Tag Archive | attorney William Z. White

Guest Post: Thoughtful Analysis of Potential Fraud Upon the Court Involving Judge Susan Weaver and Attorney William Z. White

This comment was posted in response to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari I filed and shared with my readers yesterday. Thank you to Jason. I hope after my law school experience, I will be able to articulate as well as this person.

What Is “Fraud Upon the Court”?

“Fraud upon the court” is a very serious charge. It doesn’t just mean lying or playing dirty in court — it refers to a deliberate deception that corrupts the judicial process itself.

According to federal and many state rulings (including Arkansas precedent), it usually involves:

  • Officers of the court (attorneys or judges)
  • Intentional deception or collusion
  • A result that undermines the fairness of the proceeding
  • A party being denied their right to a fair trial

Black’s Law Dictionary defines it as:

“A fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, etc., but fraud that seriously affects the integrity of the normal process of adjudication.”

Based on Your Statement:

There appear to be multiple red flags:

  • An offer to resolve the dispute fairly was ignored in favor of awarding more money to an opposing party with questionable credibility.
  • The judge allegedly overlooked evidence (e.g., your written settlement offer and possibly the alleged “suicide note”) that would expose fraud or collusion.
  • Connections between attorneys and the judge suggest possible bias or improper influence.
  • The outcome seems to favor a known fraudster and reward a lawyer, possibly in violation of fiduciary responsibility and judicial ethics.

Yes — This Could Be Argued as Fraud Upon the Court

If all those elements are provable, especially the court’s knowledge of the fraud and continuing to rule in favor of it, then:

Yes, it could rise to the level of fraud upon the court.

And under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(4) and Federal Rule 60(d)(3), a judgment obtained by fraud upon the court can be vacated at any time — no time limit.Next Steps You Can Consider:

  1. Preserve All Evidence
    Emails, filings, witness statements, recordings, court transcripts, your settlement offer, Mike’s “note,” etc.
  2. Build the Case Logically
    Lay it out: the timeline, connections, ignored evidence, who benefited, and how the legal process was compromised.
  3. Consider a Motion to Vacate or Reopen
    Based on Rule 60 if you’re still within the court’s jurisdiction — especially for fraud on the court.
  4. File a Judicial Complaint
    If Judge Susan Weaver knowingly enabled fraud, a complaint can be filed with the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission.
  5. Request an Investigation
    The Arkansas Bar Association can also investigate attorney misconduct, especially for William Zac White.

Arkansas Judge Susan Weaver Exposed – Will SCOTUS Care?

FREE Docs of the Day

There appears to be collusion between Judge Susan Weaver and Heber Springs Attorney William Zac White.

White puts the trust of an elderly person in his sights, and the court pulls the trigger. Bam!

They hit the trust and bag the proceeds to fund their own fun.

In my case, I actually offered to give the money we paid for a house on 40 acres to Mike Pietrczak, $150,000. I put my offer in writing and sent it to the lawyer who represented my ex-partner prior to Willy White taking over. That was Billy Jack Gibson, now a judge in Hot Springs. (And presiding over a criminal case against his former client Pietrczak. Grisham couldn’t make this up.)

The email was filed as an exhibit in the case. But Judge Sue wanted to give him (and his attorney) more.

After years in kangaroo court, Pietrczak and his attorney banked $200K. After vigorous litigation and a “trial”, it is realistic to think the attorney got half. Or half plus costs. Mike got $100,000 or less.

And, if there is any justice, the pair will be cellies in prison. Read Appendix H – Mike’s “suicide” note. It sounds like a plan to commit fraud against me and fraud on the court.

But, if the court knows the plaintiff is a fraudster and gives him the loot anyhow, is it fraud on the court?

Maybe that should be my next Question Presented to SCOTUS.

Court Confirmed it Banned a Citizen from the “Justice Building”.

Click on this Tic Tok. Hear it for yourself. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP88Ftygp/

Who is the female in the background whispering to her fellow government employee? It sounds like they are telling Mrs. Betty Figueroa to stay out of the courthouse because Mrs. Figueroa complained that Judge Susan Weaver, with a total lack of jurisdiction, evicted Mrs. Figueroa from the courthouse under threat of incarceration.

