[00:00.000 --> 00:05.680]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:05.680 --> 00:11.520]  Republican Senator Judd Gregg has withdrawn his name from consideration as Barack Obama's
[00:11.520 --> 00:17.080]  Commerce Secretary, another blow to an administration seeking to put a series of Cabinet problems
[00:17.080 --> 00:19.320]  behind it.
[00:19.320 --> 00:24.000]  Natural News says Barack Obama's economic stimulus package designates nearly a billion
[00:24.000 --> 00:31.280]  dollars for new vaccinations for children and 545 million dollars for genomics programs.
[00:31.280 --> 00:37.040]  A federal judge accepted the Pentagon's argument that strapping hunger strikers at Guantanamo
[00:37.040 --> 00:40.600]  into a feeding chair is safe and humane.
[00:40.600 --> 00:45.520]  Top of the hour news brought to you by INN World Report.
[00:45.520 --> 00:50.240]  Representative Barney Frank told the Rachel Maddow Show this week new regulations for
[00:50.240 --> 00:54.600]  the country's financial activities will be in place by the summer.
[00:54.600 --> 01:00.080]  Frank said the new regulations will be comparable to what FDR did during the New Deal.
[01:00.080 --> 01:05.240]  Bad subprime loans will be banned and excessive kinds of leverage restricted.
[01:05.240 --> 01:09.920]  Frank's comments were in stark contrast to the recent silence on the issue of regulation
[01:09.920 --> 01:15.200]  from Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, a long-time advocate of letting the financial markets
[01:15.200 --> 01:17.200]  police themselves.
[01:17.200 --> 01:22.600]  Frank also promised tough rules would be put in place at the Security and Exchange Commission.
[01:22.600 --> 01:29.680]  Critics note that the SEC is now headed by Mary Shapiro, another financial industry insider.
[01:29.680 --> 01:33.920]  Frank said new rules for Wall Street were coming and that from now on Congress will
[01:33.920 --> 01:35.920]  not depend on Wall Street's goodwill.
[01:35.920 --> 01:42.920]  For more news and exclusive interviews see the complete International Newsnet World Report
[01:42.920 --> 01:52.360]  each weekday evening on Free Speech TV, 9-4-1-5, Dish Network or visit our website www.innworldreport.net.
[01:52.360 --> 01:58.760]  A global drought is causing a drop in agricultural production of 20 to 40 percent.
[01:58.760 --> 02:03.760]  The drought in northern China, the worst in 50 years, is worsening and summer harvest
[02:03.760 --> 02:05.520]  is now threatened.
[02:05.520 --> 02:11.000]  Australia has been experiencing an unrelenting drought since 2004 and 41 percent of Australia's
[02:11.000 --> 02:16.240]  agriculture continues to suffer from the worst drought in 117 years.
[02:16.240 --> 02:20.120]  California is facing its worst drought in recorded history.
[02:20.120 --> 02:25.000]  In Argentina, the worst drought in a half century has turned its once fertile soil to
[02:25.000 --> 02:28.880]  dust and pushed the country into a state of emergency.
[02:28.880 --> 02:32.480]  Food production across Africa has suffered because of the lack of rain.
[02:32.480 --> 02:35.400]  Kenya has been without rain for 18 months.
[02:35.400 --> 02:39.800]  Severe drought in northeastern Uganda has left the country on the brink of a humanitarian
[02:39.800 --> 02:41.400]  catastrophe.
[02:41.400 --> 02:47.440]  Nine other African and 16 Middle East and Central Asian nations are suffering from drought.
[02:47.440 --> 02:54.040]  For more news and exclusive interviews see the complete International Newsnet World Report
[02:54.040 --> 03:10.000]  at www.innworldreport.net.
[03:25.040 --> 03:33.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[03:33.040 --> 03:40.840]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[03:40.840 --> 03:47.040]  I try to do the sleeping, the dog always barking, disturbing me but I'm relaxing.
[03:47.040 --> 03:53.040]  Neighbor dog don't stop it, I give him some hot ketchup, chocolate and cheese.
[03:53.040 --> 03:55.040]  How could that be true?
[03:55.040 --> 03:57.040]  Now he can't move back in.
[03:57.040 --> 03:59.040]  Neighbor come and ask you when.
[03:59.040 --> 04:01.040]  Tell me how did that mix in?
[04:01.040 --> 04:03.040]  Tell the neighbor what's happening.
[04:03.040 --> 04:05.040]  Six or one, ten, half a dozen.
[04:05.040 --> 04:07.040]  Take the sleeping neighbor.
[04:07.040 --> 04:09.040]  Take the dog out of your yard.
[04:09.040 --> 04:11.040]  Out of my backyard.
[04:11.040 --> 04:13.040]  He's disturbing me.
[04:13.040 --> 04:21.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my backyard.
[04:21.040 --> 04:29.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my backyard.
[04:29.040 --> 04:31.040]  I give him sponge and eat it.
[04:31.040 --> 04:33.040]  Give him red and eat it.
[04:33.040 --> 04:35.040]  Watch out these outside guests in.
[04:35.040 --> 04:37.040]  Wooden stuff from backing.
[04:37.040 --> 04:39.040]  Fasting neighbor, keep it.
[04:39.040 --> 04:41.040]  Looking over, seeking.
[04:41.040 --> 04:43.040]  Your dog in my yard, yeah.
[04:43.040 --> 04:45.040]  Barking disturbing.
[04:45.040 --> 04:47.040]  When did you start sleeping?
[04:47.040 --> 04:49.040]  Your dog love is barking.
[04:49.040 --> 04:51.040]  Who's got my name crowing?
[04:51.040 --> 04:53.040]  I don't think I'm barking.
[04:53.040 --> 04:55.040]  You know that's a young thing.
[04:55.040 --> 04:57.040]  With me you still are good.
[04:57.040 --> 04:59.040]  Tell me how you like it.
[04:59.040 --> 05:01.040]  How you dog is barking.
[05:01.040 --> 05:03.040]  Let you know I'm warning.
[05:03.040 --> 05:05.040]  But you dog bark too much until.
[05:05.040 --> 05:07.040]  Disturbing neighbor.
[05:07.040 --> 05:09.040]  People getting angry.
[05:09.040 --> 05:11.040]  That's why I give them ketchup.
[05:11.040 --> 05:13.040]  And they dog too much.
[05:13.040 --> 05:15.040]  Now they dog do too well.
[05:15.040 --> 05:17.040]  Now they dog not barking.
[05:17.040 --> 05:23.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[05:23.040 --> 05:25.040]  Get them out, get them out, get them out, get them out.
[05:25.040 --> 05:33.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[05:33.040 --> 05:41.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[05:41.040 --> 05:43.040]  Six of me say something.
[05:43.040 --> 05:45.040]  Half a dozen feel thing.
[05:45.040 --> 05:47.040]  Six of me say one thing.
[05:47.040 --> 05:49.040]  Half a dozen I feel thing.
[05:49.040 --> 05:51.040]  You know like they warning.
[05:51.040 --> 05:53.040]  Get mad when I start arguing.
[05:53.040 --> 05:55.040]  Tell me it's not your business.
[05:55.040 --> 05:57.040]  Let me tell you that one day.
[05:57.040 --> 05:59.040]  Your dog is barking.
[05:59.040 --> 06:05.040]  Neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[06:05.040 --> 06:09.040]  This one goes out to Randy in Austin.
[06:09.040 --> 06:13.040]  Randy, you know.
[06:13.040 --> 06:15.040]  You're calling every night.
[06:15.040 --> 06:17.040]  I love you to death.
[06:17.040 --> 06:18.040]  You're my brother.
[06:18.040 --> 06:19.040]  I love you.
[06:19.040 --> 06:21.040]  But I got to tell you.
[06:21.040 --> 06:25.040]  You don't need no legal advice from me or Randy or anyone else.
[06:25.040 --> 06:27.040]  All you need is a leash, dude.
[06:27.040 --> 06:30.040]  All you need is a fence.
[06:30.040 --> 06:34.040]  Keep your dog in your yard.
[06:34.040 --> 06:36.040]  Okay?
[06:36.040 --> 06:41.040]  Because neighbor, neighbor, get your dog out of my yard.
[06:41.040 --> 06:43.040]  All right, we're going to go back to Ken.
[06:43.040 --> 06:47.040]  Sorry, I've got to have some fun sometimes.
[06:47.040 --> 06:49.040]  Ken, Ken, continue.
[06:49.040 --> 06:51.040]  Okay, yeah, we almost lost me for a while there.
[06:51.040 --> 06:54.040]  I hope everybody heard the last portion.
[06:54.040 --> 06:57.040]  Yeah, I just, Ken couldn't hear me.
[06:57.040 --> 06:59.040]  I was just paraphrasing Mother Hubbard.
[06:59.040 --> 07:01.040]  Ken, Ken, Ken, we heard everything you said.
[07:01.040 --> 07:02.040]  Oh, yeah.
[07:02.040 --> 07:03.040]  In bits and pieces.
[07:03.040 --> 07:07.040]  Yeah, the biggest issue is what we were talking about was the Mother Hubbard objection.
[07:07.040 --> 07:11.040]  I think what Randy was saying was, you know, if it was timely filed,
[07:11.040 --> 07:14.040]  if you can file an objection in advance.
[07:14.040 --> 07:20.040]  And what I was about to tell was a story about how they used to do motions for new trials and stuff.
[07:20.040 --> 07:26.040]  And for a while, the motion for new trials had to be filed within so many days of the final order.
