Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Film: Local Self-Government: Brentwood, NH April 1 Monday  (Read 36637 times)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Sue Corruption [NEW: Protect Yourself From Lawyers]
« Reply #60 on: March 14, 2013, 12:57:46 pm »

Protect Yourself From Lawyers
How to Win in Court 866-LAW-EASY ( 866-529-3279 )

Do you know what it takes to win a lawsuit?
If not, you probably plan on hiring a lawyer to go to court for you.

But, then, you probably don't have a clue what your lawyer should be doing. You probably don't know you can save thousands in lawyer fees by doing at least some of the work yourself to cut down on the lawyer's billable hours!

People who hire lawyers without knowing "what must be done to win" often end up bankrupt. The lawyers they hire bail out or wimp out before trial. The innocent lose ... and never know why! And, of course, if you can't afford a lawyer, you're required to fight in the dark with both hands tied behind your back!

There IS another way! There's no substitute for knowing "what it takes to win".

If you must hire a lawyer:
    Know what the lawyer should do.
    Don't pay for incompetence or laziness.
    Don't let your lawyer cheat you!
    Know how to demand effective legal service!

If you can't afford a lawyer:
    Force the court to protect your rights.
    Draft proper pleadings.
    Get evidence in the record.
    Make effective courtroom objections.
    Move the court to get what you want!

Learn all this and more at How to Win in Court

-----

The Pro Se Problem
Why Pro Se Litigants Have a Hard Time.

Whether it's the high cost of lawyers' fees or growing distrust of lawyers in general, there is a mounting trend these days for more people to fight without a lawyer. Those who know "How to Win in Court" are winning. Those who don't are losing.

The American Bar Association (ABA) reports
    60% of the public can't afford a lawyer.
    20% simply don't want to spend the money.
    50% just don't trust lawyers!

Yet ½ of all court proceedings involve at least one pro se party. Too many pro se people are losing ... needlessly!

Ever wonder why you were never taught anything about court procedure or the rules of evidence in your tax-supported schools? Who benefits from your legal ignorance? You guessed it. Lawyers!

    Most pro se people know nothing about the official Rules of Evidence and the official Rules of Procedure that control the judge and all parties and their lawyers.
    Most pro se people have no idea what "due process" really is.
    " can't recognize the opposing lawyer's dirty tricks.
    " assume what "admissible evidence" is and don't know what stuff isn't.
    " draft their pleadings and motions incorrectly - usually with far too many words!
    " don't know why it's vital to write proposed orders for the judge to sign.
    " don't know why, when, or how to make effective objections in court.
    " don't understand what facts are critical to winning a case and what facts are of no consequence.
    " muddy the legal waters with court-confusing insignificant statements.
    " don't know how to find and cite controlling appellate opinions in support of their motions.
    " don't arrange in advance of every proceeding to have a court stenographer present, so they can control the judge.
    " waste valuable court time with non-essentials, fail to appreciate the needs of others who have other problems to bring before the court and, as a consequence, tend to make judges dread pro se cases and hate pro se people.

People who learn "How to Win in Court" are winning every day! Winners know how to use the official rules. Learn how to use the official rules at How to Win in Court

-----

How to Read the Law
Know What the Law Actually Says and Means!

One of the biggest case-losing mistakes is mis-reading the law.
    Constitutions
    Rules
    Statutes
    Codes
    Court Rulings
    Other Legal Documents

If you don't know what a law actually says, you'll have a devilishly hard time getting a judge to agree with you! Understanding the "rules of language interpretation" is essential ... not only to winning lawsuits but to obtain success in other pursuits of life as well.

Legal language must be interpreted according to the "rules of language interpretation". Understanding the rules of language interpretation are vital to winning your case. You DO want to win, don't you?

Too many otherwise clever people "assume" they know what a law says, when the only opinion that counts in court is what appellate justices say the law says. Appellate justices apply the rules of language interpretation. You must also! Learn the rules ... if you want to win!

For example, one of the principles rules is the "Plain Meaning Rule". This rule requires judges to give words their "plain meaning", i.e., what an ordinary reasonable person would believe a word means in the context where it's found.

You must never let a judge or opposing party or his lawyer play games with words. Knowing these rules (more completely explained in my course) gives you the knowledge/power you need to put a stop to the word games!

