Judge Susan Weaver Authorized Prejudgment Taking of Real Estate
Orders issued by Judge Susan Weaver in Arkansas that transferred 40 acres and a house were challenged to the Arkansas Court of Appeals. The appellee failed to file an opposition.
A year later, the COA issued an order denying the appeal, based on what the court said was a lack of jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals judges said the case was not final when the appeal was filed.
But, the property had already been transferred!
Here is a quote from my 1L Civil Procedure textbook, quoting a U.S. Supreme Court case from 1991.
“This case requires us to determine whether a state statute that authorizes prejudgment attachment of real estate without prior notice or hearing, without a showing of extraordinary circumstances, and without a requirement that the person seeking the attachment post a bond, satisfies the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We hold that, as applied to this case, it does not.” Connecticut v. Doehr, 501 U.S. 1 (1991).
An attachment does not necessarily dispose of property. The transfer of title Judge Weaver made allowed the Plaintiff to transfer the property to an irrevocable trust, who sold it to a third party, a sheriff. There was no bond required in Pietrczak v. Rural Revival Living Trust and Laura Lynn, 65CV-21-20. In fact, Laura Lynn (this blogger) was already dismissed with prejudice as a Common-Defense-Doctrine defendant. The trust was in default because there was no attorney willing to fight against Judge Weaver, who obviously favored the plaintiff’s attorney, William Zac White.
Before Mr. White got involved, Pietrczak was represented by Billy Jack Gibson, who became a judge. There is a fun little tidbit at the end of the post about the Gibson-Pietrczak connection that you won’t want to miss.
There were no extraordinary circumstances shown on the record, as to why the property should be attached before a final judgment issued. The property was in escrow within a couple days and the purchaser asked a neighbor what happened to the personal property that was in the house when they saw it…clearly before the order to transfer to Pietrczak was signed. That was a bit extraordinary. Judge Susan Weaver might have the superpower of ESP.
The most troubling part is that the appellate judges in Arkansas opined sua sponte that they had no jurisdiction, but did not notice that an old lady’s property was seized without due process. Remember the names: Judge Rita Gruber. Judge Cindy Thyer. Judge Brandon Harrison.
Now the juicy gossip. Mike Pietrczak had charges filed against him in January 2025 for assault in the 3rd degree, resisting arrest, and failure to appear. MVC-25-45. The warrant was finally served on September 18, 2025. Then on September 22, 2025, a citation was filed against Micheal (correct spelling) Pietrczak for criminal mischief in the 2nd degree, disorderly conduct, and public intoxication in the 1st degree. MVC-25-441. Who is the judge on both cases? Billy Jack Gibson.
For some reason, Judge Gibson doesn’t recuse himself from presiding over criminal cases against a past client whom Mr. Gibson helped to defraud me of my property.
By the time I find an honest judge to reverse the legalized thievery of my assets, Pietrczak will have drank the money or paid it all to the lawyer types who give him a get out of jail free card.
Exposing Corruption in the Courts
Justice should be blind, but in practice, it too often favors wealth and power. Courtrooms, meant to uphold fairness, have instead become inaccessible battlegrounds where only the elite can afford to fight. The reality? Legal systems designed to protect citizens have been manipulated to serve those who can afford to bend the rules.
This blog is dedicated to uncovering corruption in the judiciary—where excessive legal fees, biased rulings, and unchecked influence shut everyday people out of the justice they deserve.
Our mission is clear:
- Expose misconduct within the court system.
- Demand accountability from judges, lawyers, and officials who abuse their positions.
- Advocate for reform that returns justice to the people.
If you’ve faced legal injustice or have a case that deserves attention, we encourage you to share your story. Together, we can push back against a system that has strayed from its purpose.
Courts Help Portfolio Recovery Associates: Here is help for You
Portfolio Recovery Associates is not slowing down.
Even as the stock of parent company PRA Group, Inc. plummets, the debt buyer is dialing for dollars.
It took me filing a lawsuit for violation of the FDCPA and intrusion on seclusion for me to convince Portfolio to quit their incessant calling.
It didn’t end well for me. Judge Rudofsky said no reasonable juror could think that the debt collector’s calls were too annoying. PRA got a judgment for over $8,000 to reimburse their costs of defending themselves. Judge Rudofsky said that even though that is more than my annual income, I didn’t list my expenses, so it wasn’t unjust to make me pay the equivalent of a year’s pension to the billion-dollar company. Easy for him to say, living off a six-figure government job.
But, don’t give up. In a different jurisdiction, for similar conduct, PRA was hit with an $82 million jury verdict. Other pro se litigants are making leeway. And Portfolio Recovery did make a $5,000 Offer of Judgment to me – I just went all in and the dealer pulled PRA’s card off the bottom of the deck.
I hope this document showing a Portfolio Recovery Associates call log, charge off data compiled and contact log will help you convince your judge not to let the defendant cover-up similar documents in your case.
When the System Rips Children Away from Their Mother: A Voice Still Cries from Ramah
“Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.”
— Jeremiah 31:15 (KJV)
Thousands of mothers today know this pain all too well. Family court calls it “in the best interest of the child,” but for many, it feels like legal kidnapping — rubber-stamped by judges who never sat at your kitchen table, never saw your bedtime routines, never knew your child’s heart the way you do.