[07:26.040 --> 07:31.040]  The problem was that the judge frequently wouldn't sign the final order in open court.
[07:31.040 --> 07:41.040]  The judge would sign it someplace back in his chambers at some point in time.
[07:41.040 --> 07:44.040]  And if you didn't get a copy of it and know when it was signed,
[07:44.040 --> 07:47.040]  you wouldn't know when to file a motion for new trials.
[07:47.040 --> 07:52.040]  So for a long time, the attorneys would file a motion for new trial right after the trial occurred,
[07:52.040 --> 07:54.040]  but before the order was signed.
[07:54.040 --> 07:57.040]  And the appellate courts were saying, oh, you filed it too soon.
[07:57.040 --> 08:00.040]  You didn't file it within the time period required.
[08:00.040 --> 08:03.040]  So your motion for new trial was ineffective.
[08:03.040 --> 08:06.040]  That's been changed. That's been corrected.
[08:06.040 --> 08:12.040]  Essentially, you could file a motion for new trial and attach it to your original pleading,
[08:12.040 --> 08:14.040]  and then you're covered.
[08:14.040 --> 08:19.040]  Now, I'm not suggesting anybody do that, but technically you can do that.
[08:19.040 --> 08:23.040]  So if you're allowed to file a motion for new trial prematurely,
[08:23.040 --> 08:30.040]  certainly any objection in advance of deviation from the rules should be considered perfectly effective.
[08:30.040 --> 08:35.040]  Exactly. The precedent should carry over to these.
[08:35.040 --> 08:38.040]  Well, the issue is that once you put them on warning,
[08:38.040 --> 08:44.040]  I've got a big problem with the idea that you have to tell people in the court, hey, guys, follow the law.
[08:44.040 --> 08:48.040]  Isn't that their business? Isn't that what they should be doing anyway?
[08:48.040 --> 08:53.040]  And the answer is, yeah, it should be, but that's not how it necessarily is.
[08:53.040 --> 08:57.040]  So we do the best we can, and we make sure that we do strategies
[08:57.040 --> 09:06.040]  that will make it more difficult for them to deviate from what's considered justice.
[09:06.040 --> 09:13.040]  So we're back to the idea of original pleading and the process of doing that.
[09:13.040 --> 09:21.040]  So once you're preparing a cause of action, I guess this was about 45 minutes ago we were on this,
[09:21.040 --> 09:25.040]  once you've decided you have a cause of action against the party
[09:25.040 --> 09:28.040]  and you've decided you're going to go ahead and sue them,
[09:28.040 --> 09:35.040]  one of the things I would suggest is that civil litigation is to always send a letter in advance to the party
[09:35.040 --> 09:37.040]  and see if you can make a deal.
[09:37.040 --> 09:44.040]  And the idea of making deals is always a lot easier than actually going into court.
[09:44.040 --> 09:47.040]  That's why some of the attorneys that I've been just castigating,
[09:47.040 --> 09:51.040]  meaning that you get them for a car accident case and all they do is make deals,
[09:51.040 --> 09:53.040]  as opposed to going to trial.
[09:53.040 --> 09:58.040]  And the difference is making a deal with an insurance company and making a settlement on a car accident case
[09:58.040 --> 10:05.040]  may take, you know, half a dozen letters back and forth and copies of your medical file from your doctor.
[10:05.040 --> 10:12.040]  Whereas the legal process of actually suing to collect is going to be boxes and boxes of documents
[10:12.040 --> 10:19.040]  and expert witnesses and testimony and it's ten times if not a hundred times more complicated.
[10:19.040 --> 10:26.040]  So the issue is that if you can make a deal before going to court, make the deal if you think it's fair.
[10:26.040 --> 10:28.040]  If you don't think it's fair, then go to court.
[10:28.040 --> 10:35.040]  But the issue is that no matter what you do in court with the existing prevailing climate,
[10:35.040 --> 10:37.040]  it's always a crapshoot.
[10:37.040 --> 10:40.040]  You don't know if you're going to get a fair and equitable judge or not.
[10:40.040 --> 10:45.040]  And so weigh that before you start down that road.
[10:45.040 --> 10:49.040]  The issue of once you file the case, one of the things that I tell people,
[10:49.040 --> 10:52.040]  especially if you're the plaintiff, is you've got the cause of action,
[10:52.040 --> 10:58.040]  but let's walk through civil litigation in its entirety in a general sense.
[10:58.040 --> 11:03.040]  Cause of action is filed, the other party has a certain period of time to answer.
[11:03.040 --> 11:07.040]  In most cases, all they have to do is do what's called a general denial,
[11:07.040 --> 11:12.040]  and it's a one-page answer and they've essentially met the requirement that they can save answers
[11:12.040 --> 11:16.040]  to avoid what's called a default judgment.
[11:16.040 --> 11:21.040]  In the process of preparing a case, there's going to be certain facts in order to prove your case
[11:21.040 --> 11:26.040]  that you're going to have to prove, that you're going to have to put forth in front of the court
[11:26.040 --> 11:31.040]  one way or another, and that's going to be evidence.
[11:31.040 --> 11:35.040]  He said, she said, is almost never going to be in front of court for long
[11:35.040 --> 11:39.040]  because there won't be any way for anybody to prove.
[11:39.040 --> 11:43.040]  But when there's actual physical evidence, written documents, photographs,
[11:43.040 --> 11:49.040]  whatever it is to prove that the cause of action is in fact meritorious,
[11:49.040 --> 11:51.040]  you need to get to that.
[11:51.040 --> 11:56.040]  Frequently, the cause of action requires the defendant to produce documents
[11:56.040 --> 12:00.040]  or evidence that you need in order to prove your case.
[12:00.040 --> 12:04.040]  And that's the process what everybody refers to as discovery.
[12:04.040 --> 12:09.040]  Discovery, let's talk about the various instruments, processes of discovery.
[12:09.040 --> 12:18.040]  Discovery is about obtaining documents, testimony, and admission by the other party,
[12:18.040 --> 12:23.040]  and furthering the ability to find other documents and evidence
[12:23.040 --> 12:28.040]  and witnesses that might actually support your allegations.
[12:28.040 --> 12:32.040]  One way to do that is admission itself, and there's a process for doing admissions.
[12:32.040 --> 12:37.040]  And what admissions are is basically a set of questions to the other party
[12:37.040 --> 12:43.040]  that are either admitted as true or denied as false.
[12:43.040 --> 12:45.040]  And you have to be careful about writing the questions.
[12:45.040 --> 12:49.040]  There's many, many books out there about how to do admissions.
[12:49.040 --> 12:52.040]  Generally, there's rules about how many questions you can ask
[12:52.040 --> 12:54.040]  in any one admission document.
[12:54.040 --> 12:56.040]  Some jurisdictions have no limits.
[12:56.040 --> 13:02.040]  But if the other party fails to answer, they're all deemed true.
[13:02.040 --> 13:06.040]  The next instrument that's frequently used per court is interrogatories.
[13:06.040 --> 13:08.040]  Interrogatories are exactly what it sounds like.
[13:08.040 --> 13:09.040]  It's questions.
[13:09.040 --> 13:10.040]  You can ask questions.
[13:10.040 --> 13:14.040]  Generally, courts limit how many questions you can ask the other party.
[13:14.040 --> 13:19.040]  These are always submitted in writing, and they always have to be answered under oath.
[13:19.040 --> 13:22.040]  They can be multiple-part questions, meaning a question one,
[13:22.040 --> 13:27.040]  you can ask the person's name, their address, their phone number, basic information,
[13:27.040 --> 13:32.040]  and still be only one question.
[13:32.040 --> 13:35.040]  Generally speaking, this is how you get information about other people
[13:35.040 --> 13:38.040]  that may know about the case.
[13:38.040 --> 13:43.040]  Generally, questions about interrogatories are asking who's going to be a witness,
[13:43.040 --> 13:48.040]  who has, you know, what are the basic premises of your defense,
[13:48.040 --> 13:53.040]  what elements of your defense, you know, and there's ways to ask those kinds of questions.
[13:53.040 --> 14:00.040]  And what documents are you going to present, and who has these documents
[14:00.040 --> 14:06.040]  that you're going to present to essentially defend your position of not being liable.
[14:06.040 --> 14:10.040]  And what this does is it requires them to identify where these documents are
[14:10.040 --> 14:14.040]  and what these documents are, which then you can do the third discovery,
[14:14.040 --> 14:16.040]  which is production of documents.
[14:16.040 --> 14:21.040]  You can ask for these documents and exhibits and contracts and so forth to be produced.
[14:21.040 --> 14:26.040]  You can either get them copied or you can do an in-camera inspection of some sort.
[14:26.040 --> 14:33.040]  Then the fourth thing you can do for discovery is depositions.
[14:33.040 --> 14:36.040]  Depositions are where you call the other party
[14:36.040 --> 14:39.040]  and you have a meeting at a particular location in time.
[14:39.040 --> 14:45.040]  There's generally a court stenographer there and the parties do it, the principals.
[14:45.040 --> 14:49.040]  If there's a person named in the suit, that party is allowed to be there.
[14:49.040 --> 14:51.040]  Their attorney and counselors are allowed to be there.
[14:51.040 --> 14:58.040]  But other parties are, I mean, other people are not allowed to be there unless you give them permission.
[14:58.040 --> 15:04.040]  You can do videotape deposition in some jurisdictions where you can put a video camera in place.
