The first case that I bring to Federal Court has to be one for the ages. It appears, I have just the perfect one. Nothing is more sensible or absurd (depending on which way you look at it) than suing the Superior Court of the State of California. Many people I've spoken to, lawyers and legal novices alike, have told me that such an escapade is the highest form of mental derangement. One of the lawyers I know asked me to take pause and consider that the lawsuit essentially challenges not only the entire proud staff of legal researchers and lawyers who work for the court but also every judge who sits in that court of which all are certainly scholars of the law.
Hahahahahaha ….
If you are going to lose your mental faculties, don’t just lose some of it, lose all of it. Professional pride will dictate that the Superior Court not settle but rather take this to trial and beyond – Appellate Court and even the Supreme Court if I defy expectations and prevail. But that’s how you change things. You can’t bring a six-shot pistol to a machine gun fight. You bring the MOAB – the Mother of All Bombs. At issue are the rights of self-represented litigators to a fair and equitable process to address their grievances. Self-represented litigators should be accorded all the privileges that licensed attorneys get when they bring an action to court.
One part of this grievance started many months ago when I sought the assistance of the “State Bar of California” to investigate wrong doing perpetrated by one of their members – Gary J. Gough, Shea Properties’ Attorney. The Bar Association, in defiance of their duties, referred me to the civil courts full well knowing that the thousands of dollars required to file a legal action would be a deterrent. The message was subtle but in effect declared that they take care of their own. Lawyers and judges, who are also lawyers, have a club and are prone to maltreat and lampoon self-represented litigators in court. This culture is pervasive and detrimental to rights of those non-lawyers seeking redress in court. I witnessed a judge chastise one Pro Se Litigator for no reason other than the fact that he was not a licensed attorney. He made the point of saying that all the “self help books” are in effect nonsense and that lawyers in California go through the toughest bar exams in the union.
Another example of the club culture came to light when I got a hold of a letter between two attorneys in two cases I am involved in taking part in a collusion. The attorneys stated in separate courts that they have not received papers that I have served to them. They were trying to appear credible by showing a pattern that would be difficult to show if only one of them had made the assertion. This had the consequence of prolonging the case and making it more expensive. More importantly, it violated this Plaintiff’s civil rights.
As is my experience, ordinary people with no legal background brave the world of courtrooms to raise a grievance and to find justice. If, in the end, we need to put in benches judges who are more sensitive to this and are not quick to deride people who do not hold law degrees, then that’s exactly what must be done. Many will take exception to this reformist message as it seeks to change the status quo. The beauty of the American style of governance is that we have a system of checks and balances. This is where we put that concept to the test. Will the other branches of government – Executive and Legislative (not to mention the 4th Estate - the Press) - step up to the challenge?
We'll see about that!
