Parental Alienation and Hostile Aggressive Parenting Awareness ...
Parental alienation is a problem that most people don't know about. ... SOS-Sygapa-Greek. Soulwork Coaching/UK. Spanish - Parental Alienation Book ...www.parental-alienation-awareness.com/links.asp - 34k - Cached
ΑΠΟ ΤΗΝ ΙΣΤΟΣΕΛΙΔΑ:
http://www.parental-alienation-awareness.com/links.asp
ΚΑΙ ΤΟ ΜΕΝΟΥ:
http://www.falseallegations.com/
False Allegations ~ False Accusations ~ Recovered Memories
sexual abuse ~ sexual assault ~ child molestation ~ rape of child
sexual offender profiles ~ pedophiles ~ supervised visitation ~ custody
fathers' rights ~ grandparents' rights ~ men's rights stranger rape ~ student rape ~ spousal rape
sexual harassment ~ executive separation agreements
A consensual intimate relationship is NOT sexual harassment
Child abuse brings out the best in us (the desire to protect our children)
and the worst in us (the lynch mob Brian
Children lose their fathers every day in Probate & Family Court
-- Anonymous
DADDY'S DREAMThough I’m not there to turn off the light,To tuck you in and kiss you goodnight,To read a book, or get you a drink,It’s you I love, and of you I think.If you were here, I’d give you a squeeze,And ask if you could give me one please.So to the day we’d say our good-byes.As we lay down and close our eyes.-- Don MathisClick<>
Drano ##148 and 149 now availablein Adobe pdf files.
DRANO #148 Smith's Motion to Dismiss John DiPiano's three counterclaims: (1) Tortious Interference with Advantageous Business Relationship, (2) frivolous suit, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, §6F, and (3) alleged violation of the wiretap statute, M.G.L. c. 272, §99(Q) by videocam-ing DRANO #149 Smith's Reply to John DiPiano's Opposition to Smith's Motion to Dismiss DiPiano's three counterclaims: (1) Tortious Interference with Advantageous Business Relationship, (2) frivolous suit, M.G.L. c. 231, §6F, and (3) alleged violation of the wiretap statute, M.G.L. c. 272, §99(Q) by videocaming
Sensational website: http://www.votehelp.org/Answer questions of national issues,Computer will compare your answers with the answers of the candidates.Details are superb, both in text and in a graph.
The best I've seen!!
8 January 2008: Sister Keri Burnor tells her story on her new web site, clergyvictim.com, of her abuse and the case that has reshaped her life involving St Joseph's Abbey in Spencer, Massachusetts. In a 2-hour interview available on CD, Sister Keri exposes corruption in the Catholic Church hierarchy and how certain Catholic district attorney's still protect the diocese's in which they are elected.
Christ the Wall Hermitage will seek to assist victim/survivors based on each one's goals and needs. Contact Sr. Keri at sk@clergyvictim.com. Please feel free to make prayer requests.
Massachusetts Wiretapping Law
1 January 2008
I am free to copy, distribute, and transmit the article below with attribution to the Citizen Media Law Project
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
The blog article is of particular interest because I had a client who audiotaped his arrest in his own home. When the police arrived, my client was taping a conversation with a private person who had consented to the taping. Essentially, the police had walked into a "recording studio." According to the police report, one of the responding policemen thought the recorder in my client's hand was a cellphone and therefore did not ask him to stop recording. The criminal charges were later dismissed.In the client's malicious prosecution action, the officers counterclaimed for Invasion of Privacy under the Wiretapping Law. Prior to trial, the federal magistrate-judge awarded the complaining officers judgment and $1000 apiece on their counterclaim. When I appealed, the First Circuit Court of Appeals said the appeal bordered on the frivolous.At some point in the future, when time allows, I shall upload the diverse pleadings and decisions to this website. The statute is intolerable if not unconstitutional. It is viable only in this tyrannical system, where the people's rights are suppressed and the people themselves are oppressed.
Massachusetts Wiretapping Law Strikes Again
Posted December 12th, 2007 by Sam Bayard in
Criminal
Legal Threat
Massachusetts
Newsgathering
Video
Boston Now reports that Peter Lowney, a political activist from Newton, Massachusetts, was convicted last week of violating the Massachusetts wiretapping statute (Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99) and sentenced to six months probation and fined $500. The criminal case arose out of Lowney's concealed videotaping of a Boston University police sergeant during a political protest in 2006. Apparently Lowney was shooting footage of the protest when police ordered him to stop and then arrested him for continuing to operate the camera while hiding it in his coat. As part of the sentencing, the Brighton District Court ordered Lowney to remove the footage from the Internet.
The Massachusetts wiretapping statute criminalizes "interception of wire and oral communications" and defines "interception" as the secret recording of the contents of a communication through the use of an "intercepting device" without the permission of all parties to the communication. The statute provides that a person who "willfully commits an interception" may be punished with a fine of up to $10,000, imprisoned for up to five years, or both. Massachusetts is among the minority of states that prohibit recording a conversation without the permission of all parties involved. Most states and the federal wiretapping law permit secret recording of a conversatino if one party to the conversation consents.
Eugene Volokh and Daniel Solove both posted about the Lowney case yesterday, and both do a good job at pointing out why the Massachusetts statute is wrong-headed from a policy perspective. It makes little sense that a statute aimed at protecting privacy should be used to stop the recording of public officials engaging in a public function (in public no less!). The reach of the statute doesn't just affect citizens who legitimately want to document mistreatment at the hands of government officials, but impedes newsgathering as well (note that Lowney himself appears to have taken on a journalistic function when he posted his footage on the Internet). Solove sums the situation up well by quoting from the dissenting opinion in another Massachusetts case involving the wiretapping statute, Commonwealth v. Hyde, 750 N.E.2d 963 (Mass. 2001):
The purpose of G.L. c. 272, § 99, is not to shield public officials from exposure of their wrongdoings. I have too great a respect for the Legislature to read any such meaning into a statute whose purpose is plain, and points in another direction entirely. Where the legislative intent is explicit, it violates a fundamental rule of statutory construction to reach a result that is plainly contrary to that objective. . . . To hold that the Legislature intended to allow police officers to conceal possible misconduct behind a cloak of privacy requires a more affirmative showing than this statute allows. . . .
The statute, on its face, makes no exception for members of the media or anyone else. Had Michael Hyde, the defendant in this case, been a news reporter he could have faced the same criminal consequences that the court now sanctions. If the statute reaches actions by police officials acting in their public capacities in the plain view of the public, the legitimate news gathering of the media is most assuredly implicated.
Incidentally, this is not the first time that the Massachusetts law has been on our radar screen. In 2006, Mary Jean, a Massachusetts resident and the operator of the website Conte2006.com, posted a video to the site that showed state police engaging in a warrantless and possibly unconstitutional search of Paul Pechonis' home. The video was recorded by Pechonis' child-security system (or "nanny cam"), and Pechonis himself gave the video to Jean. On Feb. 14, 2007, the Massuchetts state police sent a cease-and-desist letter to Jean demanding that she remove the video within 24 hours or face criminal action under the wiretapping statute. Rather than removing the video, Jean filed a lawsuit in federal court requesting an injunction to prevent the Massachusetts police from pursuing legal action. The district court granted the injunction, and the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the First Amendment barred the Massachusetts police from prosecuting Jean for publishing the video, even assuming she knew that it was unlawfully recorded. (Please see the CMLP database entry, Massachusetts State Police v. Jean, for details.)
The Jean case is obviously different from Lowney's because he actually made the recording at issue, and the State presumably prosecuted him for the act of recording, not publishing the footage (although the details of the case are not clear based on the press report). Without the obvious First Amendment concerns present in Jean, this case draws into focus even more clearly the basic public policy shortcomings of the statute.
A New Book Worth Reading
Parental Alienation is the teaching of children of divorce or separation to harbor negative feelings and emotions toward the parent who generally does not have custody and does not reside in the same domicile. This is usually done in an effort for one parent to gain the respect and love of the children, while destroying the image and relationship of the absent parent. This phenomenon will generate feelings of hatred, ambivalence, and distance between children and the non-custodial parent. Our family court system does little to eliminate these occurrences, and although the parent affected is cheated of a normal relationship with the children, the real damage will manifest itself within the children.
Ron SmithChildren Need Both Parents, Inc
www.cnbpinc.org
616-301-1515
Ron Smith wrote to Barb:
My two sons and I completely enjoyed one another whenever we were together. We always looked forward to our weekends despite what I may have had to endure during the exchange. One of the ways that alienation took place with my sons was their mother would tell them that their father was going to pick them up at unscheduled times and disappoint the children when I didn't show up. This was in an effort to have the children not trust me. I only learned that this took place while my son wrote his contributing chapters for this book.His younger son, Ariel, who was a co-author of the book, wrote:
"Many incidences in my life didn't add up, because I lived in my mother's house I only heard her perspective therefore, I didn't know the facts about my father. For example, when my brother and I would have our noses pressed against the window, little did I know , my father did not tell my mother that he was coming and what's even more disturbing was that he didn't even know that we were expecting him."
Ariel Smith from the book "Cheated"
http://www.amazon.com/Cheated-children-DOCUMENTED-PARENTAL-ALIENATION/dp/142417306X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199073519&sr=1-8Available also at Borderbooks and other book stores.
WORDS TO REMEMBER
In my opinion, the formal commencement of a criminal proceeding is quintessentially this type of state action. The initiation of a criminal prosecution, regardless of whether it prompts an arrest, immediately produces “a wrenching disruption of everyday life.” Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, 481 U.S. 787, 814 (1987). Every prosecution, like every arrest, “is a public act that may seriously interfere with the defendant's liberty, whether he is free on bail or not, and that may disrupt his employment, drain his financial resources, curtail his associations, subject him to public obloquy, and create anxiety in him, his family and his friends.” United States v. Marion, 404 U.S.307, 320 (1971). In short, an official accusation of serious crime has a direct impact on a range of identified liberty interests. That impact, moreover, is of sufficient magnitude to qualify as a deprivation of liberty meriting constitutional protection.*fn9Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 295-296, 114 S.Ct. 807, 824-825, 1994.SCT. 40853 at ¶80
I can think of few powers that the State possesses which, if arbitrarily imposed, can harm liberty as substantially as the filing of criminal charges.
Albright, 510 U.S. at 312, 114 S.Ct. at 833,.1994.SCT.40853 at ¶119 (dissent)
. . . the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment constrains the power of state governments to accuse a citizen of an infamous crime.
Albright, 510 U.S. at 316, 114 S.Ct. at 835, 1994.SCT.40853 at ¶127 (dissent).
2nd Annual Family Preservation Festival
August 15th-17th 2008 at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.
A Child's Right Box 119 30 East Columbia Ave Ste F1 Battle Creek MI 49015 Questions: "Angela Pedersen, R.N."
Published: December 26, 2007 12:00 am
Lawyer to seek Supreme Court review of disbarmentBy Crystal Bozek, Staff WriterEagle-Tribune
ANDOVER - The Supreme Judicial Court may have denied her latest appeal, but disbarred lawyer Barbara Johnson is not ready to stop fighting.Johnson, a flamboyant former gubernatorial candidate and a fathers' rights activist from Andover, said she will petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review her case. On Dec. 13, the state's Board of Overseers upheld her 2006 ban from practicing law and a contempt charge."They made up their minds before I even walked into the room," Johnson said of her appeal hearing. "This was just retaliation. They don't like me because I'm a whistle-blower. This is because I have challenged judges and criticized them."Supreme Judicial Court Justice Francis Spina disbarred Johnson in August 2006 on charges including posting clients' confidential information on her Web site, commingling a former client's money with her own and conducting herself in an "insulting, vituperative manner."Spina sent Johnson to jail last October for a week when he found her in contempt of court for not obeying the terms of her disbarment.Johnson maintains there is no evidence to prove any of those charges."They are all lies," she said. "They've never been able to produce anything. It was all fake. They will not give the client's name, or how much money. This is simply a smoke screen they've brought against me."She said once she is done petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to review her case - a review she admits will be difficult to get - she will begin writing a book on court reform, an expose' of sorts."Hopefully my uniqueness will land me a book agent. Given I've been in jail, it should help my cause," Johnson said. "They like that stuff."Johnson, 73, gained fame locally in 2002 when she successfully defended a Haverhill man accused of kidnapping his daughter. Later that year she launched an independent campaign for governor, riding an antique firetruck around the state and claiming to "douse the flames of corruption in the court system."Johnson said a book is the only way for her to make money, now that she cannot practice law. She will also post some Google ads on her Web site, www.falseallegations.com, to make some cash.The Web site comments on her legal struggles, criticizes the court system, and offers legal advice."I need some money badly," she said. "So, I'll write the book, and let people know about the injustice, as long as I don't freeze to death first.