[15:04.040 --> 15:07.040]  There are provisions and there are processes available
[15:07.040 --> 15:11.040]  for the person without an attorney to do the depositions of the other party.
[15:11.040 --> 15:16.040]  And I always tell people if you do these, always do videotape deposition.
[15:16.040 --> 15:23.040]  When you read a transcript of somebody asking a question and then somebody answering it,
[15:23.040 --> 15:30.040]  it's not the same as when you see the facial expression and the tone or tenor of their voice.
[15:30.040 --> 15:40.040]  If a party is really, really evil and bad, videotape deposition will make them look a lot more guilty
[15:40.040 --> 15:44.040]  and culpable than the transcript of their depositions.
[15:44.040 --> 15:48.040]  And attorneys know this and that's why they do it.
[15:48.040 --> 15:56.040]  I'm trying to think of other, sometimes production of medical documents are necessary.
[15:56.040 --> 16:00.040]  And there's various rules around discovery incidents.
[16:00.040 --> 16:07.040]  You need to do as much gathering of this information without the other party even knowing you're doing it
[16:07.040 --> 16:13.040]  so that you've already got the evidence you need to prove your case.
[16:13.040 --> 16:21.040]  I suggest to many people that what they do is they go ahead and attach to their original pleading admissions,
[16:21.040 --> 16:24.040]  interrogatories, and requests for production of the documents.
[16:24.040 --> 16:28.040]  And you have to look in the various jurisdictions to see what the rules allow.
[16:28.040 --> 16:34.040]  There may be time limits or you may have to wait so much time before you can file the discovery request.
[16:34.040 --> 16:40.040]  But the faster you come out of the gate showing them that you really need visiting,
[16:40.040 --> 16:45.040]  the more likely it is that they're going to come back with some sort of counteroffer indicating a settle.
[16:45.040 --> 16:50.040]  Okay. Okay. Hold on. Hold on, Ken. I want you to talk about that more on the other side.
[16:50.040 --> 16:54.040]  The faster you come out of the gate, the more they're going to come back with a counteroffer.
[16:54.040 --> 17:00.040]  We'll be right back on the other side.
[17:00.040 --> 17:07.040]  Are you looking for an investment that has no stock market risk, has a 100% track record of returning profits,
[17:07.040 --> 17:15.040]  is not affected by fluctuations in oil prices and interest rates, is publicly traded and SEC regulated?
[17:15.040 --> 17:22.040]  If this kind of peace of mind is what you have been looking for in an investment, then life settlements is the investment for you.
[17:22.040 --> 17:28.040]  Our annual rate of return has been 15.83% for the last 17 years.
[17:28.040 --> 17:32.040]  Our investments are insurance and banking commission regulated.
[17:32.040 --> 17:36.040]  Our returns are assured by the largest insurance companies.
[17:36.040 --> 17:42.040]  Even qualified retirement plans such as 401Ks and IRAs are eligible for transfer.
[17:42.040 --> 17:47.040]  We charge absolutely no commissions. 100% of your investment goes to work for you.
[17:47.040 --> 17:57.040]  Please visit sleepwellinvestment.com or call Bill Schober at 817-975-2431.
[17:57.040 --> 18:13.040]  That's sleepwellinvestment.com or call 817-975-2431.
[18:13.040 --> 18:28.040]  Thank you very much.
[18:28.040 --> 18:44.040]  Yeah, I won't. Oh, I won't. I won't let you pull the wool over my eyes.
[18:44.040 --> 18:59.040]  They must refuse your notes, all soaked up in lies. It seems you like your face, but please take some words to the wise.
[18:59.040 --> 19:26.040]  Please stop trying to pull the wool over my eyes.
[19:26.040 --> 19:37.040]  Ooh.
[19:37.040 --> 19:45.040]  An orange is an orange and will never be an apple.
[19:45.040 --> 20:00.040]  This image is enough. It is no tough concept to grapple with. It's just too much to bear. I won't wear your evil shackles.
[20:00.040 --> 20:09.040]  A bluebird is a bluebird and will never be a grackle.
[20:09.040 --> 20:13.040]  Okay, Ken, please continue.
[20:13.040 --> 20:19.040]  Well, we were talking about doing discovery instruments up front with a lawsuit to blast them
[20:19.040 --> 20:23.040]  to show that you really need business because it may make them want to settle.
[20:23.040 --> 20:29.040]  And I don't want to give anybody any false sense of security that just because you do that doesn't settle.
[20:29.040 --> 20:37.040]  But the issue is that the more information and the more evidence you have in hand in advance of the lawsuit
[20:37.040 --> 20:45.040]  and the more you can put up front, the less likely it is for the other side to have any way to defend themselves
[20:45.040 --> 20:52.040]  and get out of it if you continue to do the diligent work in studying exactly what the process is.
[20:52.040 --> 21:02.040]  One of the aspects of this is in an original cause of action, you may be required by statute to do what's called verified pleading.
[21:02.040 --> 21:07.040]  Verified pleadings are just like making the facts in the case when you tell the story.
[21:07.040 --> 21:12.040]  You sign it as an affidavit. There's a notary place and a juror at the bottom.
[21:12.040 --> 21:15.040]  And verified pleadings is just a sworn-through pleading.
[21:15.040 --> 21:18.040]  Now, that doesn't mean you're swearing to the argument.
[21:18.040 --> 21:22.040]  What that means is you're swearing to the facts of the case as told.
[21:22.040 --> 21:28.040]  So if you said certain things happen at a certain date, certain time involving certain people, those are facts.
[21:28.040 --> 21:32.040]  You're not swearing to the argument for the statutory law.
[21:32.040 --> 21:35.040]  The statutory law and arguments are merely legal arguments.
[21:35.040 --> 21:38.040]  They're separate from the actual affidavit part.
[21:38.040 --> 21:46.040]  Even though they're in the same document, it doesn't actually address them.
[21:46.040 --> 21:53.040]  Verified pleadings are required in some cases, and you have to look up statutes based on the cause of action.
[21:53.040 --> 21:59.040]  Usually cases involving finance, somebody keeping the record has to sign an affidavit
[21:59.040 --> 22:04.040]  saying that a person has an account, has a contract, and owes a certain amount of money,
[22:04.040 --> 22:07.040]  and here's the accounting of that debt.
[22:07.040 --> 22:11.040]  In most jurisdictions, that's what's required.
[22:11.040 --> 22:15.040]  In the case where you receive a lawsuit, and I know we're kind of going on defense,
[22:15.040 --> 22:17.040]  but just for the moment, we need to address that.
[22:17.040 --> 22:21.040]  If you receive a lawsuit and the other side didn't verify pleading,
[22:21.040 --> 22:27.040]  you need to make sure you absolutely answer and contradict those verified pleadings
[22:27.040 --> 22:29.040]  to the greatest extent you can.
[22:29.040 --> 22:30.040]  And I'm not saying why.
[22:30.040 --> 22:35.040]  I'm saying when they're incorrect, indicate where they're incorrect
[22:35.040 --> 22:39.040]  and swear it out as an affidavit, as verified answer.
[22:39.040 --> 22:44.040]  Because sometimes if you don't answer verified pleadings as verified,
[22:44.040 --> 22:48.040]  the other side can move for a summary judgment and might be able to get it
[22:48.040 --> 22:52.040]  because you haven't essentially contested their evidence,
[22:52.040 --> 22:56.040]  their sworn statement, which stand as best evidence.
[22:56.040 --> 22:59.040]  So that gets into some of the strategies.
[22:59.040 --> 23:08.040]  Any time you get into an issue regarding facts, it's best to verify them.
[23:08.040 --> 23:12.040]  When you're making arguments, arguments don't need to be verified.
[23:12.040 --> 23:18.040]  The biggest area where I bump into people that are not attorneys,
[23:18.040 --> 23:21.040]  and they want to verify everything, and it's not necessary.
[23:21.040 --> 23:27.040]  Like a notice to the court for requesting a court reporter.
[23:27.040 --> 23:31.040]  In some jurisdictions out there, that's one of the procedures that begins
[23:31.040 --> 23:37.040]  before you ever have any hearing, is a request for a court reporter is required
[23:37.040 --> 23:39.040]  or the judge might not have a court reporter in the court.
[23:39.040 --> 23:44.040]  Any hearing that isn't before a judge that doesn't have a court reporter,
[23:44.040 --> 23:47.040]  you may waive any abuses of power that the judge might do
[23:47.040 --> 23:50.040]  because you have no record of it.
[23:50.040 --> 23:55.040]  No record, the court of appeals assumes the judge did the right thing.
[23:55.040 --> 23:59.040]  So you always want to request a court reporter in writing
[23:59.040 --> 24:05.040]  and ask for every hearing to be recorded and every utterance to be recorded.
[24:05.040 --> 24:10.040]  And there's basically forms out there for that. It's a one-pager.
[24:10.040 --> 24:14.040]  The issue of sending that doesn't have to be verified because it's just a request.
[24:14.040 --> 24:17.040]  There's no facts in it, it's just a request.
[24:17.040 --> 24:21.040]  But I've seen people verify the request of a court reporter.
[24:21.040 --> 24:25.040]  It's not necessary.
[24:25.040 --> 24:31.040]  Only things involving stories, where you've told a story of some sort
[24:31.040 --> 24:36.040]  or stated certain facts that you have to corroborate that actually occurred,
[24:36.040 --> 24:39.040]  then that's when it needs to be verified.
[24:39.040 --> 24:44.040]  Okay, moving on. After discovery, you'll get into some pretrial stuff.
