måndag 8 februari 1999 kl. 09:00:00 UTC+1 skrev James Kibo Parry:
> In misc.legal, Archimedes Plutonium (Archimedes...@dartmouth.edu) wrote:
> > My lawsuit against Dartmouth was dismissed.
> Gee, and I would have thought you would have gotten used to having your
> wacky ideas dismissed by other people.
> > Perhaps for technical
> > reasons of pro se. Perhaps a trained lawyer would have done
> > differently, such as writing up the complaint sheet, that the case
> > would still be active.
> Yes, that is a good suggestion, perhaps if you had submitted your case in
> writing instead of as a musical dance number they might have listened.
> > However, in the interim of this lawsuit I found out from the Dartmouth
> > newpaper that the Governor of the State of New Hampshire is a member of
> > the board of trustees of Dartmouth. So, what I am wondering is whether
> > any lawsuit involving Dartmouth would get a fair and just hearing in
> > court? Or is it highly slanted in favor of Dartmouth simply because the
> > chief of state, the governor is also a Dartmouth trustee?
> I am sure the governor spends a LOT of his day worrying about you.
> > My lawsuit against Dartmouth involved the misappropriation of
> > handicapped workers yearly pay raises. If I had won such a court
> > battle, the negative publicity to Dartmouth would have been unwanted.
> > So something as sensitive as this would have been wanted to be swept
> > under the carpet the fastest and easiest way-- to dismiss the case.
> So, in what sense are you potwashers considered handicapped?
> Besides your inability to write lawsuits that the judge takes seriously.
> I don't think you get to use the special parking space just for being a bozo.
>
> > And, I was never even allowed the process of "Discovery" in my
> > lawsuit. To gain the particular data of the misappropriation of pay
> > raise money. A motion of stay and a motion to dismiss was entered
> > simultaneously and granted.
> Well, why didn't you move to dismiss the motion to dismiss? Duh!!!
> And it looks like you have yet to learn the legal doctrine of "NO GIVEBACKS".
> I CALL COOTIES ON ARCHIE, NO GIVEBACKS!!! ALSO I MOVE TO DISMISS EVERYTHING
> HE SAYS IN ADVANCE!!! THEN I SECOND MY MOTION!!! THEN I THIRD MY MOTION
> TIMESED BY INFINITY TO THE INFINITY POWER PLUS ONE ZILLION!!!
>
> > It would be easy for the Governor to call the courthouse and to talk
> > about such and such a case. And of course the judges all know that the
> > Governor is a Dartmouth trustee. And it would be very easy for a judge
> > to simply "dismiss" the case without giving any merit to any of the
> > legal issues.
> >
> > So, can any lawsuit against Dartmouth, considering that the Governor
> > of New Hampshire is a trustee, receive a fair and just hearing?
> >
> > I have read the Superior Court Rule for Motion for Reconsideration
> Wow, you've read a rule. You're almost .0000001% of the way to getting your
> law degree.
> > and it reads thus:
> >
> > R 59 - A (1) A motion for reconsideration or other post-decision
> > relief shall be filed within ten (10) days of the date on the Clerk's
> > written notice of the order or decision... The motion shall state, with
> > particular clarity, points of law or fact that the Court has overlooked
> > or misapprehended and shall contain such argument in support of the
> > motion as the movant desires to present; but the motion shall not
> > exceed ten (10) pages.
> >
> > And I understand that the court need not even reply to a motion of
> > reconsideration.
> That's why I'm better than the court, Archie, unlike them I still reply
> to your nutty rants. Now let's hug!
>
> > Can someone tell me, whether I can file the same charges in criminal
> > court, that of misappropriation, and thereby the court is obliged to
> > obtain the data and facts that I was denied in "Discovery" process? How
> > does criminal court work? Do I just enter a sheet of charges?
> Arch, for once you're behaving rationally -- I suspect that bringing
> charges _before_ finding out "How does criminal court work?" would be a
> bad idea. However, I suggest that after you go into the court and act
> like a bozo you don't tell the judge, "I know how criminal court works,
> I asked some guys on the Internet!"
> Maybe you should watch some "Schoolhouse Rock" episodes first or something.
> > What irks me about the case being dismissed is that I was denied the
> > process of discovery. Courts have their procedures that they so much
> > want people to follow. And I, would like to see my case given the same
> > respect of procedural correctness. To slap a Stay Motion simultaneously
> > with a Dismiss Motion, I feel I have been cheated of the legal
> > procedures.
> Yeah! To be fair, judges should let anyone who doesn't know anything about
> the law do whatever the heck they want!
>
> Even Charles Manson could represent himself better than you could.
> Hey, maybe you could hire him to be your lawyer! Then at least you'd only
> be the second most craziest person in the room.
> > I do not know if an appeal to the New Hampshire Supreme Court would
> > do any good. Maybe the court systems are so overloaded that the judges
> > have a line drawn between smallish cases and pressing cases, and all
> > those smallish cases are dismissed routinely just to unburden the
> > courts.
> Oh, yeah, I'm sure your complaints written on wacky little cocktail napkins
> with random strings of legal-sounding words on them are an enormous
> burden on our gigantic legal system.
> Have you considered going to Science Court? It airs right after
> "Schoolhouse Rock".
> -- K.
> Archie, instead of being your own lawyer,
> maybe you should try being your own judge.
Shocker it was dismissed.