JUDICIAL IMMUNITY

If a defendant is a judge, judicial immunity entitles the judge to an automatic dismissal of a case against him or her.

If a defendant is appointed by a judge to do something a judge would ordinarily do, quasi-judicial immunity entitles the defendant to an automatic dismissal of a case against him or her.

"Judicial Immunity" is the doctrine that says judges cannot be sued over their judicial acts.  It was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in an 1871 case. 

Many U.S. Judges are put into office by politicians or money from business groups looking for favors. Other seek judgeships for power and /or financial gain. A good percentage of judges are incompetent to hear today's cases because of their technical aspects, or because they do not keep abreast of case law and "Stare Decisis." 

Incompetent, biased judges abound, such as Judge George Greer, whose rulings have been overturned 76% of the time on appeal, or Federal Judge Charles A. Brieant, who is Biased and Paranoid about people who cannot afford a lawyer, and attempt to represent themselves in court.  And let's not forget Judge Mark R. Moran, whose Evidence Tampering in a Capitol Case documented by the DATELINE television show on October 7, 2006, could could land him behind bars if judicial immunity was withdrawn.

---

"Pothead" Family Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Korda Busted

Letter Says Judge Was Smoking Pot In Drug-Free Zone

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, NAACP Demands Removal Of Family Court Judge Lawrence Korda

POSTED: 1:02 pm EDT March 22, 2007

UPDATED: 3:38 pm EDT March 22, 2007

"...Broward Florida Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Korda being charged with possession and usage of marijuana on Sunday, March 18, 2007...  ...The revelation that Judge Korda chose to openly use an illegal substance in a drug-free zone with children nearby clearly shows he is undeserving of this important position."

Korda, who was part of the Anna Nicole Smith proceedings, was in Stanley Goldman Park near Hollywood Boulevard on Sunday at about 2 p.m. when police patrolling the park smelled marijuana, followed the scent and found him seated on a bench, police said.

Korda, 59, was not arrested but was issued a notice to appear in court and faces a charge of marijuana possession, according to police. 

Full Story

---

Possibly the most dangerous man in the United States, more dangerous than the head of Al Quaeda, is New York Federal Judge Charles A. Brieant.

On March 10^th, 2005, New York Federal Judge Charles A. Brieant stated in a CBS Evening News interview that "Pro-Se Litigants (people who cannot afford a lawyer, or choose to represent themselves in court) very readily become paranoid" and that these can become "dangerous cases... ...Every one of them" (click here to view video).

But Judge Brieant's own statement of policy reveals personal paranoia, and implies PARTIALITY against Pro-Se litigants.  Because he is a Federal Judge, his statement might be construed as "Warring against the Constitution," an act of TREASON.

Hon. Charles L. BRIEANT
United States District Judge

United States Courthouse
300 Quarropas Street, Room 275
White Plains, New York 10601-4150
(914) 390-4077

Courtroom 218
Deputy (914) 390-4081

Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905

"... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox,  456 2nd 233

Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.

Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938)

"Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants.  They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end.  Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."

Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA)

It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section). 

Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals

The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept".  Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."

Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA)

It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section). 

Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982)

"Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law." 

Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973)

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."

Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. 

"The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."

Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925)

"The practice of law is an occupation of common right."

TO SEE MORE CASES ON PRO SE RIGHTS, SEE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AT http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/delivery/delunbundcases.html.

 

but this is only a minor facet of judges to come .....   click here