If a reasonable person would read "bicycle" to mean a two-wheeled vehicle powered only by legs and feet, no judge or lawyer should be allowed to stretch the meaning to include mopeds or motorcycles. Judges and lawyers should be compelled to agree that a law says "plainly" what it says and that it means it.

Sometimes judges and lawyers twist words to reach an outcome they desire. YOU must know these rules so you can put a stop to it before it causes you to lose your case!

So? What if the meaning is plain but the context is confusing? Other rules (explained in my course) give clear direction. For example, according to the rule of "ejusdem generis" (simply Latin for "of the same type"), general terms at the end of specific lists include only things of the same type as those specifically mentioned in the list. If a provision lists "oranges, grapefruit, lemons, and other fruit", the doctrine of ejusdem generis limits the phrase "other fruit" to mean other citrus fruit. Apples and pears are not included. One may assume the provision includes other citrus, e.g., kumquats, limes, tangelos, etc. However, strawberries and grapes are not included. The term ejusdem generis means, in essence, of the same type.

You need to know this stuff ... if you want to win! To learn more, order my affordable, official 24-hour Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" self-help course and get your competitive edge ... before it's too late.

www.Jurisdictionary.com
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Sue Corruption [How to Argue with Judges; Dodge Lawsuits]
« Reply #61 on: April 01, 2013, 04:47:16 pm »

How to Argue with Judges!

How to Win in Court
866-LAW-EASY ( 866-529-3279 )

Arguing with judges is like arguing with baseball umpires.
You better know the rules AND HOW TO USE THEM!
Here are a few rules from the Official Major League Baseball Rulebook:
A player is not permitted to step or go into a dugout to make a catch.
A player is permitted to reach into a dugout to make a catch.
If a player makes a catch outside the dugout and his momentum carries him into the dugout, the catch is allowed as long as the player does not fall in the dugout.

Simple enough? But! What if one team's players and coaches don't know the rules? Will it do any good to argue with the umpire? Probably not! And %#$@&$#*% will only get you thrown out of the park!

To argue with a baseball umpire or judge in a courtroom, you must know the Rules of Court ... and how to use them. Learn the official rules and how to use them ... or lose! End of story!


Win Without Risking Trial!

Do you know how to win before trial? Lawyers drag out cases so they can bill for more time. Many refuse to do things "the right way" so they can avoid trial, because they make more money if they can take their clients' cases all-the-way to the bitter, knock-down, drag-out bitter end at trial.

Do you hold winning cards (law and facts)? Then you can win before trial!
There is no evidence you cannot get in before trial.
There are no witnesses you cannot question under oath before trial.
There are no documents or things you cannot get in before trial.
There are no legal arguments you cannot make before trial.
There is nothing going to happen at trial that cannot be made to happen before trial. The "trying" of your case begins with the first pleading and continues with discovery and motions before trial.

Common reasons cases go to trial are:
Lazy lawyer who didn't do the pre-trial work he could have done.
Stupid lawyer who didn't know how to do the pre-trial work he could have done.
Greedy lawyer who didn't want to do the pre-trial work he could have done.
No lawyer and no idea how to do the pre-trial work that could have been done.

Don't wait for trial to win! A few reasons why are:
Trial is uncertain, especially with unpredictable juries and corrupt judges.
Trial is "think on your feet" with opponent trying to throw you off with objections.
Trial is a nasty battle against lawyers' willing to cheat if they can.
Trial is a last bite at the apple, with no take backs and no retreats.

Win before trial! There are no questions you can ask at a trial that you cannot ask before trial using interrogatories, requests for admissions, depositions, and subpoenas.

There are no documents or things you can bring to trial that you cannot get into the trial record before trial using requests for production, subpoenas, and depositions duce tecum.

There are no legal arguments you can make at trial that you cannot make more effectively and more powerfully before trial using the online legal research and carefully drafted memoranda.

Learn how to win before trial at How to Win in Court


Lawsuit Anatomy

Learn lawsuit anatomy by spelling: CAT. 3 stages in every case:
Complaint
Answer
Trial
Of course, there's much more to winning, but it's all easy if you start with basic anatomy: CAT.

The case begins when the plaintiff or prosecutor complains.
The defendant then has an opportunity to answer.
And, after the intervening battle to discover evidence, the matter goes to trial.

The real fight is in the discovery process ... not at trial as TV leads you to believe! Every winnable case can be won before trial. Learn how to win before trial at How to Win in Court


How to Dodge a Lawsuit

Do you wan to dodge a lawsuit? Whether you're a plaintiff or defendant, you must know what smart defendants do to dodge lawsuits. If a defendant is served with a complaint, he may dodge the lawsuit by filing motions to avoid filing an Answer! This is called a "flurry of motions".

