I Can Stop Anytime. Really I Can.
Someone landed on a post I wrote in 2013. Out of curiosity, I read the post titled “Really, I Can Stop Any Time.”
What happened since then? Why am I writing here again?
There is so much corruption in our government. It comes from both sides. Look at Hunter Biden and William Asa Hutchinson the Third. Cocaine, gun charges, other infractions that would land the commoner’s son in jail, but Daddy is a mucky-muck, so the way-ward son not only walks, he gets to continue raking in big bucks with his law license.
My single vote does not count. There is not enough meaningful public disclosure to make an informed decision. I voted for Judge Susan Kaye Weaver in Arkansas and Donald Trump, who appointed Judge Lee P. Rudofsky to a lifetime federal position. (I voted Ben Carson in the 2016 primaries and would have been happy with Rand Paul, but the two candidates split their votes, so neither won.) Now that I’ve seen both judges working firsthand, I wish I could do a do over. (I don’t want to vote for Joe Biden, either, so I will probably “waste” my vote on the Libertarian presidential candidate or Cornel West if he runs as the “People’s Party” candidate in 2024.)
Hopefully my stories get picked up by the A.P., a big paper, or Fox News, like they did when I wrote about Alan Friedenthal (deceased) and Dr. Joseph Keenan.
I can’t imagine ending my blog now. I wrote my first book, “Balls of Crystal and Steel: What it Takes to Play Poker Without Losing Your Assets”. It was as easy as writing a blog post every day for three months. So, you can expect to see my blog spin-off a book or three about our courts.
In the meantime, I don’t plan on quitting, but am reposting the post I wrote when my ex-partner was on a downward spiral into the hell of addiction, and I had to run our business without him and win a lawsuit as a pro se litigant.
*****************
My intention is to focus my energy and time on other pursuits.
But your comments were so kind, I am compelled to say a brief thank you.
Also, I received an inquiry about how to complain about an errant commissioner. I wrote a response and then realized it would be easy to add that response here. So here it goes:
One avenue is to file a complaint letter with the commissioner’s presiding judge. When your complaint is answered inadequately, file a complaint with the CJP.
You can also file a claim, as you found in the link [the link connects to a Japanese website now]. But judges have absolute immunity over issues where they have jurisdiction and the error was non-administrative. In practice, judges are given immunity for all wrongs they commit, the vast majority of the time.
My greatest success was trying them in the court of public opinion. Print the facts of your case. WordPress will give you a free website and is easy to use. Be careful to avoid saying anything defamatory. Stick to facts. Not opinions. Label suspicions as thus. Attribute statements. Cite cases or print transcripts. There is an absolute litigation privilege. Anything said in court [that is not sealed] can be reprinted with an indication of who said it and in what proceeding. For example, you would not write “Commissioner Friedenthal was biased and embroiled against me.” Instead you might write “Commissioner Friedenthal said on the record that he was reading my posts on CourthouseForum.” Then give a date of the hearing and the case number.
This is not legal advice. This is information I learned while studying journalism at Colorado State University.
Maybe the most important thing you can do is to meet other victims of court abuse. Choose your friends carefully. Ask to read their court documents. Use discernment.
It is uplifting when other people know you are speaking the truth. Jesus said “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20) Thank you to my friends who gathered to do His will. God Bless.
*************************
You can reach me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Isn’t It Ironic: How an Honest Clerk Corrects a Docket Entry – Not Like John Morrill’s Gang
I filed a civil rights complaint against the Clerk of the Court in the Southern District of California.
It stemmed from when deputy clerk, Jude or JPP, did a little favor for the opposing party. Try to follow.
In the underlying suit, I named one person in two capacities. One as a co-trustee of a living trust, the other as an individual. I was required to issue and serve two summonses to the same human, Linda R. Kramer.
