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

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Your Right to Be Heard & Void Judgments

Expand Messages
  • E Junker
    Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U.S. 274, 277 (1876). Apro forma opportunity will not do. Due process demands an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 21, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U.S. 274, 277 (1876). Apro forma opportunity will not do.  Due process demands an opportunity to be heard "at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."  Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 545, 552 (1965)

      I cannot help but think of the treatment Irwin Schiff has received in re these cites.  He certainly was not allowed to testify in his capacity (as an expert on tax law) and his jury was kept virtually incommunicado  as to evidence.

      Common justice requires that no man shall be condemned in his person or property without . . . an opportunity to make his defence."  Baldwin v. Hale, 1 Wall. 223, 233 (1864)
      And what of Pete Henderson?  The courts demanded he testify to what he knew to be false!



      From: Jake <jake_28079@...>
      To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, February 21, 2011 5:00:52 AM
      Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Your Right to Be Heard & Void Judgments

       

           > It looks to me like this case [Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U.S. 274, 279-284 (1876)] has never been overturned and Google Scholar shows that it has been quoted from hundreds of times . . .

      Apparently that decision hasn't been overturned - I looked to see if I had it on a CD of numerous U.S. supreme court cases & while that decision isn't on it, it is referred to & the below quotation is from a 1996 decision, Gray v. Netherland, 518 U.S. 152, Justice Ginsburg dissenting:

      As this Court affirmed more than a century ago: "Common justice requires that no man shall be condemned in his person or property without . . . an opportunity to make his defence."  Baldwin v. Hale, 1 Wall. 223, 233 (1864).  See also Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U.S. 274, 277 (1876). A pro forma opportunity will not do.  Due process demands an opportunity to be heard "at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."  Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 545, 552 (1965);  [Footnote & further list of cases omitted]

      ~ ~ ~

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