Once a defendant files an Answer, he's locked in and misses this chance to dodge the lawsuit altogether. Don't file an Answer if you can dodge the lawsuit with a "flurry of motions".

Inexperienced lawyers and pro se people make the avoidable mistake of filing an Answer to plaintiff's Complaint ... instead of using the flurry of motions.

    Motion to Dismiss
    Motion to Strike
    Motion for More Definite Statement
Each of these motions postpones the necessity of filing an Answer to the Complaint ... and gains you valuable time and evidence-gathering opportunities!In some cases it puts an end to the case. Period!

Failure to use the Flurry of Motions weakens your case. Learn how to use the Flurry of Motions at How to Win in Court.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Sue Corruption [DIY Legal Research & Lawless Govt]
« Reply #62 on: April 17, 2013, 01:17:47 pm »

Legal Research

Ignorance of the Law is NO EXCUSE! Do you know how to find the official law that will decides who wins your case? Do you know how to find and read appellate case reports? Do you know how to find and read statutes, code, and ordinances?

It's easier than you might imagine! If you went to court before personal computers and the internet, you'd be digging through dismally dry and boring stacks of look-alike books in a law library (if you could find one nearby).

Back then, winning required hundreds of hours turning dusty pages, pulling piles of books from the stacks, spreading them on a library table, and taking notes on a yellow pad in search of support. All that has changed. Thanks to the internet and price competition, online legal research is now within the reach of most pocketbooks.

Learn how to find the law. Learn how to cite the law in your pleadings, motions, memoranda, and briefs. Clever argument is not enough. You cannot win without finding and citing official legal authorities that control judges.

Be assured your opponent will cite legal authorities favoring his case. You must do the same … if you want to win. Learn how to find and cite the law at How to Win in Court

Using On-Line Legal Research
How to Win in Court - 866-LAW-EASY ( 866-529-3279 )

Find the Law that Controls the Judge! Otherwise, you cannot hope to win! You cannot win without citing "legal authority". You cannot cite "legal authority" if you don't know how to find it.

The judge is not "legal authority". Judges are required to obey "legal authority". Go tell a judge your personal opinions about the law and how you think he should rule, and see how far it gets you! The only opinions that count in court are written opinions of appellate court justices. Your opinions count for nothing in court.

Control the judge with "legal authority" by researching and citing appellate court opinions. Controlling judges is what wins cases! Your opponent will cite legal authorities. You must do the same ... if you want to win.

Learn how to find and cite legal authorities at How to Win in Court

When "The Law" Breaks the Law!

Control those who Control YOU! The Wild Wild West was won by a few folks clever enough to establish "Law & Order" in the unsettled wilds west of the Mississippi by bringing along:
    A thoroughly-read Bible,
    A Colt revolver and Winchester rifle,
    A good horse and well-provisioned wagon, and
    A sturdy copy of Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England

England, did you say? Yup! In that single book (you can get a Kindle or Nook version for free) written before our Declaration of Independence, those early settlers found enough common-sense law to jail bandits, hang rustlers, and open the way for railroads and booming towns and cities ... impossible without law and order.

Contrary to what you see on TV, it wasn't faster guns or bigger fists that settled lawless towns like Tombstone and Dodge City. It was the support of local townsfolk who wanted law and order. People who believed in the principles of Justice found in those two books: the Bible and Blackstone. People with courage to put an end to lawlessness.

Yet today we face a new threat [of] lawlessness! It may be a bank using fraud to foreclose. It may be a corrupt business partner, ex-spouse, or next-door neighbor out-of-control. For many it's the threat of government officials refusing to follow the law - tax collectors, police officers, and corrupt judges who break the law to allow fraud to reign free in their courts as lawyers rape people who do not know "How to Win in Court".

When "the law" becomes outlaw, there's only one remedy. People who know how to use the Rules! The Rules of Evidence that control all civil and criminal proceedings in state and federal courts comprise less than 30 pages in the official rule books? The Rules of Procedure that control all civil and criminal proceedings in state and federal courts comprise less than 60 pages in the official rule books?

You can use those rules to control every judge, every lawyer, every bank, every giant corporation, your next door neighbor, a business partner, and every state and federal agency trying to pull the wool over your eyes. Solve your legal problems today the same way western settlers brought lawlessness to its knees in the Wild West more than a century ago ... learn the Rules!