For some reason, the Clerk left Kramer as an individual off the docket. This was very strange, because I originally named her as an individual only, and then filed an amended complaint naming her in the both capacities. So, the individual was left out in both iterations. Or her attorney and Clerk Jude colluded in an attempt to leave the individual out of the suit.
Linda’s attorney filed a response to the complaint timely, but he wrote that he represented only the two co-trustees on the cover. The attorney’s helper did not ask the clerk of the court to add Linda Kramer as an individual when he input the filing.
I filed a motion for clerk’s default against the individual two days after the response was due. (That is pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55(a), for you legal types.)
Instead of filing a motion to set aside pursuant to FRCP 55(c), the attorney, Keith Cochran, asked Clerk Jude to change the docket entry to include the individual. The clerk did this favor. He did not add a note that said the entry was updated two days after the document was due and filed.
When I saw the change, I blew a gasket, read the riot act to everyone I could get on the phone and the clerk changed the entry back. Again, no notation of the change.
Then Clerk Jude refused to enter the default.
Judge Janis Sammartino thought it was just fine for Linda to skip a step. In fact, Janis added a snarky footnote in her order denying me any relief. She admonished me not to impugn the good character of the clerk or any staff of the court. It seemed intimidating to me, a pro se litigant who was up against six firms. I think the judge violated criminal code 18 U.S.C. sec. 241 – conspiracy against rights.
I let my suit against the clerk be dismissed. I am running low on energy and money and was not going to collect anything for my trouble. The clerk had free to him representation by a capable man with the Arkansas Attorney General’s office; the office the presiding judge worked in previously, as Solicitor General.
But I am appealing Judge Sammartino’s orders denying default against Linda Kramer and denying sanctions against attorney Keith Cochran.
Ironically, the defendants filed a joint paper today and the attorney entering it only named his clients. He left out Linda Kramer in both capacities and half a dozen other defendants.
Guess what? The appellate court clerk corrected the docket…with a note of the change.
And that, my friends, is Thursday’s Doc of the Day … in advance.
Judge Janis L. Sammartino’s Dishonest Statements Reiterated by Appellate Brief
The Doc of the Day is my Informal Reply Brief in a case that was originally presided over by Federal District Judge Janis L. Sammartino. The case was transferred to Judge Todd W. Robinson, and then passed off to Judge Linda Lopez. The subsequent judges failed to correct Judge Sammartino’s errors on reconsideration.
Enjoy reading the FREE document.
This is not legal advice. I am not an attorney.
In fact, I hope to find an attorney to represent me if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remands with instructions to give me leave to amend or proceed to discovery. That way my attorney can file the derivative claims against the attorneys who gave dual representation to the LLC and parties who had conflicting interests.
Contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Find Clues Even in the Mundane
Today’s Doc of the Day might look at first glance to belong in the giant to file pile.
Lawyers come and go. Especially in a mega firm like Troutman Pepper. And it is commonplace to have an appellate law specialist handle an appeal, if one can afford one.
The name of Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC’s attorney who will handle the appeal I filed against the debt buyer intrigued me. So, I ran it through a Dogpile search.
If you run the name I used for two decades through a search engine, you would get hundreds or thousands of pages of results. Laura Lynn is popular as a first and middle name and as a first and last name. Especially for strippers. lol. I’m not kidding. I once tried and found I was in the wrong business.
Misha Tseytlin, not so common.
It was easy to discover that the attorney PRA brought on for the appeal writes for the Harvard Law Review, is a mucky-muck at the Federalist Society and was the first Solicitor General for the State of Wisconsin. Plus, he is the head appellate attorney at Troutman-Pepper.
At first glance, that is pretty intimidating.
But analyze the meaning. The PRA Group subsidiary came out the chute claiming the case was worth no more than $5,000 plus minimal costs. They put that claim in writing in an OOJ – an Offer of Judgment – before any discovery was done.
PRA has an inhouse legal department with a few thousand employees. They hire outside firms for many of the 3,000 cases they file per week in the United States.