12/24/2007, Monday
Uploaded Drano ##181 and 182. More on immunity, immunity, and immunity. See Drano Series table below for descriptions.
12/15/2007, Saturday
Barb ia disbarred in Massachusetts. Her appeal was denied on bogus facts. She will file a Petition for Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. She will also upload to this website the decision denying her appeal with her comments regarding the facts interleaved. See Eagle-Tribune article below -- published 12/26/2007.
12/15/2007, SaturdayBarb's appeal of the dismissal of her case against the Bar (i.e., the Board of Bar Overseers and Office of Bar Counsel), now former Bar Counsel Daniel Crane, Assistant Bar Counsel Susan Strauss- Weisberg, and the Commonwealth was also denied. As soon as she finishes her Application for Further Appellate Review, pursuant to Rule 27.1 of the Mass. Rules of Appellate Procedure wil be uploaded within the next few days. It is anticipated that that, too, will be denied, even though the law is on her side.She will have to write a Petition for Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court for that case, too.She then has to write an unrelated pleading in another case-- a personal one-- and then will begin reformatting this website little be little to accommodate Google ads, to earn some money for oil this winter.If she does not freeze to death this winter, literally, she will write her book on court reform. In it, she will both expose the inequities and injustice of the present so-called justice system and will identify what it is in the court procedures that is badly need of reform. She will devote a chapter to each real case--of all different kinds--to expose the corruption and to suggest the necessary court reform.
Webcasts of Barb's arguments at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: (appeal of the disbarment and appeal of the contempt):
http://www.suffolk.edu/sjc/archive/2007/SJC_09820.html Appeal of the disbarment: 14 minuteshttp://www.suffolk.edu/sjc/archive/2007/SJC_09866.html Appeal of the contempt: 11 minutes
I have donated my fire engine and hearseto the Larz Anderson Auto Museum. The museum picked up both vehicles. They wrote:
Both seem very interesting and obviously have an interesting history.Later they wrote:
We are delighted to have the donation. I would actually like to bring both the fire truck and the hearse here to the museum so that we can show them off for a while. We can do this as early as next week. The hearse has been sold to a private collector. The sales income is a gift to the museum.What makes this exciting is that the vehicles have the signs for the cause still on them. For instance, on the hearse:
Familes Are SufferingFatherhood Is DyingJustice Is DeadI have also supplied them with the Lawyers Weekly article about the Million Dads March (June 2003) and the reason we were in Washington, D.C., that is, to fight the federal bonuses to the States. I suspect that the article -- explaining the history -- will also be on display.So we have some "free" advertising for the cause.Maybe the media will pick up on the display of the engine and the hearse.For those interested in seeing the fire engine on display, the Larz Anderson Auto Museum is located at 15 Newton Street, Brookline, MA.02445. Phone: 617-522-6547. See http://www.mot.org for directions and http://www.larz.anderson.org. You can also read about the museum on Wikipedia.Please spread this announcement far and wide. We want to encourage visits to the museum, a fascinating landmark in the MetroBoston area. For wintertime visitors, the museum maintains an ice rink, too!Thanks,Barbara
On Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's website,you can send the Governor this message:GOVERNOR, START THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS OF REMOVING BAD JUDGESClick here and then vote:http://devalpatrick.com/issue.php?issue_id=7627069
Governor, start the constitutional process of removing bad judges. YOU HAVE THE POWER. USE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Many of the judges in Probate & Family Court do not have the qualifications or ability or temperament to be good judges. They ignore due process and equal protection and make HORRIFIC decisions that have no basis in law. Many of them never practiced law. One had been a lead inspector, a family service officer, and an assistant register. He laughs as he orders fathers to jail.
Another judge ordered a father, on disability, to pay his wife, who is earning around $250,000 a year, half of his monthly disability payment to her for child support, to transfer his interest in the family home to her, and to bear responsibility for other things too numerous to cite here. He is left penniless.
There are, literally, another two dozen judges who should be removed from the bench for judicial misconduct, i.e., in making decisions not based on evidence or law. THEY MUST BE REMOVED. USE YOUR POWER TO BEGIN THE PROCESS.
That power is in Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, Part The Second, Chapter III. Art. I. M.G.L.A. Const. Pt. 2, C. 3, Art. 1
ART. I. The tenure, that all commission officers shall by law have in their offices, shall be expressed in their respective commissions. All judicial officers, duly appointed, commissioned and sworn, shall hold their offices during good behavior, excepting such concerning whom there is different provision made in this Constitution; provided, nevertheless, the governor, with the consent of the council, may remove them upon the address of both houses of the legislature; and provided, also, that the governor, with the consent of the council, may after due notice and hearing retire them because of advanced age or mental or physical disability; and provided further, that upon attaining seventy years of age said judges shall be retired. Such retirement shall be subject to any provisions made by law as to pensions or allowances payable to such officers upon their voluntary retirement.
Under this article, providing that judicial officers may be removed by the governor, with consent of the council, "upon the address of both houses of the Legislature," the address need assign no reasons. Com. v. Harriman, 134 Mass. 314 (1883) .
Under this article, providing that "all judicial officers duly appointed, commissioned, and sworn, shall hold their offices during good behavior, * * * provided, nevertheless, the Governor, with consent of the council, may remove them upon the address of both houses of the Legislature," a judicial officer may be removed by address, for misconduct and maladministration in office, although he is liable to trial therefor, by impeachment, by Pt. 2, C. 1, § 2, Art. 8, and the address need not assign reasons, and the constitution authorizes the removal without reasons being assigned, and, upon the hearing of an information in the nature of a quo warranto, filed upon the relation of a judicial officer so removed, it is immaterial what evidences or causes induced the Legislature to vote the address or led the governor and council to act upon it. Com. v. Harriman, 134 Mass. 314 (1883).
To go to Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's website,click here and then VOTE for the issue:http://devalpatrick.com/issue.php?issue_id=7626850
Terminate Daniel Crane as Director of Consumer Affairs
Terminate Daniel Crane as Director of Consumer Affairs. Crane is the former Bar Counsel of the Board of Bar Overseers. The Mass. Bar Association Task Force identified many of the serious failings of the Board of Bar Overseers and the Office of the Bar Counsel. Then the American Bar Association did another study. The ABA recommendation was that OVERSEERS were necessary to OVERSEE the BBO and the OBC.
Daniel Crane did absolutely nothing to correct the serious failures. Instead, he retired and took a looooong trip to Europe with his daughter.
Daniel Crane has NO NO NO experience, education, or the temperament or human attributes to be a Director of Consumer Affairs. He cares absolutely NOTHING for the people. For Deval to give him now a public job with pensions and health benefits that the people do not get is sinful.
Daniel Crane must be terminated immediately.
On Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's website,VOTE for this request.Click the link to go to the governor's website:http://devalpatrick.com/issue.php?issue_id=7626844
Please give the email of the person in charge of this websitePlease give the email of the person in charge of this website. We want to create a coalition, but the prompts are inconsistent. We requested help from "pace," but did not get any. Who is in charge of the website to give help? Thank you for your anticipated answer and a link to his or her email address.
Vote also for the issueDEMAND COURT REFORM OF THE PROBATE AND FAMILY COURTS
Click http://devalpatrick.com/issue.php?issue_id=7607449
Due process and equal protection are absent from the family courts. Every day in family courts across the Commonwealth, children lose one or both parents. The court is causing the Holocaust of American Families. The children are the pawns. The court claims what it is doing is in the best interests of children, but that is not so. The court is doing what will glean the most federal money in the form of bonuses at the end of the year.
Many of the judges were assistant registers and never read a law case in a decade or more. They were simply political appointments. The Commission on Judicial COnduct must be more pro-active in punishing the judges who are remiss. Given that you cannot sue judges, there must be some way to get relief from the wrongs done by incompetent judges.
Discrimination against men is rampant. When child support orders are unreasonable and men cannot meet the payments -- some greater than their weekly pay -- innocent men are found in contempt and sent to jail. When women disobey orders to allow dads to see their children, contempt actions against them are dismissed without hearing. Judges who dismiss Complaints for Contempt without a hearing should themselves be punished.
Fundamental fairness has disappeared. The crimes by the family courts have reached epic proportions. They must stop. Court reform is mandatory!
Click on http://devalpatrick.com/issue.php?issue_id=7578976 to vote for Shared Parentingand tell the Governor
Please work to encourage the legislature to get the Shared Parenting bill to your desk for you to sign. Also please make April 25th Parent Alienation Awareness day..
The Govermor, Patrick Deval, will be using the list on his website to determine where he will stand on important issues.J.K. sent us:
The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf (Boston; Houghton-Mifflin, 1943 (ed. Ralph Manheim translation), p. 403
Conviction of a crime generally means disbarment.Former Speaker of the House (Massachusetts) Tom Finneran pled guilty to a federal felony. The Board of Bar Overseers did NOT disbar him.They only temporarily suspended him.Finneran's email address is tfinneran@wrko.com
Flood his inbox with the question
What was the deal you made with the Board of Bar Overseers to not get disbarred?I would be delighted to hear whether he replies to you and if so, what his reply is.Thank you. BACKGROUND More PROOF of political decisions by the Board of Bar Overseers.Finneran pleads guilty to felony in federal court and gets only temporary suspension. Another attorney was found to haveneglected clients' cases and to have used clients' funds for her own use. Unbelievably, she was suspended ony for 9 months. Barb only criticizes judges, seeks court reform, and the abolishment of judicial immunity and she gets a preliminary decision of disbarment. What is wrong with this picture?
For people outside of Massachusetts: Finneran is former Speaker of the House who left his job to become a lobbyist for the biotech industry at $400,000 a year.
After his plea the other day, he landed a job as the new Talk Host for WRKO's morning drive time show. Given the power of his access to the public and his old connections in the Legislature, the court still wanted to MAKE NICE to him.
Conviction of a crime generally means disbarment. Tom Finneran pled guilty to a federal felony. The Board of Bar Overseers did NOT disbar him.They only temporarily suspended him.A few minutes ago on his morning-drive-time talk show, he said he used to make$100,000-$200,000 a year in his lawfirm
Finneran's email address is tfinneran@wrko.com
Flood his inbox with the question
What was the deal you made with the Board of Bar Overseers to not get disbarred? Around 9:10 a.m.on Wdnesday morning, 5/16/2007, Finneran did it again.He disparaged me. The emails must be driving him crazy.Keep flooding his inbox with the question!!!!!!tfinneran@wrko.comWhat was the deal you made with the Board of Bar Overseers to not get disbarred?
Drano #175: When Nonlawyers Are Permitted to Represent Parties in Legal Cases and the Representation Does Not Constitute the Unauthorized Practice of Law. Added, the answer to the question, What is a Court of Record? CLICK
Published: 10/25/2006
Johnson freed from jail, planning appeals
By Colin SteeleStaff writer
ANDOVER - Five days in jail didn't slow down Barbara Johnson.
The disbarred Andover lawyer and former gubernatorial candidate was released from South Bay jail in Boston on Monday and immediately continued her feud with Supreme Judicial Court Justice Francis Spina. He found Johnson, 72, in contempt last week for not obeying the terms of her disbarment and imprisoned her until she complied.
"It was really an evil thing to do," Johnson said yesterday from her Appletree Lane home. "The man is a real devil. He is a really evil man."
An SJC clerk authorized Johnson's release after she notified her clients and others of her disbarment. Johnson said she sent the notices because she had to, and she vowed, once again, to fight her disbarment all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I will not stop," she said. "I can guarantee you that. I am not going to tolerate unscrupulous actions by judges."
Spina disbarred Johnson in August for posting clients' confidential information on her Web site, commingling a former client's money with her own and conducting herself in an "insulting, vituperative manner."
Johnson maintains there is no evidence to prove those charges.
"They want to shut me up, because they don't want me criticizing the judiciary," she said. "It's total smoke and mirrors."
Johnson, a prominent fathers' rights activist, gained fame locally in 2002 when she successfully defended a Haverhill man accused of kidnapping his daughter. Later that year she launched an independent campaign for governor, riding an antique fire engine around the state and claiming to "douse the flames of corruption in the court system."
Although Johnson can no longer practice law, she will still be busy in the upcoming weeks. She has appealed her disbarment to the full Supreme Judicial Court, and she plans to appeal the contempt ruling as well.
But for now, she is enjoying her time back at home - especially sleeping in her own bed again.
"In jail they give you a metal slab to sleep on," she said. "It's terrible."
Material from the Associated Press was used in this report
The Bar War Continues -- WENT TO JAIL ON OCTOBER 19TH, 2006http://podcasting.fia.net/3254/1668678.mp3(audio/mpeg Object)WAAF 107.3 FM Inteview of Barb Johnson by Hillman Morning Showthe day after Barb's release from jailPeople say this is HYSTERICAL!!