Justice is Yours for the Taking! Protect yourself [and] children from lawless legal officials, scheming bankers, incompetent doctors, rival siblings, and anyone else who seeks to do you harm. If a fraudulent lender, bill collector, tax man, corrupt judge, crooked lawyer, or anyone else uses unlawful force to deprive you or your family of your rights, teach them a lesson!

That's how the West was won! Learn now at How to Win in Court

Preparing for Hearings or Trial

Preparation is everything! Whether you're training for the Olympics or trying to win a case in court, winners know they must exercise, prepare themselves, and be ready for competition. Most court cases can be won before trial.

All you need to know is how to use a handful of tools effectively.
    Proper pleadings.
    Evidence discovery tools.
    Motions and memoranda.
    Courtroom objections.

Pleadings frame the case and tell the court what the fight is about. Evidence proves the facts alleged. Motions "move" the court to act. Courtroom objections put the judge on notice he will be appealed if he rules against you!

Learn how to use these case-winning tools at How to Win in Court - http://howtowinincourt.com
« Last Edit: April 17, 2013, 01:20:12 pm by Luck »
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #63 on: April 25, 2013, 03:12:16 pm »

Finding Evidence - Part One
Intgerrogatories
http://HowtoWininCourt.com 866-LAW-EASY (866-529-3279)

Evidence is the "stuff" that wins cases. Do you know how to find it? One way is with interrogatories. Interrogatories are just written questions that must be answered under oath ... or someone goes to jail!

For example, one interrogatory I serve on my clients' opponents reads, "Identify all persons having first-hand knowledge of any material fact alleged in the pleadings of this case and, with regard to each such person, state what they know about each such fact and how they came to know it." The other side will have a fit!

You are entitled to find the evidence you need ... no matter who has it. No matter who is trying to hide it! Rule 26(b) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action."

Don't be left holding an empty evidence bag! Learn how to use interrogatories and see the sample forms at How to Win in Court.

Part Two
Request for Admissions


Requests for Admissions find evidence. And how! A request for admissions is simply a list of facts you serve on your opponent that he is required to answer within a set amount of time or have those things treated as admitted!

Requests for Admissions are POWERFUL! If you know how to use them tactically. Requests for admissions are like leading questions! They can find evidence your opponent is trying to hide. They can turn your opponent inside-out!

Don't be hoodwinked by lack of legal knowledge. None of what you need to win is rocket science! Don't let lawyers trick you! You have a God-given right to find the evidence you need to win. Learn how to use Requests for Admissions and see the sample forms at How to Win in Court

Part Three
Requests for Production


You can get your opponent's toothbrush or bank records, if they will help you win your case ... and either your opponent turns them over or you can send your opponent to jail!

The discovery tool is called a Request for Production. You can use it to get documents or things ... of all descriptions. Requests for Production are simply papers requiring your opponent to produce documents and tangible things you list in your request ... so you can inspect them and copy them for your own use.

Finding evidence was never easier! Even though they're called "requests", they force your opponent to produce ... or go to jail.

Protect yourself from the crooked, deceitful hide-the-ball game lawyers play! Learn how to use Requests for Production and see the sample forms at How to Win in Court

Part Four
Depositions


Depositions are simply a chance to show people things and ask them questions while they are under oath ... and with an official court reporter making a written record. The deponent (person being deposed) is exposed to criminal penalties for perjury.

Depositions are your opportunity to put your opponent and every necessary witness under oath before trial and get answers to questions that go beyond the tight restrictions of the rules of evidence that control at trial!

The facts you seek at a deposition need not be admissible at trial so long as they are "reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence".

However it's done, taking depositions is simply one of putting a witness under oath in the presence of a court reporter (who administers the oath and records all that's asked and answered) and in the presence of your opponent (and his counsel, if he has a lawyer) who may also ask questions of the witness.

Knowing how and when to take depositions gives you a major advantage over your opponent. Learn how to use Depositions at How to Win in Court
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #64 on: April 25, 2013, 03:55:42 pm »

Um, no, they don't automatically have to answer any question you ask, or produce any evidence you request, or whatever.

They can quite easily refuse.

Then you have to file a motion to ask the judge to compel them to do so.  They have an opportunity to respond to your motion.  And if the judge rules in your favor, they can file a motion to reconsider.

