gusto

Judge in Cap 1 case Accuses me of "Ghost Written Pleadings"

Recommended Posts

Get rid of the part I bolded imo, don't tell the Court what statements they should or should not issue.

IMHO, I would delete the whole first paragraph. Just inform the judge that you are the writer and it is your work. I would not question the intent or dictate what the judge should or shouldn't question.

You will likely appear before this judge again. Don't give him/her that reason to remember you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Judge:

In response to your letter: I have prepared all my own pleadings without receiving any assistance from any member of the Kansas bar or any other individual engaging in unauthorized practice of law.

Respectfully,

Gusto

Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay

As a pro se litigant, it is the Defendant’s view that the Court should not issue any statements that would be reasonably misconstrued by the Defendant.

,

My own wrinkle would be to explore--probably request directly--that the judge remove himself from my case.... I haven't read discussions of having a judge recuse himself, but I think this should be a bullet in the holster of a defendant....he probably wouldn't, but he'd be on notice that "insinuations" will not be tolerated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My own wrinkle would be to explore--probably request directly--that the judge remove himself from my case.... I haven't read discussions of having a judge recuse himself, but I think this should be a bullet in the holster of a defendant....he probably wouldn't, but he'd be on notice that "insinuations" will not be tolerated.

That's about the worst advice I've ever read--and I've read alot. It would be a bullet, but not in the defendant's holster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My own wrinkle would be to explore--probably request directly--that the judge remove himself from my case.... I haven't read discussions of having a judge recuse himself, but I think this should be a bullet in the holster of a defendant....he probably wouldn't, but he'd be on notice that "insinuations" will not be tolerated.

Or a bullet pointed at your own head.

Seriously, ticking a judge off is NEVER a good idea. Fight the other attorney, not the judge. Only if the judge does something egregious should you ever challenge them. It is a compliment that he believes an attorney wrote the motion, so treat it as one as you deny it and move on.

Let him remember you for your ability and civility, not your audacity to challenge or insult him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Flacorps nailed it. Short, to the point, keeps the emotion and personal opinion out of it, and simply clarifies the situation for the judge.

Your pleadings were obviously good enough to merit the eyebrows raising. Take the backhanded compliment, clarify the issue, and move on--keeping it strictly business and focusing on the litigation situation at hand. Even if the judge does have a disposition set against pro se litigants (which unfortunately exists in some judges), no need to give him more reason to undermine your efforts and reinforce his personal bias (if it exists, I'm working on assumption here).

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's about the worst advice I've ever read--and I've read alot. It would be a bullet, but not in the defendant's holster.

It's not advice, but my "own wrinkle". In my own particular experiences, I've never worried about "ticking off a judge." I expect a certain deportment, expect that I will get my full "day in court." And I expect that "law" will prevail, not whether or not a judge is "ticked off". Think about that peculiar concern, how to "tip-toe", rather than let the process play itself out, fairly and appropriately. Rules, facts, law. Not personalities, prejudices, fear. Asking a judge to recuse himself should always be on the table if warranted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one seems to be saying to "tip-toe" through this. The advice is more to not make an issue out of something highly irrelevant to the litigation. Why get into a battle of opinions with the court about the court when simple clarification will get the issue dropped and allow for more focus on the meaningful litigation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No one seems to be saying to "tip-toe" through this. The advice is more to not make an issue out of something highly irrelevant to the litigation. Why get into a battle of opinions with the court about the court when simple clarification will get the issue dropped and allow for more focus on the meaningful litigation?

That's what the "if warranted" is for. Of course, it's "context", "intent", etc.

On one of the PDF's of one of the big meetings the FTC held with CAs, JDBs around the country last year, that very topic came up from one of the panel members, a judge, who was "suspicious" of a young woman who "appeared" to be getting legal advice and help from "someone", perhaps "a family member" who might be steeped in law, etc. His tone was definitely accusatory. Rather than take note of the substance of her proofs and rebuttals, he seemed more interested in ascertaining why those proofs and rebuttals were so good.

Of course, one does not make an issue of something "highly irrelevant" to the litigation. But at the same time, being alert to such that might be relevant is important. One time I was in court watching a landlord/tenant case, and the judge muttered, "....I've never ruled in favor of a landlord in my life...." I don't know who else heard that mutter, but I did. Now, what would I have done had I been the landlord? Of course, it has to be relative, germane.