Published: August 25, 2006 12:00 am
Johnson lives her life her wayEagle-Tribune
Andover lawyer Barbara Johnson is, in a word, unconventional.
The chain-smoking 71-year-old has long been a fierce advocate for fathers' rights in divorce and family court matters. She is an outspoken critic of the Massachusetts court system, which she says is rife with corruption. In 2002, she ran a quixotic campaign for governor, campaigning around the state in antique fire truck.
This month, Johnson was barred from practicing law any longer in Massachusetts for putting sensitive confidential information from two of her cases on her Web site and for conducting herself in an "insulting, vituperative" manner in court, among other charges. Johnson on her Web site says she never posted confidential material. The disbarment is nothing more than an effort to silence her criticism of the courts, she says.
Somehow, we don't think Johnson intends to accept an sentence of silence anytime soon.
While we don't fully agree with either her politics or her methods, Johnson is a character in a humdrum world sorely in need of more characters. She's the thorn in the side, the thumbtack on the chair. She can be offensive to those who have forgotten there is no constitutional right to pass through life unoffended. Johnson speaks her mind, and loudly.
Johnson has already gone on the attack. She told reporter Brad Haynes she was disbarred by a "kangaroo court."
"They'll disbar me, which is fine," she said. "I'll write my judicial murder mysteries. I'm going to kill off a judge in the prologue of every one."
Johnson vows she'll fight her case all the way to the Supreme Court. Now that will be a sight. Wait until the likes of Roberts, Souter and Scalia get a load of her.
Published: August 18, 2006 12:00 am
Activist lawyer disbarred Barbara Johnson ran for governor in 2002By Brad HaynesEagle-Tribune
ANDOVER - Barbara Johnson, the flamboyant Andover lawyer who fought for the rights of fathers, campaigned for governor in an antique fire engine and drove a hearse to Washington, D.C., to protest divorce laws, has been barred from practicing law in Massachusetts.
Johnson, 71, who also has been an acerbic critic of the Massachusetts court system, said yesterday she'll fight her disbarment all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Yesterday, she called the process under which she was disbarred a "kangaroo court," and compared the state to a Third World country, but remained nonchalant about life after losing her license.
"They'll disbar me, which is fine. I'll write my judicial murder mysteries," Johnson said. "I'm going to kill off a judge in the prologue of every one. It'll be like a Where's Waldo murder mystery, and I'll use real names for the judges."
"I'm having so much fun," she said with a grin, puffing one of her always-lit cigarettes and letting out the gravelly laugh which became familiar during her 2002 independent gubernatorial campaign.
Johnson may have had too much fun, though, bringing her contentious public persona into the courtroom and bringing confidential legal matters into public light.
Judge Francis Spina of the state Supreme Judicial Court ruled Aug. 16 in favor of the disbarment recommendation by the Board of Bar Overseers writing that "the judicial system and the public must be protected from her repeated misconduct."
Johnson was disbarred for putting sensitive confidential information from two of her cases on her Web site, for refusing to pay legal fines after being held in contempt, and for conducting herself in an "insulting, vituperative" manner in court, among other charges.
"The respondent's misconduct has been directed toward her clients, opposing parties, other counsel, judges and other adjudicators, witnesses and innocent third parties," Spina wrote. "She has made inflammatory and contemptuous statements both verbally and in writing on her website. ... Her misconduct demonstrates her outright refusal to conform her conduct to professional standards and ethical requirements."
Johnson admits to her colorful language and tenacious demeanor, but she dismissed the rest as the corrupt Massachusetts justice system's "purely political" response to its most vocal critic. She notes in particular that the charges came down just three weeks after the 2002 gubernatorial election.
In that race, Johnson spent $52,000 of her own money, petitioned herself onto the ballot, and got herself on several televised debates with the four other candidates, arguing a platform of father's rights, court reform, and the abolition of judge immunity.
She also rode an antique firetruck plastered with campaign signs more than 5,000 miles around the state "dousing the flames of corruption in the court system."
In 2003, she drove a hearse covered in slogans and children's toys to the Million Dads March in Washington, D.C., mourning the "death of fatherhood" due to the courts' handling of divorce law.
Johnson became well known in the Merrimack Valley and among fatherhood rights activists for her successful defense of Brian Meuse of Haverhill, who was accused of kidnapping his daughter from her mother, who had temporary custody and had taken the child to Florida. Meuse was found not guilty by an all-male jury in May 2002 after Johnson argued he had no choice but to take the 14-month-old girl because the mother was not getting her the medical care she needed.
Johnson claimed her activism in the gubernatorial campaign and on the Internet has put the state courts on the defensive.
"This all has to do with my Web site," she said, referring to www.falseallegations.com, which offers, among several things, running "Bar Wars" commentary on her legal struggles, records of her criminal and family court cases, legal advice to parents accused of sexual abuse, and an online store - Forever Fascinating - selling T-shirts, mugs, and a "sexually explicit" screenplay.
Johnson said the Web site, which she started in 1998, registered 850,000 hits last year. "That's 2,500 per day," she said. "And, when you think, it's this short, fat, little old lady living in a very dirty house.
"They want to shut me up, but they won't be able to," said the grandmother of five, while sitting in her "cockpit" - a desk stacked high with two computers, a television, and legal paperwork far over her head.
Johnson said she may even weigh into this year's gubernatorial race with a radio ad, but she said she lacks the money to compete in the present "war of the multimillionaires." She has no regrets, though, about spending her retirement money on her last campaign.
"You can't take it with you. I never saw a hearse with a luggage rack," she said.
HERO DAVID CHICK -- A BRIT -- SAVES COURAGE FROM BECOMING EXTINCT
http://www.spidermandad.com
Click on picture for link to story this website
Denied Access - aka Heights of Despair
What to do when you are fighting CONTEMPT or How to Stay out of Jail ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Complaints for Contempt by Pocahontas Against Smith and Smith Against Pocahontas, Two Orders by Judge Smoot, and 9 Motions to Amend by Smith Click
Bulletin Board Alphabetical list of over 240 files is below the recent important pleadings. Take a look also at the Drano Series Table at "D" in the list.
Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution
Scroll down to Drano Series Table for descriptions and links
##135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, and 147 now in both .html and .pdf files
In YOUR Eyes, Questionable Judges Edward F. Donnelly, Middlesex County (Mass.) Probate & Family Court
This message is from ...:
Hi there. Whenever I get reamed I think it’s only fair that you share in my fun. I was in court ... as a Plaintiff, taking my ex-wife for contempt for visitation violations. There were approximately 6 violations over a 3 month period, then once she got the summons over a month ago everything has been perfect naturally. I made my case and was pleased with how organized it was. I did a better job than I thought I might do…did not choke, no stammering, etc.
I laid out the violations one by one. Then my ex-wife’s attorney told me how they tried desperately to make this all right but that I wouldn’t cooperate. Then my ex-wife gave a 10-minute diatribe describing horrendous things that I have done in the past, most of which were multiple years ago. It is the standard speech that she gives every time in court so I was ready for it. However, when I said ‘I object’ to object to the testimony as irrelevant, I was not allowed to object. Judge Donnelly . . . said ‘Don’t interrupt’
Donnelly had only 1 or 2 years with the State after law school, 1 year of a private practice, at which he must have not made any money, so spent the next 15-16 years pushing a pencil in the Register's office, then was, in 1998, appointed as a judge by former Gov. Paul Cellucci, who must have made a chunk of change for the nomination. When you think of Donnelly, think of Cellucci, too.
The complaint to the CJC against him was dismissed. Only with MULTIPLE complaints might he CJC sanction him. So COMPLAIN TO THE CJC IMMEDIATELY. COMPLAIN TO GOVERNOR ROMNEY. COMPLAIN TO THE GOVERNOR'S COUNCIL. COMPLAIN TO CHIEF JUDGE MARGARET MARSHALL. COMPLAIN TO CJAM SEAN DUNPHY. Then when my ex-wife was finished, I knew I was finished too. Donnelly said to me ‘Last chance’, giving me one last chance to respond. Based on the tone of that last chance, I knew I was cooked.
I said that my ex-wife made up a pack of lies, etc, but Donnelly didn’t listen.
I told him that I had 3 faxes with me where I was pleading with her attorney to give me make-up visits so we wouldn’t have to go to court, contradicting my ex-wife’s lawyer’s claim that I couldn’t wait to get to court, and Donnelly had no interest in them.
I told Donnelly that my ex-wife’s attorney’s written response to my complaint should not be considered or included in the court because he brought it in with him that morning, rather than him responding within 10 days of the complaint, so I had no chance to prepare myself against those responses.
I told Donnelly that the same holds for the $3600 that my ex-wife’s attorney is requesting. He handed me that motion in the courtroom, with no time to prepare for it. Of course, his hourly rate for that was $300 even though he bills my ex-wife $210, and there was no detail for the billing.
End result: I now sit and wait for the letter that will tell me that my ex-wife is not in contempt and that I must pay ex-wife’s lawyer $3600 and possibly other punishment for having the gall to try to enforce my right to see my son at least as much as the damn minimum 14 percenter as it is called would allow me to. Guys, I will respect your convictions for fighting tooth and nail for your rights in court, but I have learned my lesson. I will do everything I can do from this point forward to avoid a court room, even if means giving my ex-wife more than she deserves for child support or anything else. Going into court is akin to pounding your head against the wall to get what you want. You not only won’t get what you want, but you’ll be worse off than when you went in. I once again, and for the last time, know with 100% certainty that none of us will get anywhere unless and until there is a true rebellion.
Drano Series #129 Barb's Letter to the Editors, Lawyers Weekly, published on 8/16/04
Drano Series #128 See Judicial Immunity and the Supreme Court below
John Smith's Second Complaint Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution
Drano Series #111 Click
Civil Right Complaint: Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution (With special instructions how to write a Complaint
The Forum
Drano Series #102 Click.
Are Lawyers Entitled to the Full Sweep of Due Process Protections?
OOn 10/18/04, the Massachusetts Bar Assocation announced the creation of a BBO Task Force:
Time is RIPE FOR REFORM of the Board of Bar Overseers
Time is Ripe to Introduce Due Process to the BBO
See the Lawyers Weekly Editorial at Drano Series #134
Daily Injustices
The Daily Injustices of Justices Catherine Sabaitis, Lisa A. Roberts, Edward Donnelly, and Dorothy Gibson. Revolutionary Series #9. Click.
Censorship by the BBO and Retaliation by the Appeals Court Revolutionary Series #10. Click.
Where Did Justice Go?? Miscellaneous Cases
UPLOADED 6/21/03 Drano Series #96 Click. Judge Allen J. Jarasitis: Judas to Justice A sitting justice is a traitor to justice in trying to help the Bar Counsel and his Assistant Bar Counsel get JohnsonMay they be hoisted on their own petard! May the judge be impeached and the Bar Counsel, Daniel Crane, and his assistant, Susan Strauss Weisberg, be disbarred for unethical and perhaps criminal behavior.
We do not need such despicable people in our judicial system.
Drano Series #92 drano92-immunity-elderly-medical-assistance.htm#decision.
DECISION IN ON JUDICIAL AND QUASIJUDICIAL IMMUNITY
An Elder Fights the Denial of Medicaid by Division of Medical Assistance and the Hearing Officer Needs the Immunity Defense Provided by the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act
LLink to Massachusetts Court Rules.
A new product is now unveiled -- a film script: Cameo, Cam-e-oOO.
I've held it under wraps for a few years until the world would be ready for the theory behind it. The theory is that marital relationships fail because of the breakdown of the sexual dynamics of the couple.
Enter my e-commerce store, Forever Fascinating, and click on Relationship Film Scripts when you reach the list of products or click here. You can buy it as one entire script (without camera directions for $14.95 or with them for $24.16) or in six sections, each from $5.01 to $5.06)
Now YOU !!! can add your own event to the PROTEST AND DEMONSTRATION calendar for the next five months. Click
Press Control-End to go to Google search tool at bottom of pageYou can search this websiteor the entire web!
. . . Bulletin Board . . . Bulletin Board . . . Bulletin Board . . . RALLIES, PROTESTS, DEMONSTRATIONS, MEETINGS SPECIAL LINKS . . . DETAILS CONSTANTLY UPDATED ! ! ! ! ! Battered Men: http://www.noexcuse4abuse.org 1-888-7HELPLINE OR 1-888-743-5754
Now you you you CAN Add your own event to the calendar for the next five months
Drano Series #1 through #182 in the ALPHABETICAL LIST BELOW
SCROLL below ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF SUBJECTS BELOW SCROLL below A-Dra above the Drano Series Table Dr-Z below the Drano Series Table
Allegations: True or Not?