And if you are trying to get a judge to compel someone in producing something frivolous, like their toothbrush or something, you may very well end up in jail for contempt of court.

Pretty much nothing in that post is actually honest.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #65 on: April 28, 2013, 10:40:47 am »

I was posting Fred Graves' info. He's a lawyer with 25 or more years experience and he helps people learn to win in court with or without a lawyer and he advises winning and getting the opposition to settle before trial, before or after a hearing. All of this effort to get evidence is meant to occur before trial and possibly even before a hearing. So there would be no contempt of court, if it's not occurring in court.

Your info might be helpful if you would state it clearly. As is, it's not very clear and I can't tell if your knowledge is any better than Fred's.
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #66 on: April 28, 2013, 11:10:10 am »

I was posting Fred Graves' info. He's a lawyer with 25 or more years experience and he helps people learn to win in court with or without a lawyer and he advises winning and getting the opposition to settle before trial, before or after a hearing. All of this effort to get evidence is meant to occur before trial and possibly even before a hearing. So there would be no contempt of court, if it's not occurring in court.

All of the things listed in that post are things that occur during the legal process, not before it.  You can certainly request answers to questions but, as I noted, you can't require them other than by requesting that the judge compel the other party to respond.  The only way you can do that is by submitting a motion to have that done, either by mail or at a hearing.  Unless it's something that obviously relates, the judge is going to ask you what purpose the given evidence or question serves.  In either case, you can be charged with contempt if the motion is frivolous.

For example, "I need his phone records from 8:15PM to 9:45PM on the night of the 28th of April to prove that he called me and spent approximately 50 minutes on the phone with me, which demonstrates that he initiated the contact and didn't just hang up as soon as I pitched this offer to him, supporting my claim that we did, in fact, discuss it at length and reached a verbal agreement" would be a realistic and reasonable request.

"I need his phone records for the past three months, just because" is not.  The courts tend to take a dim view of using the system for harassment.  Following Graves' advice would put someone at a substantial risk of spending some time behind bars, being fined, or both.

Your info might be helpful if you would state it clearly. As is, it's not very clear and I can't tell if your knowledge is any better than Fred's.

Please let me know what you found unclear.  The law is often hard to explain, but I do my best to make my posts accessible.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #67 on: May 02, 2013, 10:02:03 am »

Quote
MS said: Please let me know what you found unclear.  The law is often hard to explain, but I do my best to make my posts accessible.
It would be great if you could fill in Fred's missing info. I have his course so I can look up more of his material, but it's copyrighted. He provides enough info in his ads to entice people to buy his course for $250, which I think is a good price, but, if you can fill in the blanks, folks could get more complete info for free, or you could offer to consult for a fee or something.

I think I understand what you're saying, but I don't think you necessarily contradicted Fred. He said in the ad:
Quote
Evidence is the "stuff" that wins cases. Do you know how to find it? One way is with interrogatories. Interrogatories are just written questions that must be answered under oath ... or someone goes to jail!
- For example, one interrogatory I serve on my clients' opponents reads, "Identify all persons having first-hand knowledge of any material fact alleged in the pleadings of this case and, with regard to each such person, state what they know about each such fact and how they came to know it." The other side will have a fit!
- You are entitled to find the evidence you need ... no matter who has it. No matter who is trying to hide it!
Questions
- Is Fred wrong in saying that someone goes to jail if they don't answer an interrogatory in a case?
- Who does and who doesn't go to jail for refusing to answer?
- Fred said you're entitled to the evidence you need. So, if a judge agrees that the evidence you request in an interrogatory is needed, is Fred right then that failure to answer can result in going to jail?
- Or are some people privileged and don't have to answer, even if the judge agrees that the evidence is needed?
- Do you contend that Fred's example of an interrogatory that he said he uses is a bad example that would often result in contempt?

If you have any major disagreements with Fred, I can ask him to reply or discuss. And, by the way, how about telling us your background in law? Do you provide people law info for a fee or free?


(My own background involves having had a 1,000 dollar fine for driving in my home state of Illinois in 2003 without insurance and with a suspended license and for a few minor problems; then buying $400 worth of books by James B Woods III and learning enough law from that and from the Tips and Tricks yahoogroup to get out of the fine at the hearing, but only doing 20 hours of community service at a charity of my choice. I felt it wasn't worth the trouble to go to trial, but I would have if they had insisted on a sizable fine, say 100 or more.)
« Last Edit: May 02, 2013, 10:13:50 am by Luck »
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: DIY Law [How to Get Evidence for Your Case]
« Reply #68 on: May 02, 2013, 07:02:57 pm »

- Is Fred wrong in saying that someone goes to jail if they don't answer an interrogatory in a case?