If you’ve lost contact with your child because of a bitter ex or a system that refuses to hear your side, this message is for you.
The world may try to erase you, but you are still their mother.
Watch the short video above and know you are not alone.
Your voice matters. Your story matters. You still matter.
Please share your story in the comments or send a note to bbohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Stop Laughing! There is nothing funny about Judge Rudofsky ordering us to give scam callers our personal info.
This video is a scam caller who called me back to ask what my YouTube channel is called.
He and his partner in crime called earlier to try to trick me into divulging information about myself, such as where I bank and approximately how much money I have in my accounts.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, a debt buyer and collection company owned by PRA Group, Inc., also made calls trying to gain information about me, even after I told them I have no debt and to quit calling me.
Instead of messing with them like I did with this caller, I sued for violations of the FDCPA and invasion of privacy.
PRA got the last laugh (so far) on that one. Trump appointed judge Lee Rudofsky threw my case out on summary judgment, meaning I did not get a jury trial. The Harvard educated judge also ordered me to pay over $8,000 of the scam caller’s costs. He even lied – flat out – that I said I owed the debt.
The Eighth Circuit justices said they agreed completely with Judge Rudofsky, but failed to elaborate at all on the reasons they disagreed with my full-length appellate brief and reply.
By this order and failure to reverse on appeal, the courts are ordering us to answer questions from scammers or expect the scammers to call us again until we comply with their demands for information.
A good question that was not addressed in Hammett v. Portfolio Recovery Associates: If a person lies to a scam caller on a recorded line, can that lie be used against the recipient of the call in a court of law to prove the recipient is somehow less than honest?
Here are the aforementioned briefs and the Eighth Circuit Order affirming Rudofsky’s B.S. summary dismissal.
Judge’s Pet, PRA Group (PRAA), Owner of Unethical Debt Collector, Stock is Stuck!
When I filed my lawsuit against Portfolio Recovery Associates in 2021, its parent company PRA Group, Inc’s stock was selling around $20 per share. Today it sold for $13 plus change.
I don’t mean to be a schadenfreudist, but watching PRAA’s stock nosedive genuinely made my day. Maybe true schadenfreude is about undeserved suffering — and this isn’t that. This is earned misery. PRAA is a pet litigant of Federalist Society cabalist Judge Lee Rudofsky, and if justice exists, this is just the beginning of their bad news.
Stop Laughing! There is Nothing Funny About Court Corruption or Judge Susan Weaver
Technology and I are in a love-hate relationship. Thanks for your patience. Hopefully you catch my drift.
Attorney Knows Better Than to Confirm Info — Even When Caller Has Accurate Private Details. But According to Judge Rudofsky and the Eighth Circuit, You’re Supposed to Cooperate Anyway
Portfolio Recovery Associates, the Nation’s second largest debt buyer, made 100s of phone calls to me before I agreed to confirm (or deny) my identity, birthdate and address. After I confirmed my name and birthdate and denied the address they had was one I was familiar with, they told me that I owed $2,297.63 but not by whom, on what, where, or when the account they purportedly purchased was used.
I sued PRA.
The CFPB had already obtained a consent agreement against the debt collector against making phone calls exactly like this one. A couple years after I filed my suit, Portfolio Recovery stipulated to an order to pay another $24 million for continuing to make the harassing collections.
Judge Lee P. Rudofsky threw my suit out on summary judgment. He said it was not more than an acceptable annoyance for a debt collector to make repeated calls if the recipient refused to confirm personal information about themselves on a recorded line. The Eighth Circuit confirmed. SCOTUS denied writ of certiorari to review the orders. (Steve Lehto, at 5:20 of the YouTube video said, “so I said, ‘just so you know, I find this entire phone call annoying’, and I hung up on her.”)
The courts also allowed the supposed evidence that their decision was based on to be kept under seal. I can tell you that the evidence provided did not show that I owed PRA any money and did not show that my estimate of the number of calls made was inaccurate. This begs the question, why would PRA want to keep the records of my account confidential if I begged to have the records made public?
I can’t answer Steve Lehto’s question, but agree with him whole-heartedly that a caller has no right to demand confirmation of identity or anything else. (At 10:10, Mr. Lehto said, “in fact, I didn’t even confirm some of the things that she asked me.”
I pointed out to Judge Rudofsky that the Fourth Amendment of that pesky Constitution forbids demands for identification. The judge said the 4th amendment only applies to government intrusion. By that reasoning, there is separation of church and state, but it is perfectly fine for an individual to tie you to a rock and force you to profess faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior before the tide comes in. – Well, that is hyperbole. A more literal analogy is that Portfolio Recovery Associates can call you as often as they want if you let the calls go to voicemail and once every three days for answered calls, indefinitely, until you state on a recorded line that Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior. (For me, that is a true statement, but I don’t think I should have to confirm my faith on a recorded line, nor wear a Star of David on my sleeve.)
And isn’t it interesting, when I said that I could not confirm the address they had on file, PRA went ahead and discussed the alleged debt with me anyhow?
A Higher Law 