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.