How I Cope with a Corrupt Judge Like Lee P. Rudofsky of The Federal District Court
My most popular post over the past year was “How I Cope with a Corrupt Judge Like Susan K. Weaver of Arkansas”.
One of my readers who is now a close friend led me to another mental health tool since I wrote that post. In lieu of the Doc of the Day, I am sharing a link to the website that teaches this coping device, “The Crappy Childhood Fairy“. The basic program is free.
This is a way to deal with fears and resentments by writing and meditation. (Meditation to me is akin to prayer.)
For example, I might write:
I feel resentment toward Judge Lee P. Rudofsky. I fear that he will continue to pretend to miscomprehend my arguments and testimony in order to write orders that look legitimate on their face. I fear the justices on the court of appeals will also justify showing partiality. I fear the work that is required to appeal will be a waste of time. I resent attorneys David Mitchell of Rose Law Firm, Jed Komisin and James Trefil of Troutman Pepper. I fear they will use Judge Rudofsky’s political and ideological bias to the advantage of their client, a debt collector that is notorious for using illegal or unethical litigation tactics. I fear they may force me into bankruptcy and ruin my outstanding credit. I fear that there is little justice to be had in this once great nation any longer.
Since no one will read the handwritten note before I douse it in water, wad it up and throw in the trash, I get a little more personal, too.
Next, I write my prayer to God. “I am now ready and humbly ask that you, God, remove these fears and resentments. I pray to know your will for me today, and to have the strength to carry it out.”
After the writing and symbolic release ritual, which could be burning the notes, but wetting them seems less dangerous, I sit on my yoga mat and meditate. I use the mantra “release”. Honestly, I suck at meditation. My mind always wanders back to the torment Judge Rudofsky and the Three Henchmen put me through and all the work I need to do to stop them. But, when I notice, I come back to the mantra. “Release.”
I’ve only used this technique for a week. My outlook is improving. I see that some of my fears are about losing the wonderful things I have in my life now. So, it makes sense to appreciate and enjoy those things now. And it helps me to look at the job God gave me as a gift rather than a burden. My all time most popular post was written the day the Commission on Judicial Performance made a “severe” public admonishment against Court Commissioner Alan Friedenthal, the liberal Democrat version of Judge Lee P. Rudofsky, based upon my complaint. I wouldn’t trade that victory for a million bucks. (It saved others from suffering the way my children and I did at the hand of the corrupt judge.)
I hope you gain as much from the practice as I have. If you want to share your experience privately, email bohemian_books@yahoo.com. Otherwise, feel free to comment below.
Judge Terry Doughty Upholds Freedom of Speech while Judge Lee Rudofsky Tears it Down
You get two free Docs of the Day today.
One is 155 pages of brilliance in defense of our free speech, in an order for an injunction by Louisiana Federal District Court Judge Terry A. Doughty. I admit I have only made it through three pages. But this is the reading that will keep me up past my bedtime tonight.
The other is an order by Arkansas Federal District Court Judge Lee P. Rudofsky. I scanned the text only entry that came in the mail to me. The court’s printer is misaligned, and the ends of words were truncated. It is short, and you will probably be able to fill in the blanks.
Judge Rudofsky’s order seems to me to be an attempt by the judge to chill my free speech.
I have a bachelor’s degree in journalism from Colorado State University that I earned before my 21st birthday. I have spent more than a decade writing about corrupt judges and attorneys. I am not an attorney, but I understand the subtleties of free speech. To borrow a metaphor from the judge, I know how to keep my pinky toe on the right side of the line.
A Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Detective once told me he and his fellow law enforcement agents read my blog and they were none too pleased with what I had to say; but could not arrest me. My current litigation adversary reads my blog. My adversary has given several of my posts to Judge Rudofsky as exhibits.
You may have read some of my posts about Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC and its parent company, PRA Group, Inc. You know I think the company violated a court order when it called me hundreds of times to try to collect an alleged debt that was part of a portfolio of alleged debts that was known to have inaccuracies. I allege that the attorneys who represent PRA lied numerous times during litigation and that one business record produced by PRA is inconsistent with another and they are both inconsistent with my records and my memory.
