Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Corruption in the Santa Cruz Courts
Corruption in Santa Cruz Courts
I am involved with a real property case in Santa Cruz, CA, where there are nine easements in dispute, and I am writing this blog because I am absolutely amazed with the level of Judicial Abuse and Unethical Behavior by the Attorneys involved in this case.
I am seeking assistance (no solicitations) and I want to education the public about the Santa Cruz Courts. I will be discussing this case on YouTube and MySpace, but for now the following is my story.
I am involved with a real property case in Santa Cruz, CA, where there are nine easements in dispute, and I am writing this blog because I am absolutely amazed with the level of Judicial Abuse and Unethical Behavior by the Attorneys involved in this case.
I am seeking assistance (no solicitations) and I want to education the public about the Santa Cruz Courts. I will be discussing this case on YouTube and MySpace, but for now the following is my story.
As I mentioned, my suit involves several easements. Two easements do not have any legal deeds and two easements are exclusive. My neighbors Niki and Tim Bowden claim ownership of my land through these exclusive easements. One exclusive easement was drafted two months before Ken Haber and Catherine Lynch agreed to sell me the property; indicating that Haber and Lynch intended to sell me land I cannot use, except for paying taxes.
In May of 08, I considered settling with my realtor Alan Melikian and Bailey Property for a small amount of money, because I needed the money. Currently, I am a single mom and a fourth year law student. However, no settlement was reduced to writing. In fact, their attorney Hamerslough never exchanged documents with me, which was a condition to the settlement agreement. However, Judge Stevens ruled that the settlement was enforceable without hearing any of the terms of the settlement and without a written agreement. A Judge cannot enforce agreements made outside of court, without a written agreement. This is against all established law and is mind boggling to me. Alan Melikian and Bailey Properties wanted me to agree not to talk about this case, even though it is ongoing. However, I said no and am going to write about this case and the extraordinary judicial abuse that exists against the pro per litigant. I have not accepted any settlement money.
Another party included in the law suit is Santa Cruz Title. SCT filed a demurrer, which allows a party out of a case with no discovery. SCT claims they were not named in my lawsuit and that they had no duty to me for mishandling my escrow. However, SCT is properly listed in my complaint and according to the law they do have a duty as escrow holder. All one has to do is READ the complaint to see that SCT is listed property under the correct cause of action. Even so, Judge Samuel Stevens ruled in their favor, with no discovery; indicating that SCT can operate in Santa Cruz with absolute immunity because the Santa Court refuses to hold their local corporation accountable. Therefore, I encourage everyone in Santa Cruz to be aware that if you use SCT and they make a mistake, the local court will not hold them accountable.
Further, months before a settlement conference, Judge Burdick stopped all discovery because attorney Bosso objected to only one interrogatory (discovery questionnaire). Such a ruling never happens, except in this case where Bosso, the opposing counsel, is married to Judge Atack. Then, during the settlement conference, Judge Burdick was not interested in the merits of my case. Judge Burdick's only approach was to attempt to intimidate me by telling me that pro pers never win. After the settlement, I discovered that Bosso's client, the Bowden's were unlawfully using a third easement that I had not yet discovered. This easement also does not have a deed. Discovery would had revealed this easement, and if the settlement went through as initially agreed, Bosso would have knowingly manipulated me into giving up my rights to this easement. Bosso, and Bowden's knew, or should have known, of their unlawful use of this road before the settlement conference. As a result, Judge Burdick excused himself from the case and my case was delayed for almost one year; resulting in my sustaining financial damage in a declining real estate market. I had my tape recorder with me during this settlement conference.
Recently, a head hunter called me and told me that before Judge Stevens was a judge, he was this man's attorney in the 80s. This man stated that Judge Stevens told him that the Santa Cruz courts were such a 'good old boy network' that he would be better off if he could get his case out of Santa Cruz County. At that time this man's opposing counsel was a son of Judge Pickering (I don't know if this spelling is right) and it was pretty well known that extreme judicial prejudice existed because of this connection. My opposing counsel, Mr. Bosso, partner is married to a local judge and I believe his success comes in part from this relationship. This means that a local judge financially benefits from Bosso's success in Santa Cruz.
I am writing a book called "From Rags to Middle Class" where I will be discussing judicial abuse against pro per litigants, even when the pro per litigant reasonably can work within the system. If the poor and middle class cannot have their case heard fairly based upon the merits, then they essentially do not have reasonable access to the courts. This is one of the reasons are our entire political system has become so corrupt.