Yes.  Failure to answer an interrogatory is not grounds for imprisonment, or even a fine.  Anyone can ask anyone any question, anywhere.  That's all an interrogatory is.  I can walk up to you on the street and ask you a question; you don't go to jail for refusing to answer me.

- Who does and who doesn't go to jail for refusing to answer?
- Fred said you're entitled to the evidence you need. So, if a judge agrees that the evidence you request in an interrogatory is needed, is Fred right then that failure to answer can result in going to jail?

No one goes to jail for refusing to answer.  Someone might go to jail for contempt of court if that individual was ordered to answer, and did not do so.  BUt the cause would be the refusal to abide by the judge's order, not the refusal to answer.  A judge can order you to take off your hat, and throw you in jail if you refuse, for that matter.

- Or are some people privileged and don't have to answer, even if the judge agrees that the evidence is needed?

I've never met anyone who was jailed pursuant to refusal to answer an interrogatory.  I'm sure it happens that someone is ordered to do so, and does not, and gets jailed for contempt, but it's rare.  If nothing else, the individual can always exercise his Fifth Amendment right to stand silent.  Few judges have any interest in getting involved in a Constitutional dispute, so they usually won't pursue that for some minor civil case.

- Do you contend that Fred's example of an interrogatory that he said he uses is a bad example that would often result in contempt?

I can't imagine any judge actually enforcing an interrogatory like that.  It's ridiculously over-broad.  You don't get to demand that the other party hand you a case, wrapped with a bow.  You can ask specific questions, but something that basically says, "prove my case for me" is going to get tossed.

And, by the way, how about telling us your background in law? Do you provide people law info for a fee or free?

Charging for legal advice is generally illegal, unless you're a licensed lawyer.  I've been studying law for around three decades, both on my own and by paying to take courses at law schools.

(My own background involves having had a 1,000 dollar fine for driving in my home state of Illinois in 2003 without insurance and with a suspended license and for a few minor problems; then buying $400 worth of books by James B Woods III and learning enough law from that and from the Tips and Tricks yahoogroup to get out of the fine at the hearing, but only doing 20 hours of community service at a charity of my choice. I felt it wasn't worth the trouble to go to trial, but I would have if they had insisted on a sizable fine, say 100 or more.)

I prefer it when the judge turns to the prosecutor and says, "why don't I make it easy - case dismissed," personally.  That resulted from a failure of the prosecutor to provide proper discovery, so the evidentiary motions can definitely be useful, but they have to be properly-done.  If the judge had been annoyed at me for pushing a bunch of nonsense, he might have let it ride the way it was, and forced me to prove, item-by-item, that any given piece of discovery which had not been provided was actually something that would prejudice my case.  Instead, he tossed it within two minutes.  There are ways to use the rules to win, but annoying the court with frivolous nonsense is not among them.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2013, 03:47:28 pm »

M.S., thanks for your comments. Now I'd like to have your comments on the opening post of this thread, which I'm copying below.

Quote
Injunctions
"(I)njunctions are able to command high officials to answer your questions and concerns about what they're doing with your children, your tax dollars, and the future of your country. There are no limitations on injunctions. You can file a complaint seeking an injunction to require a local school board to tell you why children are being taught non-traditional values. You can file for an injunction to stop chemical dumping, or to fill in dangerous holes left by abandoned excavations. You can even bring an action to enjoin leaders to explain why government doesn't teach its public even the simplest points of how to win in court. ... If you're one of the good guys, you're supposed to use your power to make the world better for all of us. Force government and giant businesses to answer you on the public record (or [they] go to jail). ... Demand justice! Learn your fundamental right to be heard by the court. Move the court. Enforce the official rules in your jurisdiction. Make everyone obey -- the American way."
Quote
Mr. Graves explains that everyone has the duty not to harm others and that causes of action for injunctions and law suits are any acts or negligence that can be shown to have caused undue harm. That includes harm done by public servants by direct action or by negligence.