You may have seen me drop the F-bomb on this blog once or twice. You probably saw me call the attorneys “sleazy snakes”. But, each and every document I file in court is quite professional and an exercise in civility.
The PRA attorneys chose to ignore the subtleties of freedom of speech. They made up a lie about me that I was suing their client to recoup money I lost playing online poker.
I play poker way too much on my phone, but it is for fake money, and I don’t pay for chips. Zynga and Poker Bros give free chips to suck players in, and I am able to turn the $10,000 or so gift into multi-millions. Eventually I bust out and start over again with my freebies.
I am hardly a degenerate, running from my bookie.
What stops attorneys from making up lies about plaintiffs? They have immunity against civil defamation claims for statements made in the course of legal proceedings. But there is this pesky little thing called perjury. And there is supposed to be a rule, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that requires attorneys to certify claims and defenses they make in the documents they file are supported or can be supported by evidence.
I filed a motion against the attorneys at Rose Law Firm and Troutman Pepper for making up lies about my poker losses. I mentioned that I was writing a book about poker, and the false accusations by the attorneys may hurt my reputation as a solid poker player.
[Shameless plug: The book is published and available on Amazon and Kindle – Balls of Crystal and Steel: What it Takes to Play Poker Without Losing Your Assets, by Sean Lynn and Laura Lynn Hammett.]
Judge Rudofsky poo-poo’d my motion and wrote: “the record reveals that Ms. Hammett has engaged in conduct that comes perilously close to harassment of opposing counsel and abuse of the litigation process.”
Poppy-cock!
There is nothing harassing about writing the truth or a sincerely held opinion on a blog. PRA attorneys do not need to read the blog. They certainly don’t need to go tattling to the judge like little bitches. I haven’t suggested anyone break the law nor have I incited violence. There is nothing revealed in the record otherwise.
Man, why couldn’t I draw a judge once in a while like Judge Doughty?
Complaint About Abusive Defense Tactics by Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC Sent to the CFPB
If you filed a suit under the FDCPA against any of the PRA Group, Inc subsidiaries, and they bullied you into settlement, let the CFPB know about the debt buyer’s abusive practices.
For instance, it is extremely rare for the debt collector accused of violations of the FDCPA to be paid attorney fees, even if they win, but PRA threatened to ask for attorney fees from me if I did not settle for nothing.
Here is the complaint I sent. This is not legal advice. I am just letting you know you are not alone.
If you want confidentiality that the CFPB cannot give you, but you want to share your story so other FDCPA plaintiffs know what to expect, tell me about your experience at bohemian_books@yahoo.com and I will incorporate it into a blog post, removing identifying details. I am also glad to help edit complaints for spelling, punctuation and to make them easier to understand.
Here is mine:
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC violated most of the options listed on the complaint form at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/ while trying to collect an alleged debt of $2,297.63 from 2010, but my main complaint is not one of the listed options. I know PRA has done similar things to many people, including Guadalupe Mejia, who was awarded $82 million in punitive damages by a jury in 2016. This issue should be addressed.
My main complaint is that after I filed a lawsuit under the FDCPA, invasion of privacy on seclusion and outrage, on March 10, 2021, PRA used litigation tactics that were unethical, illegal, deceitful and meant to inflict severe emotional distress.
PRA was represented by outside counsel, The Rose Law Firm in Arkansas and Troutman Pepper from Virginia (AKA Troutman Sanders).
On April 3, 2023, Troutman Pepper issued a blog post that said, in part: “According to the CFPB, entities cannot take unreasonable advantage of circumstances where people lack sufficient bargaining power to protect their interests.
“The policy statement describes such circumstances as when consumers do not elect to enter into a relationship with an entity,” and specifies debt collectors.
PRA used my lack of legal training, financial distress caused by the COVID related stock market crash, and my ill health, including diagnosed anxiety disorders and Hashimoto’s Disease, to bully me in court. PRA also capitalized on the opportunity of a judge who is notoriously anti-consumer and anti-CFPB, Judge Lee P. Rudofsky.