Please Provide Advice, Assistance or Responsible Comments
In May of 08, I considered settling with my realtor Alan Melikian and Bailey Property for a small amount of money, because I needed the money. Currently, I am a single mom and a fourth year law student. However, no settlement was reduced to writing. In fact, their attorney Hamerslough never exchanged documents with me, which was a condition to the settlement agreement. However, Judge Stevens ruled that the settlement was enforceable without hearing any of the terms of the settlement and without a written agreement. A Judge cannot enforce agreements made outside of court, without a written agreement. This is against all established law and is mind boggling to me. Alan Melikian and Bailey Properties wanted me to agree not to talk about this case, even though it is ongoing. However, I said no and am going to write about this case and the extraordinary judicial abuse that exists against the pro per litigant. I have not accepted any settlement money.
Another party included in the law suit is Santa Cruz Title. SCT filed a demurrer, which allows a party out of a case with no discovery. SCT claims they were not named in my lawsuit and that they had no duty to me for mishandling my escrow. However, SCT is properly listed in my complaint and according to the law they do have a duty as escrow holder. All one has to do is READ the complaint to see that SCT is listed property under the correct cause of action. Even so, Judge Samuel Stevens ruled in their favor, with no discovery; indicating that SCT can operate in Santa Cruz with absolute immunity because the Santa Court refuses to hold their local corporation accountable. Therefore, I encourage everyone in Santa Cruz to be aware that if you use SCT and they make a mistake, the local court will not hold them accountable.
Further, months before a settlement conference, Judge Burdick stopped all discovery because attorney Bosso objected to only one interrogatory (discovery questionnaire). Such a ruling never happens, except in this case where Bosso, the opposing counsel, is married to Judge Atack. Then, during the settlement conference, Judge Burdick was not interested in the merits of my case. Judge Burdick's only approach was to attempt to intimidate me by telling me that pro pers never win. After the settlement, I discovered that Bosso's client, the Bowden's were unlawfully using a third easement that I had not yet discovered. This easement also does not have a deed. Discovery would had revealed this easement, and if the settlement went through as initially agreed, Bosso would have knowingly manipulated me into giving up my rights to this easement. Bosso, and Bowden's knew, or should have known, of their unlawful use of this road before the settlement conference. As a result, Judge Burdick excused himself from the case and my case was delayed for almost one year; resulting in my sustaining financial damage in a declining real estate market. I had my tape recorder with me during this settlement conference.
Recently, a head hunter called me and told me that before Judge Stevens was a judge, he was this man's attorney in the 80s. This man stated that Judge Stevens told him that the Santa Cruz courts were such a 'good old boy network' that he would be better off if he could get his case out of Santa Cruz County. At that time this man's opposing counsel was a son of Judge Pickering (I don't know if this spelling is right) and it was pretty well known that extreme judicial prejudice existed because of this connection. My opposing counsel, Mr. Bosso, partner is married to a local judge and I believe his success comes in part from this relationship. This means that a local judge financially benefits from Bosso's success in Santa Cruz.
I am writing a book called "From Rags to Middle Class" where I will be discussing judicial abuse against pro per litigants, even when the pro per litigant reasonably can work within the system. If the poor and middle class cannot have their case heard fairly based upon the merits, then they essentially do not have reasonable access to the courts. This is one of the reasons are our entire political system has become so corrupt.
Please Provide Advice, Assistance or Responsible Comments
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
did u use your 180.6? if there's real bias with the good ol boy system, challenge it to the judicial counsel
Whether or not the system is corrupt is a separate issue from whether an individual judge behaves unethically. As you are a law student, I recommend you discuss your concerns with your teachers. And hire an attorney.
1. You're a law student, not a lawyer.
2. The sixth district court of appeals covers four counties with a combined population of around 2.5 million people, additionally, those judges are appointed. While the Santa Cruz superior court may possibly be a good ol' boy's network, it would be a much more difficult feat for the sixth district to be such.
My recommendation would be to hire a lawyer, they might have better luck, and at the very least, they probably know what's going on. I'm sure a law student playing lawyer is not a great impression.
Oh yes, the supreme court of California will deny to hear the case, because it hasn't even been accepted by the court of appeals. And yes, if your problem is not considered important enough, the supreme court can refuse to hear it.
If the judge's misconduct is so blatant as you purport it to be, than the court of appeals should make quick work of this transgression -- however, and I am not trying to be rude -- you are just a law student, and I wouldn't be surprised if there is an aspect of your case that you are overlooking/not understanding/etc...
2. The sixth district court of appeals covers four counties with a combined population of around 2.5 million people, additionally, those judges are appointed. While the Santa Cruz superior court may possibly be a good ol' boy's network, it would be a much more difficult feat for the sixth district to be such.
My recommendation would be to hire a lawyer, they might have better luck, and at the very least, they probably know what's going on. I'm sure a law student playing lawyer is not a great impression.
Oh yes, the supreme court of California will deny to hear the case, because it hasn't even been accepted by the court of appeals. And yes, if your problem is not considered important enough, the supreme court can refuse to hear it.
