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

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Slammed In Traffic Court

Expand Messages
  • Roy Dobbs
    I agree with what you say, the officers are to have oaths on file before undertaking duties of office. Besides if they are going to preach to us about doing
    Message 1 of 46 , Aug 11, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree with what you say, the officers are to have oaths on file before undertaking duties of office. Besides if they are going to preach to us about doing right and wrong they better be doing right themselves. I don't know if it will do any good but it will be on record and possibly be an appealable issue. You already know about objection from "Jurisdictionary" as he stresses that, hopefully you win and maybe they won't want you in their court anymore. From what I was told by an old guy who sues all the time , he's in prison, they don't respect you until you sue them. I don't know if you want to do all of that but at least get them to understand that you aren't easy pickings.
      -
    • stonekutteral
      On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Snowman wrote: My brief was rejected 4 times: Didn t serve DA, couldn t submit exhibit not accepted at trial, Type not large
      Message 46 of 46 , Oct 19, 2010
      • 0 Attachment

        On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Snowman wrote: My brief was rejected 4 times: Didn't serve DA, couldn't submit exhibit not accepted at trial, Type not large enough, one day late.

          Well they did notify you of the defects, but putting this in the beginning of your filings can help sometimes…



              MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE

         THIS IS NOTICE THAT THE CONTROLLING CASE, IN ALL MY COMMUNICATIONS
              WITH THE COURT,  WILL BE 
                   HAINES V.KERNER  404 U.S. 519,520,(1972).
        In All My Communication with the court Haines V. Kerner 404 U.S.
        519,520(1972), In re Haines: pro se litigants are held to less stringent
        pleading standards than bar licensed attorneys. 
         Platsky vs CIA. 953 F. 2nd 26 (C.A.2(N.Y.),1991)In re Platsky: court
        errs if court dismisses the pro se litigant without instruction of how
        pleadings are deficient and how to repair pleadings.
        , Anastasoff v. United States,223 F.3rd 898(8th circuit) (2000)In re
        Anastasoff: litigants' constitutional rights are violated when courts depart
        from precedent where parties are similarly situated.
        - will be the controlling cases in regards to any deficiency in my
        pleadings.



          SIGNED 

              Lysander
        Spooner____________________________________________________-
        (actually Spooner would rip them a darn sight stronger, but let's remember
        his name , anyway.)

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.