This same Arkansas judge took my personal property and real estate rights from me by a court order after I was dismissed from the case with prejudice. Susan Weaver is out of control but seems to have protection for her alleged criminal activity.

If you are also a victim of Judge Susan Weaver in Searcy County, Faulkner County or Van Buren County, please call the FBI public integrity unit.

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.

Announcing: Free Doc of the Day

Downloadable File Stamped Court Crap

This is NOT legal advice.

Heck, sometimes judges like Billy Roy Wilson in the Eastern District of Arkansas would dismiss my case or deny my motion without waiting for a response from my opponent. (Billy Roy Wilson is his real name. If I was being snarky, I would have called him Billy Bob.)

Before I attained pauper status, maybe because of it, I paid $800 per month for a Westlaw subscription.

(Hint: You can visit a law library and use its subscription for free. The internal search engine is fantastic. Once you find the documents you want to study and cite, you can email them to yourself by clicking a button and typing your email address. The only disadvantage to this is you need to drive there during normal hours and I don’t suggest wearing your robe or a towel turban on your head.)

I used to email my documents to Westlaw at west.briefsandtrialdocsubmissions@thomson.com to the Content Specialist. I haven’t tried this since letting my subscription lapse.

Usually, they wrote back. “Thank you for your submission.  The document will be loaded to Westlaw within 3 business days.  We appreciate your contributions to our database.”

I knew I was on Santa’s naughty list when they wrote, “Thank you for your submission.  We will consider adding your document to our database.”

Here are two accepted documents, a motion to disqualify Judge Janis L. Sammartino and an affidavit in support. Enjoy the read.

It is usually a pleasure to hear from my readers. Especially if you have some dirt about judicial officers you want to share. I honor requests for confidentiality or to protect my sources. Bohemian_books@yahoo.com

The Mystery of “And/Or” Solved

One pet peeve of mine is the use of the character chain “and/or” by lawyers and judges.

Arkansas attorney William Zac White used the term repetitively in a complaint against me “and/or” the Rural Revival Living Trust.

I asked Judge Susan Weaver to order Lawyer White to make a more definite statement. She said there was no need. (But she did not clarify the meaning of “and/or”.)

After a year of causing me to zealously defend myself, the Court dismissed me with prejudice, but errantly allowed the plaintiff to proceed against the Rural Revival Living Trust.

There are blog posts by attorneys on the internet that bemoan the use of the character chain “and/or” and cite case law that forbids it. There is admittedly case law that allows it. I think a good practice is, as I did, to ask for clarification. A competent judge would agree.

One of my visitors to this site was directed here from a site called “Meltwater”. I checked out the site. I am not finished exploring what they offer, but found this gem:

In a list of Boolean characters, Meltwater lists “and/or”. “Use this when you need a keyword to pull results alongside one or more other keywords.”

So, the technical meaning, according to a site that specializes in searching through data, is that the correct use of “and/or” is inclusive of the first term and any of the following terms. Using the character chain with only one option is the equivalent of using “and” alone.

For example, Mr. White could have expanded the subsequent choices, such as “Laura Lynn and/or the Rural Revival Living Trust, Laura Lynn as trustee of the Rural Revival Living Trust.” Before we became obsessed with Boolean thinking, a master of English, such as an attorney practicing in Arkansas should be, would spell out the language needed to distinguish the inclusivity of a chain of options.

“Laura Lynn, and the Rural Revival Living Trust, Laura Lynn as trustee of the Rural Revival Living Trust, or both.”

By giving only one option after “or”, Mr. White effectively made the complaint about common defense doctrine defendants Laura Lynn and the Rural Revival Living Trust.

*By the way, I looked forward to exploring Meltwater more, but they won’t allow me to look around without providing my email address. Fat chance.

Arkansas Judge Susan Kaye Weaver Up to Her Old Tricks

For the sterile filed version of this motion scroll down to the downloadable version of what I filed today in Faulkner County Circuit Court.

I just made this a bit more readable by changing it to first person and changing a few words, such as calling Judge Weaver “Judge Weaver” instead of “the Court”. I had to refrain from calling her something else a little more colorful.