As to the situation of this thread, I don't know, I wasn't there. My point is that if I thought, had good reason to believe, that this inquiry was spawned by something other than admiration, I would want to know if there was a bouncing ball that could affect my case.

From the original post:

"In this, the judge includes a copy of a letter written by all four judges in the .... Judicial District in 2002 that expresses their "serious concern" over "ghost written pleadings". "

Just reading over the above, I would take their "serious concern" rather seriously.....

Edited by LearningasIgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

No disrespect intended, but since the judge or magistrate is in control of the ruling upon a defendant's case, it would not seem very sound advice to aovid ticking off the judge..you can be right all day long, but in the end, the goal is not to be right, the goal is be successful...

There are plenty of seasoned attorneys who were in the end, adjudged to be "right" but they had to expend time and energy and their clients money to win on appeal..most Pro Se Defendants do not have the skill set to win on appeal so it would make the most sense to conduct oneself with some comportment in order to win at the outset.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's about the worst advice I've ever read--and I've read alot. It would be a bullet, but not in the defendant's holster.

I think I would have said it more diplomatically Dr. Evil, but I 1000% agree with your sentiment..That truly was not good advise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I would have said it more diplomatically Dr. Evil, but I 1000% agree with your sentiment..That truly was not good advise.

It truly wasn't "advice" but more of an admonition to be alert. Note the tenor of the judge's statement and how other judges chimed in--not in admiration. To be that far along, there has been much discussion, much ado about nothing (although they don't know that}, when the interest and emphasis should be on the facts of the case. This undo interest and misplaced inquiry (the letter of "real concern") cannot be a positive for an individual's case.

And how to go about proving, what appears to be, a negative? They suspect a defendant is getting illegal legal help. How does the defendant prove otherwise?

There's a balance to it all, but none of that balance should reflect or be tipped by "fear". Judges put their pants on one-leg-at-a-time. They come, too, from a general population and can reflect a range of biases and knowledge, and can conduct themselves in a variety of proper, or improper, deportment.

Consider how the water might be muddied: I, as the defendant, worked my butt off to educate myself on what to do, and how to do the what. Then, I receive a letter from MY judge who "suspects" I am being aided illegally by "someone", and to bolster his suspicion, he has reached out to FOUR other judges who corroborate his "suspicions". Why would I want to continue with this judge? Whatever relationship there may have been in this court, it now has to deal with the "suspicion" factor. Whether that would be major or minor, if a judgment went against me, especially if I had a rather strong case, it would be something I might always wonder about.

Edited by LearningasIgo
Link to post
Share on other sites
There are plenty of seasoned attorneys who were in the end, adjudged to be "right" but they had to expend time and energy and their clients money to win on appeal..most Pro Se Defendants do not have the skill set to win on appeal so it would make the most sense to conduct oneself with some comportment in order to win at the outset.

So even if the attorneys were "right', they shouldn't have appealed? And if a pro se defendants thinks the decision is not right, or tainted, or judicially incorrect, he shouldn't appeal, either?

And no one is suggesting a defendant have no "comportment" other than composed, professional bearing. In a request for recusing, the facts are presented, plus the reasons. That's not bad "comportment".

The above appears to be what you are suggesting. Unless I've read it incorrectly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my pre-trial hearing the judge asked me a similar question about my answers to the plaintiffs complaint. He asked if I was an attorney or if I had studied law. My response to him was that, because of my current unemployed state and the complaint that was filed against me, I had no choice but to turn to the internet and "educate" myself, using literally hundreds of hours, on what I needed to know, write, do, and say in the courtroom.

He nodded his head and never revisited his question.

Made me feel good that the judge gave me such respect/acknowledgment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In my pre-trial hearing the judge asked me a similar question about my answers to the plaintiffs complaint. He asked if I was an attorney or if I had studied law. My response to him was that, because of my current unemployed state and the complaint that was filed against me, I had no choice but to turn to the internet and "educate" myself, using literally hundreds of hours, on what I needed to know, write, do, and say in the courtroom.

He nodded his head and never revisited his question.

