Vexing Litigant
Okay I see it now! HAHA. I've been dealing with a lieyer who for the second time since last May has served me with a motion to declare me a vexatious litigant. I won in the first hearing now he's at it again. I'm going to ask the judge for a restraining order on him at the hearing. I wrote in a federal brief that the castle doctrine is legal. He called the sheriff and filed a report that I threatened him with violence. Then after a court hearing I told someone he was a corrupt criminal. He came tearing around the corner screaming defamation. I laughed and told him if it was the last thing I ever did I was going to put him in prison. He called the sheriff and made another report that I threatened him and said I was going to "get him."
He interned for none other than Kamala Harris. I really don't believe he's even an attorney. I was in a pre-trial conference with him once and he said, "Your honor my clients purchased their property in 1993." The judge turned bright red and said "Calm Down! This isn't a trial!" In another hearing the judge screamed at him again when he filed a motion trying to sanction me for violating a court order. The judge really screamed at him again and said "A stipulation is Not a court order!"
Catherine Albertini:
He claims to have graduated from law school in 2 years, and passed the BAR the first time but this guy can't be an attorney because he's clueless about practicing law. I think he cheated and bought a law degree and license. Unbelievable.
To be declared a vexatious litigant one must have filed, maintained, brought to trial and lost 5 meritless cases in 7 years. I've filed 1 in 7 years. One must be a plaintiff too. Last May he filed a VL motion and I was the defendant! You should have seen this judges face when he saw the motion. I had scheduled a legitimate hearing and this guy without warning must have paid the clerk to throw his un-noticed or served motion on top of my properly scheduled motion for a hearing.
Erik V:
Amazing to see how the government ignores case law, Supreme Court case and Brady law.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fshsk8MCAf4
๐จ CALL TO ACTION: COURT WATCH NEEDED TODAY ๐จ
⚖️ Case: Christensen v. StJohn
๐ Court: Alaska
๐ Time: 1:00 PM Eastern / 12:00 PM Central / 11:00 AM Pacific / 8:00 AM Hawaii
๐ป Virtual Hearing (Public – Zoom):
๐ Join here:
https://akcourts-gov.zoom.us/j/8504617003
๐ Meeting ID: 850 461 7003
๐ Passcode: H7?q&TCA
This is Day 2 of a custody modification hearing involving serious allegations, disputed evidence, and significant due process concerns. Court transparency matters — especially in cases impacting children and parental rights.
๐ Court watchers are encouraged to attend, observe, and document what occurs.
๐ Parents should never face this system alone.
—
We The Parents Foundation
Court Watch Program
Comments
Post a Comment