PRA threatened me with having to pay its “significant” attorney’s fees. A copy of the email is submitted. PRA filed a motion for the Clerk to tax $8,356.18 in costs to me. I am going to appeal the summary judgment, but thus far, PRA has ignored my request for them to stipulate to a stay of the cost motions until after the appeal.
PRA has never produced Old Account Level Documentation that shows what was purchased to incur the debt or the vendor who was paid by Capital One Bank. PRA has never produced a credit card agreement and specified it does not have the credit card agreement.
Before I filed suit, PRA sent its identity theft and fraud letter to me, with directions to answer the intrusive questions under penalty of perjury and notarized or witnessed. I refused because PRA did not tell me where the debt was incurred or what it was for. Even if I could deduce who committed the fraud, the statute of limitations to file criminal charges on the person had passed, and it would be extraordinarily difficult to collect evidence. The only purpose I saw in having me fill out the details, including my social security number, all previous addresses, and so on, was for PRA to use against me in trying to collect the debt. The letter was backdated.
After I filed suit, PRA sent three more backdated letters that said it “concluded its investigation” and closed my account and set the balance to zero. But the first letter informing me of this was addressed to “Laura Lyman” instead of “Laura Lynn” and had a different account number on it. I was fooled into thinking my account was closed. When I went to document the letter, I noticed the error. When I asked for a correction, PRA changed the wording. After my next request, they gave me another letter with the original wording and with my name and account number. Copies submitted.
Eight months after I filed suit, PRA produced a single account statement mailed to an address where I never received mail, that showed a balance of $1,916.05. They said Capital One gave it to them and got Capital One to submit an affidavit, but Capital One had told me many months earlier that it had no OALD at all. (Recorded)
PRA withheld and altered other documents. The company records filed under seal do not have each call made on PRA’s self-generated phone log documented on PRA’s notes. A representative told me the notes have an entry that I filed for bankruptcy, though I never filed for bankruptcy. That entry is not in the documents filed under seal.
PRA admits to calling a landline at my past residence in Arkansas hundreds of times. But, it claims it did not call my California cell phone for a seven year stretch with the first call they admit to being on November 18, 2020. I recorded that call, after setting up my computer. (There is a minute pause on PRA’s recording of the call.) The reason I spoke to PRA on a recorded line was because they had called me about a hundred times from August to November. About 85 of those calls I blocked and they went to voice mail.
PRA would not produce a third party record of its calls. I got my cell phone record and found fourteen calls that came from PRA, that don’t appear on PRA’s phone log, and each of the numbers those calls were placed from were disconnected. In fact, all the numbers PRA called me from were disconnected.
Judge Rudofsky, in his order granting summary judgment in PRA’s favor, truncated a sentence to distort my testimony, then PRA repeated the falsehood. Eventually the judge admitted the sentence was truncated, and then said the complete sentence had a different meaning than the meaning given by ChatGBT’s OpenAI and the opposite of what I meant.
PRA requested and Judge Rudofsky approved of making many of the business records under seal, against my heavy protest. It is difficult to write this complaint and complaints to other agencies with the confidentiality restrictions and the public cannot make an informed decision about who is telling the truth. That is why I am using the awkward way of saying what was not in the documents, instead of what was in the documents.
After I filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the single issue of misrepresentation of the amount of a debt, PRA lied, saying it “waived” my debt “in light of the litigation”, even though it did not issue a 1099-C to me in the two years since.
PRA hired an “expert witness” who is a hired gun. He made a diagnosis that contradicted the diagnosis of my medical providers. The Psychiatrist they hired was not licensed in Arkansas, and the Arkansas medical board told me (recorded) that out-of-state doctors can review records, but not diagnose. The report is filed under seal and I am only allowed to share it with law enforcement and the various medical boards and committees on professional conduct. But I am willing to share my version of what happened during the horrific Defense Medical Exam with the CFPB in confidentiality.
PRA posted my credit report, marked “CONFIDENTIAL”, and another document that had my full unredacted social security number and birthdate on PACER. When I complained, they said it was an accident.
There is so much detail that I will give the case number and my blog address, where I write about the case and other instances of corruption in courts. I will then make bullet points of specific misconduct on my request for a fair resolution.
