Motion to Reconsider Filed

Well, we made the deadline, and filed our Motion to Reconsider.  I got everything I wanted in there, in case an appeal is required.  You can read the latest on our Case History page.

Also important, with this filing, I will now start to share what I’ve learned about our legal system, and how pro se litigants can use it to help fix what’s going on in our country.  For a good overview of where I’m going with this, please check out my blog post “For the Love of God, Guns, and Governance.”

More soon, and as always, comments welcome …

This entry was posted in History. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Motion to Reconsider Filed

  1. nootkabear says:

    Judge Duffey hates pro se litigants, and will not allow one to prevail in his courtroom, as is the case with most of the judges at the Northern District of Georgia. To date, the only honest judge, who does not discriminate against pro se litigants, and/or homeowners attempting to keep their homes, is Judge Amy Totenberg.

    From “Plaintiff’s Brief in Support of Motion to Recuse” we filed in Civil Action File No: 1:08-CV-01971-WSD in our Georgia Power case, which was our third time in front of Duffey:

    “Judge Duffey sits on the Georgia Supreme Court’s Equal Justice Commission Committee On Civil Justice. The “Minutes” of the December 4, 2006 Meeting:

    “…in August 2006, the ABA endorsed the right to counsel in certain civil cases, also known as the civil Gideon…The kinds of cases of which the ABA endorses a civil right to counsel…”

    “The ABA’s principles endorse the inclusions of all persons in a state’s system for the delivery of civil legal aid, including …the disabled…vulnerable populations…”
    “Fourth,…promote …the judiciary and court personnel in reforming rules, procedures and services to expand and facilitate access to justice…to support pro se litigants.”
    “Clients that most touch the public’s sympathy are children,…and the disabled.”

    “Ms. Fairbanks…defined an equal justice community as ‘a group of individuals and organizations united through common, expressed vision and a shared set of values, who are bound together by a sense of fidelity to the promise of justice and equality, and who are willing to put personal, professional and organizational allegiances aside in pursuit of a common justice ideal.’”

    “An equal justice community requires…‘You have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.’”.

    The January 26, 2007 Meeting Minutes:

    “Judge Duffey believed that it would greatly benefit the system if pro se individuals were represented in court.”
    “Judge Duffey…expressed doubt as to the wisdom of providing free legal service in the justice system.”

    From the Minutes of May 23, 2007:

    “The final vision statement is as follows:

    ‘The cornerstone of a free society is a population that has faith that its legal system will assist them in their daily lives and a judiciary that will resolve disputes in a fair and impartial manner. We envision a civil legal assistance system which is inclusive, responsive and accountable to the needs of all. To be responsive, each person should have timely access to services, information and tools to promote their interest and present their case to an informed, responsible and accountable judiciary.’”

    The history of bias and prejudice against pro se litigants within the Courts is long. Stephen Elias who had been with Nolo Press, the nation’s leading publisher of self-help law books, back in 1997, in an article Bias Against Pro Per Litigants… stated:
    “From the moment they first contact the court system, most people who want to represent themselves, without a lawyer, encounter tremendous resistance. Within the closed universe of the courts, this bias is as pernicious as that based on race, ethnic origins or sex.”

    “People who cannot afford a lawyer are a rebuke to the organized bar’s monopoly…, because that monopoly is morally—if not legally—justified…the ABA has admitted that 100 million Americans can’t afford lawyers.”

    “… the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws.” Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905

    At present, Plaintiffs still believe in the judicial system in this Country, in their pursuit of truth and justice, and their quest to seek redress within the Court systems, they have continually been denied meaningful access to the Courts.
    “Redress: to set right, remedy or rectify… to make a fair adjustment; to see that justice is done”. – Webster’s New World Dictionary

    Justice Bradley in Boyd v. United, 116 U.S. 616 at 635 (1885): ” It is the duty of the Courts to be watchful for the Constitutional Rights of the Citizens, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. Their motto should be Obsta Principiis.”

    “It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside supreme law finds lodgement in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this Court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violations of the principles of the Constitution.” Downs v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)

    “It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who, by accepting office participates in its functions, is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes on the exercise of the authority which it gives.” U.S. v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 1 S. Ct. 240, 261, 27 L. Ed 171 (1882)

  2. nootkabear says:

    We are enjoying your blog, and will keep our fingers crossed for the outcome to be favorable to you. William Windsor has been in front of Duffey as well. After dealing with the Judges in the Northern District of Georgia, he began the website: and has been making a movie about the corruption.

Comments are closed.