If they think a jury would award a mere $5,000 if the judge lets the case go to a jury, why would they use anyone other than a flunky to handle the case against a 60-year-old layperson who has a health condition that saps her energy?
Well, I am that woman. Brain fog or not, my educated guess is that PRA is afraid of losing another $62,000,000 punitive damage award. And they should be.
****Fun Facts***
Judge Lee P. Rudofsky who presides on the case also wrote for the Harvard Law Review, also is entrenched in the Federalist Society, and was the first Solicitor General for the State of Arkansas.
Open Email to a Pro Se Litigant
In lieu of the Doc of the Day, I will share a couple helpful tools with you.
This is an email I sent to my new friend. Other pro se litigants, feel free to email me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com. I cannot give legal advice, but I can share experience, wisdom, tears and a few laughs.
Pleasure meeting you.
The best search tool I have is http://www.dogpile.com. It is a conglomeration of search engines including Google. The trick is to use precise language. Misha Tseytlin is much easier to find than John Smith.
If you don’t have a Westlaw subscription (about $800 per month) you can use Westlaw at the Arkansas Supreme Court Building and Bowen Law School by the Museum of Fine Art. I pull up 10 or 15 cases in an hour and email them to myself. Then when I am at the pool with my granddaughter, I can read the cases at my leisure.
You are an honor to your parents and an inspiration to me.
Cheers.
The Irony: Federal Judge Complained that Head of CFPB Is Tough to Fire
Thank you to the good people at the Alliance for Justice for providing the Doc of the Day.
This article “from the desk of Leslie Rutledge” was a Statement of Joint Quarters with input from Federal District Judge Lee P. Rudofsky.
Judge Rudofsky seems to be on an unconstitutional power grab of his own. It is nearly impossible to remove a Federal Judge, which appears to some judges to be a license to lie from the bench and throw cases.
Portfolio Recovery Associates Responded to Complaint About Their Abusive Defense Tactics
I filed a complaint with the CFPB about the PRA Group subsidiary lying in court and trying to force a nominal settlement by out-lawyering me. You can read it here.
Here is PRA’s response:
“Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC (“PRA”) investigated your complaint. We take compliance with all applicable state and federal laws very seriously. The investigation found no records supporting the allegations of misconduct or harassment, including, without limitation, that PRA or its representatives acted improperly regarding the relevant account. We closed the PRA account ending in 6049 and ceased all communications regarding collection of the PRA account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. We believe that no further steps in response to your complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time.
“DESCRIPTION OF NON-MONETARY RELIEF
“In response to your dispute, we closed the PRA account ending in 6049 and ceased all communications regarding collection of the PRA account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law.”
That’s it. Case closed.
I was allowed to file a survey response, with no personal details, that will be posted on the CFPB website, supposedly.
Here it is. A PDF is posted below so you can download it as your Doc of the Day.
The company’s response addressed all of my issues.
No.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC gave a conclusionary response with no details. They failed to address my main concern, their litigation misconduct in the FDCPA case I filed against PRA. They were also able to make the account notes and documentation “under seal” so they can avoid detection of law enforcement. PRA closed my account in response to my lawsuit and set the balance to zero, but in court said I owed the money when they were collecting. The account closure letters did not say “cancelled” nor “waived” and PRA did not issue a 1099-C to me.
Consumers like me should not have to file a lawsuit to make PRA stop calling.
PRA should not demand consumers like me to fill out an intrusive identity theft / fraud letter on an alleged debt that is past the statute of limitations for legal collection and past the statute of limitations for fraud. The only purpose of the inquisition is to collect information to use to try to collect on the debt. PRA should not be able to use a refusal to fill out the fraud letter as evidence that the debt was not fraudulent, as they did in my case.
PRA should not use its superior bargaining power to strong arm a settlement offer of $5,000 from each victim and then continue to violate the FDCPA and the consent agreements with the CFPB.
I understand the company’s response to my complaint.
Yes.
