Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Bob Pickle on September 22, 2011, 12:31:46 PM
-
We shipped off our petition on Sept. 7. It arrived at the Supreme Court on Sept. 9, and was docketed on Sept. 12. 3ABN and Danny have until Oct. 12 to respond.
I got a copy of a letter from Simpson today that he sent to the Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, stating that he was not going to file a response unless required.
-
It seems Greg Simpson is pretty busy these day's? My attorney's have until the 4th or 5th of October to respond to the motion to dismiss. Then 3ABN has so many thereafter.
-
Not going to respond unless required? :scratch:
-
What determines if Simpson has to respond or not?
And what is certiorari?
-
What determines if Simpson has to respond or not?
And what is certiorari?
From http://www.supremecourt.gov/ctrules/2010RulesoftheCourt.pdf (http://www.supremecourt.gov/ctrules/2010RulesoftheCourt.pdf):
Rule 15. Briefs in Opposition; Reply Briefs; Supplemental Briefs
1. A brief in opposition to a petition for a writ of certiorari may be filed by the respondent in any case, but is not mandatory except in a capital case, see Rule 14.1(a), or when ordered by the Court.
My guess is that the reason Simpson doesn't want to respond is that Danny and 3ABN don't want to pay him to. After all, most lawyers never make it to the Supreme Court, and here Simpson has an opportunity to do so. If you were Simpson, wouldn't you want to, unless you had to do it on your own dime?
From http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Acertiorari (http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Acertiorari):
Noun: A writ or order by which a higher court reviews a decision of a lower court: "an order of certiorari".
-
It does sound exciting to appear before the Supreme Court!
-
Bob, are you going to post it?
-
Simpson: Mr. Simpson has clearly demonstrated his legal competence. If the court grants the Writ, will he argue the case? Perhaps? However, if he has never argued a winning case before the U.S. Supreme Court many legal advisors would suggest that 3-ABN should retain the services of a law firm that had a proven record of arguing winning cases before that court.
Writ of certiorari: The odds are against it. My legal friends would likely state that it is more likely that Denver will have a 3" snowfall on July 4, 2012 than it is that the Writ will be granted. But, who knows. Due to a typo the Farmers Almanack once published that there would be a snowfall at a time and place where snow had never fallen before at that time and place. It came true and the Farmers Almanack had a rebirth.
My prediction: The names of Bob Pickle, Gailon Joy and 3-ABN will become well known to law school students as they study the rights granted pro se litigants and the mistakes that were made. Is this an inditement against them? No. But, every judicial decision whether for or against provides a learning moment. In that respect, every adverse decision represents a failure to convince the judge and therefore that mistake is a learning moment.
-
Bob, are you going to post it?
Yes, but it may take a little bit before I can.
Simpson: Mr. Simpson has clearly demonstrated his legal competence.
I don't think it was competent of Simpson to assert to the First Circuit that subpoenas were issued after motions that were filed after the subpoenas were issued. It made absolutely no sense. If anything, he should have asserted that the subpoenas were originally issued before the motions were filed, which was the truth.
My legal friends would likely state that it is more likely that Denver will have a 3" snowfall on July 4, 2012 than it is that the Writ will be granted.
A paralegal who has previously prepared a petition for the Supreme Court told me that the Supreme Court grants about 1% of the petitions filed. Shouldn't that be a bit better than Denver getting 3" of snow on July 4, 2012? Or does that happen on July 4 once each century?
My prediction: The names of Bob Pickle, Gailon Joy and 3-ABN will become well known to law school students ....
Why leave out the name of one of the four parties to the case? Why leave out the name of Danny Shelton, individually?
-
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/11-312.htm
-
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/11-312.htm
I don't think the Supreme Court's use of "et. al." justifies the omission of Danny Shelton's name from the discussion.
Of course, it is to Danny's advantage to omit his name from the discussion, which obscures the fact that he sued us as an individual claiming that we lied when we allegedly said that he was privately enriching himself at 3ABN's expense, and then allegedly had 3ABN foot all his personal, private legal expenses in that same suit. Certainly law students would want to discuss the utter stupidity of such a move!
-
For those of you who are interested in the number and type of orders that the Supreme Court is asked to order, go to the home page and click on the link to the court orders. As of the October 3 posting, it consisted of 89 pages. The most common request is for the one that Bob and Gailon has asked of the Court. Compare, if you wish, the number granted with the number denied. Note that of the number granted, the number that will be heard by the Supreme Court and compare with the number that are remanded to the respective Appealate Court.
By the way, they are listed in numberical order. For a quick check to see if Bob and Gailon's request has been granted, look for # 11-312.
-
For those of you who are interested in the number and type of orders that the Supreme Court is asked to order, go to the home page and click on the link to the court orders. As of the October 3 posting, it consisted of 89 pages. The most common request is for the one that Bob and Gailon has asked of the Court. Compare, if you wish, the number granted with the number denied. Note that of the number granted, the number that will be heard by the Supreme Court and compare with the number that are remanded to the respective Appealate Court.
By the way, they are listed in numberical order. For a quick check to see if Bob and Gailon's request has been granted, look for # 11-312.
What is th link for this?
-
The following page is one that has the link to the orders of the court.
Click on the link on the left, then in the pop-up and finally the <orders of the court>
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/11-312.htm
-
The next step is for the petition to be distributed. Maybe two weeks later there will be a conference, after which an order may issue.
-
Can't find # 11-312 in the list.
-
The court has not acted yet. So, not on the list.