Judge Susan Weaver was once quoted as saying she loved “every stinking minute” of law school.

But what was she doing those three years? It does not appear that she read a book.

Here I am, going into the second week of school… the first week of regular classes… and reading material that makes Judge Weaver’s violations of my rights clear.

For instance, optional reading for Real Property I includes this explanation of trespass:

“Trespass to real property involves intentional wrongful entrance onto or physical disturbance of a plaintiff’s land. The intent requirement, however, like the intent requirement for conversion, is a general intent requirement, and not a specific intent.” – Intro to Property Law, Foster.

Here are two examples given by Professor Foster to illustrate specific intent:

“Example: While walking in a wooded area behind his home, A wandered onto B’s property.
A did not intend to commit trespass, but A did intend to put his feet down in such a way that
he is now standing where he is. A has general but not specific intent, and A has committed
trespass.”

“Example: L and M kidnapped N and placed him in the trunk of their car. They tossed him out
onto O’s property and drove away. N not only did not intend to trespass, but he had no intent
to be in the specific place he is in when thrown from the vehicle. N has neither general nor
specific intent. N has not committed trespass. Have L and M? Answer: Yes.”

In a case over which Judge Weaver presided, I was a co-defendant for a cause of action for what the Plaintiff called “ejectment/trespass” on real estate brought by my former boyfriend, Mike Pietrczak. The other defendant was my living trust, for which I was sole non-contingent beneficiary, sole settlor and sole trustee.

Judge Weaver would not allow me to represent the trust, because I am not a licensed attorney, even though there were no other individuals involved in the trust.

I represented myself zealously and was dismissed with prejudice after a year. (The substantially identical action was filed previously and dismissed against both the trust and me without prejudice. I could retain an attorney at that time and there was a different judge.)

So, it was decided, by Judge Weaver, that I did not trespass on the land and there was no need to eject me. Pietrczak was clear in his complaint and in the evidence presented that he did not want me on the land. I was on the land during much of the time he complained about, or I gave permission to others to be on the land. I intended to be on the land. No one tied me to the bed and forced me to stay there. I intended to have tenants on the land. But I was not trespassing and there was no need for ejectment.

How then could my trust be trespassing on the same land? How does one even eject a trust? Ejectment entails removal. The trust is a fictitious person, to the extent a trust is a person at all. It is really a vessel to hold assets. Even if the trust is considered a separate “person” from me, so too was the tenant I rented the property to for a year and so too were my other invitees.

Inviting the use of the land by the tenants and the trust was a physical disturbance of the land. But Judge Susan Weaver opined that I was not liable for any trespass on the property.

Then Judge Weaver entered default judgment and damages against the trust. She inexplicably said any further inhabitation of the land by me would be considered trespass. She ordered the county recorder to void the record of title to the land passing to the trust. And she allowed Pietrczak to transfer title to the “person” of his choosing.

The Court of Appeals claimed it lacked jurisdiction to upset the lower court orders based on my unopposed appeal, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the COA decision. I petitioned the United States Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari. It is extraordinarily rare for such a petition from a pro se litigant to be granted. But I maintain hope.