True or not, allegations of sexual abuse and/or rape of child ignite a chain reaction of events in administrative agencies, a police detective bureau, a district attorney's office, lawyers' offices, one or more criminal courts, possibly one or more civil courts, appeals courts, and, of course, likely a hospital, jail, and/or prison.
If you have had the misfortune to have been vacuumed into this maelstrom, what you need is a local lawyer pronto. If, for whatever reason, you have not hired an attorney, what you need until you do is a guide through the system, lots of information, quickly, sample motions and supporting legal briefs, and some clues to strategy. You don't need to read a story. You're living it.
Before exploring this site, you should first read my disclaimer. (My name, address, phone number, and email feedback connection are at the very bottom of every page in the site.)
And you should read my goals.
My goal is to make this Website informative for all falsely accused of sexual abuse or assault or rape of a child. What I have uploaded is only the nucleus of what I hope to see here: a treasure trove of information related to false allegations. If you don't see the answers to your questions here, visit my Store, where I sell answers to questions. And if those aren't enough to solve your problems, visit The Back Room, where I discuss Consulting Services and Legal Representation.
Information such as practices and policies and successes and defeats of the authorities in each state would be welcome. Names of so-called experts used by the state or defendants and the cases in which they testified would be welcome. Names of community centers or other locations where supervised visitation may be held would also be welcome: knowing those resources could possibly make the ordeal a bit easier for those readers going through it at this time. And suggestions for new Webpages are welcome!
In the meantime, the following is what this site can offer you now. If you need further help in finding what you're looking for, you can use the search tool at the end of this page. It will help you search within this entire site, which contains multi megabytes of information!
Abel Screening Abuse, Determining Whether Children and Adolescents Have Been Abused: Forensic Evaluation of Children and Adolescents Who May Have Been Physically or Sexually Abused Abuse, Determining Whether Infants and Toddlers Have Been Abused: How to Conduct a Psychiatric Assessment of Infants and Toddlers (0-36 Months) Abuse, Problems in Determining Whether Abuse OccurredAdministrative Agency: form for written report by mandatory reporter; form for investigative report by agency Alienation of Affection A Man's Right to Choose: Down with Paternity Fraud A falsacc list member writes candidly about what must be done to prevent paternity fraud. America's Secret HolocaustAmicus Brief by Committee of Concerned Social Scientists, State of NewJersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels Anatomical Dolls Another Reader's Story Answers to AdmissionsAnswers to Interrogatories Appeal, Notice of A Reader's Story Attorney's Fees, Rule 1.5 of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct Attorneys: Referrals AVERSION THERAPY On The planning Board Award: Barb's Woman of the Year Award Fathers Day, 16 June 2002 Banners to Help Barb Advertise This Site Battered Men and Family Violence, authored by Tom Williamson, President of National Coalition of Free Men. Click to Purchase Battered Men: http://www.noexcuse4abuse.org 877-643-1120 access code 0757 Bibliography for Amicus Brief by Committee of Concerned Social Scientists, State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels Books: Bestsellers Books for Defending Yourself Books, Paperback/Hardcover Fiction/Nonfiction Books to Relax with During Time of Stress "Boys will be boys; women should let them," by Kathleen Parker Caretaking Plans Certificate of Service (for convenience only) Child: Consistent statements by child Child: Do Children Lie? Child: Establishing trust Child: Repeated Interviews: Memory Distortion and Learned Behavior Child-Batterer Profile (Eli Newberger's Testimony Inadmissible) Child Protection at the Crossroads: Child Abuse, Child Protection, and Recommendations for Reform, by Susan Orr, Ph.D. (external link) Child Protective Services If you are having trouble with Child Protective Services or the Department of Social Services, you must read this case. A Massachusetts case filled with lots of cases from lots of States!!!! Child Savers: A Dirge in Pictorial Poetry Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, CSAAS Child Support: Both parents have duty to support Child Support by Nonbiological FatherChild Support: Solution to Child Support Guidelines Child Support Guidelines: Constitutional Aspects of the Guidelines and Their Enforcement (as presented by Denman to ABA Family Law Section Child Support Guidelines in Georgia Declared Unconstitutional Child Support Modification for Reservists Child Support Orders when two states are involved Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders, 28 U.S.C. 1738B Child Support Guidelines for Massachusetts AND Worksheet for PRE-2/15/02 Child Support Guidelines for Massachusetts AND Worksheet for POST-2/15/02
Child Support Guidelines -- Compare them from State to State: A very important study by David Weden, III, financial analyst and expert on the guidelines. See them at the fact-filled site of a fathers' rights group in Massachusetts: ClickPlease note that the revised Child Support Guidelines were effective as of 2/15/02.ClickNote also that David Weden is available as an expert witness.Circumcision: Pros & Cons, authored by Tom Williamson, President of National Coalition of Free Men. Click to Purchase Citation for Motor Vehicle Offense: How statute is stretched to reach result desired by Commonwealth and likely the public, too Civil liability for malicious prosecution: Immunity Class Action by Divorced Dads for Illegal Child-Support Collection in Michigan Client Fee Agreements: HourlyorContingency (Harassment in Employment) Blank Agreement Forms for Filling out and Signing: Hourly or Contingency (Harassment in Employment), Contingency (Non-employment) Clinical psychologists. See Psychologists "She's cohabiting! Must I send so much support?" Collection and the Department of Revenue Colposcopy and the Unknown Complaint for Modification (based on a deprivation of parental rights and a substantial change in circumstances) Complaint: An Outline for a Complaint Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and to Invoke the General Superintendence of the Court Blank forms for filing judicial complaints at Commission on Judicial Conduct Click Confidentiality of Information, Rule 1.6 of the Mass. Rules of Prof. Conduct Consulting Services: Multilevel Fee Structure A Must Read Contempt: Citations for the States of Washington and Texas by an Anonymous Friend Contempt: Sample Appellate Brief Controversy! With Texas psychologist & University of Texas at Tyler Criminal motions. See Motions, criminal Cups/Mugs and T-Shirts See Forever Fascinating Politically Correct and Incorrect Cups/Mugs/T-Shirts Custody Daubert Test and DNA Dean Tong's Ashes to Ashes' Table of Contents De Facto Parent Awarded Visitation Defamation Complaint: A Live Case Provides a Sample Complaint . See also Drano #153. Defending YourselfWhat to Do When You are Accused and Fighting for Your Liberty A falsacc list member writes candidly about how you must manage your defense team and what you must do to properly defend yourself. Denman's Cases for Custody/Visitation Fights Dennis the Menace Depositions Depression according to DSM-IV Deprivation of Parental Rights: A Federal Complaint Development of memory Dictionary, See Law Dictionary at the bottom of every page Disclaimer Discovery Tools: See Depositions, Motions, Interrogatories, Answers to Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents Divorce: Sexual abuse, prove by preponderance of the evidence Dollar Incentives for States for Collection Efforts of Child Support and Declarations of Paternity According to the National Women's Law Center Click 3/9/02 Why is there not a fathers' group gathering the statistics of how much the States receive, the methods used, and the errors made? Domestic Violence Guidelines
See below DRANO SERIES TABLE for rest of alphabetical list
DRANO SERIES TABLE The documents shaded Green are the documents the Board of Bar Overseers wants to censor.
1
Drano Is Needed to Wipe Out Rampant Discrimination by the Judiciary(1) PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS,(2) EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PHYSICAL EXAMINATION OF CHILD,(3) EMERGENCY MOTION TO COMPEL ATTENDANCE AT DEPOSITION AND FOR AN AWARD OF SANCTIONS,(4) SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT, ASSORTED RELATED MOTIONS, & PROPOSED ORDER
Meuse
2
More Drano Is Needed to Wipe Out Rampant Discrimination by the Judiciary: Fathers' outreach attempt to other fathers is rejected by Chief Justice as being political. What then are the women's outreach efforts?
Meuse
3
Judge Manzi's Order Puts Infant in Harm's Way
Meuse
4
Petition for Interlocutory Relief, Supporting Memorandum of Law, and Motion for Stay of Order of Probate & Family Court Pending Appeal
Meuse
5
An Amended Complaint Based on the Deprivation of Parental Rights Suit against doctor, court investigator, mental-health counselor, psychologist, social worker, trial court and child protective service
Linnehan and Brown
6
Mom's Ex Parte Motion to Continue and Judge Mary McCauley Manzi's Unlawful Decision and Appeals Court Judge George Jacobs' Denial of Relief
Meuse
7
Plan for Recusing an Anti-Children Judge
8
Petition to Invoke the General Superintendence of the Court
Meuse
9
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss on Immunity Grounds
Linnehan and Brown
10
Notice of Appeal from the Denial of the G.L. c. 211 sec. 3: Petition to the Full Bench of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Meuse
11
Letter to Chief Justice Sean Dunphy for Judicial Assignment
Meuse
12
Opposition to Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on Grounds of Sovereign Immunity: A Creative Look at Its Unconstitutionality. It Could Change the Way Massachusetts Treats Its Citizens
Linnehan and Brown
13
Why an interlocutory appeal is necessary!
Meuse
14
The Default of Eli Newberger of Children's Hospital
Linnehan and Brown
15
Motion to Strike Eli Newberger's Answer to Amended Complaint and Motion to Dismiss
Linnehan and Brown
16
Opposition to Motions to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Sanctions
Meuse
17
Opposition to Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Linnehan and Brown
18
Is there a G.A.L. in your life? A letter to a guardian ad litem, the president of the hospital, and the hospital's general counsel
Another active case
19
Opposition to Eli Newberger's Motion to Remove Entry of Default
Linnehan and Brown
20
Jim's Story: The Devastating Story People Have Been Waiting For
Linnehan and Brown
21
Opposition to Eileen Kern's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Linnehan and Brown
22
Amended Complaint
Linnehan v. Robyn Gerry Sylvia Paternity Case
23
AFFIDAVIT OF ROBYN GERRY-SYLVIA IN HER DIVORCE CASE
Robyn Gerry-Sylvia v. Michael R. Sylvia Divorce Case
24
AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL R. SYLVIA IN HIS DIVORCE CASE
Robyn Gerry-Sylvia v. Michael R. Sylvia Divorce Case
25
Complaint
Robyn Gerry-Sylvia v. Michael R. Sylvia Divorce Case
26
Obituary of a Grandfather Who Longed to See His Grandson Before He Died . . . AND THE LETTER OF THE PSYCHOLOGIST WHO RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF GRANDPARENTS' VISITATION
Linnehan Grandparents v. Robyn Gerry Sylvia
27
Mass. SJC Denies Relief
Meuse
28
Deleted.
Deleted
29
Brown's Opposition and Memorandum in Support of Opposition to Eli Newberger's Motion to Dismiss
Linnehan and Brown
30
Meuse's SJC Rule 27 Petition for Rehearing
Meuse
31
Plaintiff James Linnehan's Opposition and Combined Memorandum in Support of His Opposition to Children's Hospital's and Eli Newberger's Motion to Dismiss
Linnehan and Brown
32
Linnehan's Opposition and Memorandum in Support of Opposition to Jack McCarthy's Motion to Dismiss
Linnehan and Brown
33
Judge Death Threat case: Commonwealth v. Trimboli Motion for Exculpatory Evidence
Trimboli
34
Renegade Juvenile Court Judge Orders Impoundment of Materials Being Sued on in Federal Court. The outrageous order is reminiscent of edicts issued by tyrants, autocrats, and sociopaths who have climbed to the pinnacle of power in countries other than OUR U.S. of A.
Linnehan related
35
Petition for Interlocutory Relief from Supervised Visitation (M.G.L. 231, sec. 118)
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
36
(1)Decision by judge to CLOSE courtroom over Smith's objection. (2)Petition for Interlocutory Relief from Closed Session in Family Court (M.G.L. 231, sec. 118)
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
37
Letter to Judge Mark E. Lawton about Order to Impound Reports of Social Workers, Psychologists, and Eli Newberger-Childrens Hospital and Certain Documents on This Website
Linnehan related
38
A real case with names changed for privacy reasons.Complaint Brought Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 for False Arrest, False Imprisonment, Conspiracy, and Malicious Prosecution and Other Claims. "John Smith" was holding a tape recorder with which he had been taping the conversation with his wife's step-brother when the police entered the scene. Fate would have it that it was even in his palm when the officer cuffed his wrists behind Smith's back. The officer didn't notice it until Smith was being booked at the station.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
39
PLAINTIFFS' BRIEF ON (1) COURT'S AUTHORITY TO RETAIN JURISDICTION (this is about the domestic relations exception -- that is, about when the federal court will not take jurisdiction of cases arising out of domestic relations cases), (2) DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST ELI NEWBERGER, (3) LINNEHAN'S SURREPLY TO DEFENDANT McCARTHY'S REPLY TO LINNEHAN'S OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION TO DISMISS
Linnehan and Brown
40
A Complaint for Rescission or Reformation of a Deed from JOHN SMITH's parents and John SMITH to JOHN SMITH and POCAHONTAS based on mistake, deceit, or fraud by not intending to keep solemn marital vows to stay married to JOHN until death do them part. This Complaint, whether successful or not, should warn all parents who convey real property to a child and his or her spouse to write IN THE DEED that in the event the parties divorce, the property will revert to the grantors (the parents) and shall not be property of the marital estate.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
41
Judge Dreben's Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Regarding Closed Hearings in Probate & Family Court (Decision on Drano #35 and #36)
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
42
Letter to Chief Judge Martha P. Grace, Juvenile Court, and Chief Judge Sean M. Dunphy, Probate & Family Court
Linnehan related
43
Letter to Chief Justice Barbara A. Dortch-Okara, Trial Court, Chief Judge Martha P. Grace, Juvenile Court, and Chief Judge Sean M. Dunphy, Probate & Family Court. Added the context in which all these letters were written.
