Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net" <rraschio@gorge.net> Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 11:44 AM Subject: Here's a case to check out
Judicial Watch: Here's a case to Check out: Hummasti v. Ali, Et. Al., 06-1710-BR (OR. US DC.)
How can Plaintiff be represented in Civil RICO case by "Counsel of Record" when Counsel of Record was suspended by the Oregon State Bar for NOT representing Plaintiff and Resigned from the California State Bar for admittedly not withdrawing from Plaintiff's case in a timely manner in 2008? Milo Petranovich did not withdraw until September 2012 after District Court ruled against Plaintiff in August 2012 reasoning that "Local Rule 83-9b prohibited Plaintiff from filing her own pleadings" and Plaintiff was denied new counsel, a protection and safe passage order and was assaulted and arrested while fleeing domestic violence and attempting to return to Israel? If Plaintiff was NOT entitled to file own Motions and Pleadings,as per the latest ruling in August 2012, (denying Motions for New Counsel, Safe Passage and Return, a Protection Order and Witness Security) how could Court rule on Rule 60b3 Motion to Correct the Judgement for fraud, inter alia, and Deny said Motion as untimely (when there is no time limit on making a Motion to Correct a Judgment)? If Plaintiff was actually represented by Counsel of Record, Court should not have ruled on Rule 60b3 Motion and rejected the Motion outright as it did in August 2012 when it rejected Plaintiff's Safe Passage, New Counsel, and Protection/Witness Security Motions. If Plaintiff was not represented by Counsel of Record, due to Counsel's informal withdrawal and his later OSB Suspension and his resignation from the California State Bar, then the US District Court should have at the very least Ordered New Counsel to be appointed to Represent Plaintiff and held Milo Petranovich in contempt and ordered sanctions against Petranovich. The Court cannot have it both ways: either Plaintiff can file own Motions and Pleadings as was the case with the Rule 60b3 Motion; or Plaintiff cannot file own Motions and Pleadings as was the case with the Motions for New Counsel, Protection Safe Passage and Witness Security Orders. This inconsistency in the record is grounds for appeal and raises the question of the Competency of the Court to adjudicate this case, or the question of the bias of the court for holding inconsistent positions wherein both rulings have been to the detriment and prejudice of the Plaintiff causing irrepairable injury to Plaintiff's person, property and reputation. <http://www.scribd.com/doc/127503357/In-RE-Hummasti> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/120538616/Petranovich-Resignation-Before-the-CaliforniaState-Bar> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/102234538/12-J-10703-Petranovich-California-State-BarORDER> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/78349253/Petranovich-Suspension-Order-by-Oregon-State-Bar> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/123801532/International-Strategy-and-Assessment-Center-sLibel-and-Slander-too-Is-Petranovich-subject-to-a-Libel-and-Slander-civil-action-forcausation> <http://www.scribd.com/doc/123799587/What-Constitutes-Libel-and-Slander-via-the-WWW>
What I do know is someone better fix this or a Petition for sciar fascius writ is next!
4. At the conclusion of any hearing, or within twenty-one (21) days if no response is filed by the attorney, the presiding judge or master will enter a final order. A copy of the order will be mailed to the attorney and the Oregon State Bars Discipline Committee.
<http://www.ord.uscourts.gov/index.php/attorneys/local-rules/local-rules-of-civilprocedure-2013/830-lr-83-rules-and-directives-by-the-district-court128>