[24:44.040 --> 24:47.040]  Sometimes you'll get into pretrial stuff even before discovery,
[24:47.040 --> 24:51.040]  like the other side will move for summary judgment again,
[24:51.040 --> 24:54.040]  saying that you don't have any evidence or whatever.
[24:54.040 --> 24:59.040]  Summary judgments, and we kind of touched upon these in the first two hours
[24:59.040 --> 25:06.040]  a week ago, summary judgments in most jurisdictions are not about having a hearing.
[25:06.040 --> 25:10.040]  The hearing date is set because there has to be a way to set the time limit
[25:10.040 --> 25:16.040]  for when you file an answer and when the summary judgment will be determined by the judge.
[25:16.040 --> 25:21.040]  Hearings are optional in some cases, and almost never during a summary judgment hearing
[25:21.040 --> 25:26.040]  do they allow you to proper any testimony or any evidence.
[25:26.040 --> 25:28.040]  It's just argument.
[25:28.040 --> 25:33.040]  In Texas, the time periods are all what's important there.
[25:33.040 --> 25:38.040]  As a matter of fact, every motion and every rule out there has time periods that apply,
[25:38.040 --> 25:42.040]  and you need to be very cognizant of those time periods.
[25:42.040 --> 25:45.040]  I tell people that are involved in litigation, especially through the plaintiff,
[25:45.040 --> 25:50.040]  to sit down and put a calendar on the wall someplace and put all the days out there
[25:50.040 --> 25:53.040]  and indicate, here's where I filed my original pleading,
[25:53.040 --> 25:56.040]  here's where the rule says that I have to have a trial date set,
[25:56.040 --> 25:59.040]  or they may dismiss it for want of prosecution.
[25:59.040 --> 26:02.040]  You may say, here's where I filed my first discovery instrument,
[26:02.040 --> 26:06.040]  here's where they have up until this date to answer it,
[26:06.040 --> 26:10.040]  and you fill in all of the dates and the times in advance
[26:10.040 --> 26:14.040]  and recognize that there are certain dates and times and events that will happen in a trial
[26:14.040 --> 26:19.040]  in the course of the litigation that might fall on a weekend or holiday.
[26:19.040 --> 26:24.040]  This is one that's caused a lot of people a lot of consternation and confusion.
[26:24.040 --> 26:29.040]  In Texas, as in most of the federal rules that I'm aware of,
[26:29.040 --> 26:33.040]  if it falls on a weekend or holiday or a day the court is closed,
[26:33.040 --> 26:38.040]  don't assume it's closed, find out for sure, find out their holiday listing and schedule.
[26:38.040 --> 26:43.040]  If the court is closed, you get what's called the next day the court's open.
[26:43.040 --> 26:47.040]  In Texas, it's the weekend, you get the Monday next rule.
[26:47.040 --> 26:51.040]  So if a deadline for filing a document, say a motion for new trial
[26:51.040 --> 26:56.040]  or a motion for extension of time on a particular discovery instrument,
[26:56.040 --> 27:00.040]  you have until 30 days or 20 days or whatever it is,
[27:00.040 --> 27:05.040]  and that falls on a weekend, you have until the next day the court is open on Monday,
[27:05.040 --> 27:08.040]  or the Monday next rule as they refer to it in Texas.
[27:08.040 --> 27:13.040]  So that means if you file it on Monday, even though technically it's more than that many days,
[27:13.040 --> 27:17.040]  the issue is you can't file it on the weekend because the court's not open.
[27:17.040 --> 27:20.040]  So they're giving you until the next day the court is open to file it.
[27:20.040 --> 27:23.040]  And I've seen some time periods where it falls on the Monday next,
[27:23.040 --> 27:27.040]  and the Monday next is the holiday, then it comes to Tuesday.
[27:27.040 --> 27:30.040]  So you get a couple extra days.
[27:30.040 --> 27:35.040]  If you file things on a Monday next rule or on the next day the court is open,
[27:35.040 --> 27:40.040]  always plead those when you say you're filing the document on time.
[27:40.040 --> 27:45.040]  Indicate you're filing in accordance with a rule, whatever rule applies,
[27:45.040 --> 27:50.040]  and indicate how many days you had to file it, and it was due on this date according to the rule,
[27:50.040 --> 27:54.040]  but this date fell on a Saturday, so you had until Monday,
[27:54.040 --> 27:59.040]  but Monday was such and such, you know, holiday, so you had until Tuesday,
[27:59.040 --> 28:05.040]  and I filed it in the court on Tuesday, or I mailed it in accordance to the mailbox rule.
[28:05.040 --> 28:12.040]  You specify all of those rules that you followed, the other party really can't complain.
[28:12.040 --> 28:17.040]  And then the judge can walk through it and see it and say, yeah, okay, I followed this.
[28:17.040 --> 28:20.040]  Make sure you do the math, don't miss it by a day,
[28:20.040 --> 28:25.040]  because in some cases missing something by a day is fatal to a cause.
[28:25.040 --> 28:28.040]  Motion for new trial.
[28:28.040 --> 28:32.040]  You lose the trial or the case gets dismissed and you want to file a motion for new trial,
[28:32.040 --> 28:37.040]  motion for new trial has to be filed on time, on or before the date it's due.
[28:37.040 --> 28:41.040]  You file it the day after it's due, too late, it's over.
[28:41.040 --> 28:46.040]  There's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube, it's over.
[28:46.040 --> 28:55.040]  So be very, very cognizant of time periods.
[28:55.040 --> 28:57.040]  I'm trying to think of what else might come in.
[28:57.040 --> 29:03.040]  Okay, the next step of the process will usually be once the discovery gets going,
[29:03.040 --> 29:09.040]  is the court, through local rules, might require what's called a scheduling order.
[29:09.040 --> 29:15.040]  Some courts, they require the parties to essentially send a scheduling order to each other.
[29:15.040 --> 29:19.040]  And what that means is they're saying it's going to take us this long to prepare the case,
[29:19.040 --> 29:22.040]  it's going to take us this long to finish all of the discovery,
[29:22.040 --> 29:27.040]  so we estimate that we'll be in trial on a certain date or a certain week or time.
[29:27.040 --> 29:33.040]  And then you contact the court's coordinator to find out if they have trials in that case.
[29:33.040 --> 29:39.040]  Contact the opposing side, and this is not through the courts that you get an agreement,
[29:39.040 --> 29:42.040]  but you essentially go back and forth until you come up with an agreed schedule,
[29:42.040 --> 29:47.040]  and we're going to go to trial, say, hypothetically on August 1st.
[29:47.040 --> 29:50.040]  And the trial will take two days, and...
[29:50.040 --> 30:00.040]  Okay, hold on, hold on, Ken. We'll be right back.
[30:00.040 --> 30:05.040]  Gold prices are at historic highs, and with the recent pullback, this is a great time to buy.
[30:05.040 --> 30:09.040]  With the value of the dollar, risks of inflation, geopolitical uncertainties,
[30:09.040 --> 30:13.040]  and instability in world financial systems, I see gold going up much higher.
[30:13.040 --> 30:16.040]  Hi, I'm Tim Fry at Roberts & Roberts Brokerage.
[30:16.040 --> 30:20.040]  Everybody should have some of their assets in investment-grade precious metals.
[30:20.040 --> 30:24.040]  At Roberts & Roberts Brokerage, you can buy gold, silver, and platinum with confidence
[30:24.040 --> 30:29.040]  from a brokerage that's specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[30:29.040 --> 30:32.040]  If you are new to precious metals, we will happily provide you with the information
[30:32.040 --> 30:37.040]  you need to make an informed decision whether or not you choose to purchase from us.
[30:37.040 --> 30:40.040]  Also, Roberts & Roberts Brokerage values your privacy
[30:40.040 --> 30:45.040]  and will always advise you in the event that we would be required to report any transaction.
[30:45.040 --> 30:50.040]  If you have gold, silver, or platinum you'd like to sell, we can convert it for immediate payment.
[30:50.040 --> 31:00.040]  Call us at 800-874-9760. We're Roberts & Roberts Brokerage, 800-874-9760.
[31:00.040 --> 31:24.040]  Hello? Yes, George. How good of you to call. Yeah, we had dinner with the Cheneys last week.
[31:24.040 --> 31:31.040]  I saw a big red stain on his wall and I was thinking to myself,
[31:31.040 --> 31:58.040]  heavens, you know, the war must be going splendid.
[31:58.040 --> 32:07.040]  Things all soaked up in blood with jacks, bricks, and the mud, it's red money.
[32:07.040 --> 32:14.040]  They used to be so green, the greenest money that I ever seen.
[32:14.040 --> 32:23.040]  They used to back it up with silver and gold way back in the days of old.
[32:23.040 --> 32:31.040]  Oh mommy, oh mommy, please protect us from this bloody commie.
[32:31.040 --> 32:39.040]  The free republic that I used to know started to look just like the manifesto.
[32:39.040 --> 32:57.040]  Whoa, look at all that red money. Red money. Red money.
[32:57.040 --> 33:04.040]  I come crying, go go buy this gun, everybody get some red money.
[33:04.040 --> 33:13.040]  Red money in a team called Squire to prop up the fiat red money.
[33:13.040 --> 33:22.040]  Two billion will take just to keep a float, red China's got us right by the throat with red money.
[33:22.040 --> 33:29.040]  The banks get the gold plus the free ride, funding wars from both sides with red money.
