And the Winner of the Award for Dumbest Attorney Ever Goes To…

William “Zac” White of Heber Springs Arkansas.

Mr. White rarely wins a case. Unless Judge Susan Weaver is presiding, and no summons is served on the defendant.

It seems that was the plan to transfer ownership of 40 acres and a house in Witts Spring, Arkansas to one of White’s clients, a convicted felon, Micheal “Mike” Pietrczak.

Unfortunately for Mr. White, he named this writer as a defendant. I found the case against me on Court Connect and began to vindicate myself, pro se.

My defense was far superior to the advocacy by the licensed attorney. The Judge, Susan Weaver, seemed to favor Mr. White to a degree that I consider unethical. Still, I had Mr. White on the ropes.

So, he hatched a scheme. He had named a second defendant, a trust. No attorney who saw the crazy rulings prior would take the case for the trust. If I represented the trust, I would be found to have committed the unauthorized practice of law, a misdemeanor that might subject me to a year in jail.

After I found indisputable evidence that Mike Pietrczak had committed fraud on me (posted below), Mr. White dismissed me with prejudice. He thought, and it seems like Judge Weaver agreed, that I could no longer make arguments or submit evidence in the case. (That is probably not true, as dismissed defendants often file motions, such as a motion for attorney fees.)

Judge Weaver and Mr. White went on to find against the trust on all claims and gave Mr. White a blank check to file for damages. I was not allowed to say one word about the facts of the case, even though I was ordered to attend the hearing and I am the trustee of the trust.

Then Mr. White wrote a proposed order in which the Court “finds” that I committed crimes and did all the things I was accused of in the complaint, things for which I was dismissed with prejudice.

Mr. White musta thunk he was pulling a fast one. He did not think that once a joint non-defaulting defendant is dismissed with prejudice, the defaulting defendant must also be dismissed.

In other words, I think the court must go through the complaint and strike out any sentence that says the trust and I did anything. The court already decided I did not do those things. “And” means both. So, the sentence is no longer true.

I’ll let y’all know if Judge Weaver weasles out of her signed dismissal with prejudice and if she finds me guilty of a bunch of charges with literally no opportunity to defend myself.