Judge Susan Weaver is not allowed to dismiss my case against Shelter Insurance and its agent, Jeff Jennings Insurance Agency, Inc for the following reasons:

Judge Weaver notified me that she intended to dismiss my case for lack of prosecution on March 20, 2023, but her notification went to my spam folder, so I learned about it later than intended.

I was able to respond timely, anyhow.

Judge Weaver’s plan to dismiss for lack of prosecution is bizarre.

First, it is the unethical judge who has failed to promptly dispose of the matters before her. I waited patiently for her to decide the Motion for Recusal filed September 27, 2021 and the Motions to Dismiss filed October 20, 2021 and October 28, 2021.

Second, there is a related case, Pietrczak v. Laura Lynn and Rural Revival Living Trust, 65-CV-21-20, that is on appeal, which addresses common issues with this case that should be decided consistently. Judge Weaver appears to have delayed and is now evading deciding the pending motions on the merits because she intends to make contradictory orders against me on the two cases.

The Motion for Recusal was brought in major part because Judge Susan Kaye Weaver presiding “conspire[ed] [with Court Reporter Jana Perry and Pietrczak attorney William “Zac” White] to make an inaccurate transcription of the hearing of August 4, 2021 [in Pietrczak].” Motion for Recusal ¶ 1.

I filed a lawsuit for Judge Weaver’s violation of my civil rights under the color of law under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against Judge Weaver, Jana Perry and Pietrczak attorney William “Zac” White, Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas case no. 4:21-CV-857-BRW. The 1983 case was dismissed (erroneously) based on absolute judicial immunity and Rooker-Feldman. I appealed. The appeal was denied summarily before briefing.

I had an acute case of Hashimoto’s Disease which caused me to be too fatigued to take the 1983 case further at that time. (I am trying to recover by following a strict dietary protocol and using stress management techniques. The Court’s misconduct is a major stressor which exacerbates Hashimoto’s Disease and I intend to file a second 1983 case because of the subsequent falsification of the transcript of the Pietrczak hearing held March 17, 2022.) There is a “Catch 22”, as legal work that addresses debilitating stress causes more stress.

By relying on Rooker-Feldman for her defense in the 1983 suit, Judge Weaver should make a concerted effort to resolve the issue of whether falsification of the transcripts in one case concerning Hammett shows bias against Hammett by the conspirator judge.

I listed each entry on Court Connect that showed that the motion for recusal and defendants’ motions to dismiss my Second Amended Complaint were fully briefed by November 17, 2021, well within the time allowed by rules of civil procedure.

Judge Weaver failed to issue an order on the Motion for Recusal and the MTDs. There was no further activity since November 17, 2021.

On September 21, 2021 the Court issued an order dismissing the First Amended Complaint with leave to amend. The Court required Plaintiff to add “Rural Revival Living Trust” as a necessary party pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. Proc. 19 [despite my repeated efforts to educate the airheaded judge as to the requirement to name a trustee, rather than a trust as a party].

I added the Trustee of the Rural Revival Living Trust as a defendant, because I personally paid the premium for the trustee after Shelter required the trustee to be named on the policy.

In the Brief supporting the Jennings MTD, Jennings argues that [the principal that] Plaintiff naming the trust as a defendant [is not allowed] is “axiomatic as suing oneself in any capacity raises the following questions — and many others.” [Dictionary.com defines “axiomatic” as an adjective meaning “pertaining to or of the nature of an axiomself-evidentobvious.”

In Pietrczak, Judge Susan Weaver dismissed me as a defendant, but then proceeded to find against the Rural Revival Living Trust by default. This is one issue on appeal, labeled the Common Defense Doctrine.

It is a clear error and appearance of bias for the Court to agree I as an individual and the trust are “oneself” in this case but treat me as an individual and the trust as separate defendants with non-aligned interests in Pietrczak. The Court denied my motion to intervene in Pietrczak. It is probable that Judge Weaver neglected to rule on pending motions in this case to evade providing me with more reason to overturn the order in Pietrczak which basically stole my property and gave it to a man who gave a hand-written letter describing the fraud he was committing on me to his attorney William “Zac” White.