[33:29.040 --> 33:37.040]  Red money used to be so green, the greenest money that I ever seen.
[33:37.040 --> 33:46.040]  They used to back it up with silver and gold way back in the days of old.
[33:46.040 --> 33:54.040]  Oh mommy, oh mommy, please protect us from this bloody commie.
[33:54.040 --> 34:02.040]  The free republic that I used to know started to look just like the manifesto.
[34:02.040 --> 34:20.040]  Whoa, look at all that red money. Red money. Red money.
[34:20.040 --> 34:28.040]  The manifesto plank is a private central bank printing red money. Red money.
[34:28.040 --> 34:36.040]  They really got some nerve down at the federal reserve printing red money. Red money.
[34:36.040 --> 34:44.040]  The federal fractional reserve, the private bank was really who they served with red money. Red money.
[34:44.040 --> 34:53.040]  Red banks make up that money for free then loan it back to us for a fee, I'm seeing red ink money. Red money.
[34:53.040 --> 35:01.040]  Ain't no law creating income tax, just a heap of guns cocked behind our backs getting our red money. Red money.
[35:01.040 --> 35:09.040]  Just like the mob they make us pay, so maybe nothing bad happens to us today, it's strictly red money. Red money.
[35:09.040 --> 35:24.040]  Let's get them on sample trees and cause we got some real voice of reason but we still got that red money. Red money.
[35:24.040 --> 35:41.040]  Red money. Red money.
[35:41.040 --> 36:00.040]  Red money. Red money.
[36:00.040 --> 36:13.040]  Okay, Ken, take it away. Okay, we're at the point where we're down to scheduling orders. Scheduling orders is something that they'll play games with.
[36:13.040 --> 36:25.040]  The judges who want to dismiss a unrepresented person's cause of action will use the lack of a scheduling order to dismiss for want of prosecution.
[36:25.040 --> 36:34.040]  And want of prosecution doesn't necessarily throw you out of court unless you've lost the statute of limitations, which is another thing we need to kind of talk about.
[36:34.040 --> 36:41.040]  Statute of limitations is usually how long you have to file a cause of action on a particular failure.
[36:41.040 --> 36:46.040]  There's all sorts of special circumstances but don't count on those.
[36:46.040 --> 36:54.040]  What you have to look at is clearly when a particular action took place, when it was discoverable, when you had knowledge and discovery of it.
[36:54.040 --> 37:00.040]  And pretending you didn't have knowledge of it isn't necessarily going to get you past that statute of limitations.
[37:00.040 --> 37:04.040]  So some causes of action are very narrow.
[37:04.040 --> 37:19.040]  An example is a lot of the employment law under federal law is you have to file a complaint with some federal agency, either the EDOC or the Justice Department, for discrimination within 180 days.
[37:19.040 --> 37:29.040]  Then you have 180 days to file suit after they send you a letter stating you have that they're not going to take the cause of action.
[37:29.040 --> 37:33.040]  So the issue is that it's a very narrow timeframe.
[37:33.040 --> 37:40.040]  It can be sometimes less than a year in which you have to get an attorney or get all of the information necessary to file it.
[37:40.040 --> 37:46.040]  Now immediately the question that should come to mind is why is the statute of limitations like that so narrow?
[37:46.040 --> 37:51.040]  It's to prevent people from filing those times lawsuits, obviously.
[37:51.040 --> 37:59.040]  As a matter of fact, what's amazing is lawsuits against the government are some of the narrowest timeframes available,
[37:59.040 --> 38:08.040]  and yet lawsuits against an individual for failure to pay bills or financial obligations are sometimes the longest.
[38:08.040 --> 38:16.040]  They want to give the opportunity for the banking community to extract every dime they can.
[38:16.040 --> 38:22.040]  And obviously the government's motivated to keep people from filing actions against them.
[38:22.040 --> 38:34.040]  I recognize that at one point in time we live in a modern world where we have computers and photographs and recordings and fax machines and the Internet.
[38:34.040 --> 38:39.040]  So these statute of limitations were set up long ago and they set them up for one good reason,
[38:39.040 --> 38:47.040]  is that a cause of action might mature and a person just failed to file it because they don't want to go through the trouble.
[38:47.040 --> 38:52.040]  And then the person they have the cause of action against may become politically active.
[38:52.040 --> 38:56.040]  They run for sheriff or something or councilman or congress.
[38:56.040 --> 39:07.040]  Now all of a sudden they'll bring up a cause of action in order to disgrace this person when they don't have any recollection of what took place because it happened four, five, six years ago.
[39:07.040 --> 39:17.040]  So there was good reasons when nobody kept documentation that long not to allow people to invent a cause of action six, seven, eight years later.
[39:17.040 --> 39:24.040]  But in the modern world they always talk about everything's on the record, and basically that's the way it is.
[39:24.040 --> 39:28.040]  Your life from cradle to grave now is recorded.
[39:28.040 --> 39:34.040]  It's in computer chips, it's in databases, there's numbers, there's date places.
[39:34.040 --> 39:39.040]  They can pretty much trace your life with few exceptions of everything you do.
[39:39.040 --> 39:43.040]  So based on that, an interaction and a cause of action that might mature,
[39:43.040 --> 39:52.040]  the statute of limitations certainly could be longer than they are in order to allow a party that's been harmed to recover from the initial harm
[39:52.040 --> 39:58.040]  and then to be able to seek proper legal representation and or produce a cause of action themselves.
[39:58.040 --> 40:02.040]  But that has to be changed by the legislature.
[40:02.040 --> 40:10.040]  So the issue of scheduling order is to sit down and find out what a scheduling order looks like.
[40:10.040 --> 40:15.040]  And you can usually get out of the courthouse again and look in somebody else's file and file a scheduling order.
[40:15.040 --> 40:23.040]  What I've found in Texas is frequently the courts will absolutely require a person without representation
[40:23.040 --> 40:28.040]  to get a scheduling order but will not require attorneys to do it.
[40:28.040 --> 40:35.040]  There will be rules out there that state that if a case is set on the docket for a trial within six months of its filing,
[40:35.040 --> 40:42.040]  that it be put on the dismissal docket for hearing to see whether there's good cause to retain it.
[40:42.040 --> 40:50.040]  Cases filed by attorneys will sit on a docket sheet for years before they're dismissed for want of prosecution.
[40:50.040 --> 40:59.040]  As soon as six months and a day occurs, they'll be put on the dismissal docket if the plaintiff in the case is a pro se litigant.
[40:59.040 --> 41:07.040]  That shows you the prejudice of many of the courts against people essentially going to court and asking for justice on their own.
[41:07.040 --> 41:11.040]  Be aware of this so that at least you know what you need to do.
[41:11.040 --> 41:15.040]  So if you know that there's a local rule requiring a scheduling order,
[41:15.040 --> 41:24.040]  you might as well prepare one up front and send it to the opposing party and you've got to produce this writing to show that you've tried to do it.
[41:24.040 --> 41:32.040]  If they refuse to negotiate, then you have to file a motion with the court to ask the court to compel them to negotiate
[41:32.040 --> 41:36.040]  or to accept your request for it. Since you're the plaintiff in the case,
[41:36.040 --> 41:40.040]  you should be allowed to do that since the other party doesn't do it.
[41:40.040 --> 41:46.040]  It hasn't cooperated.
[41:46.040 --> 41:48.040]  Any questions there?
[41:48.040 --> 41:58.040]  I have a comment that sounds like an interesting way to hammer the opponent because prior to filing your action,
[41:58.040 --> 42:03.040]  you have all the time you need to prepare all your paperwork.
[42:03.040 --> 42:13.040]  So once it's prepared, you have way less to do than they do, I would want to file a scheduling order as tight as I could get it.
[42:13.040 --> 42:18.040]  If you're well prepared, that might be a strategy that works.
[42:18.040 --> 42:23.040]  And the other side is going to argue and move for continuance.
[42:23.040 --> 42:27.040]  But I'm going to generally say that people without representation
[42:27.040 --> 42:31.040]  and people only first learning about legal causes of action and processes
[42:31.040 --> 42:38.040]  are always playing a catch-up game with vocabulary and legal terminology.
[42:38.040 --> 42:45.040]  So based on that, I've always said play for time so that you can become fully familiar with it.
[42:45.040 --> 42:48.040]  And the only thing is, I'm not saying be ridiculous with time,
[42:48.040 --> 42:53.040]  but I'm saying if you think you can do it in a week, give yourself an extra week.
[42:53.040 --> 42:58.040]  So if you're inclined to say, oh, we can have that hearing in a week, Your Honor, say two weeks.
[42:58.040 --> 43:03.040]  Then when they split the difference and give you 10 days, at least you got a couple extra days.
[43:03.040 --> 43:06.040]  You never know what's going to come down the pike in your life,
[43:06.040 --> 43:11.040]  and you may need that extra day or two, or you might discover something you need to take care of
[43:11.040 --> 43:17.040]  that you didn't anticipate because of your inexperience.
[43:17.040 --> 43:24.040]  But yes, one of the little side issues here about discovery and preparing your case is in Texas,
[43:24.040 --> 43:28.040]  and I believe in many states they have a similar process.
[43:28.040 --> 43:30.040]  Most attorneys don't utilize it.
[43:30.040 --> 43:39.040]  But there's a provision for perpetuation of testimony for further litigation,
[43:39.040 --> 43:44.040]  and it's under Pet Rules of Civil Procedure 202.