Linnehan related
44
Child's Attorney Caught Lying to Chief Justices!! Provable by Documentary Evidence: Letter in Reply to Child's Attorney's Letters to Chief Justice Barbara A. Dortch-Okara, Trial Court, Chief Judge Martha P. Grace, Juvenile Court, and Chief Judge Sean M. Dunphy, Probate & Family Court Added the context in which all these letters were written.
Linnehan related
45
Memo #14 by Retired Justice John J. Irwin, Jr., regarding payment of Guardian ad Litem fees: ordering the family court judges to violate a statute. See section 4(a) of the memo. Do the Nuremberg principles apply here?
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
46
Judge Caught Lying in Decision!!! Provable by Documentary Evidence. Judge's Order Denying Motion for Restitution of Guardian ad Litem's Fees
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
47
JOHN SMITH's interlocutory appeal on the issue of paying fees for the alleged services of a guardian ad litem was filed on Wednesday, July 25th. The appeal was based on both a constitutional issue -- the separation of powers -- and an allegation of fraud upon the court.In the petition, sufficient facts were asserted for the court to find that Merrill committed a fraud upon the court.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
48
Guardian ad litem fees being contested in the Appeals Court. APPELLANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION FOR INTERLOCUTORY RELIEF. The Judge and the Wife's Lawyer Caught Lying!! Provable by Documentary Evidence
John Smith, Sr, John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
49
Supplementary Brief for the Return of John Smith's Children. File includes a sample cover, the motion for leave (permission) to file the supplementary brief, the very brief brief itself, and some important attorney-client fee agreements and billing tips.
John Smith and Pocahontas
50
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Rescission Sought on Grounds of Not Honoring Solemn Marriage Vows
John Smith, Sr., John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
51
Verified Complaint for Violations of 42 U.S.C. §1983, False Arrest and Imprisonment, Conspiracy (under §1983 and common law), Failure to Protect and Prevent (by inadequately training), Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Negligence, Intentional and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
52
Drano Series #52, 53, 54, and 55: OppositionS to Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Violations of 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, False Arrest and Imprisonment, Conspiracy (under section 1983 and common law), Failure to Protect and Prevent (by inadequately training), Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Negligence, Intentional and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Oppositions to Police Commissioner Big Honcho's Motion (in his personal capacity) Court allowed the Commissioner's Motion to Dismss
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
53
Oppositions to City and Police Commissioner in His Official Capacity The court ALLOWED in part and DENIED in part the City's Motion to Dismiss. Count 5 -- a section 1983 count -- against the City is still alive and well.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
54
Oppositions to Officers Colorone and McBroghan's Motion to Dismiss Smith won this round. The court DENIED the police officers' Motion to Dismiss. The case against the officers is alive and well.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
55
Oppositions to Pocahontas Smith and Sean Plumber's Motion Smith won this round. The court DENIED Pocahontas and Plumber's Motion to Dismiss. The case against the Pocahontas (Smith's wife) and her stepbrother is alive and well.
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
56
Complaint for Contempt Against Court and Its Judge . . . for disobeying an order of a single justice in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. See the Attorney General's Motion to Dismiss at Drano #71.
Judge's contempt case
57
Complaint Against the Judges, the Family Court, the Trial Court, and the Commonwealth (see Opposition to Motion to Dismiss at Drano #62)
John Smith, Jr., against judges
58
Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus, Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 211, sec. 3 (about removal of children to another State)
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
59
Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 211, sec. 3 (about closing hearings) and Decision on #58 and #59
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
60
Consolidated SJC Rule 2:21 Appeal of the Denials of Relief about the closed hearings and the removal of the children from one State to another
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
61
The Decision on the Consolidated Appeals
John Smith, Jr., and Pocahontas
62
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Complaint Against Judges, the Family Court, the Trial Court, and the Commonwealth (see Complaint at Drano #57)
John Smith, Jr., and People Who Wear Black Robes
63
The Marriage Vows Case: Pointing out the errors in Pocahontas's Reply. John Smith's Surreply to Pocahontas's Reply to his Opposition to her Motion to Dismiss
King Harry Smith, John Smith, and Pocahontas
64
More Technical Pleadings for the Marriage Vows Case: Good if you want to learn how to argue the facts of your case using the LAW. The pleading is a "Supplement" to a "Surreply."
King Harry Smith, John Smith, and Pocahontas
65
Petition for Interlocutory Relief from the Application of the Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines Where the Father Has No Visitation The legal ARGUMENT in this petition was written by the foremost NATIONAL EXPERT on Child Support Guidelines. (A link to her website and services is provided.) The petition does not address the constitutionality or the UNconstitutionality of the Massachusetts guidelines. That I will have to challenge in another way. DENIED on 12/27/01 without hearing. See Drano #70. Federal Complaint will be coming.
Linnehan domestic relations case
66
Petition for Interlocutory Relief for Temporary Child Custody This petition is unlikely to be successful. The court will likely say that relief will be available after final judgment, but it WON'T BE. The child will be too old and will likely leave the home of the mother and go to points unknown. The father does not want to risk losing track of him.
In either event, the petition shows the format -- at least in Massachusetts -- to be used for such an interlocutory appeal. It may also work in other States. The law, primarily from the United States Supreme Court, is good in all States. DENIED on 12/27/01 without hearing or explanation.
Linnehan domestic relations case
67
Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and to Invoke the General Superintendence of the Court (pursuant to M.G.L. c. 211, sec. 3) to Reverse the Denial of Meuse's Motion to Dismiss the PARENTAL KIDNAPPING Charge Technical but necessary. It's another way to get interlocutory relief, that is relief from the denial of a motion to dismiss before trial. The law is, of course, primarily from Massachusetts, but there is also law from other States and from the United States Supreme Court, which is good in all States.
Brian Meuse Found NOT GUILTY of Parental Kidnapping
Brian Meuse's parental kidnapping case
5/23/2002: Brian Meuse Found NOT GUILTY of Parental Kidnapping
68
Motion for Restitution of Fees Paid for Guardian ad Litem if Your State Was Supposed to Pay but You Were Ordered to Pay Instead The courts are trying to get around the statute by saying you consented by either stipulating or not objecting to their ordering you to pay the fees. My contention is that that is not good enough::: the statute orders the Commonwealth to pay, NOT you. Any agreement into which you entered or any failure of you or your counsel to object does not cut it . . . it would have yielded a result opposite to the intention of the statute and thus would have been an unlawful agreement or result.
A sample for you to use with your own facts
69
First Round of an Appeal Fighting Immunity: * Sovereign Immunity for the State * Absolute, Quasijudicial Immunity for certain so-called mental-health workers * Qualified Immunity for public officials and certain private parties
Linnehan and Brown against doctor, court investigator, mental-health counselor, psychologist, social worker, trial court and child protective service
70
Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and to Invoke the General Superintendence of the Court In Massachusetts, this is the only way to "appeal" a denial by a single justice in the Appeals Court to give relief from the application of the Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines where a father has no visitation
Linnehan v. the mother of his child and the court
71
Attorney-General Thomas Reilly's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Contempt Against Judge. The SJC dismissed the Complaint immediately, without giving the plaintiff an opportuity to oppose the motion. See the Complaint at Drano #56.
Judge's Contempt Case
72
Reply of Brown and Linnehan to Defendants' Appellee Briefs The Primary arguments are immunity and state action, i.e., whether the defendants were state actors.
Linnehan & Brown against Evil Evaluator ELi Newberger et al in the multibillion $,$$$,$$$,$$$ sex-abuse industry
73
Decision of Appeal Against Eli Newberger and Immunity: * Sovereign Immunity for the State * Absolute, Quasijudicial Immunity for certain so-called mental-health workers * Qualified Immunity for public officials and certain private parties When I filed this appeal, I had absolutely no hope of winning it. I hoped only that I would get one or two sentences which would crack open a wee bit the door locked tight by immunity. I think I succeeded. See the decision: if judges are people, they are accountable -- according to Article V of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. This one might be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on that question. It might also be used for the appeal in my judge case.
Linnehan & Brown against Evil Evaluator ELi Newberger et al
74
Complaint under §1983 for Deprivation of Civil Rights, §1985(3) for Conspiracy, Common-Law Conspiracy and Emotional Distress. Five attorneys -- one now a sitting judge and one prominent lawyer court-appointed as Discovery Master -- being accused of attempting to commit fraud upon the court Uploaded with pseudonyms!!
John Smith and Pocahontas and her counsel
75
Two more exhibits proving opposing counsel and the Discovery Master were committing fraud upon the court on Monday, June 3, 2002, in Suffok Probate & Family Court.
John Smith and Pocahontas and her counsel
76
Opposition to a motion to dismiss by one of the attorneys sued for attempted fraud. Uploaded with pseudonyms!!
John Smith and Pocahontas and her counsel
77
Answer to a Complaint for Contempt for Nonpayment of Child Support When There Has Been No Custody or Visitation Uploaded without surnames!!
Paul and Lynda
78
To come when I know it's safe!
John Smith and Pocahontas and her counsel and the Discovery Master
79
Opposition to a motion to dismiss by the second of five attorneys sued in federal court under 42 U.S.C. section 1985(3) for conspiracy. At the top, I give instructions on how I tried to write a brief to overcome the hurdles of judicial and quasijudicial immunity.Uploaded with pseudonyms!!
John Smith and Pocahontas, her former counsel (now lsoa sitting judge), the Discovery Master, and a judge
80
The Bar War: Barb's First Response to the Complaint by Robyn (mother of Jim Linnehan's child) and the child's court-appointed attorney, Deborah D. Wolf to the Board of Bar Overseers Office of the Bar Counsel
Barb Fights for her First Amendment rights against secrecy by impoundment
81
The Bar War: Barb's Second Response to the Complaint by Robyn (mother of Jim Linnehan's child) to the Office of the Bar Counsel and/or Board of Bar Overseers
Barb's fight for her First Amendment rights continues
82
The Bar War: Barb's Second Response to the Complaint by Deborah D. Wolf (the child's Juvenile-Court-appointed attorney) to the Office of the Bar Counsel and/or Board of Bar Overseers
Barb's fight for her First Amend- ment rights continues against the court-appointed attorney
83
The Bar War: Barb's Response to the Complaint by the Office of the Bar Counsel
Barb's fight against Bar Counsel
84
The Bar War: The Sano Saga: a series of letters from me to the Assistant Bar Counsel in response to a Complaint filed by Deb Sano in 1999, three years ago. It was a bill dispute. Deb had given me a little more than $10,700. Feeling sorry for her and her family I did not charge f33or many things I did -- discounted many charges -- and sent her back a little more than $3100. She wanted more money back I asked what parts of the bill she disputed. Instead of giving me what I thought was a reasonable response, she complained to the Bar. The Bar counsel did find an arithmetic error of a little more than $300. I sent Deb a check for the amount. Read the details.
Barb's fight against Bar Counsel and the Sanos
84a
The Bar War: To come. Banned in Boston by the Board of Bar Overseers, commandered by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Barb's fight against Bar Counsel and the Sanos
85
The Bar War: To come. I must yet write this account. It is about the events surrounding the 24 hours in 1998 I spent in jail because I said "No" to a judge who wanted to allow opposing counsel to see records of my own personal finances. . . . to determine whether my clients and/or I had the funds to fight the long, hard fight.
The judge had found me in contempt of a non-existent order to pay opposing counsel fees and to pay fines each day I did not pay. I balked in paying them. I was trying to see 26 boxes of documents . . . to get MORE (I already had some) . . . documentary proof of the fraud committed by a company against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. (TYCO -- yes, of scandal fame -- had bought the defending company and was in control of the boxes.)
Barb's fight against Bar Counsel about a bogus charge of contempt
86
The Bar War: Sunday, 1/19/2003 My Proposed Findings of Fact, Memorandum of Law, and Proposed Rulings of Law after hearing on Bar Counsel’s motion for the release of impounded or segregated records.