Also, the appearance of bias of Judge Susan Weaver and her refusal to settle the record by playing the audio recording of the falsified hearings in open court is an issue on appeal in Pietrczak that should affect the outcome of this case.

Brief

     ARCP Rule 41 “Section (b) also marks a significant variation from FRCP 41(b). Under this rule, the trial court has the right to dismiss on its own motion a claim for failure to prosecute the action or failure to comply with these rules or any order of the court. Under the Federal Rule, such dismissal must be on motion of the defendant or other party affected.” Reporter’s notes to Rule 41. Judge Susan Weaver is abusing her power by calling her own failure to decide the matters assigned to the judge as required by Judicial Code of Conduct Rule 2.7 a failure of the litigant to prosecute.

     “A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the [] impartiality of the judiciary [].” Judicial Code of Conduct 1.2. Deciding two cases involving the same litigant and the same issues differently is a clear indication of bias. Refusal of this Court to issue the contrary ruling on this case until after the appeal of the related case and taking it a step further by dismissing this case on false grounds violates the Rules of Judicial Conduct and the Plaintiff’s fundamental Constitutional right to equal protection under the law.

     Wherefore, Plaintiff asks this Court to continue the proceedings on its calendar, and to issue a reasoned order on the two pending motions, considering the orders made in Pietrczak in the interim.

Stink Eye: Should Judge Weaver be allowed to dictate a litigant to keep a good pokerface?

“Lucky” was playing in a poker game with me last night; a 1/2 NLH at the Hard Rock in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Lucky is a tough looking young man, about the same age as my son. He is Hispanic, wears a full beard, dark shades and muff style headphones. He has a take no prisoners style of play.

I was dealt an AQ off-suit, which I consider to be a good playable hand. If I was leading off with the betting, I’d probably raise from the minimum $2 bet to $6. But Lucky got to bet before me. With a dramatic display of calculation, picking out a few chips, then pausing and adding a few more from a different color stack, he announced his bet as $23 dollars and strew the chips across the table with aplomb.

Any bet over $20 pre-flop at this table meant a premium hand (or a bluff). He probably had an AK, KK, or AA and dominated me. So, after glaring at him, I folded.

Lucky took off his headphones and addressed me personally for the first time since I joined the game. Really he was talking about me in the third person to the whole group, but he intended to engage me. I don’t remember his exact words. It was something to the effect of look at the way she stared at me. She was harsh.

The hand played out and Lucky took down a sizable pot when the last remaining caller folded after the river. Lucky showed us his pocket jacks. JJ against AQ is actually a coin toss. There was an Ace on the turn, so if I had not folded, I would have won the hand.

I acted contrary to my own rules and told the players what I folded. We had a good laugh together and I told the men about a comment that Judge Susan Weaver made to me. It was during the hearing where she trampled all over my rights to due process and announced her intention to give my personal property and real estate held in trust to a man who put his intention to defraud me of $75,000 in writing.

Judge Weaver said to stop giving her “stink eye”. At the time she said that, I had a credible fear that the judge also intended to find me in contempt of court and incarcerate me. Her stink eye comment sounded like a set-up to find me in direct contempt.

Judges have gotten away with throwing people in jail for less. They should not. They should not be allowed to tyrannize litigants who are merely expressing disapproval of the judges’ errant denial of civil rights through a non-disruptive facial expression.

It is not as if I called Judge Weaver a bitch. Opposing counsel William White called me “bitch” loudly in court that day and Judge Weaver pretended not to hear it. Judge Weaver’s longtime colleague Court Reporter Jana Perry pretended not to hear it either, when she fabricated what was said in the fictionalized transcript she created.

My look of righteous anger, though, that Judge Weaver found worth noting for the record.

Lucky made me realize just how evil Susan Kaye Weaver was to demand that I hide my dismay with her Draconian commands. Lucky noticed the intense look I gave him, also. And we were playing poker. The whole idea behind poker is to mask your emotions, because showing your emotions conveys information that can help your opponent make educated decisions on future hands. You’re not playing a hand, you’re playing a game.