Federal District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 4:21-cv-00189-LPR.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC should file a notice in our case, explaining to the court each lie, deceptive statement and falsification of documentation they or their client made during the proceedings. This should include:
1. That letters to me were backdated, though there is deposition testimony from PRA in another case where they say their letters are dated on the day they are mailed.
2. All OALD. The number showing in hyperlinks on the records under seal is not zero or one.
3. PRA should admit that the number of calls logged on its self-generated phone log is not the same as the number of calls recorded in collection notes.
4. In particular, that a call I received on February 18, 2021 from PRA, which was recorded by PRA, does not show on either the phone log nor the collection notes. PRA hung up on me when I told them to hang-on for me to turn on my recorder, and I recorded the next call.
5. PRA should tell the court its policy about issuing 1099-Cs which is in policy manuals CFPB has obtained through its investigations of PRA that led to the 2015 consent agreement and 2023 consent order.
6. PRA should admit that I emailed them plentiful evidence that their lies about me having significant gambling losses from online, and therefore illegal poker playing, are false. They also submitted many of my blog posts as exhibits. They should submit the post that says I published my book subtitled “What it Takes to Play Poker Without Losing Your Assets.”
This is not an exhaustive list. PRA should stipulate to reversing the judgment and going to a jury trial. For any other impeachment evidence I produce, which the jury agrees proved a lie, PRA should agree to pay $100,000 per item above what the jury awards.
The wording of the closing letters taken with the extortionist settlement offer that allows PRA to pursue “future” debts gives me a reasonable inference that PRA plans to attempt to collect a further alleged debt. PRA should agree to a no contact order for the remainder of my life. My credit has no reportable derogatory comments. Any other alleged debt PRA claims is outside the statute of limitations for legal collection. I do not want to be forced to endure PRA’s abusive collection activity ever again. PRA should mark any further accounts that allegedly belong to me as “do not contact”.
Doc of the Day: Attachments
Doc of the Day: What We Really Want to Say to Debt Collection Attorneys (And Other Sleazy Liars)
My new work bestie is a dog named Noods. She feels the same way as me about annoying phone calls.
I filed a lawsuit under the FDCPA, just to get a company called Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC to stop calling me. They are a debt buyer and collector that are notorious for collecting on non-existent debts. They buy electronic data files with millions or hundreds of millions of lines of error filled portfolios.
It was getting monotonous signing off on emails to PRA’s attorneys at Rose Law Firm and Troutman Pepper, regards, regards, regards. “Respectfully” was not an option. So, I asked Noods for ideas.
Let’s get authentic.
Aren’t you sick of listening to lawyers, and sometimes judges, who drone on stringing together meaningless words – or as Judge Rudofsky, giving words new meaning?
Here is something refreshing. A judge who says what she is thinking.
Judge Colleen McMahon.
Sending her gratitude and respect.
Check out the fun Reels by Noodles the Pooch Here.
Judge Rudofsky Multiplies Litigation by Tacit (and not so tacit) Approval of Fraud on the Court
Portfolio Recovery Associates committed fraud, misrepresentation and misconduct while defending itself against private allegations of violating the FDCPA and state law. Judge Lee P. Rudofsky, after being informed about the allegations against the debt buyer, dismissed the case on summary judgment anyhow.
The CFPB was able to obtain a $25 million settlement against PRA for similar claims in a public suit filed in March 2023.
There was an $83 million verdict returned in a private case against PRA in 2016, based upon the same kind of fraud, misrepresentation and misconduct.
The Doc of the Day is the motion I filed requesting more time for discovery or sanctions for Portfolio Recovery’s destruction of evidence. Also included is Judge Rudofsky’s response.
It was within Judge Lee P. Rudofsky’s discretion to allow for more time to let the defendant correct its spoliation of evidence. He refused. Therefore the case shall be challenged pursuant to FRCP Rule 60 and then, if Judge Rudofsky does not correct his errors, by appeal.
If you are a plaintiff’s attorney who handles FDCPA claims against any of the PRA Group, Inc. subsidiaries, please contact me to discuss representation. bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Judge Lee P. Rudofsky’s Biased Opinion: Free Doc of the Day, Transcript of Hearing on MSJ
The transcript of the hearing on my motion for partial summary judgment and the dueling MSJ filed by Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is posted below.