87
Where Did Justice Go? (Case #1) Three courts and the Board of Bar found NOTHING wrong with an attorney putting an attorney's lien for attorney's fees on the case of a senior citizen who did not even know him. Retaliation??4/4/03 Update: The highest court in Massachusetts denied Senior Citizen Cholfin's application for further appellate review. No reason given. Just denied. An abominable decision.
Retaliation because I'm fighting aainst JUDICIAL IMMUNITY????
88
Where Did Justice Go? (Case #2, An Estate Owed Elderly Caregiver Payment for Services ) The decision in this old case is so badly reasoned that I cannot help think it was just an example of how far the court will go in Retaliation because I'm fighting aainst JUDICIAL IMMUNITY.
Retaliation because I'm fighting aainst JUDICIAL IMMUNITY????
89
Reserved.
90
The Bar War: Barb's Official Answer to the Petition for Discipline Against Barb The Board of Bar Overseers is the adjudicatorial arm. General Counsel of the BBO reports to the Board. The Office of Bar Counsel is the prosecutorial arm. Bar Counsel of the BBO reports to the SJC. However, before a Petition for Discipline is sent out, the OBC needs the approval of the BBO.This answer was the one produced by counsel, whom I soon fired and then submitted as my answer my original answer as shows in ##90A, 90B, and 90C..
90A
Count One of Bar Counsel's Petition for Discipline of Barb and Her Side of the Story Interwoven in Blue
90B
Count Twoof Bar Counsel's Petition for Discipline of Barb and Her Side of the Story Interwoven in Blue
90C
Count Three of Bar Counsel's Petition for Discipline of Barb and Her Side of the Story Interwoven in Blue
91
The Bar War Barb's Motion for Award of $50,000 Fees by Mass. Supreme Judicial Court for Attorney to Defend Against Charges by Office of Bar Counsel in Petition for Discipline of Her.
The Battle Between Barb and the Bar
92
The Elderly and the Struggle for Medicaid: An Elder Fights the Denial of Medicaid by Division of Medical Assistance and the Hearing Officer Needs the Immunity Defense Provided by the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act An elderly woman appealed the administrative decision by the Division of Medical Assistance of the Office of Health and Human Services to deny her MassHealth/Medicaid. She sued a few folks in their official and individual capacities. Those folks moved to dismiss the case against them as individuals ... because the Commonwealth does not indemnify them (pick up the tab for them) in their individual capacities, where their own bank accounts would be in jeopardy.
GiGi (Great-Grandma) fights the Division of Medical Assistance of the Office of Health and Human Services: Issue 1: Immunity not applicable. Issue 2: Incompetence and bad faith erases any protection by immunity of the Mass. Tort Claims Act
93
The Bar War: Maggie Mulvihill, Columnist with the Boston Herald, Weighs in on Barb's Fight with the Bar Counsel: "Bar better be prepared for battle" (March 11, 2003)
Retaliation because I'm fighting aainst JUDICIAL IMMUNITY????
94
Has your spouse moved to another State and gotten a restraining order there against you? A Special Petition about a Restraining Order in Another State: When a Section of a Restraining Order Statute Has Not Been Interpreted by the High Court
A revengeful spouse?
95
Family Court Commits Crimes: Destruction of Evidence and Obstruction of Justice Three sitting judges and two assistant registers are implicated in crimes, proving that Sean Dunphy is a failed administrator
Corruption of the Family Court
96.
The Bar War: Judge Allen J. Jarasitis: Judas to Justice A sitting justice is a traitor to justice in trying to help the Bar Counsel and his Assistant Bar Counsel get JohnsonMay they hang on their own petard! May the judge be impeached and the Bar Counsel, Daniel Crane, and his assistant, Susan Strauss Weisberg, be disbarred for unethical and perhaps criminal behavior. We do not need such despicable people in our judicial system.
Corruption of a judge and the Office of Bar Counsel
97
John Smith's Opposition to Discovery Master's Motion of 4 May 2003 (a) to Approve Expenditures from Escrow Accounts and (b) for Instructions on What to Do with the Remaining Funds Conversion? Larceny? Fraud? Two court-appointed escrow agents -- two lawyers -- were not to remove funds from a $43,000 escrow account without court permission . . . but they did remove funds without that permission. Now one is trying to get the judge to approve his conversion of the funds.
John Smith and Pocahontas.
Corruption of two lawyers -- now one a judge
98
Lawyers Weekly Hearsay Column, 6/23/2003:A HEARSE, OF COURSE
Calling attention to people's civil rights
99
John Smith's Opposition to His Wife's Attorney's Fees Great for finding reasons upon reasons why you should NOT have to pay your spouse's attorney's fees
John Smith and Pocahontas
100
The Bar War: Johnson Seeks Reconsideration of Her Motion for a Jury Trial for the Board of Bar Disciplinary Hearing
The Battle Between Barb and the Bar Continues
101
Floyd and Barker: the Seminal Case from the Star Chamber out of which Judicial Immunity Arose in 1607
Judicial Immunity
102
The Bar War: Are Lawyers Entitled to the Full Sweep of Due Process Protections?
BBO and the Star Chamber
103.
John Smith Appeals Dismissal on Eleventh Amendment and Judicial Immunity Grounds of Case Against Judges -- UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT (Memorandum and order included)
John Smith against the judges Eleventh Amendment and Judicial Immunity
104
Panel to Set Standards on Judicial Accountability by David G. Sacks, first justice of the Hampden Probate & Family Court and chairman of the newly created Steering Committee on Performance and Accountability. The article appeared in Lawyers Weekly, October 27, 2003 on page 11 [ 32 M.L.W. 443]
Dunphy gives us the status quo??
105
Barb's Letter Makes It into the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, November 3, 2003 She complains that the Board of Bar Overseers' new accounting rule steamrolls over lawyers' rights. Yep, we have them, too. The point is that they steamroll EVERYONE's rights!
Barb warns against BBO's trap for the unwary: New Board Rule 1.15 unconstitutional
106
The Bar War: Some of the Motions Barb Filed at the BBO [Board of Bar Overseers] from the most recent to the oldest
To save yourself???
107
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE:The Bar War:State Complaint Against the Board of Bar Overseers, Chair Ellen Carpenter, Special Hearing Officer Herbert P. Phillips, the Office of Bar Counsel, and Bar Counsel Daniel Crane
Barb sues the BBO
108
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE:The Bar War: Preliminary Injunction
The attempt failed
109
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE:The Bar War: Federal Complaint Against the Board of Bar Overseers, Chair Ellen Carpenter, Special Hearing Officer Herbert P. Phillips, the Office of Bar Counsel, and Bar Counsel Daniel Crane
Barb sues the BBO in federal court
110
John Smith's Reply to the A-G's Appellee Brief: What do you think? Was the A-G stymied about how to justify judicial immunity? Is the Commonwealth a "person"? Can you sue your own State in Federal Court? Did you know there are two prongs to the Eleventh Amendment? One ratified. The other, 100 years younger and judge-made. Can you overcome the Rooker-Feldman doctrine?
John Smith on Judicial Immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, Rooker-Feldman, and a taste of sovereign immunity
111
John Smith's Second Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution Complaint against Pocahontas (the second time), the Detective with the Domestic Violence Unit, the City of Boston, and Pocahontas's attorney, who made the bogus 911 phonecall to the police
John Smith sues Pocahontas for malicious prosecution again, the police, and Pocahontas's attorney in federal court
112
John Smith's Opposition to DV Detective James's Motion to Dismiss
Second malicious prosecution action by Smith.
113
John Smith's Opposition to Boston's Motion to Dismiss. See also ##111, 112,139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146 (all summary judgment pleadings),
Second malicious prosecution action by Smith.
114
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE: Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss by Board of Bar Overseers, the Board Chair Carpenter, Special Hearing Officer Herbert Phillips, Office of Bar Counsel, Bar Counsel Daniel Crane All about the Younger Abstention Doctrine, which the courts use to dismiss your federal complaints
Barb Fights Back the BBO and the OBC AND the Younger Abstention Doctrine in federal court
115
115a
Table of Contents to Proposed Findings of Fact
Actual Proposed Finding -- Half html'ing done. Other half to do.
What you need to write after a divorce trial Will show you what you can ask during your divorce trial
116
Brian Meuse's Federal Complaint for Violation of His Civil Rights, including Malicious Prosecution, False Arrest and Imprisonment, and Defamation: All Arising out of an Affidavitless Warrant and a Conspiracy, Uncaring Courts, and a Parental Kidnapping Charge Leading to a Verdict of Not Guilty
What you need to file after a verdict of Not Guilty
117
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE: Barb's Brief Asserting That Neither Quasi-judicial Nor Quasi-prosecutorial Immunity Is Applicable ANDBarb's Opposition to Defendants' Further Motion to Dismiss AND Motion to Reconsider Dismissal of Counts 1-6, Which Seek Declaratory Judgments (Court has subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge did not realize that!!!)
A few creative arguments on: Quasi-judicial Immunity and Quasi-prosecutorial Immunity
118NCMECStultsPane
Brian Meuse's Oppositions to Three Motions to Strike for Alleged Noncompliance with Rules 8(a) and 8(e) Opposition to National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), 3/31/04Opposition to Rosalyn Stults, Esq., 3/13/04, Opposition to Susan Pane, 3/13/04
Compares Rules 8(a) and 8(e) with 9(b) and the common law on pleading conspiracy.
119
The Bar War Continues: Barb's Proposed Findings of Fact and Rulings of Law in the Bar's Action Against Her
Barb Fights the BBO
120
John Smith's Petition for a Writ of Certiorari from the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to the United States Supreme CourtAbout "Good Behavior" and Judicial Immunity and the Eleventh Amendment All three documents are here: the Petition, the Judgment from the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and and the Memorandum and Order from the United States District Court at Boston -- Related pleadings:Drano #57, the ComplaintDrano #62, the Oposition to Motion to Dismiss, andDrano #103, the appellate brief to the First Circuit Court of Appeals andDrano #128
There is only ONE percent chance that this writ will be heard by the United States Supreme Court. Keep your fingers crossed! I sued four judges in this case!
121
Brian Meuse's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss by FOX Television Stations, Inc. Issues: Fair Report Privilege to Defame and Conspiracy
Meuse's Sec. 1983, false arrest, defamation, malicious prosecution, etc.
122
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE: COMING: Motion to Reconsider Memorandum and Order of 5/26/04 and Vacate Dismissal of Counts 7-10. This motion was denied. Case on appeal.
Barb's federal case against the Board of Bar Overseers
123
Meuse's Opposition to STF Production's Motion to Dismiss. STF is more well known as America's Most Wanted, the TV show on FOX.
Brian Meuse
124
Meuse's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss by National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Judge rules NCMEC immune to suit under federal law
NCMEC gets $10,000,000 a year from the federal government. BACKCHANNEL source says, No over $18,000,000 a year!
125
Fathers for Justice: Photos of London Fathers Day Protest March
Support F4J-UK !!!!!!
126
The Court's Decision & Meuse's Motion to Reconsider Sua Sponte Dismissal of Bivens Claims. Judge rules American's Most Wanted and FOX TV immune to suit under federal law. UPDATE: Judge Harrington refused to issue Rule 54(b) judgment, so First Circuit appeal of the dismissal of the claims against the corporations was not allowed to go forward.
(1) Meuse will have to sue American's Most Wanted and FOX TV (Rupert Murdoch enterprises) and National Center of Missing and Exploited Children and Wal*Mart in State court or wait to appeal the dismissal os the corporations at the end of trial.
(2) Meuse will have to sue the FBI separately for fraud.
A Surprise Dismissal of so-called Bivens claims
127
The Firestorm Caused by Meuse's Motion to Reconsider Sua Sponte Dismissal of Bivens Claims
Former Boston FBI Agents Caught LYING !!! The same month now-imprisoned FBI John J. Connolly, Jr., indicted
128
Smith seeks a rehearing of his Petition for a Writ of Certiorari from the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. His nonconforming letter-petition has probably 1/2 of 1% of 1% chance of being granted -- but it was a chance to tell the Supreme Court what she thinks of the judicially-created doctrine of judicial immunity
Barb hoped her letter would reach the Supreme Court justices. A few months later, Barb had heard nothing. Into the Black Hole it went!
129
Letter to the Editors of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, published on 8/16/04. Barb includes here the original letter, too. You can compare what got cut out before statewide publication.
Barb surprised that provocative letter about judges got published ... but judges' names got redacted
130
Opposition to Motion in Limine to Preclude Defense. Defendant is charged with criminal trespass.
Dottie LaFortune's home was foreclosed and a Writ of Possession issued. This 50-something former dance teacher was removed from her home by a SWAT team (law enforcement thought the Alabama Militia had come North to Maine to help her resist removal!). They handcuffed her, searched her home, and charged her with Criminal Trespass.
