rruff, I'm not under any illusions, and maybe the worst thing for me to have happened, ironically, was, two weeks after I even learned what a writ of mandamus was, in my first briefs against my adversaries, to file two writ petitions in the California Court of Appeal against the brokers and then have BOTH of them granted by the Court of Appeal. As an attorney, I'm sure you realize how often writ petitions are granted, especially in Cali, maybe 5%, and when a pro se files them? LOL - 1-in-1000 would be a generous estimate. Well, one of them was 4 pages long. Maybe that's why I got it, and it was hard to file that one without sounding arrogant, but the law was clear and I heeded Judge Aldisert's advice to "hit [the appellate court] between the eyes immediately with the strongest argument, which in those writs was a Supreme Court ruling barring arbitration that the Superior Court completely ignored, and a new ruling that by some miracle was handed down 4 weeks after the Superior Cour ruled, which extended the earlier law. Even one of the firms effectively conceded responding to the writs that "maybe" (lol) I had a point. What was funny was when I dismissed damage claims and thereby arbitration the SFSC went ballistic, and issued an order to show cause why all parties should not be sanctioned for not completing arbitration. Clearly, SFSC didn't appreciate the successful writs, and didn't want any trial, but the appellate court had ordered one, so that was that (but for reasons I can't discuss we didn't have on in the end.)
When we got to the Eastern District of Virginia, probably overconfident from the writ success, I hit my adversaries with a number of sanctions motions for filing completely bogus factual claims in the courts and didn't get one of them. Defense counsel wisely "encouraged" me to keep the motions coming with some outrageous briefs, also by complaining during the discovery conference that I was overloading them with discovery requests (authorized by the Court). During that hearing a magistrate judge smiled at me, sitting there in chambers with about 8 attorneys and another half-dozen on CC from Chicago, Dallas and San Francisco that maybe I should consider retaining counsel, because they were going to bury me during discovery. I mildly replied, they can certainly try ;-). And speaking of local attorneys Berber and Moor clearly planned it that way hiring...The President of the Virginia State Bar, he who called my claims "unsubstantiated and outrageous" even though I had piles of evidence and now have a RICO co-conspirator (Rea) directly implicating his clients. Well the Bar President got exasperated during the meeting saying I clogged his inbox with discovery requests right after the judge said they would try to bury me (lol - I have had visions of 18-wheelers showing up at my door one day, we'll see), and then I said OK how about CD-rom service then, compromise, they argued for what reason I don't know and the judge ruled well that sounds fair to me and efficient.
In VA defense counsel got into the habit of sending me long lectures about do this do that and naturally I did the opposite (they knew I would, I've learned since then to address this kind of reverse psychology like when the Bar Prez said sue in Texas and I accepted the invite this time, much to their obvious chagrin). I filed volumes and volumes of evidence, way over 10,000 pages, and that's why Magistrate Judge O'Grady with a smile said in Court his clerk was very afraid I might file two dozen boxes of evidence as an appendix to my affidavit of damages. This led to Berber and Moor being dismissed on a lack of jurisdiction, when the fact is it's right there in the RICO statute that there was jd over both of them because I served them in the US, so we see if you're a pro se, you better not make the Court's job any tougher than it already is or else.
You have to learn and I hope I have. The amended complaint could not be reasonably shortened much more than I did, considering the allegations, but this time around I haven't filed sanctions motions, or for injunctions, or loads of evidence, and I've organized the materials better than last time, for when the time comes. Berber and Moor clearly attempted a repeat of VA by moving for sanctions, assuming I'd retaliate with some of my own invective, but not so fast amigos not this time, and so they fell into their own trap, this time they filed the invective and this time they are the ones overloading the court with exhibits like all the e-mails which clearly did not impress Judge Sparks one bit (and I doubt that theatrical entrance in Court with the steel hand-truck and seven huge boxes didn't either.)
If I did my job right, there won't be any way to dismiss, and discovery will be ordered and a trial calendar set. I may be pro se, but I hope and believe that the Court is not going to treat me any better, or any worse, than it would a lawyer - and Judge Sparks indicated that in one of his orders when he stated that a Rule 11 violation by either a lawyer or a pro se - makes no difference who it is - usually results in sanctions in his Court.
When judges see a pro se case, particularly one with 1000's of pages LOL, they literally pee their pants. They may smile at you, but they are generally trying to find ways to get rid of you. Why? They can handle 10 cases at least in the time they spend with you. Further, if there is a "local" lawyer on the other side, the court will be dealing with him in the future. So long as he can get rid of you without some sort of report to the judicial conduct board, the judge really will try to get rid of you. |
