My Life Fighting Judicial Corruption and the Political Subversion of Freedom; keeping in mind Winston Churchill's words: ""All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope"
Judge David O. Carter has given Renada Nadine March another interesting albeit non-conclusive, non-final “win”: he has reset from Wednesday May 19 to Monday, June 14, a hearing on the evil eviction-Shark/Shylock, Steven D. Silverstein’s, vengeful Motion to have her third and latest Civil Rights Removal of her Eviction case remanded to state court, which this time was coupled with Silverstein’s Motion to have Renada declared a “vexatious litigant” which in California amounts to slamming the doors of every courthouse in the state against you and padlocking it from the inside—even if you are a defendant. Carter entered the order resetting this hearing in response to Renada’s Motion for Stay Pending Appeal:28 USC 1447(d) RNM Motion for Stay Pending Appeal and Extention of Time; 28 USC 1447(d) RNM Motion with DECLA ISO Stay Pending Appeal and Extention of Time.
The significance of this development is that Renada and her octogenarian mother Fay now have the opportunity to present evidence on what I would call the key “Greenwood v. Peacock” factor which is this: whether by the mere fact of bringing a defendant into state court, in a certain type of proceeding, the outcome is already determined against the defendant.Greenwood v Peacock 1966.
In support of Renada’s efforts, I would like to issue this challenge, statewide, or to anyone who has ever lived in the state of California. Can anyone bring to me the case number, complete docket, and trial transcript of a single eviction case, tried or summarily disposed anywhere in the state of California, during the past thirty years (that would be since Ronald Reagan was elected President in 1980), in which a Plaintiff has lost, and a defendant has actually won, and prevailed, in a judicial eviction action instituted in a property which had been non-judicially foreclosed pursuant to California Civil Code Section 2924 and related statutes. I am certainly interested in collecting interesting stories about settlements, dismissals for want of prosecution, death of Plaintiff’s attorney by shark attack or otherwise, or any other outcome favorable to the defendant and the circumstances which gave rise to such defendant-favorable outcomes, but none of these are what I’m really looking for. I want to see if anyone can document even ONE SINGLE CASE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE PAST THIRTY YEARS, in which any defendant has actually PREVAILED, as a matter of trial-of-facts or summary judgment or dismissal as a matter of law, against a non-judicial foreclosure effected under the terms of California Civil Code Section 2924. If anyone can find such a case, and properly document it with references to Court, date of disposition, Judge, case number, parties, and available docket report, I want to see it. Steven D. Silverstein, Larry Rothman, and Carol G. Unruh, attorneys for Meglodon Financial, are all especially invited to participate in this little concourse, this “race to the heart of darkness.” I am betting that not even one truly Defendant-won case will be found, but if even one can be, I want to know everything there is to know about how it was done. If I am right, or even if there is exactly one case per decade, I think that Renada and Fay March will be well-able to sustain their plea of “fixed outcome” to justify either Civil Rights Removal under 28 U.S.C. Sections 1443(1) and 1447(d), as well as Greenwood v. Peacock, or else a Civil Rights Injunction analogous to the one entered in Dombrowski v. PfisterDOMBROWSKI v PFISTER 380_US_479 and found to be specifically authorized by Congress in Mitchum v. Foster Mitchum v Foster 407_US_225. Thank you, Judge David O. Carter, for this opportunity! Mitchum v. Foster is, in my opinion, an underappreciated and underutilized source of Federal-State jurisprudence whose time has come, precisely because the state courts have drifted so very deeply into unconstitutional and unconscionable procedures and court customs having the force and effect of unconstitutional law. Mitchum v Foster 407_US_225
Anyone with pertinent information should send it to me at firstname.lastname@example.org, or else to Renada Nadine March at email@example.com, or else call Renada at 949-748-0398 or 949-586-4020. Comments with relevant information can also be left (and will be published) on this blog, below: https://charleslincoln3.wordpress.com/
(However, I think it is important to qualify that no one reading this request for data, except a person already employed in the chambers of Judge David O. Carter, or just possibly someone employed elsewhere in the United States District Court for the Central District of California or Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, should even THINK of contacting judicial chambers trying to discuss the question outside of the context of litigation with this very fair-minded judge. It is completely improper ever to engage in such tactics as trying to extrajudicially influence the Judge, even though some licensed attorneys in the state of California have, within recent memory, tried to stir their supporters to mount telephone calling or letter writing campaigns to this and/or other judges).
The Failure of the United States Supreme Court and other Federal Courts to develop the potential of Civil Rights Removal and Civil Rights Injunctions against state proceedings is, to my mind, one of the most notable failures of the expansion of Federal Power which was and remains connected with the overall decline in individual freedom in the United States seen and witnesses since the end of the Second World War. I believe that, on the whole, the entire Civil Rights movement of the period 1948-1976 was a bit of a sham, perhaps even a scam, in that the concept of civil rights was developed ONLY as a means of raising up the African-American population of the United States just enough to keep them from being fertile ground for communist infiltration—but the U.S. Supreme Court never intended a really or fully free society. The net effect of the civil rights movement, in the end, was actually a diminution of average freedom in the United States, even considering the advances of the African-American population towards something more closely resembling equality. The white population, by-and-large, saw a diminution in its freedom and average individual autonomy, on a population wide basis. And how can the temporal correlation between the Civil Rights movement and the Explosion of the U.S. Prison population be explained except as part of a coordinated plan to destroy general individual freedom in the United States and replace individual freedom and autonomy with dependence on the State?