[43:44.040 --> 43:48.040]  And what it is is it allows you to essentially stop the process of discovery
[43:48.040 --> 43:56.040]  as a motion to the court to allow for the depositions and production of concuments for those depositions
[43:56.040 --> 44:01.040]  in order to perpetuate this testimony if you find that you have a cause of action.
[44:01.040 --> 44:07.040]  And now you can state that you think you have a cause of action and what that cause of action may be.
[44:07.040 --> 44:16.040]  And the case in which I was a participant with the party that cared about this
[44:16.040 --> 44:24.040]  was a probate case in which the family was suspicious of the attorney that had handled the probate.
[44:24.040 --> 44:30.040]  After some grandparents had died and there was a will and it went through probate,
[44:30.040 --> 44:35.040]  essentially members of that family got what they thought was a hidden by comparison
[44:35.040 --> 44:41.040]  to what they thought the family really had, what the grandparents actually had salted away.
[44:41.040 --> 44:45.040]  And essentially the attorney didn't answer their letters or anything,
[44:45.040 --> 44:51.040]  they went down and filed with the court indicating that they thought that the attorney had committed fraud
[44:51.040 --> 45:00.040]  and wanted to videotape depositions in order to perpetuate testimony and production of documents.
[45:00.040 --> 45:03.040]  And lo and behold, when the judge actually signed the order saying,
[45:03.040 --> 45:07.040]  yes, I'm going to allow this, all of a sudden the attorney said,
[45:07.040 --> 45:13.040]  oh, by the way, we've managed to find some money that was missing, here's $50,000.
[45:13.040 --> 45:19.040]  All said and done, I think there was a total of half a million dollars was ultimately found or discovered.
[45:19.040 --> 45:25.040]  And this was only because of the threat of the 202 against the attorney for fraud.
[45:25.040 --> 45:30.040]  And the fact that the money was forthcoming and they never actually had to go into court and do litigation,
[45:30.040 --> 45:34.040]  they thought that was perfectly fine and they ended the case.
[45:34.040 --> 45:37.040]  Now, if they thought there was more money or maybe there was,
[45:37.040 --> 45:41.040]  they just waived their rights to it by not continuing the litigation.
[45:41.040 --> 45:51.040]  But looking at the 202 rule is a good way to go into a court and at a court order sign, start depositions,
[45:51.040 --> 45:55.040]  videotape depositions for one of the processes and production of documents
[45:55.040 --> 45:58.040]  because you would discuss those documents in the depositions.
[45:58.040 --> 46:04.040]  And you can get them to admit under oath all of the elements you need to prove your case,
[46:04.040 --> 46:09.040]  pretty much then attach them to your pleadings and move for summary.
[46:09.040 --> 46:11.040]  The other side has no defense.
[46:11.040 --> 46:16.040]  It's just a matter of arguing over how much money you should get as damage.
[46:16.040 --> 46:23.040]  And that's one approach to the process.
[46:23.040 --> 46:26.040]  If you really have your ducks in a row, yeah,
[46:26.040 --> 46:31.040]  moving the other side in a hurry will make them have to make a deal.
[46:31.040 --> 46:38.040]  But with attorneys involved, there's almost no way the judge is going to allow you to rush them.
[46:38.040 --> 46:43.040]  It's amazing how I've seen some cases in which I saw a case out of Dallas
[46:43.040 --> 46:50.040]  in which a worker's compensation case, the employee worked for Texas Instruments
[46:50.040 --> 46:55.040]  and was injured and filled out a worker's compensation claim form,
[46:55.040 --> 46:59.040]  which was altered by the employer.
[46:59.040 --> 47:03.040]  He went to court with regards to the worker's compensation case,
[47:03.040 --> 47:11.040]  and they essentially kept telling the employer to correct the date, which they never did.
[47:11.040 --> 47:17.040]  He then was fired by that employer while pending a worker's compensation case,
[47:17.040 --> 47:19.040]  which is statutorily prohibited.
[47:19.040 --> 47:24.040]  You could not fire a person while there's an ongoing worker's compensation case.
[47:24.040 --> 47:26.040]  And they did this.
[47:26.040 --> 47:30.040]  So he got an attorney, and they filed suit in Dallas court.
[47:30.040 --> 47:39.040]  And Texas Instruments' attorney got 21 continuances, three years of continuances
[47:39.040 --> 47:44.040]  for free trial motions about discovery and production of documents and all of that.
[47:44.040 --> 47:49.040]  When his attorney withdrew, and he needed to find a new attorney
[47:49.040 --> 47:51.040]  because this attorney wanted to make the deal.
[47:51.040 --> 47:54.040]  She didn't actually do trials.
[47:54.040 --> 47:59.040]  I think she would have dropped dead if she ever had to appear in front of a judge.
[47:59.040 --> 48:04.040]  She withdrew, and the plaintiff in this case filed a motion for continuance.
[48:04.040 --> 48:11.040]  His first motion for continuance, the judge denied it.
[48:11.040 --> 48:14.040]  And he ultimately lost his case.
[48:14.040 --> 48:19.040]  But that gives you an example of how the system can be so very prejudicial
[48:19.040 --> 48:23.040]  against a person who doesn't understand the process.
[48:23.040 --> 48:28.040]  The only way you can help this process to make it better is know the rules.
[48:28.040 --> 48:34.040]  Know the rules as well, if not better, than the opponent does.
[48:34.040 --> 48:37.040]  One observation I can tell you is if you go down to the courthouse,
[48:37.040 --> 48:39.040]  which I recommend everybody do,
[48:39.040 --> 48:42.040]  look at the attorneys and parties walking into the court.
[48:42.040 --> 48:47.040]  In Texas, the giveaway that they actually use the rules is the attorneys
[48:47.040 --> 48:51.040]  and parties walking in will have a copy of the rule book with them.
[48:51.040 --> 48:54.040]  If they don't walk in with a copy of the rule book,
[48:54.040 --> 48:56.040]  or you don't see anybody holding the rule books in the courtroom,
[48:56.040 --> 49:03.040]  I'd be suspicious that it's all based on bravado and innuendo and argument
[49:03.040 --> 49:06.040]  and open court and has nothing to do with the rules.
[49:06.040 --> 49:11.040]  That's a sad state of affairs, but unfortunately it's reality in some jurisdictions.
[49:11.040 --> 49:13.040]  Yes.
[49:13.040 --> 49:17.040]  I don't think I've ever seen attorneys walking around any courthouse I've been in
[49:17.040 --> 49:20.040]  with a copy of the rules.
[49:20.040 --> 49:22.040]  I have.
[49:22.040 --> 49:24.040]  I've seen it in Parent County, Texas.
[49:24.040 --> 49:27.040]  I've seen it occasionally in Dallas, Texas,
[49:27.040 --> 49:30.040]  and I've seen it occasionally in Denton County, Texas,
[49:30.040 --> 49:32.040]  where they've actually had a copy of the rule book.
[49:32.040 --> 49:39.040]  I'm not saying that every attorney did, but some did.
[49:39.040 --> 49:45.040]  I've been in some other jurisdictions where they didn't even know what the rule book was.
[49:45.040 --> 49:50.040]  Okay, well, Deb, you want to open up the phone lines?
[49:50.040 --> 49:57.040]  We've still got Randy and Jim holding.
[49:57.040 --> 49:59.040]  Yes, we have Randy and Jim.
[49:59.040 --> 50:06.040]  Callers, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984.
[50:06.040 --> 50:12.040]  Randy, do you want to talk to Randy?
[50:12.040 --> 50:13.040]  Randy?
[50:13.040 --> 50:17.040]  Oh, man, he's probably out digging pellets out of his dogs behind.
[50:17.040 --> 50:19.040]  All right, let's find out.
[50:19.040 --> 50:26.040]  Randy, are you digging pellets out of your dog's butt?
[50:26.040 --> 50:27.040]  I'm just kidding.
[50:27.040 --> 50:30.040]  Randy, are you there?
[50:30.040 --> 50:31.040]  Hello?
[50:31.040 --> 50:34.040]  Okay, Randy, go ahead.
[50:34.040 --> 50:37.040]  You have a question for Ken or me?
[50:37.040 --> 50:40.040]  Well, I just was going to ask you.
[50:40.040 --> 50:41.040]  We had talked last.
[50:41.040 --> 50:45.040]  I was going to take some complaints down to Perkins.
[50:45.040 --> 50:47.040]  Oh, good.
[50:47.040 --> 50:49.040]  But he wasn't there on Friday.
[50:49.040 --> 50:53.040]  It was the visiting judge, so I didn't give them to him.
[50:53.040 --> 50:56.040]  I thought it would be better to wait until he's there.
[50:56.040 --> 50:58.040]  Yeah, probably would.
[50:58.040 --> 51:01.040]  The visiting judge probably wouldn't have a clue as to what to do.
[51:01.040 --> 51:08.040]  But Perkins, he was a...as judges go, he was real amenable.
[51:08.040 --> 51:12.040]  I mean, he wasn't really difficult.
[51:12.040 --> 51:17.040]  It may be that he's very well aware of the politics of his position,
[51:17.040 --> 51:20.040]  but just watching him deal with other attorneys,
[51:20.040 --> 51:26.040]  he was a very pleasant and relatively jovial individual.
[51:26.040 --> 51:29.040]  And when I nailed him good, he really took it well.
[51:29.040 --> 51:38.040]  So yeah, you probably did better waiting for Perkins to be there.