[On Friday night, July 7 at 5:59 p.m., attorneys for Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC sent an email to me. I was sitting out back under the porch, watching a light rain and a grand rainbow, destressing from reading PRA’s latest pack of lies. When I went back to writing for the night (because my hubby was fishing), I opened the email. The version of the transcript I had posted was an unredacted version. There is a redacted version which I am posting tonight in its stead. I got the unredacted version off PACER minutes before I posted it on June 28, 2023. Please let me know if you were one of the readers who downloaded the unredacted version. You should delete it. Thank you and I am sorry for any inconvenience this causes you.]
(The usual $3 per document maximum charge on PACER does not apply to transcripts, so the value of the free document is $13.50. In my spare time I will address the inequity of charging pro se litigants to download copies of their file stamped documents from PACER. Also, how charging the average person to browse through federal district court files discourages the transparency that is supposed to be a cornerstone in our justice system.)
Read the transcript as if you are on a jury. Would you be reasonable to believe that I was telling the truth?
Did PRA call me hundreds of times, more times than they admitted to? Or did I decide to take a full minute to set up a video recording of our call on November 18, 2020, without having received any calls from the same people in the months leading up?
At the time PRA “investigated” my alleged debt, before I filed my lawsuit, did they have any documentation supporting the debt. Or did they base their investigation on one line item in a portfolio of untold thousands or millions of line items that are known to be inaccurate?
Judge Rudofsky decided that no reasonable juror could believe I had a case, and no reasonable juror could agree with me that I had no debt to Portfolio Recovery, nor that the numbers they claimed did not add up.
If you happen to read this transcript of a hearing held in front of Judge Lee P. Rudofsky and you are opposing confirmation of a promotion of Judge Rudofsky, feel free to contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com. I’d love to talk. [My attorney and I presume potential attorneys may have access to the unredacted version of all the case documents. Maybe we can form a symbiotic relationship.]
Free Doc of the Day: Motion in Limine to Exclude Report of Dr. Sanjay Adhia Hired Gun of Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
Busy Busy Busy.
I am preparing for my post judgment activity in the case against PRA Group, Inc’s wholly owned subsidiary. PRA Group, Inc. has $2.6 billion dollars of credit extended to it, which it can use to try to destroy me in court. So, fighting them is a daunting task.
Here is a motion to file a motion in limine that was mooted when Judge Lee P. Rudofsky granted the debt buyer’s motion for summary judgment.
Awfully convenient that PRA will not need to defend Dr. Adhia’s indefensible conduct in this case. Look for PRA II, which will address the “moot” conduct.
If you are a plaintiff’s attorney in Texas, Virginia or Arkansas and want to get involved in the suit, contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com or TheNext55Years@gmail.com.
P.S. Judge Rudofsky denied my motion to file my documents electronically. This increased my costs in time and money. I was required to drive to the courthouse 30 miles from home and deliver the documents in triplicate, plus make a copy for myself if I wanted a stamped copy before leaving.
I say this because two random pages from Dr. Adhia’s CV were attached at the end of this document by accident, and I was not the one who entered them.
[UPDATE] The Brief in Support is also posted. It is similar to the motion, adding a bit of authority and importantly, exhibits. If you have time to kill, look up each case on Dr. Adhia’s resume. He represented the losing party predominately.
Stupid Attorney Tricks: First Honorary Mention to Keith Cochran of Fitzgerald Knaier, LLP
Writing the caption of a court case is an exacting task. Lawyers seem to get off on getting their clients off on a technicality. One pro se case in Florida was dismissed because the non-attorneys named “First American Home Warranty Corp.”, instead of “First American Home Warranty of Florida”. I kid you not.
Attorney Keith Cochran appears to me to have tried a new trick. He left one party he later claimed to represent off the cover of his first response to the First Amended Complaint that was served to Linda R. Kramer as a co-trustee of a trust and Linda R. Kramer as an individual. Separate copies of the complaint were served and two acknowledgements were signed by Linda R. Kramer.