The DA, formerly the President of Maine's Senate, then brought a Motion in Limine on the grounds of collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) to stop LaFortune from claiming the home from which she was removed was hers.
So LaFortune contacted Barb to oppose the motion. The opposition discusses collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) and void judgments. In Barb's opinion, the bureaucrats of the City of Biddeford goofed, the DA's motion is frivolous, and LaFortune was not trespassing.
Judge Arthur Brennan forbid Dorothy from defending against a civil judgment she contends is invalid. In Barb's opinion, the judge is incorrect. A civil judgment, based on a preponderance of the evidence, cannot support a judgment on reasonable doubt.
State of Maine v. Dorothy LaFortunefor criminally trespassing in her own home, from which she was removed by a SWAT team.
Appellate Issues: Collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) and void judgment.
The trial judge on the criminal case was also on the civil case. He denied Dot's motion to recuse himself from the criminal case.
Trial on March 28th in Alfred, Maine, at York County Superior Court
131
Amended Motion to Dismiss State of Maine v. Dorothy LaFortune on Grounds of Where Judgment of Civil Court Was Void on Jurisdictional Grounds, Defendant Was Owner of Property and Could Not Trespass, Making Dismissal Mandatory by Operation of Law. In Barb's opinion, the bureaucrats of the City of Biddeford goofed and LaFortune was not trespassing. Where the foreclosure and writ were unlawful, the charge of criminal trespass must be dismissed.
Issue: Void judgment
State of Maine v. Dorothy LaFortune Trial on March 28th in Alfred, Maine, at York County Superior Court
132
Updated Pretrial Conference Memorandum Uncontested Facts, Contested Facts and Issues of Law, Lists of Witnesses and Documents, Updated Pretrial Conference Memorandum Contested Facts and Issues of Law
State of Maine v. Dorothy LaFortune Trial on March 28th in Alfred, Maine, at York County Superior Court
133
BARB GOES ON THE OFFENSIVE: Appellate Brief in Barb v. Board of Bar Overseers, the Board Chair Carpenter, Special Hearing Officer Herbert Phillips, Office of Bar Counsel, Bar Counsel Daniel Crane All about the Younger Abstention Doctrine, Rooker-Feldman, and the Eleventh Amendment (the unconstitutional second prong), all of which the courts use to dismiss your federal complaints PLUS: The Massachusetts Bar Association announces Task Force to study and evaluate policy and procedures at the Board of Bar Overseers. Lawyers Weekly, Editorial, Oct. 18, 2004. 33 M.L.W.426
Barb versus the Board of Bar and others goes to the First Circuit Court of Appeals
134
In Memoria: Patrick "Butch" Bailey, on September 20, 2004, by Suicide brought on by Judge Herbert Gill, Chesterfield County, Virginia
Patrick "Butch" Bailey
135
Opposition to Defendant Attorney John DiPiano's Motion to Dismiss.The ofollowing Drano pleadings are related to this opposition: ##136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, and 147 now in both .html and .pdf files .
Facts for summary judgment broken into Disputed Material and Immaterial and Undisputed Material and Immaterial facts Learn thow o argue the difference! The pleadings include legal arguments for:
tape-recording police officers at the scene (recorder on before officers arrive)
videocam-ing a wife and her divorce attorney
Domestic Violence Guidelines
municipal liability
custom and policy
deliberate indifference
single incidence or "obviousness"
arrest-preferred policy
full faith and credit for out-of-state restraining order
federal bonus incentives for complying with Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders Programs (by DoJ Office of Justice Programs and Office of Violence Against Women, OVW/VAWA)
garden-variety malicious prosecution and section 1983 malicious prosecution
a constitutional argument allowing a conspiracy claim under the second clause of § 1985(3)(c) without having to prove invidious gender discrimination Drano Series #141
Second malicious prosecution action by Smith. In .html and Adobe pdf files
136
Opposition for Reconsideration of Judge Mark Wolf's Denial of Detective Suzanne/Susan James's Motion to DismissThis pleading goes deeply into the issue of RESTRAINING ORDERS and the DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GUIDELINES, particularly the arrest-preferred policy.
Second malicious prosecution action. Smith won!
In .html and Adobe pdf files
137
Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of Judge Mark Wolf's Denial of John DiPiano's Motion to DismissThis pleading goes deeply into the issue of RESTRAINING ORDERS and CIVILand CRIMINALCONSPIRACIES.
Second malicious prosecution action. Smith won!
In .html and Adobe pdf files
138
Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of Judge Mark Wolf's Denial of City of Boston's Motion to Dismiss. The opposition is exciting because it goe deeply into the issue of RESTRAINING ORDERS and the DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GUIDELINES particularly the arrest-preferred policy, custom and policy of municipality.
Judge Wolf denied the defendants' motions for reconsideration of the denial of the defendants' motions to dismiss.In .html and Adobe pdf files
139
Is your claim a "garden-variety" malicious prosecution claim or a malicious prosecution claim amenable to Section 1983? Very important issue!If you have a garden-variety malicious prosecution claim, it might be dismissed.
For any malicious prosecution case by John Smith. Judge Wolf ruled the malicious prosecution claim was NOT a "garden-variety" malicious prosecution claim. In .html and Adobe pdf files
140
Smith's Opposition to Police Officers' Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Facts in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment
First malicious prosecutioncase by John SmithIn .html and Adobe pdf files
141
Smith's Memorandum in Support of His Opposition to Police Officers' Memorandum s in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment Important brief about conspiracy under section 1985(3)(c),comparing conspiracy under first and second clauses. The first needing invidious discrimination. The second, not.
First malicious prosecution case by John SmithIn .html and Adobe pdf files
142
Smith's Surreply to Police Officers' Local Rule 56.1 Statement of Facts in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment [
First malicious prosecutioncase by John Smith In .html and Adobe pdf files
143
DECIDED: POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY: Smith's Opposition to Police Officers' Motion for Reconsideration (by Chief Magistrate-Judge Robert B. Collings) of the Denial of the Officers' Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Qualified Immunity
First malicious prosecution case by John Smith
In .html and Adobe pdf files
144
DECIDED: POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY: Smith's Surreply in Opposition to Police Officers' Motion for Reconsideration (by Chief Magistrate-Judge Robert B. Collings) of the Denial of the Officers' Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Qualified Immunity
First malicious prosecution case by John Smith
In .html and Adobe pdf files
145
DECIDED: POLICE OFFICERS ARE ENTITLED TO PROTECTION UNDER WIRETAP STATUTE (Tape recording in progress when police came. Statute treated as mandatory statute. Barb still disagrees): Smith's Motion for Partial Reconsideration (by Chief Magistrate-Judge Robert B. Collings) of the Officers' Motion for Summary Judgment on Their Counterclaim for Violation of the c. 272, sec. 99(Q) (the wiretap statute) by tape-recording
First malicious prosecution case by John Smith
In .html and Adobe pdf files New 7/7/05
146
DECIDED: POLICE OFFICERS ARE ENTITLED TO PROTECTION UNDER WIRETAP STATUTE (Tape recording in progress when police came. Statute treated as mandatory statute. Barb still disagrees): Smith's Supplemental Motion for Partial Reconsideration (by Chief Magistrate-Judge Robert B. Collings) of the Officers' Motion for Summary Judgment on Their Counterclaim for Violation of the c. 272, sec. 99(Q) (the wiretap statute) by tape-recording
First malicious prosecution case by John Smith
In .html and Adobe pdf files
147
DECIDED: POLICE OFFICERS ARE ENTITLED TO PROTECTION UNDER WIRETAP STATUTE (Tape recording in progress when police came. Statute treated as mandatory statute. Barb still disagrees): Smith's Reply to Officers' Opposition to Motion for Partial Reconsideration (by Chief Magistrate-Judge Robert B. Collings) of the Officers' Motion for Summary Judgment on Their Counterclaim for Violation of the c. 272, sec. 99(Q) (the wiretap statute)
First malicious prosecution case by John Smith
In .html and Adobe pdf files
148
Smith's Motion to Dismiss John DiPiano's three counterclaims: (1) Tortious Interference with Advantageous Business Relationship, (2) frivolous suit, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 231, §6F, and (3) alleged violation of the wiretap statute, M.G.L. c. 272, §99(Q) by videocam-ing In an Adobe,pdf file
Second malicious prosecution case by John Smith In an Adobe pdf file
149
Smith's Reply to John DiPiano's Opposition to Smith's Motion to Dismiss DiPiano's three counterclaims: (1) Tortious Interference with Advantageous Business Relationship, (2) frivolous suit, M.G.L. c. 231, §6F, and (3) alleged violation of the wiretap statute, M.G.L. c. 272, §99(Q) by videocam-ing In an Adobe pdf file
Second malicious prosecution case by John SmithIn an Adobe pdf file
150
The Bar War Continues: As Barb anticipated, "they" want Barb's law license. So here is her appeal to the Board. "They" might give the appeal to a few members of the Board or the whole Board. It's a roll of the dice.
The BBO v. Barb
151
Barb v. The Bar et al: Barb sent her Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court The issues are quasi-judicial immunity and quasi-prosecutorial immunity. It's another roll of the dice.
Barb v. The BBO at SCOTUS
152
Complaints for Contempt by Pocahontas Against Smith and Smith Against Pocahontas, Two Orders by Judge Smoot, and 9 Motions by Smith: (1) Motion to Reconsider Order in ¶1 of August 12th Order re Appointment of Special Master, (2) Motion to Amend Order in ¶2 of August 12th Order re Child Support, (3) Motion to Amend Order in ¶3 of August 12th re Uninsured or Unreimbursed Medical Expenses, (4) Motion to Amend Order in ¶4 of August 12th Order in Pocahontas Smith v. John Smith and Order in ¶3 of August 12th Order in John Smith v. Pocahontas Smith, both re Life Insurance, (5) Motion to Stay Order in ¶5 of August 12th Order re Financial Statement,(6) Motion to Amend Order in ¶6 of August 12th Order re Delivery of Children to Pocahontas’s Father, (7) Motion to Vacate Order in ¶7 of August 12th Order re Signing up for DOR/CSE Services, (8) Motion to Amend Order of August 12th to Include Order re Health Care Providers, (9) Motion to Adjudge Pocahontas Smith in Contempt of ¶¶4, 14, 23 of the Amended Judgment of Divorce of 22 April 2004 and to Sanction Her for Falsely Alleging that a Child Was Injured in Smith’s Care and Then Accusing Him of Not Reporting the False Injury to Her
All were denied and will be appealed. The ones in red demonstrate very clearly the invidious gender discrimination in family court against men. These will be helpful to get to the U.S. Supreme Court -- if Barb can overcome obstacles like the 11th Amendment and Rooker-Feldman, etc.
John Smith and Pocahontas are back at it in family court for post-divorce matters.
Pocahontas jumped the gun: she had a baby sired by a man other than her husband, married him, bought a new home, AND THEN THE DIVORCE BECAME FINAL.
So she ended up not only an adultress but also a bigamist. The Massachusetts family court in Boston did not care.
153
Barb's Other Case Against the Bar and Bar Counsel Daniel Crane and his Assistant Prosecutor. Complaint against for Defamation and Interference with Prospective Advantgeous Business Relationship
Barb against the Bar, Crane and Strauss WeisbergSee also Drano #156, #157, and #158
154
Barb's Opposition to the Recommendation of the Board of Bar Overseers ["BBO"] for Disbarment This document was filed on Tuesday, July 18th, 2006, in the Single-Justice Session of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. A hearing that day was held before Justice Spina.On August 9, 2006, Justice Spina ordered my disbarment, I am to stop practicing in Massachusetts by September 8, 2006. I received notice of it on Friday, August 11, 2006.
