Investigate Debt Collection Firm (via Georgia Supreme Court Blog)

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Injustice, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

In a 4-to-3 decision, the Georgia Supreme Court has upheld a ruling by a Cobb County court prohibiting a state official from investigating a law firm that collects debts on behalf of creditors. Background Joseph Doyle is the Administrator of the Fair Business Practices Act of 1975, Georgia's principal consumer protection law that prohibits deceptive practices involving consumer trade. Doyle enforces the law through the Governor's Office of Consum … Read More

via Georgia Supreme Court Blog

In the Domain Name World

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

For all of those who are involved in domain names, visits Domain news websites, and/or keeps up with the Rick Latona auctions…

All I have to say is the following in support of John Zuccarini in the DS Holdings v Zuccarini and/or the Zuccarini v NameJet, Network Solutions, Verisign, Enom cases:

“Equal Justice for All”????

If you go back to the original Office Depot v Zuccarini suit, the Court lacked jurisdiction and venue. They claimed quasi in rem jurisdiction under ACPA, but still a problem… In that case they should have had to go to VA to do the suit.

Then Office Depot gets this judgment, and never tried to collect on it, yea DSH has repeatedly claimed that Office Depot couldn’t ever collect because of Zuccarini and his notorious way of moving around and not being able to find him. That too is hogwash.

The facts clearly show that Zuccarini was living in FL since 2001 and was fairly easy to find (most of the time); nevertheless, Office Depot never bothered to file the Judgment in FL, so that means they never tried to collect on it.

And for everyone else that wants to say some really bad things about Zuccarini… he may be alot of things, but really people “criminal notorious cybersquatter”; “serial cybersquatter”, and other references, which are really quite worse… Then you have some asshole attorney, Kronie, who claims that the Shields case is where some of the worse comes from. I read the Shields Appellate Court Opinion, it didn’t say that at all. It said:

“Although Zuccarini’s sites did not involve pornography, his intent was the same as that mentioned in the legislative history above — to register a domain name in anticipation that consumers would make a mistake, thereby increasing the number of hits his site would receive, and, consequently, the number of advertising dollars he would gain.”

So John was given a bad time, and there are a lot of wild rumors out there, and a lot of people want to say a lot of BullShit, but really… does that make DS Holdings, Rick Latona, or any other number of entities better? They are actually bigger crooks than Zuccarini could ever be… Kronie does it under the guise of being an attorney.

Maybe that is why attorneys have bad names (not all attorneys, Berryhill has shown to not be quite like the rest, and I hear good things about several others that run domain news websites)

Then you have this Judge…Illston. What the hell kind of Judge allows that much fraud upon the Court in their Courtroom? Is she just stupid, or is she in on it too?
Does DS Holdings somehow own Illston?

Hell, now I have more questions than I had before I found out that Kronie is DSH!

The Invention of a criminal statute in order to arrest a citizen

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal
Basically that is exactly what happened.  I don’t really know onto who’s Birthday cake John Zuccarini shit so many years ago, but the whole incident has had the Domain world talking about it off and on for more than ten years. 
Yes, the gov’t did invent a new crime in order to arrest Zuccarini; why?  Because they could.  Where in the hell is due process of law when that happens?
Don’t take my word for it, John Berryhill is an attorney, and well known in the “Domain” world… Berryhill was responding to one of my questions on the matter as I was trying to learn more about the situation…
John Berryhill
June 9th, 2010 | 3:38 pm

“My question is this… If Zuccarini was prosecuted for using these particular domain names, are they not illegal?”

There are several legal actions involving what might be termed “Zuccarini domains”.

The basic lay of the land in THIS case is that an attorney in California bought uncollected civil judgments against Zuccarini and used those judgments to levy against his *other* domain names. In that view, *these* domain names were not the ones which triggered the civil judgments (which I believe also transferred the infringing domains). It is something like my putting a lien against your house because I obtained a judgment against you for hitting me with your car.

Now, there is another shoe to drop here, because the US government also has some outstanding issues, and has filed to intervene in the case. The US issues relate, IMHO, to back taxes and to a judgment with the FTC obtained against Zuccarini at some time in the murky past. Interestingly, the FTC order prevented him from engaging in a laundry list of activities involving trafficking in the entire set of his domain names.

Apart from all of that, there was a criminal conviction of Mr. Zuccarini resulting from an alleged violation of the Truth in Domain Names Act (or whatever it was called). Oddly, the indictment in that case relied on acts committed prior to the effective date of the statute, but Mr. Z took a plea deal for reasons unknown. US Attorneys can be very persuasive.

