Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: One Judge (Illinois) On Requiring (Not) Attorney License

Expand Messages
  • Val Christian
    This may be meaningless in your situation... In NY I was prosecuted by a non-attorney, who under county law 700 did not have: -a letter of authorization to act
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      This may be meaningless in your situation...
      In NY I was prosecuted by a non-attorney, who
      under county law 700 did not have:
      -a letter of authorization to
      act as a prosecutor
      -an oath of office
      -a bond

      All of these are required to be on file in the county clerk's office.
      I did an open records FOI request for these documents, and was told
      by the clerk that they had none of them. I asked for a response in
      writing, which they reluctantly provided. That constitutes my proof
      that the proper authorization to act as a prosecutor was not in
      place. At trial I also asked the prosecutor what law school he
      graduated from, and whether was a member of the bar. So that is
      on the "record" whatever that means from that court.

      The point is that there may be a different way to get certified what
      you want to have certified.



      >
      > Tuesday 5 February 2008
      >
      > Turns out in Illinois, anyone with a professional
      > license is "presumed" to have it [and burden on
      > the challenger to prove otherwise], which is why
      > my efforts to demand proof of license have been
      > failing.
      >
      > While I lack the depth and experience of a FF, I
      > do have tenacity. Rather than accept yet another
      > turn down in my demand for proof, I found the above
      > info during research, which was deflating, and then
      > I spotted a comment that caught my attention.
      >
    • mn_chicago
      Wednesday 13 February 2006 There is no way a judge is going to let anyone challenge the attorney license issue here in Illinois. Despite what I thought was a
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 13, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Wednesday 13 February 2006

        There is no way a judge is going to let anyone
        challenge the attorney license issue here in
        Illinois.

        Despite what I thought was a lean, well-written,
        factual pleading, incorporating existing case
        law decisions and language, my efforts were
        denied for a fourth time, today.

        I was prepared to say to this group that perhaps
        I was not forceful enough in defending my
        position to the judge, but I said all I had
        prepared in what I figured was a strong argument,
        backed by law, but no. Denied for the last time,
        and subject to sanctions should I bring the
        issue up again.

        That was not really a threat to me, just the
        judge telling me I tried, and it ain't going
        to fly. I can deal with it in appeals, but not
        in court again. Even I agree, having just spent
        my best shot.

        Her position was that while it is the law that
        an attorney must be licensed, there is no law
        that requires them to show a license in a case,
        and certainly not in a foreclosure case.

        I argued that I am entitled to know that those
        who claim to be who they are must prove it, or
        the court is not properly set. I objected to
        her ruling, based on bias and prejudice, but to
        no avail.

        One thing for sure, Illinois ain't California.

        Cheers!

        mn


        As an aside, I took another look at two judge's
        oath of office I have on file, and they are word
        for word as required per the Illinois constitution.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.