If the judge's misconduct is so blatant as you purport it to be, than the court of appeals should make quick work of this transgression -- however, and I am not trying to be rude -- you are just a law student, and I wouldn't be surprised if there is an aspect of your case that you are overlooking/not understanding/etc...
The extraordinary abusive decision by Judge Stevens and Burdick have NOTHING to do with the fact that I am a student and NOT an attorney. I work with an excellent attorney in the bay area, and regardless a Judge cannot enforce a non judicial settlement and must read the complaint. This is not dependent upon whether I am an attorney or not!! I cannot afford an attorney and am doing a good job on my own, except for the abuse. Your answer does not address the issue of whether the judicial has to follow the law when a pro per is involved.
Telling me to hire an attorney is not the issue or the solution. Regardless of whether I am an attorney or not, does not give the judge a right to enforce a non judicial settlement, or excuse him from reading the complaint. I cannot hire an attorney and so many corporations and rich people rely on the middle class and the poor not being able to have the resources for expensive attorneys to rip then off. I work with a great attorney consultant and have a RIGHT to a fair trial whether or not I can afford an attorney or not; based upon the merits of the case. So, please don't response with simplistic and irrelevant statements such as hire an attorney.
CK, or Cheryl: You solicited advice on a public news site, so why are you so indignant at the people who gave you their advice? I understand you are unsatisfied with the outcome (so far) of your case, and the judge's rulings, but maybe you should solicit advice in a lawyer's internet forum next time, if you are seeking more concrete steps you might take, aside from "hiring an attorney?"
I am seeking to educate the public about the abuse which takes place in the legal system against those who do not have $300 an hour to hire an attorney. If Judges do not make decisions based upon the merits of a case, regardless of whether one is pro per or not, leads to the system as it is today - one where the middle class and poor cannot access the system. Here, I am doing fine on my own in filing the paper work and making the right legal arguments. However, because the system is so corrupt toward the pro per my case is not being heard on the merits, and this affects everyone. If I as a person who has a masters and is months away from having a J.D. cannot get a fair trial, then how can others who do not have the skills that I have.
For more information:
http://santacruzcacorruptcourt.blogspot.com/
Why is it when someone loses a case it is due to corruption and not some flaw in their case or argument? If Cheryls argument was as convuluted and hard to follow as her posting here it is no wonder she lost. I can't even tell clearly what the issue she is suing over. Like they said you are a law student you lack the experience of a real attorney and there may be some things you are missing. There are many low income legal services that will help you if you have a valid case.
If you are buying property in Santa Cruz you can't be that bad off.
It could easily be judicial corruption, or bias against the side with weaker attorney representation. That happens all the time.
What I wish I understood was what the situation is with eight easements on a property. Is this rural land with a bunch of driveways going across it, or is this on a hill or next to a business district or something?
What I wish I understood was what the situation is with eight easements on a property. Is this rural land with a bunch of driveways going across it, or is this on a hill or next to a business district or something?
I began to read your post and would like to sympathize with you, however I immediately noticed inconsistencies and misspellings. I would suggest correcting these as well as rewriting the piece so that someone not familiar with the case would be able to follow. Frankly it sounds like an emotional rant.
I see your points and they may or may not be accurate but your writing style, grammatical errors and misspellings lend to discredit.
Is it eight easements or nine?
Is it necessary to highlight your point by using ambiguous adjectives in ALL CAPS?
I am only offering advice here but in doing so I feel it necessary to ask that you consider that perhaps you've handled yourself in court in a similar manner due to your emotional attachment to the case causing judgment against your personal demeanor and character and not the facts. This happens frequently in many courts. If you show up poorly dressed for example it says that you do not care and do not respect the court. You can be assured they will not respect you.
Best of luck to you, my advice is to polish your presentation.
I see your points and they may or may not be accurate but your writing style, grammatical errors and misspellings lend to discredit.
Is it eight easements or nine?
Is it necessary to highlight your point by using ambiguous adjectives in ALL CAPS?
I am only offering advice here but in doing so I feel it necessary to ask that you consider that perhaps you've handled yourself in court in a similar manner due to your emotional attachment to the case causing judgment against your personal demeanor and character and not the facts. This happens frequently in many courts. If you show up poorly dressed for example it says that you do not care and do not respect the court. You can be assured they will not respect you.
Best of luck to you, my advice is to polish your presentation.
thank for your input. I wrote this blog at 2 in the morning and did not properly review it before posting. I have modified the blog and reposted.
For more information:
http://santacruzcacorruptcourt.blogspot.com/
I have had zero years of law school but this strikes me as weird:
"In May of 08, I considered settling with my realtor Alan Melikian and Bailey Property for a small amount of money, because I needed the money. Currently, I am a single mom and a fourth year law student. However, no settlement was reduced to writing. In fact, their attorney Hamerslough never exchanged documents with me, which was a condition to the settlement agreement. However, Judge Stevens ruled that the settlement was enforceable without hearing any of the terms of the settlement and without a written agreement."