Made me feel good that the judge gave me such respect/acknowledgment.

And that's the way it could have been, and should have been, handled. The "letter" described in the opening post, seems a little overboard, even somewhat heavyhanded. And especialy so, when "four" other judges are used for emphasis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, LearningAs makes some interesting points. and as Widto pointed out ive been in a similar situation. more than once.

if the pleadings or the facts do not support what the judge is saying i've been known to raise all holy hell with respect to impartiality and fairness. i always have my case law for these in my bag with each appearance in court.

judges arent always fair, i tend not to stay quiet all the time

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a lawsuit against Equifax, I sought help from several attorneys after I filed the complaint which was then removed to federal court 33 days after service (Rule 11 violation..yes). 2 of the attorneys asked me directly if I had drafted my own pleadings to which I answered yes. One of the 2 stated it looks like an attorney was shadowing me. I later determined this was the same as ghost writing.

Another case in which I was defendant in state court. Sued by insurance company by attorney who falsified information on the complaint, controverted the facts in a sworn affidavit and attempted to coerce me into signing a consent judgment based on the falsified information.....amazing. My attorney noted the defects in the answer and several separate motions to dismiss. He never once calendared any motion for hearing. I finally fired attorney after he asked If I wanted to litigate the case, he'd need a substantial deposit in his trust account. There was nothing to litigate so I fired him. Then I filed a motion for summary judgment, calendared that motion for hearing and the plaintiff dismissed the case days later. They attempted to extort money from me through the courts and failed because I took it upon myself to learn the rules and procedures, review case law through web and pacer. I then filed a motion for rule 11 sanctions based on the complaint and affidavit which were neither well grounded in law, fact and interposed for an improper purpose. No response in opposition was filed. No show cause order was issued. Judge skimmed over the motion at the hearing in 1 minute (6 page motion not including exhibits). Asked if I had drafted the motion to which I answered yes. Shortly after, the judge looks at the other attorney that appeared and stated she'd have the order ready by 8/19. The one sided order was signed and filed the following day with a single conclusion of law....This court has jurisdiction of the subject matter and parties. Completely ignored all findings of fact to ensure no sanctions would be considered.

I don't believe the state court judge believed I wrote the pleadings even though it was all my work. A little about me.....I'm 39, starting writing programs at age 11 on a commodore 16, wrote my first video game at age 14, have no college degree, currently work as a software/database consultant and make a 6 figure income. As someone noted in this post: Poor and Pro Se doesn't = Stupid. Drafting pleadings are in no way rocket science....an 8th grader can do it. My pleadings were done before I discovered a wonderful tutorial from JurisDictionary.com I of course appealed the judges order and will do the appeal myself following the rules of the appeals court. Like I said, it's not rocket science...as a matter of fact, I find it to be far less complex than my own field of work. There's just too much information available to the general public for judges to simply assume a pleading by a pro se was written with the aid of an attorney. Yet, this is exactly what's happening....even if they don't say it or may you aware of it, their unfair treatment and oversight of obvious rule violations by an attorney on the other side will give you a clue. I also filed a complaint against the judge in my state case because her questioning of me and subsequent baffling order couldn't have been based on my well grounded and unopposed motion for sanctions. She could have recused herself if she didn't believe I wrote the pleadings because courts are really frustrated when they believe a pro se's pleadings were written by or with the aid of an attorney.

I'm seeing the same type of treatment developing in federal court as I wait for a remand order due to an untimely removal. The magistrate, in his recommendation and order, suggested that an amended removal notice based on an amended complaint which was submitted by the defense attorney more than 60 days after they were initially served was legit....as if there was some recognized exception to give the defense a second chance at removing a case. This issue with wrongfully assuming ghostwriting will soon manifest itself into something more. I take it as a compliment and an insult. I haven't gotten help from any attorney and no attorney can take credit for any of my work. If one steps forward and does, that would be a misrepresentation to the court. If I claim an attorney help me, it would be a misrepresentation to the court. What a problem the attorneys that illegally ghostwrite without making it known and the courts that have adopted a standard of identifying ghostwritten pleadings. Do they not know there are potentially hundreds of millions of potential pro se's in this country who have enough intelligence to read, write and following rules and procedures. This is both amazing and disappointing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.