Jump to content

foolish

Members
  • Content count

    1,027
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About foolish

  • Rank
    Diamond Contributor

Recent Profile Visitors

2,172 profile views
  1. foolish

    Process

    I understand the frustration about not giving more information but I continue to be forced to represent myself and am extremely cautious about not giving too much away that might prejudice me on my on going case. Answering your question yes it does matter, I needed to know in an attorney's experience does the swiftness or slowness matters. Generally speaking of course.
  2. foolish

    Process

    How long does it take in a federal case (where the litigant is pro se and moving IFP from) a court receiving a suit that review the motion for ifp, assigning case a docket number and addressing the issues, or possibly referring case to a magistrate?
  3. foolish

    Filing Petition

    Tax_Counsel, your correct we have touched down on the basics over the years, my total reliance was on the federal agency not on the state when the bargain was struck and accepted and the terms and conditions was incorporated into the record of conviction, the cases you cited that I accessed basically involve cases where the plaintiff's sought relief in FCL for the breach instead of originally seeking relief where the bargain originally took place. (correct me if I am wrong) This way, LegalwriterOne is partially correct in that my case was vacated on statutory grounds (Ca;PenCode 10165(d)) and not on due process grounds for failure to perform not that it wasn't claimed, Hereto my record was also unexplainably purged of valuable documents and orders that addressed these issues. Let me ask this, isn't this true that based on the ''doctrine of finality'', once the judgment became final, both the judgment and plea bargain was equally enforceable against agency as I was bound by my guilty plea? well if true somehow agency has gone beyond legal means to let the courts decide the issue (by simply taking the documents out of the equation) my claims have fallen on deaf ears, met disbelief, or prior courts have been complicit in allowing this to go this far. . despite the serious claims have never been objected to by agency.
  4. foolish

    Filing Petition

    You say that the in my FOIA claim by not giving me those documents is not concealing, I agree with you as it relates to the FOIA action but the ooncealment can be traced back to the beginning, in fact there is evidence of spoliation of documents occurring to my file(s). . .for no apparent legal reason.
  5. foolish

    Filing Petition

    About the SOL as applied to FTC claims wouldn't equitable estopple or equitable tolling apply to ''inequitable conduct"" committed by agency and its officers if claimed and proven Jankovic v. Int'll Crisis Group, 494 F.3d 1080, 1086 ''A defendant who engages in "inequitable conduct" can be equitably estopped from invoking the statute of limitations.'' Citing Chung v. DOJ., 333, F.3d 273, 278 . I'm confident that I can sufficiently demonstrate that such inequitable acts described in Jankovic,, 494 F.3d at 1086
  6. foolish

    Filing Petition

    Tax_Counsel thanks for the lead, now I can research those cases its something to consider. So can I ask you this as you stated that basically even these avenues of relief are possibly closed. Isn't this what the Supreme Court in Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 684 (1946) intended to do is open avenues of relief where the government closed them off.?
  7. foolish

    Filing Petition

    Has anyone heard of a breach of contract case filed in the federal court of claims stemming from a breach of plea bargain? The reason why I ask is because I think under the universally accepted rule that plea bargains are contractual in nature (meaning the same contractual principals apply to plea bargains) except that unlike commercial contracts plea bargains have constitutional implications. . .there might be case all there that I can't find with my limited access to free research engines. A case where the plaintiff alleges a state or federal entity went to such extreme lengths to deprive them to their end of the plea bargain to go so far as to cut them off of all legal avenues of relief they would have normally been entitled to by law (specific performance or vacating conviction due to due process violations).. That they were forced to file their case in the federal court of claims as a breach of contract claim?
  8. foolish

    Belated Relief

    Let me clarify on this post, it seems that there was glitch in my keyboard that I overlooked of omitted words therefore I will repost prior question in corrected version: ''I appreciate the insight you find ironic, but the question is ''not'' whether I believe my case is apart from others or how long an upper courts order is or is not to uphold or reverse order. The question was should have the clerk issued an order to 'show cause why relief should not be granted on the issues raised instead of an order impliedly permitting the filing of an otherwise procedurally barred motion. That was my question. I don't want my question to get ''lost'' on other issues.'' Actually, my question inclined being more rhetorical and therapeutic. . , I understand that its up to the Court to decide the issues on the merits I just was seeking constructive input based on experience. . . I think its important here to say that I try to keep my personal feelings out of this for my own sake and be objective despite the adverse experiences I constantly face but my frustration escapes, so please ignore when I vent. Again thanks anyways for the replies.
  9. foolish

    Belated Relief

    I appreciate the insight you find ironic, but the question is whether I believe my case is apart from others or how long an upper courts order is or is not to uphold or reverse order. The question was should have the clerk issued an order to 'show cause why relief should not be granted on the issues raised instead of an order impliedly permitting the filing of an otherwise procedurally barred motion. That was my question. I don't want my question to get on other issues.
  10. foolish

    Belated Relief

    Actually, that's the last thing I am not suggesting that my motion be automatically granted because it was not opposed what I asked shouldn't have the Clerk issued an order to show cause why relief should be granted (on the issues raised) instead of permitting appellees file a procedurally barred motion that it didn't file in the first place. Your correct that I lost in the lower court but that's why I appealed however the standard of review I believe is not error but abuse of discretion. Additionally, I understand the normal course of action is to affirm a lower court order but this case is far from that normal course of action.
  11. foolish

    Belated Relief

    This question goes back to my June 18, 2018 post, the question simply keeps festering in my mind. Here is the scenario, once the allotted time to file dispositive motions placed by both circuit rule and by Clerk (Court) order and one party timely files theirs while the other party fails to file their own and fails to respond to the dispositive motion. '''Shouldn't the Clerks order be an 'order to show cause why relief should not be granted' instead of an order for appellees to file 'any response'''. Which impliedly opened the door to file an otherwise procedurally barred motion?
  12. foolish

    Position

    Thanks for the input, my concern's have been put to rest, sort of. We're returning to the same place, I kept coming back to, its up to the Court to decide the issues which I believe it would take into account the merits of the motion opposing to the motion itself.
  13. foolish

    Position

    So true, but this scenario was considered, and yes I understand that ultimately the Court decides the issues. But the one question remains has someone ever experienced: after the adversary takes no position, it files an opposition.
  14. foolish

    Position

    The assumption is correct. The first part is understood '''taking no position' means exactly that'' But have you experienced or known of situation where the adversary party, took no position then files an opposition? Bare with me, I am just trying to understand this no position part. I've reviewed case laws and I came to understand that when the adversary party takes a no position stand it does so when they cannot in good faith file an opposition. Am I close.
  15. foolish

    Position

    In layman's language, what does it mean when the opposing party takes no position to a motion that will be filed? The reason I ask is because I am currently on appeal and the court ordered the appellees to file an answer to my motion, in filing their answer they filed a dispositive motion combined in their answer to my motions, to be clear the dispositive motion was over a month out file. I conferred with appellees that I was filing an opposition to the procedurally out of time dispositive motion, I explained because Circuit regulatory procedures were not followed I will be seeking for out of time dispositive to be denied. . . . See Belated Relief post Appellees stated that it took no position to my opposition motion. Therefore, what does it mean in layman's terms when the appellees take no position to a motion [and] does the10 day rule for the appellees to file a potential motion continue to apply ?
×