Was there an agreement or wasn't there an agreement? You're basically saying that you are not obligated because there was no written agreement, which was a condition of the settlement agreement. So the "settlement agreement," which I'm assuming was verbal, is considered a valid agreement when applied speficially for the things that work for you? And then it turns into just you "considering" things and hence evidence of corruption when things don't go your way?
"In May of 08, I considered settling with my realtor Alan Melikian and Bailey Property for a small amount of money, because I needed the money. Currently, I am a single mom and a fourth year law student. However, no settlement was reduced to writing. In fact, their attorney Hamerslough never exchanged documents with me, which was a condition to the settlement agreement. However, Judge Stevens ruled that the settlement was enforceable without hearing any of the terms of the settlement and without a written agreement."
Was there an agreement or wasn't there an agreement? You're basically saying that you are not obligated because there was no written agreement, which was a condition of the settlement agreement. So the "settlement agreement," which I'm assuming was verbal, is considered a valid agreement when applied speficially for the things that work for you? And then it turns into just you "considering" things and hence evidence of corruption when things don't go your way?
I read the new blog and I still don't understand what the problem is. First what are these easements for. Who has them? Why did they not show up in the title search? Even if they have no deed they may still be valid if the access to them has not been challenged in the past. Might I suggest you take it one issue at a time. If the title company was negligent in finding the deeded easements you should deal with them. I would deal with each easement individually.
The easements are very complicated and I am trying to resolve the issue through the courts. However, unfortunately, people are missing the point of my blog. The issue is:
Judge Stevens is trying to enforce a private settlement, where I did not agree. This means that anyone can file in court for a settlement and a judge can force that person to settle even though they did not agree to the terms of the settlement. This is against established law and leaves me in a position where the realtor is taken out of the lawsuit, where there is no settlement. Again, this is against established law and sets up a precedent where a pro per can be forced into a settlement, even if the pro per has not agreed to the terms.
Second, Judge Stevens took Santa Cruz Title out of the lawsuit merely because SCT said that they were not named in the lawsuit properly. However, they were listed properly and the law states that they do have a duty. This ruling is so amazing because all the judge had to do is read the complaint and see that SCT is listed properly, under the correct cause of action. This establishes that SCT has absolute immunity in Santa Cruz to make mistakes in how they deal with discovery, and denies me of all discovery to prove that they made an error.
This judges rulings are so absolutely against all established law and fairness and establishes a precedent that the pro per litigant does not have access to the courts.
I will take these issues to the CA Supreme Court and I am looking for legal groups and others to write supporting briefs on my behalf so that the Santa Cruz Court can not set up a precedent where they can force a pro per to settle, even though no settlement agreement was established. Also, so that a court can not simply falsely state that a corporation has not duty to a person for their mistakes and falsely state that they are not in a complaint; when they are listed in the complaint. I don't think people are getting our outrageous these rulings are, and the dangerous precedent that it establishes. I am doing my best to try to educate people, and am seeking assistance from those who 'get it' and agree with my outrage.
Judge Stevens is trying to enforce a private settlement, where I did not agree. This means that anyone can file in court for a settlement and a judge can force that person to settle even though they did not agree to the terms of the settlement. This is against established law and leaves me in a position where the realtor is taken out of the lawsuit, where there is no settlement. Again, this is against established law and sets up a precedent where a pro per can be forced into a settlement, even if the pro per has not agreed to the terms.
Second, Judge Stevens took Santa Cruz Title out of the lawsuit merely because SCT said that they were not named in the lawsuit properly. However, they were listed properly and the law states that they do have a duty. This ruling is so amazing because all the judge had to do is read the complaint and see that SCT is listed properly, under the correct cause of action. This establishes that SCT has absolute immunity in Santa Cruz to make mistakes in how they deal with discovery, and denies me of all discovery to prove that they made an error.
This judges rulings are so absolutely against all established law and fairness and establishes a precedent that the pro per litigant does not have access to the courts.
I will take these issues to the CA Supreme Court and I am looking for legal groups and others to write supporting briefs on my behalf so that the Santa Cruz Court can not set up a precedent where they can force a pro per to settle, even though no settlement agreement was established. Also, so that a court can not simply falsely state that a corporation has not duty to a person for their mistakes and falsely state that they are not in a complaint; when they are listed in the complaint. I don't think people are getting our outrageous these rulings are, and the dangerous precedent that it establishes. I am doing my best to try to educate people, and am seeking assistance from those who 'get it' and agree with my outrage.