Suggested Causes of Action
I think some of the greatest abuses that we should prosecute are the following:
- Racketeering in and out of government, with major media as accomplices;
- Lawmaking that violates human rights, including unjust war;
- IRS fraud, such as claims that all citizens and residents are liable for income and employment taxes, and thus prosecuting fraudulently;
- Prisoner abuse; prosecution of victimless crimes; promoting criminal recidivism;
- ABA licensing of incompetent lawyers (who fail to properly represent clients' interests);
- NEA, ATA, School Boards abuse and miseducation of students;
- CFS unnecessary forced separation of parents and their children;
- FDA, AMA, ADA, APA et al approval of unsafe health products and biased health science;
- NSF, AAAS et al support for biased science.
Do you know much about injunctions? Fred made it sound like people could help end a lot of govt corruption by using injunctions. Do you know if he's right? If you think he's not right, can you say why? And do you have ideas about how to end major corruption via the legal system etc?


« Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 03:49:58 pm by Luck »
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2013, 05:47:22 pm »

Do you know much about injunctions? Fred made it sound like people could help end a lot of govt corruption by using injunctions. Do you know if he's right? If you think he's not right, can you say why? And do you have ideas about how to end major corruption via the legal system etc?

The same issues of contempt apply.  Additionally, if you were to file a frivolous injunction, the other party could recover damages from you for your action.  If you are being sued, you have a lot more leeway in what you can do - once you are the initiating party, then you're the plaintiff, and the defendant can recover quite a bit in damages if your injunction was frivolous or fraudulent.

You also need to convince a judge to rule in your favor.  So the ability to use an injunction to fight against corrupt government is pretty limited... since you are asking the government to rule that the government is corrupt.

Another item worth note is a writ of mandamus, which is a court order to some body who has a legal authority to perform some action (or fail to perform some action), ordering that body to carry out its duty.  So, if some town planning board was giving someone trouble by refusing to act on his request to subdivide a property, he could file for a writ of mandamus to get the court to order the board to make a decision.  Then, if the board refused him, he could file against them if their decision was biased or somesuch.  If they could just sit on it, he would have no decision to appeal, and would be stuck, so mandamus works to prevent that.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

Ward Griffiths

  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1050
  • Canvas and Quicklime
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #71 on: May 05, 2013, 07:13:52 pm »

Flat out, trying to use the government to fight the government is a losing proposition.  The judge will look at the signature on his paycheck.  Separation of Powers -- Legislative, Executive and Judicial -- it's three mouths on one tax-paying tit.

Of course, nobody will ever accuse me of "Respect of Court" unless I'm in free market arbitration.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 07:16:19 pm by Ward Griffiths »
Logged
--
Ward Griffiths    wdg3rd@comcast.net

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  (Denis Diderot)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #72 on: May 06, 2013, 04:49:58 pm »

Ward, how would you persuade anyone to use free market arbitration? Would you threaten to sue if they don't arbitrate?

Anyway, the people of the U.S. are the govt, you know; the public office holders aren't the govt, regardless of what they think or how they act.
Logged

Ward Griffiths

  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1050
  • Canvas and Quicklime
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #73 on: May 06, 2013, 09:10:27 pm »

Ward, how would you persuade anyone to use free market arbitration? Would you threaten to sue if they don't arbitrate?

Anyway, the people of the U.S. are the govt, you know; the public office holders aren't the govt, regardless of what they think or how they act.

I don't enter a contract without an arbitration agreement.  If somebody defaults, I publish the fact.

Sorry, _I'm_ not part of the government.  I haven't been represented by any elected official in my lifetime, and especially during these two decades in New Jersey.  Seems I always voted for losers.  And if "We, the People" are the real government, I prefer to stay an anarchist.  Democracy is just gang warfare writ large:  "we outnumber you, we can beat you up, so you better do what we want".  Not that elected officials pay any attention to the campaign promises, anyway.
Logged
--
Ward Griffiths    wdg3rd@comcast.net

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  (Denis Diderot)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: DIY Law [Can Injunctions Help Much to End Major Corruption?]
« Reply #74 on: May 08, 2013, 11:16:25 am »

Ward, have you published any defaults on contracts? If so, could you describe some of them or copy them for us? Why would such publication have any effect?

I don't accept majority rule either. Unanimous rule is the only appropriate form of rule by those of sound mind. Authoritarians are not of sound mind. Self-defense is not authoritarian. Authoritarians like anarchists, because the latter don't unify to defend themselves from authoritarians.

By the way, prejudice against political words, like "government", is irrational. Collaborative self-government is reasonable and responsible.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Up
 

anything