I understand PRA’s response and disagree with it.
The company did what they said they would do with my complaint.
No.
Portfolio Recovery Associates said they would do nothing further with my complaint.
PRA lied when it said it closed my account “in response to [my] dispute.” They said in court that they closed my account “in light of the litigation”. In response to my dispute PRA sent the fraud / identity theft affidavit for me to fill out, even though I did not claim there was fraud. I had no idea what happened with the account because it was 10 years since the alleged charges were made and there was no documentation showing on what or where those charges were made.
PRA asked the court to make me pay their costs in my FDCPA case, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692(k) which only allows for costs and attorney fees where the plaintiff filed the complaint in bad faith.
Obviously, my complaint was not in bad faith, as PRA set my balance to zero and closed the account in direct response to the litigation. They also said specifically that they did not file the 1099-C because my claim of fraud was made in good faith. I have had to spend another two weeks opposing PRA’s motion and am nervous that Judge Lee P. Rudofsky, who wrote that the CFPB is on an unconstitutional power grab, will rule in PRA’s favor erroneously.
Read a Deposition Taken by Portfolio Recovery Associates and Decide for Yourself if the Case Should Have been Dismissed Summarily by Judge Lee P. Rudofsky
While you are reading, answer these questions:
- Might a reasonable juror think it more probable than not that I owed no debt to PRA? Judge Rudofsky said no reasonable juror can think that PRA bought a debt that was a clerical error or incurred by a fraudster.
- Did I, as Judge Rudofsky said, admit to incurring the debt?
- Did I present testimony that the many calls made by PRA were annoying to the point that they coerced me to tell them my personal identifiers in order to make the calls stop? Or should we allow PRA to call people, not identify themselves and demand the person called identify herself, as Judge Rudofsky ordered?
And, out of curiosity, do you think that the protection against improper search and seizure offered by the 4th Amendment applies only to search and seizures by the government, as Judge Rudofsky interprets it? Do you think you must identify yourself to everyone who asks you to, as long as the inquisitor is not dressed like a police officer?
I think Judge Lee P. Rudofsky’s opinions are preposterous.
If you are a consumer advocate who wants to fight the summary dismissal of my FDCPA claim at appeal, please contact me at TheNext55Years@gmail.com or Bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Why Judge Lee P. Rudofsky Couldn’t Care Less What Everyday People Think of Him: Presidential Candidate Cornel West, PhD Speaks Reason
It was perplexing to me. I have the goods on Judge Rudofsky. (He failed to recuse from a case where he has the appearance of bias and impropriety. He misquoted a sentence to change the meaning. When he was caught, he admitted the sentence he quoted was inaccurate, but said the meaning of the actual sentence is even more off the actual meaning. He wrote that the CFPB was on an unconstitutional power grab, according to an article by the AFJ, but the link to his article is broken now, so it won’t be seen quite so easily.) Why didn’t he just apologize and correct himself?
Doesn’t he have aspirations to go any further in his career?
Tonight, the Genie inside my phone suggested I watch an interview with a long-shot presidential candidate, Cornel West, PhD. Dr. West doesn’t just speak; he sermonizes. I wanted to shout Amen!
Listen to him here. Please consider this your Doc of the Day.
Dr. West went to Harvard, the same school Lee Rudofsky attended. Dr. West also studied at a list of other Ivy Leagues. And he was born in 1953 and is a black man. His mother was an impressive woman, a teacher and principal, and his grandfather was a Baptist pastor.
The commonality in philosophy between me and this great thinker, besides that we see Christianity in a similar way, is that we think iniquities are driven not only by racism but by classism. There is a duopoly of the power, the Democrat and Republican parties, who cater to big business corporations and the ultra-rich.
Rudofsky doesn’t care what the everyday person thinks, because we don’t have any power and we don’t control the flow of money. My cries that the judge is anti-consumer only endears him more to the people who have enslaved the rest of us.
A Higher Law 