The Bar against Barb
154a
Home Page Announcement from 8/13/06 to xx/yy/07 for Barb's Opposition to the Recommendation of the Board of Bar Overseers for Disbarment
Barb fights back in her words:The Bar against Barb
155
Barb's Petition for Rehearing Pursuant to Mass. R.A.P. 27, after Judge Francis X. Spina, sitting as a single justice at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rubber-stamped the Recommendation of the Board of Bar Overseers ["BBO"] for Disbarment
The Bar against Barb
156
(1) Motion to Strike Appearance of the Attorney General for the Board of Bar Overseers and the Office of Bar Counsel, (2) Opposition of A-G, and (3) Barb's Reply to A-G's Opposition
Barb against the Bar and Bar Counsel Crane and Asst. Bar Counsel Weisberg
157
(1) Barb's Motion to Strike Appearance of the Attorney General for Bar Counsel Daniel Crane and Assistant Bar Counsel Susan Strauss-Weisberg(2) the A-G's Opposition (when it is scanned in)(3) Rule 9A Notice of Filing (4) Barb's Motion for Leave to File Reply to A-G's Opposition (included here only for use as boilerplate) and(5) Barb's Reply to A-G's Opposition
Barb against the Bar and Bar Counsel Crane and Asst. Bar Counsel Weisberg
158
(1) the Motion to Dismiss by Board of Bar Overseers, Office of Bar Counsel, Bar Counsel Daniel Crane, and Assistant Bar Counsel Susan Strauss-Weisberg, (2) Table of Contents (Including List of Exhibits)of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss by Board of Bar Overseers, Office of Bar Counsel, Daniel Crane, Susan Strauss-Weisberg, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Their Request to Dispense with Hearing, Barb's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss by Board of Bar Overseers, Office of Bar Counsel, Daniel Crane, Susan Strauss-Weisberg, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (4) Motion for Leave to File Surreply to A-G's Reply to Barb's Opposition (included here only for use as boilerplate) and (5) Barb's Surreply to A-G's Reply to Barb's Opposition (including some interesting exhibits: (B) Chief Judge Young’Order of February 25, 2004, (C) Issue 3, excerpted from Johnson’s Appellate Brief, filed in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, (D1) Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Federal Complaint, (D2) Supplemental Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Federal Complaint, (D3) Opposition to Defendants' Second Motion to Dismiss Federal Complaint, amd (E) History of Absolute Immunity
Barb v. the BBO, OBC< Danny Crane & Susan Strauss-Weisberg
159
The Bar War Continues -- THE 9TH ROUND: Barb's Appeal of Justice Spina's Judgment of Disbarment to the Full Panel of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The BBO v. Barb
159a
The Bar War Continues -- EVIDENCE OF IMPROPRIETY AND CONFLICT -- Some Surprises on the Docket Sheet of Barb's Appeal of Justice Spina's to the Full Panel of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Judgment of Disbarment
The BBO v. Barb
160
The Bar War Continues -- THE 9TH ROUND : Barb's Motion for Leave to File Brief in Excess of 50 Pages (filed in the Clerk's Office for the Full Panel of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court)
The BBO v. Barb
161
The Bar War Continues -- THE 9TH ROUND : Barb's Combined Motions: (1) Motion to proceed only on those parts of the original record before the single justice which are Johnson’s pleadings and (2) motion to strike the documents which Johnson has not seen or of which Johnson has not been given copies or which have not been properly authenticated (filed in the Clerk's Office for the Full Panel of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court)
The BBO v. Barb
162
The Bar War Continues -- A DETOUR : Barb's Motion to Recuse Justice Francis X. Spina from this Board Disciplinary Action (filed in the Clerk's Office for Suffolk County for the single-justice session of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court)
The BBO v. Barb
163
The Bar War Continues -- A DETOUR : Barb’s Motion for Jury Trial on Petition for Contempt and a Declaration of Whether a Finding of Civil or Criminal Contempt Is Actually Being Sought by Bar Counsel (filed in the Clerk's Office for Suffolk County for the single-justice session of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court)
The BBO v. Barb
164
The Bar War Continues -- A DETOUR : Barb’s Combined Opposition and Answer to Show Cause Why Contempt Should Not Issue (filed in the Clerk's Office for Suffolk County for the single-justice session of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court)
The BBO v. Barb
165
Barb’s Motion for Declaration as to What Constitutes the Unauthorized Practice of Law (to be filed in the Clerk's Office for Suffolk County for the single-justice session of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court) AND Judge Spina's Order
The BBO v. Barb
166
JJohnson's Claims Predicated upon the Grounds Set Forth in Subsection (2)(D) of Local Rule 83.6 AND Request for Show Cause Hearing before Judge M. Wolf or a Panel of Three Persons
The BBO v. Barb
167
Motion for Order Commanding the Board of Bar Overseers (1) to Correct Docket Sheets for BBO Board Discipline Case Against Barbara C. Johnson, (2) to Provide a Table of Contents Which Identifies Each and Every Document Included in the 12-Volume Set of the Appendix, (3) to Provide a Copy of the 12-Volume Set of the Appendix to JohnsonIF ANY LAWYER HAD TRIED TO FILE AN APPEAL AND AN APPENDIX WITHOUT A TABLE OF CONTENTS,WITHOUT SUPPLYING COPIES TO THE OPPOSING PARTY, AND WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE,THE CLERK WOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED IT FOR FILINGBarb's Reply to Weisberg's Opposition to the Motion for Order Commanding the BBO to produce
The BBO v. Barb -Egregious discrimination -- in this case a class-of-one theory
~~~~~~~~BUT BELIEVE IT OR NOTBBO/OBC Susan Strauss- Weisberg opposed having to supply a Table of Contents for the 12-volume set, etc.
168
Barb's Motion to Vacate Order Allowing Bar Counsel's Motion to Stay and Consolidate and to File Consolidated Brief on Appeal
The BBO v. Barb No due process, no equal protection, and egregious unlawful discrimination again on a class-of-one theory)
169
Johnson’s Opposition to Bar Counsel’s Motion to Impound and Disregard Portions of Johnson’s Appendix, to File a Limited Supplemental Appendix, and to Proceed on and Refer to the Original Record. If Bar Counsel’s Motion Impound Has Been Allowed, Then Johnson’s Motion Is One to Vacate the Impoundment.
The BBO v. BarbThe BBO and OBC want everything impounded. Impoundment equals secrecy! Barb does not like secrecy! The OBC motion was allowed without giving Barb a chance to oppose
170
Barb's Motion for Declaration As to What Constitutes the Unauthorized Practice of Law ["UPL"] under G.L. c. 221, §41 and As to Other Related Matters. Barb challenges the constitutionality of the UPL statutes, c. 221, §§41, 46, 46A, and 46B. She also wants to get it in writing what she is permitted to do and not permitted to do!
The BBO v. Barb
171
Barb's Brief appealing the Judgment of Contempt by Judge Francis X. Spina.Spina lacked jurisdiction to hear Bar Counsel's contempt petition.
The BBO v. Barb
172
Barb's Brief appealing the Judgment of Dismissal by Judge Thomas Billings. Billings wrote an interesting decision (included here, too). Helpful to a great extent. Clearly he knew he had to follow the party line and make a political decision, which meant dismissal. Barb thinks his heart was not in it. The appeal is solely on IMMUNITY IMMUNITY IMMUNITY: How the Mass. Tort Claims Act is unconstitutional because there is no sovereign immunity in the Commonwealth, judicial immunity, prosecutorial immunuty under the common law, and unconstitutional immunity under the Board of Bar Rule 9(3), and even a summary of everything you wanted to know about the Eleventh Amendment, which should not have any effect in a State court. Barb's case had four counts of defamation and one count of intentional interference with prospective advantageous business relationships.
Barb v. the BBO, OBC, Bar Counsel Danny Crane, and Asst. Bar Counsel Susan Strauss Weisberg, and the Commonwealth
173
Brief to show cause why no disbarment in First Circuit. Then the First Circuit on December 5th entered an order of stay until Barb's appeal at the Mass. SJC is resolved.
The BBO v. Barb
174
Reply to Bar Counsel's Opposition to Barb's Motion for Declaration as to What Constitutes the Unauthorized Practice of Law [see Drano #170]. Weisberg said Barb should have filed a Complaint for a declaratoty judgment. Barb, no, that was not necessary, but if the court deems it was, just treat the motion as a complaint. She had a cite right on point!
The BBO v. Barb
175
When Nonlawyers Are Permitted to Represent Parties in Legal Cases and the Representation Does Not Constitute the Unauthorized Practice of Law
For folks who cannot afford or who do not want a lawyer to represent them
176
Barb's Amended Motion, Pursuant to M.G.L. C. 231, §59F, for Acceleration of Filing, Proceeding, Hearing, and Decision, with affidavit
Barb v. Bar Counsel Danny Crane, Asst. Bar Counsel Susan Strauss Weisberg, the BBO, the OBC, and the Comm. of Massachusetts
177
A Multi-faceted Motion: Motion (1) to Vacate Order Allowing Appellee a Third Extension to over Four Months to File Brief, (2) to Reverse Forthwith the Denial of Johnson’s Motion for a Stay of Disbarment, (3) to Hold OBC and BBO in Default, (4) to Dismiss the Petition for Discipline Against Johnson, and (5) to Vacate Judgments of Disbarment and Contempt on Grounds of Being Both Devoid of Evidence and Replete with Egregious Irregularities in Process.
The Bar War
178
Motion to Dismiss the Disbarment on Grounds of Violation of M.G.L. C. 231, §59F, and for Acceleration of Filing, Proceeding,Hearing, and Decision, with affidavit
The Bar War
179
Reply Brief -- Combined --to the Appellees' combined brief against Barb's Appeal of the Judgment of Disbarment and the Appeal of the Judgment of Contempt
BBO and Bar Counsel's misrepresentations, omissions, and errors of fact and law
structural bias and absence of due process and equal protection
violation of equal protection on a class-of-one theory
BBO quashed her trial witness subpoenas duces tecum
distinction between exclusive and non-exclusive (illustrative) lists is deceptive: re M.G.L. c. 233, §8
judge issues order without either personal jurisdiction or subject-matter jurisdiction
improper use of issue preclusion or offensive collateral estoppel
clear error of law committed in disbarring and adjudicating Johnson in contempt
The Bar War
180
Barb v. The Bar et al: Reply Brief to the BBO, OBC, Crane, and Weisberg's Appellee Brief Against Barb's Appeal of the Judgment of Dismissal in Superior Court . The issues of interest are:
To what extent are the Siamese twins politically dependent or independent?
It is undisputed and admitted by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that it controls and supervises the BBO and OBC, but how pervasive is that control and supervision?
How much further than making political appointments to the BBO and OBC does the control and supervision go?
Does the Mass. SJC dictate which cases are investigated and which are prosecuted?
Does the Mass. SJC dictate what sanctions should be applied in certain or all the cases?
Does the Mass, SJC ductate in which cases an Information should be filed at the single-justice session of the SJC?
Barb v. Bar Counsel Danny Crane, Asst. Bar Counsel Susan Strauss Weisberg, the BBO, the OBC, and the Comm. of Massachusetts
181
The Bar War: 5 Motions and Oppositions in Barb's Two Appellate Cases: One, the Appeal o f the Judgment of Disbarment and the Other, the Appeal of the Judgment of Contempt The SJC never decided these motions. Guess you can conclude they were thus denied.
The Bar War
182
Barb v. The Bar et al: Barb's Rule 27.1 Application for Further Appellate Review by the Mass. SJC and the Appeals Court order causing Barb to seek further appellate review . The issues -- abridged below -- are:
(1) Assuming arguendo that the Bar Counsel and the Assistant Bar Counsel are public employees, Article V of the Declaration of Rights, the Constitution of Massachusetts, commands that they be accountable at all times to all of the people, of which Johnson is one. (2) The Mass. Tort Claims Act ["(MTCA"] is unconstitutional. There was no rational bases for the Legislature to adopt the judicially created doctrine of sovereign immunity. The people have a right to sue, given by Articles XI and XV of the Massachusetts Declaration of Right, and the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United State Constitution. Therefore, the dismissal of Johnson’s claims against the BBO, the OBC, and the Commonwealth on grounds of sovereign immunity was error. (3) Where there is no enabling statute for the BBO and OBC, their employees are not immunized by the MTCA for intentional torts. (4) The very existence of § 9(3) circumstantially sufficiently demonstrates that the Bar Counsel and the Assistant Bar Counsel are private employees and are vulnerable to suit by the people, of which Johnson is one. (5) Where sec. 1 of the MTCA does not include the BBO and the OBC or Bar Counsel or Assistant Bar Counsel, the dismissal of Johnson’s claims against the defendants on grounds of sovereign immunity was error.
Barb v. Bar Counsel Crane, Asst. Bar Counsel Weisberg, the BBO, the OBC, and the Comm. of Massachusetts
.
DRANO VIEWPOINTS
1
Boys will be boys; women should let them KATHLEEN PARKER
A MUST READ
2
Dads on the Run by Candis Mclean, Western Standard – September 5, 2005 http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.cfm?page=article&article_id=977 Ex-wife take the kids, the house and all your money? Meet the secret group spiriting desperate dads out of Canada to start a new life overseas.
3
Fathers under Fire by Candis Mclean, Western Standard – June 13, 2005 http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.cfm?page=article&article_id=967 Dads who own guns are increasingly being labelled “dangerous” by therapists, cops and ex-wives who want to keep them from their kids. The Western Standard can use more subscriptions. Support this courageous publication and subscribe.
4
Domestic violence law abuses rights of men by Phyllis Schlafly-- May 12, 2006 http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060512/news_lz1e12schlafl.html
A MUST READ
5
2 Φεβ 2008
PAA - PAHAPA
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια ανάρτησης (Atom)
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου