840 replies to this topic

[NakPPI]

Davey, on 01 November 2011 - 08:16 AM, said:

There might not be anything set in stone but I imagine there will come a point in time that any further delays would be excessive, unprofessional, and perhaps unethical.  Aren't there ethics boards or ethical oversight committees for those in law?

Lol! If it was an ethics violation for a judge to take her time before making a historical constitutional ruling we would have no judges. There are ethics rules, but the judge is not violating any.

[frankw438]

NakPPI, on 01 November 2011 - 08:36 AM, said:

Davey, on 01 November 2011 - 08:16 AM, said:

There might not be anything set in stone but I imagine there will come a point in time that any further delays would be excessive, unprofessional, and perhaps unethical.  Aren't there ethics boards or ethical oversight committees for those in law?

Lol! If it was an ethics violation for a judge to take her time before making a historical constitutional ruling we would have no judges. There are ethics rules, but the judge is not violating any.

Palmer v DC sat untouched for 18 months before a new judge was assigned to the case, and it STILL hasn't been decided. I hope we don't see that kind of delay here.

-- Frank

[TyGuy]

I'm not going to pester the judge, but I was wondering what's to keep the judge from never ruling?

[snubjob]

TyGuy, on 01 November 2011 - 09:58 AM, said:

I'm not going to pester the judge, but I was wondering what's to keep the judge from never ruling?

Nothing

[bob]

snubjob, on 01 November 2011 - 04:24 PM, said:

TyGuy, on 01 November 2011 - 09:58 AM, said:

I'm not going to pester the judge, but I was wondering what's to keep the judge from never ruling?

Nothing

She can't ignore it forever, but she can delay for a long time.

[PPK]

bob, on 01 November 2011 - 04:45 PM, said:

She can't ignore it forever

We keep thinking that, anyway.

[Federal Farmer]

PPK, on 01 November 2011 - 06:33 PM, said:

bob, on 01 November 2011 - 04:45 PM, said:

She can't ignore it forever

We keep thinking that, anyway.

She's bound to be promoted or retired eventually...

[mrmagloo]

Federal Farmer, on 01 November 2011 - 07:02 PM, said:

PPK, on 01 November 2011 - 06:33 PM, said:

bob, on 01 November 2011 - 04:45 PM, said:

She can't ignore it forever

We keep thinking that, anyway.

She's bound to be promoted or retired eventually...

That's an interesting thought FF !!

Does a judge have any obligation to complete their backlog prior to moving on, unless of course, it's the forever kind?    

[Tvandermyde]

My understqnding is that twice a year judges have to make a report on cases sitting on their docket for more than 6 months and have to jusitify it.  The last report was do at the end of september.

[mrmagloo]

Well that's encouraging to know. At least we'll know she has to have a good excuse ready in 5 months. I wonder if those are public? that would sure give us insight on where she's leaning at least.

Edited by mrmagloo, 01 November 2011 - 07:42 PM.

[NakPPI]

Someone sent a letter to judge myerscough about this case... I sincerely hope it wasn't from our side. (online docket shows the judge sent a copy of the letter to all parties.)

Todd--any idea of what the letter was about?

Edited by NakPPI, 02 November 2011 - 03:23 PM.

[mauserme]

NakPPI, on 02 November 2011 - 03:22 PM, said:

Someone sent a letter to judge myerscough about this case... I sincerely hope it wasn't from our side. (online docket shows the judge sent a copy of the letter to all parties.)

Todd--any idea of what the letter was about?

Sounds to me like you're trying to cover your tracks

[NakPPI]

mauserme, on 02 November 2011 - 03:30 PM, said:

NakPPI, on 02 November 2011 - 03:22 PM, said:

Someone sent a letter to judge myerscough about this case... I sincerely hope it wasn't from our side. (online docket shows the judge sent a copy of the letter to all parties.)

Todd--any idea of what the letter was about?

Sounds to me like you're trying to cover your tracks

Lol there are a lot of stupid ways to lose a law license. Ex parte communication to a federal judge would certainly be a fast track!

[Getzapped]

Where can you find the online docket?  I just have the link to the opinions.

[Sigma]

what does all of this mean

[NakPPI]

Getzapped, on 02 November 2011 - 03:37 PM, said:

Where can you find the online docket?  I just have the link to the opinions.

There is nothing to see. Everything from today  is sealed, which is what peaked my interest...

[NakPPI]

Sigma, on 02 November 2011 - 03:42 PM, said:

what does all of this mean

Some numb nuts sent a letter to the judge, which is a big no no...

[Sigma]

Oh gosh I really hope it wasnt some one from here or on our side

[mrmagloo]

God, please don't let that be the case!

Any idiot knows to corner judges in the parking lot.

j/k !!!

[ming]

deleted

Edited by ming, 03 November 2011 - 03:50 AM.

[ming]

From the Docket:

011-11-02 35 0 TEXT ORDER: The Court has received a letter in reference to this case that it has forwarded by United States Postal Service mail to the Parties. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 11/2/2011. (VM, ilcd) (Entered: 11/02/2011)
2011-11-02 36 0 +++ SEALED DOCUMENT - ORIGINAL DOCUMENT UNREDACTED Letter. (VM, ilcd) (Entered: 11/02/2011)

A link to the docket (see post #278):

http://thefiringline...=416973&page=12

Edited by ming, 03 November 2011 - 03:50 AM.

[tysonu74]

Interesting,  I hope its a good thing for us.  Wonder why its sealed.

[colt-45]

tysonu74, on 03 November 2011 - 05:15 AM, said:

Interesting, I hope its a good thing for us. Wonder why its sealed.

i wonder how big a 35 text order is, is it 35 words or 35 pages?

[TyGuy]

mrmagloo, on 02 November 2011 - 04:14 PM, said:

God, please don't let that be the case!

Any idiot knows to corner judges in the parking lot.

j/k !!!

Thanks for the laugh!

[Molly B.]

NakPPI, on 02 November 2011 - 03:45 PM, said:

Some numb nuts sent a letter to the judge, which is a big no no...

I do hope all our members here know contacting a judge about an active case is indeed a huge no no.

[NakPPI]

35 is just the number for the entry on the electronic docket, it's not a page number count.

As for the content of the letter, there is no reason to speculate. I will say that jail house "lawyers" and local crazies send letters to judges all the time, so my best guess is some violence victim wrote a letter expressing a point of view. The judge will pay it no mind, she just has an ethical obligation to tell everyone in the case that she received it.

The sealing could be for any number of reasons, there could be personal information in it, etc. that the judge doesn't want the whole world to see, crazies dig up all kinds of bizarre things.

[Getzapped]

It doesn't say what the letter is or where it originated?  is it just an assumption that a citizen sent it?

[NakPPI]

Getzapped, on 03 November 2011 - 08:13 AM, said:

It doesn't say what the letter is or where it originated?  is it just an assumption that a citizen sent it?

It's an assumption that the parties to the case know to follow the rules.  Thus the letter had to come from a third party.

[Getzapped]

OK, well how can a third party letter affect this?  Do they think that it can affect the judges ruling?  This is the first I have ever seen anything like this so forgive my ignorance!!

[NakPPI]

Getzapped, on 03 November 2011 - 08:53 AM, said:

OK, well how can a third party letter affect this?  Do they think that it can affect the judges ruling?  This is the first I have ever seen anything like this so forgive my ignorance!!

The Letter won't effect the case at all. I'm hoping that the letter ends up being comic relief from some nut bag. Crazy people write great stuff. Crazies have been known to record maritime liens against judges' HOUSES, etc.