I also don't think people are 'getting it' in regard to how abusive it was for Judge Burdick to stop discovery and to force a pro per into a settlement conference, where then his strategy was to intimidate the pro per into settling into an agreement that was not in that pro per's best interest. All Judge Burdick did was to tell me that I would never win because I was pro per. Then, when I found out about yet another easement, it was clear the Bosso's approach was to hide that there was another easement and to get me into an agreement before I knew that it existed. This abuse is horrible and again demonstrates the extreme judicial abuse toward the pro per litigant.
Everyone says just hire an attorney, however, my motions are reasonably written and I should not have to hire an attorney in order to expect that the courts will rule in a reasonable manner (following established standards and precedent).
As somone who is almost an attorney, I believe that if a pro per like myself can manuever through the system, that the court should rule reasonably. Otherwise, people who cannot afford expensive attorneys do not have access to the courts, and our democracy is further compromised. This system of abuse against the pro per and our inability to access the courts has led to corruption we have in our current system.
Everyone says just hire an attorney, however, my motions are reasonably written and I should not have to hire an attorney in order to expect that the courts will rule in a reasonable manner (following established standards and precedent).
As somone who is almost an attorney, I believe that if a pro per like myself can manuever through the system, that the court should rule reasonably. Otherwise, people who cannot afford expensive attorneys do not have access to the courts, and our democracy is further compromised. This system of abuse against the pro per and our inability to access the courts has led to corruption we have in our current system.
...can be found here...
http://64.166.146.51/openaccess/CIVIL/civilnames.asp?deflastname=KELMAR&bus=N&defmidname=&deffirstname=CHERYL&dob=&courtcode=A&filedateto=&filedatefrom=&limit=50&sort=filedate
Along with many others! Cheryl, I don't mean to demean you, but are you the same person that's involved in all of those cases?
http://64.166.146.51/openaccess/CIVIL/civilnames.asp?deflastname=KELMAR&bus=N&defmidname=&deffirstname=CHERYL&dob=&courtcode=A&filedateto=&filedatefrom=&limit=50&sort=filedate
Along with many others! Cheryl, I don't mean to demean you, but are you the same person that's involved in all of those cases?
Ten of the cases you cite are related to this same case. This case has been going on for two years and includes many parties. For example, the SCT report described a ComCast cable line as being underground. However, it was not underground, it was physically connected to the redwood trees, whereby I could not cut trees down because of this one large lone cable wire that stretched 700 feet across my land. At one point, ComCast agreed to settle, and I dismissed them. However, when they then did not settle, I refiled against them. Now ComCast has removed this cable wire. I have learned alot in the past two years, and in 2006, I had never filed my own non-small claims case. Today, I know how to manuever within the system and will be petitioning the State Supreme Court in this current case.
My neighbors, the Bowdens, have previously been sued twice for their aggressive encroachment on their neighbors land, by their other neighbor Ms. Sexson. A third time, Ms. Sexson used mediation to remove their encroachment. The Bowdens have learned how to use the legal system to aggressively acquire land that they have not had to pay for. In fact, it is cheaper to hire a well connected attorney, then it is to buy the land in Santa Cruz County. However, I have had to buy the land and now have to fight to be able to use the land; except for paying taxes.
Also, on my land, there is a major road, that does not have a deed. The previous seller Ken Haber knew that this road existed and that five families were landlocked without crossing over my land, but Ken did not disclose this fact to me. I did not see this road because on the County map there is undeveloped easement that is located right next to this road for ingress and egress (which usually means it is a road). Visually it appeared that this road was that easement. However, Ken knew about the undeveloped easement/road because he tried to set up a road association and two months before going into escrow with me, he signed an exclusive easement with the Bowdens, with the exact same terms of an easement that already existed and signed by Mr. McKee, that the Bowdens now claim they own - and I have no right to use, except to pay property tax on it. I propose that an exclusive easement cannot be used to convey land.
Yes, I do use the legal system because I find that it is the only way to get attention of large corporations. For example, many times I have paid my mortgage on the 30th of the month, when my income as an entrepreneur stopped, corporations have inappropriately 'dinged' my credit. Then, when I call to have the corporation fix my credit, I get sent to India and spend many hours on the phone with no results. In 2001, when I sought to refinance my property, after spending one month and every Saturday on the phone for two hours with WAMU, I filed a small claims suit. In two weeks my credit was fixed. Luckily I fixed my credit quickly, because I was subsequently laid off and once laid off you can no longer acquire loans. 911 then happened months later, and I was out of work for quite a while. Now, I won't spend that time with the corporations. I simply file a small claims action and am able to speak to a decision maker right away. However, I have never been involved in a trial; had a deposition, etc. My cases always settle, but here, the attorney Bosso wants to play hardball and his clients the Bowdens won't want to settle. Why should they? ...the local system is so discriminatory against the pro per litigant that my previous realtor is able to remove themselves from the suit without having to pay me settlement money; unless they force me to sign a document that contains terms that I have not agreed to. Pretty amazing!!