[51:38.040 --> 51:42.040]  One of my questions about that is that if they do something in the meantime,
[51:42.040 --> 51:45.040]  since I haven't really acted with Perkins yet,
[51:45.040 --> 51:48.040]  is that going to affect being able to go to him?
[51:48.040 --> 51:51.040]  If who does something in the meantime?
[51:51.040 --> 51:55.040]  The JP or the county attorney.
[51:55.040 --> 51:59.040]  I went to that hearing, by the way, and when I was there,
[51:59.040 --> 52:03.040]  I basically stood on my motion to dismiss.
[52:03.040 --> 52:08.040]  Then I asked her if she would take my criminal complaints in an unrelated case,
[52:08.040 --> 52:09.040]  and she refused.
[52:09.040 --> 52:11.040]  So I got them on that.
[52:11.040 --> 52:15.040]  So did you file criminal charges against her?
[52:15.040 --> 52:17.040]  I was going to with Perkins.
[52:17.040 --> 52:20.040]  And then a motion to disqualify her.
[52:20.040 --> 52:21.040]  Okay.
[52:21.040 --> 52:24.040]  Do I do that with the court or with Perkins?
[52:24.040 --> 52:27.040]  With court, with her court.
[52:27.040 --> 52:31.040]  You see, so far, as best I can tell, they have no jurisdiction in this thing.
[52:31.040 --> 52:34.040]  And I don't understand how they can, and I told them this.
[52:34.040 --> 52:37.040]  I said, I don't understand how you can proceed.
[52:37.040 --> 52:41.040]  So do you need to file criminal charges against the judge, then,
[52:41.040 --> 52:44.040]  for impersonating a public official?
[52:44.040 --> 52:45.040]  Well, that's what I was going to do.
[52:45.040 --> 52:52.040]  I was going to file on the county attorney, the judge, the constable, and the sheriff.
[52:52.040 --> 52:53.040]  Good.
[52:53.040 --> 52:55.040]  Let me intercede here for a second.
[52:55.040 --> 53:01.040]  The first thing is, is there any motion to dismiss you did file a copy with the prosecuting attorney
[53:01.040 --> 53:03.040]  if this is a criminal action case?
[53:03.040 --> 53:04.040]  Yes, I did.
[53:04.040 --> 53:06.040]  They didn't have a copy of it.
[53:06.040 --> 53:07.040]  They didn't know anything about it.
[53:07.040 --> 53:14.040]  When I asked her what the actual statute I violated was, she didn't know.
[53:14.040 --> 53:16.040]  The prosecutor didn't know?
[53:16.040 --> 53:17.040]  No.
[53:17.040 --> 53:19.040]  They looked at the paperwork and said, well, I don't know.
[53:19.040 --> 53:21.040]  Because it's not there.
[53:21.040 --> 53:22.040]  It's not anywhere on there.
[53:22.040 --> 53:28.040]  It's just termed fail, refuse, dog, restrained dog, cat.
[53:28.040 --> 53:36.040]  So then, clearly, you've not, it doesn't rise to constitutional requirements of notice.
[53:36.040 --> 53:40.040]  So the complaint, then, is insufficient on its face and right.
[53:40.040 --> 53:42.040]  The judge does not have subject matter jurisdiction.
[53:42.040 --> 53:43.040]  Right.
[53:43.040 --> 53:49.040]  So the discussion to dismiss was based on, it's essentially what's called the plea to the jurisdiction.
[53:49.040 --> 53:56.040]  You've asked them to plead their jurisdictional date and specify why the judge could retain jurisdiction.
[53:56.040 --> 53:59.040]  And essentially, the prosecutor hasn't answered.
[53:59.040 --> 54:00.040]  Right.
[54:00.040 --> 54:03.040]  They basically, what happened is, I filed a motion.
[54:03.040 --> 54:06.040]  They sent a notice to appear.
[54:06.040 --> 54:10.040]  The notice to appear was specifically to make a deal with the prosecutor.
[54:10.040 --> 54:11.040]  That was outlined.
[54:11.040 --> 54:18.040]  So I said, I filed another motion to dismiss saying, insufficiency of process.
[54:18.040 --> 54:23.040]  They're just not filing any of the statutes on process.
[54:23.040 --> 54:29.040]  Went to this hearing, because I didn't want them to file on me a warrant of arrest, which was the threat and the notice,
[54:29.040 --> 54:32.040]  and said, look, you don't have jurisdiction.
[54:32.040 --> 54:35.040]  Why are you pursuing this dismiss?
[54:35.040 --> 54:37.040]  And they basically wouldn't do anything.
[54:37.040 --> 54:40.040]  They just, they didn't know what to do, to be honest with you.
[54:40.040 --> 54:41.040]  They were absolutely...
[54:41.040 --> 54:43.040]  What time period falls in all of this?
[54:43.040 --> 54:44.040]  When did it start?
[54:44.040 --> 54:46.040]  Where are we now?
[54:46.040 --> 54:50.040]  It started October 20th.
[54:50.040 --> 54:56.040]  And right now, it was left that they would do something,
[54:56.040 --> 54:59.040]  and it was unknown because they did not know what to do.
[54:59.040 --> 55:00.040]  Okay.
[55:00.040 --> 55:01.040]  Wait until he gets to...
[55:01.040 --> 55:02.040]  What do you think, Randy?
[55:02.040 --> 55:05.040]  Six months to move for dismissal, want a prosecution?
[55:05.040 --> 55:07.040]  I'd move already.
[55:07.040 --> 55:09.040]  It's a misdemeanor.
[55:09.040 --> 55:10.040]  It's class A misdemeanor.
[55:10.040 --> 55:12.040]  I'd move already.
[55:12.040 --> 55:15.040]  Historically, they have 30 days to prosecute.
[55:15.040 --> 55:21.040]  I'd move for a speedy trial or essentially a motion to dismiss,
[55:21.040 --> 55:27.040]  want a prosecution, is a demand for speedy trial, any alternative.
[55:27.040 --> 55:29.040]  But I'd move for dismissal already,
[55:29.040 --> 55:33.040]  and they may do it because they don't want to give them a way out.
[55:33.040 --> 55:38.040]  You back this bulldog in a corner, and I'll give him a way to get out of it.
[55:38.040 --> 55:41.040]  Well, don't they have one with the motion to dismiss?
[55:41.040 --> 55:45.040]  Well, if they dismiss based on lack of prosecution,
[55:45.040 --> 55:49.040]  I mean the lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
[55:49.040 --> 55:56.040]  they essentially admitted to the civil suit.
[55:56.040 --> 55:59.040]  And they're not going to want to do that.
[55:59.040 --> 56:05.040]  The biggest problem I've seen in Texas is with municipal courts and speedy ordinances
[56:05.040 --> 56:09.040]  and class C misdemeanors and stuff is that they don't follow any of the rules
[56:09.040 --> 56:11.040]  with regards to pleaded jurisdiction.
[56:11.040 --> 56:16.040]  But half the time they don't answer or they'll answer an open court on the day in question.
[56:16.040 --> 56:22.040]  But absent a written response, they can't get jurisdiction, which means on appeal,
[56:22.040 --> 56:26.040]  they'll be absent any records showing any jurisdictional,
[56:26.040 --> 56:33.040]  the jurisdictional answer to your motion to dismiss based on a pleaded jurisdiction.
[56:33.040 --> 56:36.040]  Yeah, but with a misdemeanor, they're going to get double the amount of the fines,
[56:36.040 --> 56:42.040]  and then you're never going to get it into an appeals court.
[56:42.040 --> 56:47.040]  Well, there's a process of filing surety,
[56:47.040 --> 56:51.040]  but even if you post the bond, the issue then is its malicious prosecution,
[56:51.040 --> 56:58.040]  since they didn't provide a, this is a municipal court of record?
[56:58.040 --> 57:00.040]  Justice of the Peace Court.
[57:00.040 --> 57:01.040]  Oh, the JP Court.
[57:01.040 --> 57:06.040]  Okay, well, I mean, at this point in time, you can plead no conscience,
[57:06.040 --> 57:11.040]  go right to the court of county court, move to dismiss based on the fact
[57:11.040 --> 57:14.040]  that the trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
[57:14.040 --> 57:17.040]  You could also petition instead of having to pay that.
[57:17.040 --> 57:18.040]  For mandamus.
[57:18.040 --> 57:24.040]  Well, instead of having to post all that bond, you could petition for rid of mandamus,
[57:24.040 --> 57:29.040]  ordering the court to dismiss.
[57:29.040 --> 57:36.040]  But first, file criminal charges against him, motion to disqualify,
[57:36.040 --> 57:41.040]  and a civil action in the criminal.
[57:41.040 --> 57:42.040]  Just file a counter complaint.
[57:42.040 --> 57:45.040]  If the judge refuses to act, I go ahead and file the complaint
[57:45.040 --> 57:48.040]  with the Judicial Conduct Commission.
[57:48.040 --> 57:50.040]  And bar grievances against the prosecutor.
[57:50.040 --> 57:51.040]  Yes.
[57:51.040 --> 57:55.040]  But should the motion to disqualify that goes to the JP Court,
[57:55.040 --> 57:57.040]  the criminal complaint go to the district court?
[57:57.040 --> 57:58.040]  Yes.
[57:58.040 --> 58:02.040]  It goes to the court in question that you're disqualifying,
[58:02.040 --> 58:07.040]  and it goes to the copy of the prosecutor because it involves the prosecutor's case.
[58:07.040 --> 58:10.040]  Still notice has to be given to the other parties
[58:10.040 --> 58:15.040]  because they don't feel that they've been ambushed.