While the US has not completely dropped its shoe yet (the last time I checked the docket), it is not outside of the range of possibilities for the US to see things your way – i.e. that the collection of domains itself (cybersquatted or not) is somehow tainted as “instruments of crime” or some other theory that will snatch defeat from that clever California attorney’s hands.

Needless to say, the US government has large shoes.

The decade-long sweep of this story is epic.

Our Legal Filings

by nootkabear, posted in Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, law, Legal

As a Pro Se litigant, it is often difficult to know or understand what a Motion, Objection, etc. is supposed to look like. So, what I have done is uploaded to two different websites some of the legal filings we have filed in Probate, State, Superior, District, Court of Appeals of GA, US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Courts.

Feel free to check out the filings, they are very useful and informative. Feel free to use the case law, it has all been checked and is what it says. Feel free to contact us should you have any questions.

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND… WE ARE NOT ATTORNEYS, WE DO NOT GIVE LEGAL ADVICE!
We supply this information only as information in hopes of a better United States and in hopes of combating the corruption within the legal system and courts!

Go to: http://www.docstoc.com/profile/NootkabearMcDonald

Documents

Superior Court Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit

by nootkabear, posted in Injustice, Judicial Corruption, law, Legal

Ya know…

It never ceases to amaze me the amount of corruption at Superior Court Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit.

Now Judge Becker, the same Judge that we have a case against in Federal Court, and who refuses to recuse from the Superior Court case, has set a Summary Judgment hearing for GA Power.

Because she is defendant in a case in federal court along with GA Power and two of the attorneys representing them in the Superior Court case, she cannot legally preside over the Superior Court case. She refuses to recuse.

How in the hell is anyone to have a fair and impartial tribunal in that Court system? The day after she was properly served with Summons and Complaint, she dismissed with prejudice our case against GA Power leaving only their counterclaim.

This is truly a sign of the done deal syndrome!

DeKalb Superior Court Judge Mark Anthony Scott

by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Court Cases, Courts, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial Rulings, law, Legal

Keep in mind, Judge Scott has had an Appeal and Void Judgment in front of him for over three years. He set it for Jury Trial that was to begin January 26, 2009. He failed to send Notice of trial to any of the parties.



Monday, January 26, 2009 in a wheelchair, I attended a “Jury Trial” calendar call in Superior Court before Judge Mark Anthony Scott for an Appeal from Probate Court, which was filed three years ago. When my name was called I responded; Judge asked if I was ready for trial, I responded that I was. Judge asked if I was proceeding Pro Se, I responded that I was. Judge asked if I was represented by counsel, I responded that No, I am proceeding Pro Se. The Judge asked me two more times if I was represented, and/or if I was proceeding Pro Se, I responded that I am proceeding Pro Se both times.



The clerk, very quietly spoke to the Judge. The Judge stated that there are “technical difficulties” in the file. I asked what the technical difficulties are. The Judge, very irritated stated to the Bailiff “take him out back!” I stated to the Judge: “All I did was ask what the difficulties are”; Judge responded: “I didn’t like your tone of voice!”; I responded: “I am in constant pain, I wasn’t rude”; Judge said: “Why didn’t you tell me that to begin with, I was having you arrested for contempt!”; I said nothing. The Judge then said: “Bailiffs take him out of my Courtroom!”



At that point the Bailiffs, one grabbing the handles of my wheelchair physically removed me from the courtroom. I waited outside approximately 30 minutes, decided I should go in case this Judge decided to have me arrested for contempt. I have heard nothing sense.

Judicial Corruption

by nootkabear, posted in Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, law, Legal

I don’t know about the rest of yall, but I have had about enough of the corruption within the Judicial System. I see that it’s not just in Georgia, but all over the whole country.

It’s just a damn shame that the greatest country in the world is riddled with such corruption and apparently everyone knows it and nothing is done about it.

If anyone else (I’m not speaking of attorneys, or law students, I am speaking of those of us forced to fight for our Rights in the Courts as Pro Se litigants) if anyone else has ever sat back and read case after case after case for caselaw, it is obvious that what is going on goes against everything our country was created for. The Supreme Court in many cases goes through and analyzes what it was that the “framers intended” when they made laws.

I can tell you…. the framers did not intend justice to be only for the rich, only for those who can afford attorneys, only for friends and family of Judges. They never intended the Judges to be bias/prejudice and treat litigants without dignity, to treat them as idiots, to humiliate them.

We have studied the law diligently for four years now. No, not at college, but studied in the same way one would study in college. We are not idiots, and we will not quit, we will not go away!