Corporations and the Media have created an image that if the average person uses the legal system, they are litigious; but they use the legal system all the time. I have used small claims alot as I described, and in my opinion that is what the legal system is for. In this current case, I am attempting to use the legal system to argue "why wasn't I told by Ken Haber, when I asked him to tell me about the road, that he was selling me land I could not use?" "Can your neighbor acquire your land through an exclusive easement that amounts to ownership?" I have blank forms from Santa Cruz Title, which prove that SCT did not give me descriptions about easements, during escrow, for me to "READ AND SIGN" before I purchased this property. "Why weren't the escrow instructions properly followed by SCT?" "What were the escrow instructions?" ..and now why did the local court dismiss this lawsuit when SCT was properly listed on the lawsuit. I will display my complaint on video and demonstrate that SCT is listed on the lawsuit, as part of my YouTube presentation in a few weeks. Now I have finals and in less than two weeks I will be done with my JD courses.
Regardless of whether I am pro per, or whether I have used small claims for other purposes, I have a right to a fair trial, which I am not getting in Santa Cruz County. In fact, according to the rules of evidence, the fact that one uses the legal system is generally inadmissible. However, Bosso admitted this evidence; exagerated the number of small claims suits and got Judge Burdick to stop all discovery. Bosso did this to hide another existing easement that the Bowdens were using without a legal right to do so. This fact would had been discovered before the 2007 settlement conference, but instead my case was delayed for almost one year, and I have sustained damage in having to hold onto this property while this lawsuit continues. What am I suppose to do? ...pass this property to someone else, without disclosure, like Ken Haber...or take the financial hit from selling a property with so many problems.
My neighbors, the Bowdens, have previously been sued twice for their aggressive encroachment on their neighbors land, by their other neighbor Ms. Sexson. A third time, Ms. Sexson used mediation to remove their encroachment. The Bowdens have learned how to use the legal system to aggressively acquire land that they have not had to pay for. In fact, it is cheaper to hire a well connected attorney, then it is to buy the land in Santa Cruz County. However, I have had to buy the land and now have to fight to be able to use the land; except for paying taxes.
Also, on my land, there is a major road, that does not have a deed. The previous seller Ken Haber knew that this road existed and that five families were landlocked without crossing over my land, but Ken did not disclose this fact to me. I did not see this road because on the County map there is undeveloped easement that is located right next to this road for ingress and egress (which usually means it is a road). Visually it appeared that this road was that easement. However, Ken knew about the undeveloped easement/road because he tried to set up a road association and two months before going into escrow with me, he signed an exclusive easement with the Bowdens, with the exact same terms of an easement that already existed and signed by Mr. McKee, that the Bowdens now claim they own - and I have no right to use, except to pay property tax on it. I propose that an exclusive easement cannot be used to convey land.
Yes, I do use the legal system because I find that it is the only way to get attention of large corporations. For example, many times I have paid my mortgage on the 30th of the month, when my income as an entrepreneur stopped, corporations have inappropriately 'dinged' my credit. Then, when I call to have the corporation fix my credit, I get sent to India and spend many hours on the phone with no results. In 2001, when I sought to refinance my property, after spending one month and every Saturday on the phone for two hours with WAMU, I filed a small claims suit. In two weeks my credit was fixed. Luckily I fixed my credit quickly, because I was subsequently laid off and once laid off you can no longer acquire loans. 911 then happened months later, and I was out of work for quite a while. Now, I won't spend that time with the corporations. I simply file a small claims action and am able to speak to a decision maker right away. However, I have never been involved in a trial; had a deposition, etc. My cases always settle, but here, the attorney Bosso wants to play hardball and his clients the Bowdens won't want to settle. Why should they? ...the local system is so discriminatory against the pro per litigant that my previous realtor is able to remove themselves from the suit without having to pay me settlement money; unless they force me to sign a document that contains terms that I have not agreed to. Pretty amazing!!
Corporations and the Media have created an image that if the average person uses the legal system, they are litigious; but they use the legal system all the time. I have used small claims alot as I described, and in my opinion that is what the legal system is for. In this current case, I am attempting to use the legal system to argue "why wasn't I told by Ken Haber, when I asked him to tell me about the road, that he was selling me land I could not use?" "Can your neighbor acquire your land through an exclusive easement that amounts to ownership?" I have blank forms from Santa Cruz Title, which prove that SCT did not give me descriptions about easements, during escrow, for me to "READ AND SIGN" before I purchased this property. "Why weren't the escrow instructions properly followed by SCT?" "What were the escrow instructions?" ..and now why did the local court dismiss this lawsuit when SCT was properly listed on the lawsuit. I will display my complaint on video and demonstrate that SCT is listed on the lawsuit, as part of my YouTube presentation in a few weeks. Now I have finals and in less than two weeks I will be done with my JD courses.
