RE: City of Portland, Oregon | Office of City Attorney. Letter dated November 10, 2009
Subject: STIPULATED MOTION BETWEEN PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANTS TO ALLOW REVIEW OF POLICE REPORTS AND RECORDS.
Dear Mr. Considered the Number One Civil Rights Attorney in the State of Oregon:
I understand you charge no less than $400.00 per hour. And, at this time you do not take any new case/s because you're basically retired. But, your incredible spirit to be the true attorney-at-law who defends our rights as Constitutional freedom loving human beings, draws you to be available from time-to-time - to provide the pro se litigant, et al. our necessary understanding to be intelligent in the court system, in particular the Federal or United States District Court* (*See below.)
A number of legal issues discussed.
Plaintiff told you the city attorney was attempting to have plaintiff sign the STIPULATED MOTION noted above in Subject.
RULE NUMBER ONE: NEVER SIGN A RELEASE THE OTHER SIDE PREPARES.
In examining the paper work sent by the city attorneys' office, there are two sets of STIPULATED MOTIONS, and therefore, two sets of six numbered ALLOWANCES for the city attorney and defendants (totalling 12) admissions by plaintiff to the claims by city attorney and defendants: giving them carte blanche in setting a first record in/with/through the court.
November 2, 2009, the STIPULATED MOTION notes Number 6: Hence, the parties agree and jointly move the Court for an Order allowing that the police reports be unsealed and that counsel for defendants be allowed to obtain and utilize copies of any and all police reports and records related to the September 22, 2007, incident.
November 4, 2009, the STIPULATED MOTION notes Number 6: Accordingly, the parties agree to the Order Allowing Review of Police Reports and Records, as submitted in case # and to be granted/signed by the Honorable United States District Court Judge.
Notes from scribbling and memory:
The United States District Court of Oregon, LOCAL RULES, and The FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Found on-line. Smart enough to study these rules and know as much as a first year fresh out of law school attorney.
IGNORE LETTERS: but, MOTION FILED, MUST RESPOND.
City attorney STOLE plaintiffs' record/s. Plaintiffs' husband can face criminal charges for practicing law without a license, and communication with city attorneys' office regarding plaintiffs' case is ... a set-up by city attorney ... et al.?
Comments