What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
Just an Update,
I had a demurrer hearing scheduled for Jan 26, 2010.
But is was postponed because EVERY JUDGE in the Santa Clara County recused themselves from the case.
Has anyone heard of this kind of thing happening, a mutiny of the court.
I pointed out that the ABA code is not a public policy; it was not created by elected representatives selected by the public, or voted as a voter proposition to establish voter consent to the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct.
Thus there is no restriction against a lay person regarding the use of the binding force of the code against any judge, and this allows for civil liabilty. This is because the document restriction for civil liablilty can only apply to members of the Bar Association. It would be unconstitutional to apply the restrictions set by representatives of the Bar on the general public, because the general public had no representation in the design of this private groups policies. Thus it is further restricted from being enforced on the public.
The Defense argued that I was not in compliance woth the California Tort claims act, but their cases establishing their precendence involved an attorney that represented all of their plaintiffs. However, I do not have any legal advice from anyone even though I asked many attorneys to represent me.
The California Tort Claims Act in my case provides that I as a non attorney can proceed because of the following case information:
The filing of a claim against a public entity is not a perfunctory condition precedent of instituting litigation; there must be compliance with the requirements of this section which will permit the government to make a meaningful decision in allowing or disallowing the claim. Eaton v. Ventura Port Dist. (App. 2 Dist. 1975) 119 Cal.Rptr. 746, 45 Cal.App.3d 862.
“Relief from failure to timely present a government tort claim is available only if the applicant establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the failure was "through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." (§ 946.6, subd. (c)(1).) Following our initial review of the petition and the record, we reached a preliminary conclusion that the so-called mistake was not excusable in view of the fact that Dzhibinyan and his counsel at all relevant times had possession of and/or readily available access to the information necessary to determine the potential liability of the DWP and simply failed to take the steps necessary to protect the right to seek relief.”[/
Since I have no lawyer, I am not a lawyer, and just moved to CA in 2007, I cannot be aware of all the rules of the CA Tort law. My case is a perfect fit of being a mistake or an excusable neglect provision of the CA Tort Claims Act. Thus the court has no basis to enforce the Ca Tort Claims act on my case.
These issues obviously are placing judges in a position where they do not want to trouble thier political future by having to enforce the laws in a manner that would cause significant trouble to those they're dependent on for their political career. Judges in CA are elected and not selected like they are in Massachussetts where I moved from. This proccesss clearly demonstrates that the Ca method of selecting judges has a serious negative impact on a judges ability to adjudicate freely.
Just an Update,
I had a demurrer hearing scheduled for Jan 26, 2010.
But is was postponed because EVERY JUDGE in the Santa Clara County recused themselves from the case.
Has anyone heard of this kind of thing happening, a mutiny of the court.
I pointed out that the ABA code is not a public policy; it was not created by elected representatives selected by the public, or voted as a voter proposition to establish voter consent to the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct.
Thus there is no restriction against a lay person regarding the use of the binding force of the code against any judge, and this allows for civil liabilty. This is because the document restriction for civil liablilty can only apply to members of the Bar Association. It would be unconstitutional to apply the restrictions set by representatives of the Bar on the general public, because the general public had no representation in the design of this private groups policies. Thus it is further restricted from being enforced on the public.
The Defense argued that I was not in compliance woth the California Tort claims act, but their cases establishing their precendence involved an attorney that represented all of their plaintiffs. However, I do not have any legal advice from anyone even though I asked many attorneys to represent me.
The California Tort Claims Act in my case provides that I as a non attorney can proceed because of the following case information:
The filing of a claim against a public entity is not a perfunctory condition precedent of instituting litigation; there must be compliance with the requirements of this section which will permit the government to make a meaningful decision in allowing or disallowing the claim. Eaton v. Ventura Port Dist. (App. 2 Dist. 1975) 119 Cal.Rptr. 746, 45 Cal.App.3d 862.
“Relief from failure to timely present a government tort claim is available only if the applicant establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the failure was "through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect." (§ 946.6, subd. (c)(1).) Following our initial review of the petition and the record, we reached a preliminary conclusion that the so-called mistake was not excusable in view of the fact that Dzhibinyan and his counsel at all relevant times had possession of and/or readily available access to the information necessary to determine the potential liability of the DWP and simply failed to take the steps necessary to protect the right to seek relief.”[/
Since I have no lawyer, I am not a lawyer, and just moved to CA in 2007, I cannot be aware of all the rules of the CA Tort law. My case is a perfect fit of being a mistake or an excusable neglect provision of the CA Tort Claims Act. Thus the court has no basis to enforce the Ca Tort Claims act on my case.
These issues obviously are placing judges in a position where they do not want to trouble thier political future by having to enforce the laws in a manner that would cause significant trouble to those they're dependent on for their political career. Judges in CA are elected and not selected like they are in Massachussetts where I moved from. This proccesss clearly demonstrates that the Ca method of selecting judges has a serious negative impact on a judges ability to adjudicate freely.
