James and others,
The act of filing
a grievance against a Judge is not
enough to cause for grounds of recusal.
Only if the JTC complaint is successful
is it solid grounds for recusal. Substantial
case law backs that up, as far as
you have to succeed on the JTC complaint
to overcome the presumed impartiality
of a "judge."
I lost my disqualification
hearing after two hours on Friday,
so I moved to have it heard De Novo
before the Chief Judge, because right
after the hearing the Judge was more
than happy to sign an Order to Show
Cause Against me for the other side
for Contempt outside immediate presence
of court, and without an affidavit.
I am also trying
to get a Federal Complaint together
by tomorrow to file in Federal Court
on the specific issue of Due Process
Rights being violated. Only asking
for a Declaratory ruling, once that
is established I plan going further
with it.
At this point,
the test is, they failed to give me
the hearings that I asked for per
the statutes here in Michigan as
well as the Michigan court rule on
three occasions, its a vacuum test
for denial of due process. This should
also conflict the judge out, because
I name him and the Friend of the Court
on it as parties.
I plan on getting
a solid JTC complaint on the issues
later, but I need to establish that
my federal rights have been delayed
and denied in my case. No money, no
nothing, just a statement that : yep,
they didn't follow the rules. No injunctions,
no directives from the federal court
to the state courts. As simple as
I can get it.
Lary
James Nollet <JNollet@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
wrote:
Here's another
way to create a recusal situation.
I have tried it withOUT success.
Find a way to
file a complaint with the Commission
on Judicial Conduct against your
judge. Say that the judge
did A, B, C, & D that was against
the rules and against the "Canons"
of his profession. Show how
the judge ignored the law.
Don't just give
the Commission a pile of crap, however.
Do your very best to show how, specifically,
the judge violated his job.
This will surely
piss-off your judge. That's
the disadvantage. Now the
judge will PERSONALLY be pissed
off at YOU. However, the better
your complaint, the better your
basis of recusal is.
This now can
help your case. You can now
say that the judge should recuse
himself because there is manifest
reason to suppose that the judge
has a personal animus against you.
You can also argue, how can a judge
possibly give me fair, impartial
justice when I have a complaint
before the CJC against that very
judge alleging illegal and unethical
behavior?
And -- you have
an advantage in that you're NOT
an attorney. A professional
attorney will not gladly anger the
judge because he will have to face
that judge again and again in other
cases. But YOU don't have
to worry about your professional
standing with the judge because
you have none.
And, if I were
a judge with a complaint against
me, while I'd want to screw a
pro-se litigant, I'd do so
VERY carefully. I'd actually
try to do my job right in order
to get him.
Doing his job
right is much of what we ask judges
to do.
James
| 