Regardless of whether I am pro per, or whether I have used small claims for other purposes, I have a right to a fair trial, which I am not getting in Santa Cruz County. In fact, according to the rules of evidence, the fact that one uses the legal system is generally inadmissible. However, Bosso admitted this evidence; exagerated the number of small claims suits and got Judge Burdick to stop all discovery. Bosso did this to hide another existing easement that the Bowdens were using without a legal right to do so. This fact would had been discovered before the 2007 settlement conference, but instead my case was delayed for almost one year, and I have sustained damage in having to hold onto this property while this lawsuit continues. What am I suppose to do? ...pass this property to someone else, without disclosure, like Ken Haber...or take the financial hit from selling a property with so many problems.
I'm starting to understand the judge's decision....
"I'm starting to understand the judge's decision...."
Yes, amazing how the rants of a crazy person can generate more posts than most of the Indymedia headlines combined.
Cheryl, your beef should not be so much with the courts but with the state's mental health system, which was destroyed by Cowboy Ronnie when he was governor.
You bought a piece of property WITHOUT KNOWING there was a major road running through it?
Yes, amazing how the rants of a crazy person can generate more posts than most of the Indymedia headlines combined.
Cheryl, your beef should not be so much with the courts but with the state's mental health system, which was destroyed by Cowboy Ronnie when he was governor.
You bought a piece of property WITHOUT KNOWING there was a major road running through it?
Wow! You the last blogger are obviously a person who is connected with the opposing party, and you are not a person who is interested in hearing the issue at hand. It's unfortunate, that the only blogger ithis issue has generated is someone who is only interested in 'cutting' me down.
Suppose you are in a lawsuit, and you tell your opposition that you will settle for $100. They then submit an agreement to the court that states that you will settle for $1000, and without your consent, the judge signs an order to enforce the settlement for you to pay $1000. This is exactly what is happening in my case, and I will discuss this on YouTube and will display the documents.
In Judge Steven's other decision, as I mentioned, SCT is listed within my complaint, and yet because SCT said that they were not, the judge sustained a demurrer.
These rulings are so fundamentaly prejudicial and amazing that I was hoping that others would 'get it' and see the connection to my case to the fundamental fairness of the courts in dealing with pro per litigants. Where are the Santa Cruz progressives?
Suppose you are in a lawsuit, and you tell your opposition that you will settle for $100. They then submit an agreement to the court that states that you will settle for $1000, and without your consent, the judge signs an order to enforce the settlement for you to pay $1000. This is exactly what is happening in my case, and I will discuss this on YouTube and will display the documents.
In Judge Steven's other decision, as I mentioned, SCT is listed within my complaint, and yet because SCT said that they were not, the judge sustained a demurrer.
These rulings are so fundamentaly prejudicial and amazing that I was hoping that others would 'get it' and see the connection to my case to the fundamental fairness of the courts in dealing with pro per litigants. Where are the Santa Cruz progressives?
"This is exactly what is happening in my case, and I will discuss this on YouTube and will display the documents. "
-Great, looking forward to it! Please post it here when you do.
"Where are all the Santa Cruz progressives?"
-We have better things to do than waste time supporting someone stupid enough to buy a lot WITHOUT KNOWING there was a major road running through it!
-Great, looking forward to it! Please post it here when you do.
"Where are all the Santa Cruz progressives?"
-We have better things to do than waste time supporting someone stupid enough to buy a lot WITHOUT KNOWING there was a major road running through it!
I understand your frustration. What most humanoids don't realize the court system was designed to tobe used by the wealthy as a way of taking form the average person.
The cost of a lawsuit to defend (in my case property rights) will reach $100,000. The wealthy know this and the average person does not until the fees pile up. What happens after you are in debt up to your neck the opposing side will make an offer to settle. Then you must decide take the offer or risk having a good o boy judge make a decision and you lose everything.
Again most humanoids don't realize is that all judges are judges because they could not make it as a lawyers. In other words they are not qualified to be judges. It's a crap shoot if you cannot pay the fee of a legal insider that can get to a judge.
The cost of a lawsuit to defend (in my case property rights) will reach $100,000. The wealthy know this and the average person does not until the fees pile up. What happens after you are in debt up to your neck the opposing side will make an offer to settle. Then you must decide take the offer or risk having a good o boy judge make a decision and you lose everything.
Again most humanoids don't realize is that all judges are judges because they could not make it as a lawyers. In other words they are not qualified to be judges. It's a crap shoot if you cannot pay the fee of a legal insider that can get to a judge.