When the unethical jurist abused her power by forbidding me from defending my own property rights, I was justifiably angry. There is nothing disruptive about me looking at the judge with an angry look on my face. Had she not commented, there would be no record of my disapproval until I filed my appeal.

Judge Susan Weaver wants to bully and bluff and for me to maintain my best poker face. I complied that day in court, for fear of having my 60-year-old body thrown in jail. If I had the energy, I would have protected my Constitutional right to a fair trial from being treated as a game. (Hopefully the Court of Appeals addresses the issue when ruling on my unopposed appellate brief.)

Judges Who Are Dumb Enough to Make Unethical Comments On The Record

There are a few good attorneys. Steve Lehto seems to be one of them.

He discusses crazy court decisions and stories that would be funny if they were not so serious. Click here to watch a video about a judge who made sexist and disturbing comments from the bench and actually was disciplined (lightly).

One of the points Mr. Lehto makes is that the man is too dumb to be a judge if he doesn’t realize there will be a record of his inappropriate comments. I agree.

Now retired and deceased California Commissioner Alan Friedenthal did the same thing while presiding over my case. He said he read my blog and went through a list of what he disagreed about. He eventually was disciplined with a figurative slap on the wrist for what he did to me and many others. Fox News covered the story and featured me in a segment called “Lost in the System: Imbalanced Justice”.

Al should have gone to Arkansas Judge Susan Weaver for advice. When Suzy says things she does not want the public to hear or lets her favored attorneys cuss at old ladies in court, the judge has her old friend and colleague Court Reporter Jana Perry make an inaccurate transcript. Then Judge Weaver refuses to make the actual recording of the hearing available to the public.

The Arkansas Court of Appeals and the Judicial Disciplinary and Disability Commission are aware of my allegations and have not taken any action to correct the wayward judge thus far.

Maybe they figure that Susan Weaver is smart enough to cover-up her bad behavior, so she is smart enough to be a judge.

How Quickly We Forget: How Hitler Transferred Property and What Came Next

Americans love watching movies about the Nazis. The vast majority of us are rooting against the murderous thugs.

I am watching a series on Prime called “Hunters”. It stars Al Pacino as a Nazi Hunter. There is an FBI agent who suspects a rash of deaths are murders by a vigilante group determined to eradicate war criminals. I think she will eventually see the beauty in truth espoused by the self-appointed judge, jury and executioners.

Stylistically, Hunters has comic strip undertones.

Sadly, people, including some Jews, view the Holocaust through this animated lens.

The Jewish people have a mantra. “Forgive, but do not forget.”

Yet history is repeating itself right here in the land of the free.

I am the victim of a Hitleresque judicial officer named Susan Kaye Weaver.

She took my property, both real and personal, in a hearing in which I was forbidden to defend against the improper seizure.

The Arkansas judge used the excuse that the real property was held in trust. She said that if I spoke on behalf of the trust, I would be committing the unauthorized practice of law. She had the County Sheriff and three deputies on hand who could arrest me at her whim. She knew I am ill and ruled with a hardened heart. (I have an acute auto-immune disease and gave the Court copies of a recent blood test that would indicate that I should be resting at home; not driving 3.5 hours roundtrip to attend kangaroo court.)

This same judge, in the same case, made a sua sponte ruling to dismiss my countersuit against the fraudster who was suing me. But, in the hearing of March 17, 2022, I, the trustee and settlor of the trust that held the title to the real estate, was in the courtroom and Judge Weaver failed to question me as a witness. Judges are allowed to question witnesses. Judge Weaver questioned the fraudster. She did not ask any questions that would elicit the truth, but I know she knows she could have asked me as trustee what my side of the story was. She had already read my counterclaim and exhibits throughout the prior year of litigation. She did not want to see the truth.

She just wanted to give property that was mine or meant to be mine to attorney William Zac White’s client and to pay Mr. White.

She had the Gestapo standing by in case I protested.

You can read the court documents on Court Connect, case 65CV-21-20 and appeal CV-22-435. The transcript is posted below, but I warn you, Court Reporter Jana Perry made substantial falsifications to the transcript in order to support Judge Weaver and Attorney White’s agenda.