The clerk failed to enter the individual on the docket when he entered all the other defendants. Kramer and her husband Erik Hunsaker were not named as co-trustees on the original complaint.
Apparently, the clerk did not notice his error when he added the co-trustees. Apparently, the clerk did not notice his error when entering the notices of acknowledgement.
I suspect the plan was to go through the proceedings to finality and then, if I won, pop up and say Linda R. Kramer was not included as an individual. They could put the blame on me, for failing to notice that Kramer was entered in only one capacity and only represented in one capacity.
If I filed a motion for default under FRCP 55 that late in the game, Kramer would have a good argument that there was too much prejudice to her defense.
I am not certain that the clerk’s original error was by mistake. It could have been and Mr. Cochran seized the opportunity, dropping the individual off the list of parties he represented.
Unfortunately for the defendants, I caught the error and filed for default.
Mr. Cochran’s paralegal swore under penalty of perjury: “As a paralegal for over five years, I had never encountered a party not being listed on the ECF system. I believed that by selecting the single option for Linda R. Kramer on the system, it encompassed both Linda R. Kramer as an individual and as co-trustee of the Lynn and Erik’s Trust.”
Um, ok, so why did he remove Linda R. Kramer as an individual from the cover of the document he was filing? Or was it a convenient coincidence that the paralegal and the clerk both omitted the individual?
The Doc of the Day attached below for free download is paralegal Robert M. Wilson’s declaration. Bonus docs are the MTD filed timely (naming only the co-trustees), my motion for “clerk’s default judgment”, an opposition to my motion and my improved motion for clerk’s default.
This would all be much ado about nothing. But Mr. Cochran chose to call the clerk and ask a favor, instead of filing a motion to set aside default. The clerk agreed to add the third party to the docket entry as if it was done timely. He did not make the expected notation that he altered the docket entry two days after the attorney filed.
This caused me to have a melt-down. I called the clerk’s office and spoke to a few individuals. A female clerk told me the addition of Kramer as an individual was improper.
I read the riot act to Mr. Cochran. I told him I had a copy of the original, unaltered docket entry.
Presto, the clerk changed the docket entry back, but refused to enter default.
I did my usual bitch and complain in court documents. The judge, Janis L. Sammartino, instead of correcting the clerk, made a snarky threat to me about “impugning” the clerk in her dismissal of my complaint.
I am appealing the decisions regarding the default and several other decisions.
Attorney Cochran’s argument on appeal is citing caselaw that discusses Default Judgments entered by the judge, not the clerk.
Will the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals act like the clerk’s default and default judgment granted by a judge are the same thing and there is no need to file a motion under FRCP 55(c) to set aside a clerk’s default?
Stay tuned.
A Moment of Silence for Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Robin Wynne (deceased)
To honor the late justice who passed away last night, I will have a long weekend without any posts.
Justice Wynne had my vote, and it was with much sadness that I heard the news.
May God bless his soul.
Judge Susan Weaver Gives Tacit Approval to Fraud on UAMS and Old Lady, Me
Judge Weaver received the Doc of the Day, my motion for Criminal Contempt against Attorney William Zac White and his client Mike Pietrczak, and ignored it. The accused fraudsters did not file an opposition.
Judge Weaver was completely silent as to the accusations. She finally dismissed the case against me, with prejudice, but still gave the property Pietrczak and I were fighting over to the accused fraudster. She approved a fraudulent transfer of the property to an irrevocable trust. She even wrote that she would help with the transfer.
The unethical judge never addressed the motion for contempt.
Judge Susan Kaye Weaver also lied in an order by saying she listened to an audio recording of a hearing and she insisted the recording was accurate, even though the transcription was grossly inaccurate. Weaver blocked me from having the recording played in public.
So far, the justices at the Arkansas Court of Appeals have given me no relief from any of the errant orders.
Judge Susan Kaye Weaver is the elected judge in three Arkansas counties, Searcy, Faulkner and Van Buren.
If she has the audacity to put her name on the ballot in 2024, vote her out.
Here is a copy of the filed motion for criminal contempt and a few exhibits, the fraud notes trio and a record of Mike Pietrczak’s felony conviction for misuse of a passport at the U.S. Mexico border.
A Higher Law 