I dealt with Judge Stevens when he was in family court, and he was lazy, unethical, unfair, biased and hostile. He showed no concern for the well-being of the children - in my case and others.
The Santa Cruz court system has been corrupt for decades, including Art Danner, Melissa Berenge (supposed court investigator) and others. I wouldn't be surprised if they're bought off on a regular basis. I'm amazed they still have their jobs.
The Santa Cruz court system has been corrupt for decades, including Art Danner, Melissa Berenge (supposed court investigator) and others. I wouldn't be surprised if they're bought off on a regular basis. I'm amazed they still have their jobs.
I have recently filed a complaint with the Judicial Review Committee against Paul Burdick. Following his issuance of a bogus Order where he had no jurisdiction, gave no notice to third parties and encumbered assets without requireing an undertaking, I posted the web site http://www.judgeburdick.info.
I then sent emails to no less than 50 Santa Cruz attorney's informing them of Burdick's actions and sent the url inthe email. Following Burdick's act of incompetence he again issued a retaliatory Order against me, my friends and family further restriciting the sale or transfer of their personal assets. Burdick is incompetent, doesnt care about legal jurisdiction and in fact during the hearing on the Motion asked Planitiff's counsel "how it was" that he had jurisdicition. While Plaintiff's counsel never answered Burdick issued the order in any case.
Judge Sam Stevens is another good old boy, just ask Dale Dawson, yet another Santa Cruz good old boy or the grotesque piece of work known as Austin Comstock, who ought to be called Austin SuckCock! The attorney's in Santa Cruz are nto "home town" out of town lawyers and to negotiate settlements in chambers failing to consider the merits of the case or their clients interests.
I then sent emails to no less than 50 Santa Cruz attorney's informing them of Burdick's actions and sent the url inthe email. Following Burdick's act of incompetence he again issued a retaliatory Order against me, my friends and family further restriciting the sale or transfer of their personal assets. Burdick is incompetent, doesnt care about legal jurisdiction and in fact during the hearing on the Motion asked Planitiff's counsel "how it was" that he had jurisdicition. While Plaintiff's counsel never answered Burdick issued the order in any case.
Judge Sam Stevens is another good old boy, just ask Dale Dawson, yet another Santa Cruz good old boy or the grotesque piece of work known as Austin Comstock, who ought to be called Austin SuckCock! The attorney's in Santa Cruz are nto "home town" out of town lawyers and to negotiate settlements in chambers failing to consider the merits of the case or their clients interests.
Know your rights. County has concealed due process since 1976. Any adverse decision, determination or order is State mandated to be appealed before an independent, citizen occupied, Housing or Local Appeals Board.
http://sites.google.com/site/thetaintsantacruz/Home
http://www.straighttalknews.org
http://www.freedomadvocates.org
http://www.capropertyrights.org
http://sites.google.com/site/thetaintsantacruz/Home
http://www.straighttalknews.org
http://www.freedomadvocates.org
http://www.capropertyrights.org
For more information:
http://www.straighttalknews.org
I'm glad indybay has (unlike almost ayy of IndyMedia) been able to remain a fixture for so long. The subject of this post continues to be a problem - victims are silenced by money. The courts here are so blatantly corrupt it's not believable.
Why people shake their head in wonder about how such a"liberal" city as Santa Cruz often inflicts such massive injustice - take your question to the court.
We need court observers. I plan to start next week.
Join me if you can.
Why people shake their head in wonder about how such a"liberal" city as Santa Cruz often inflicts such massive injustice - take your question to the court.
We need court observers. I plan to start next week.
Join me if you can.
For more information:
http://indyradio.info
Has anyone been successful as a pro per against big gun attorneys in his town?
Judge Gallagher ordered me today not to irrigate anything on my property, or to garden at all on my ten acre property. I have an organic farm and the neighbors want me out, as I am not rich like them... The County wants me out too, as they have a Civil and Criminal case against me for farming on my land and not having a legal house.
It is really a case of malicious prosecution, as I sued County twice in Federal COurt for Civil RIghts violations, and they settled out of Court twice... I have a third CR case pending in Federal Court!
How dare a man appearing Pro Per stand up for his Rights in my Court!... I can hear them yelling
Judge Gallagher ordered me today not to irrigate anything on my property, or to garden at all on my ten acre property. I have an organic farm and the neighbors want me out, as I am not rich like them... The County wants me out too, as they have a Civil and Criminal case against me for farming on my land and not having a legal house.
It is really a case of malicious prosecution, as I sued County twice in Federal COurt for Civil RIghts violations, and they settled out of Court twice... I have a third CR case pending in Federal Court!
How dare a man appearing Pro Per stand up for his Rights in my Court!... I can hear them yelling
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$120.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network