[58:15.040 --> 58:16.040]  Wait a minute.
[58:16.040 --> 58:17.040]  Wait a minute.
[58:17.040 --> 58:21.040]  Challenged subject matter jurisdiction, that's between you and the judge.
[58:21.040 --> 58:22.040]  Right.
[58:22.040 --> 58:30.040]  The prosecutor basically brought you in to the process by issuing a citation of some sort.
[58:30.040 --> 58:36.040]  Even if the citation is fatal on its face, the other party deserves notice.
[58:36.040 --> 58:41.040]  Or they're going to argue that no notice is going to be a weaver of the motion.
[58:41.040 --> 58:43.040]  I'd send them.
[58:43.040 --> 58:51.040]  Yeah, I always notify everybody anyway to make sure I don't ever have a question.
[58:51.040 --> 58:55.040]  But go after the judge's throat.
[58:55.040 --> 58:58.040]  If the judge doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction,
[58:58.040 --> 59:04.040]  and that's the first thing he has to determine, then he's not a judge.
[59:04.040 --> 59:08.040]  He's just an imposter.
[59:08.040 --> 59:11.040]  But is that simulated process or what?
[59:11.040 --> 59:15.040]  No, that's impersonating, impersonating the public official.
[59:15.040 --> 59:16.040]  Okay.
[59:16.040 --> 59:18.040]  You can't be a judge unless you have jurisdiction.
[59:18.040 --> 59:20.040]  That's the whole idea of jurisdiction.
[59:20.040 --> 59:23.040]  It's kind of like me going down to the uniform store and renting my uniform
[59:23.040 --> 59:27.040]  and then getting me a bubblegum, putting it on top of the car and pulling you over.
[59:27.040 --> 59:30.040]  You're not going to file a challenge to my jurisdiction.
[59:30.040 --> 59:33.040]  You're going to ask, I'll be arrested.
[59:33.040 --> 59:35.040]  The judge is in the same position.
[59:35.040 --> 59:40.040]  And since you challenged jurisdiction and he hasn't answered or hasn't proven,
[59:40.040 --> 59:43.040]  you get to sue him personally.
[59:43.040 --> 59:46.040]  Okay, we're going to break.
[59:46.040 --> 59:48.040]  We're going to break.
[59:48.040 --> 59:50.040]  We'll be right back.
[01:00:18.040 --> 01:00:40.040]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:00:40.040 --> 01:00:43.040]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:00:43.040 --> 01:00:48.040]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how
[01:00:48.040 --> 01:00:51.040]  in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:00:51.040 --> 01:00:55.040]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:00:55.040 --> 01:00:59.040]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:00:59.040 --> 01:01:04.040]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:01:04.040 --> 01:01:07.040]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney
[01:01:07.040 --> 01:01:10.040]  with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:01:10.040 --> 01:01:14.040]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:01:14.040 --> 01:01:19.040]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:01:19.040 --> 01:01:23.040]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials,
[01:01:23.040 --> 01:01:28.040]  forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:01:28.040 --> 01:01:40.040]  Please visit wtprn.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:01:58.040 --> 01:02:00.040]  Thank you.
[01:02:28.040 --> 01:02:30.040]  Thank you.
[01:02:58.040 --> 01:03:00.040]  Thank you.
[01:03:28.040 --> 01:03:30.040]  Thank you.
[01:03:58.040 --> 01:04:00.040]  Thank you.
[01:04:28.040 --> 01:04:33.040]  Okay, we will occupy our Father's house.
[01:04:33.040 --> 01:04:39.040]  We're talking about a good Lord Jesus till He returns.
[01:04:39.040 --> 01:04:42.040]  All right, we got Randy from Austin on the guest bridge.
[01:04:42.040 --> 01:04:48.040]  We're talking about the nature of the situation with his dog in a gate.
[01:04:48.040 --> 01:04:50.040]  Okay, we're going to get to that later.
[01:04:50.040 --> 01:04:53.040]  Ken, please finish your presentation.
[01:04:53.040 --> 01:04:58.040]  Okay, we're going to get to that later.
[01:04:58.040 --> 01:05:02.040]  Ken, please finish up on you were discussing the situation with the trial.
[01:05:02.040 --> 01:05:06.040]  And then we're going to go to Randy because I want to know,
[01:05:06.040 --> 01:05:10.040]  somebody has been opening the gate and we're going to find out who it is.
[01:05:10.040 --> 01:05:15.040]  But before we get to that, go ahead, Ken, what's the deal with the trial?
[01:05:15.040 --> 01:05:18.040]  Okay, well, once you've done your scheduling order,
[01:05:18.040 --> 01:05:22.040]  you've got essentially a schedule for getting ready for trial.
[01:05:22.040 --> 01:05:25.040]  What I would suggest everybody to do is get all your witnesses together.
[01:05:25.040 --> 01:05:29.040]  You have to look at the prospects of subpoenaing witnesses that are unfriendly.
[01:05:29.040 --> 01:05:33.040]  You don't subpoena the people from the other side that have to give testimony.
[01:05:33.040 --> 01:05:37.040]  Even if they did deposition, you lose them.
[01:05:37.040 --> 01:05:41.040]  So you have to look into the process of issuing subpoenas.
[01:05:41.040 --> 01:05:45.040]  If for some reason on the day of court, court gets postponed,
[01:05:45.040 --> 01:05:49.040]  you have to reach to those people or have the court issue an order
[01:05:49.040 --> 01:05:54.040]  holding those people accountable to those subpoenas for the new trial date.
[01:05:54.040 --> 01:06:00.040]  I know of a situation where a guy forgot to do that and essentially he had the new trial date.
[01:06:00.040 --> 01:06:03.040]  He showed up, none of the witnesses were there.
[01:06:03.040 --> 01:06:06.040]  So how easy is it to get the judge to issue that order?
[01:06:06.040 --> 01:06:09.040]  Is that pretty well standard?
[01:06:09.040 --> 01:06:13.040]  Yeah, pretty much if he's going to grant a continuance is if you're ready for trial
[01:06:13.040 --> 01:06:16.040]  and you want to go forward and they're going to grant a continuance to the other side
[01:06:16.040 --> 01:06:18.040]  because you're not asking for a continuance.
[01:06:18.040 --> 01:06:24.040]  You want to bring prepared a blank order that says I want to continue the subpoenas
[01:06:24.040 --> 01:06:28.040]  and make sure all of the witnesses appear as if they've been subpoenas for that day.
[01:06:28.040 --> 01:06:32.040]  There's some formats for that, but you just have to be cognizant of that.
[01:06:32.040 --> 01:06:35.040]  If they don't have a subpoena to say to be down there at the courthouse
[01:06:35.040 --> 01:06:39.040]  at a specific date, time, and a specific court, they won't be there.
[01:06:39.040 --> 01:06:43.040]  Especially if they're friends of the opposing party.
[01:06:43.040 --> 01:06:49.040]  Teen subpoenas that require someone to be there on a certain date and to...
[01:06:49.040 --> 01:06:50.040]  And to the conclusion of the trial.
[01:06:50.040 --> 01:06:52.040]  Yeah, to the conclusion of the trial.
[01:06:52.040 --> 01:06:56.040]  Okay, but the issue is if the trial is postponed, the trial didn't occur.
[01:06:56.040 --> 01:06:57.040]  Oh, okay.
[01:06:57.040 --> 01:07:00.040]  Yeah, you have to look at how you write the subpoena
[01:07:00.040 --> 01:07:03.040]  and whether or not you get a court order that's broad enough
[01:07:03.040 --> 01:07:06.040]  to cover whenever the trial date is set.
[01:07:06.040 --> 01:07:11.040]  There is a question about continuances.
[01:07:11.040 --> 01:07:18.040]  You mentioned this one case where they got multiple continuances for three years.
[01:07:18.040 --> 01:07:19.040]  Right.
[01:07:19.040 --> 01:07:25.040]  Can you pretty well force the one requesting the continuance
[01:07:25.040 --> 01:07:30.040]  to confirm a date in which they can absolutely be ready?
[01:07:30.040 --> 01:07:32.040]  Well, it's not a case trial.
[01:07:32.040 --> 01:07:34.040]  Most of these were pre-trial hearings.
[01:07:34.040 --> 01:07:40.040]  They were arguments over documents and production of documents and pre-trial matters,
[01:07:40.040 --> 01:07:43.040]  and they were coming to resolve them in front of the judge,
[01:07:43.040 --> 01:07:45.040]  and what they kept doing is procrastinate.
[01:07:45.040 --> 01:07:52.040]  Recognize that the strategy of defense and civil litigation almost always is procrastinate.
[01:07:52.040 --> 01:08:00.040]  Because if the other party ever stubs their toes substantially on any rule, the case is over.
[01:08:00.040 --> 01:08:07.040]  So the basic strategy for the defense is always to procrastinate.
[01:08:07.040 --> 01:08:13.040]  So how do you shorten up the time that they?
[01:08:13.040 --> 01:08:17.040]  Well, you use the time that's in the book, and you object to any other motion.
[01:08:17.040 --> 01:08:24.040]  Most of the time, corporate attorneys will not file an affidavit stating why they need the continuance.
[01:08:24.040 --> 01:08:29.040]  The rule of the continuance requires that they state good cause in an affidavit
[01:08:29.040 --> 01:08:32.040]  or supported by affidavit.
[01:08:32.040 --> 01:08:35.040]  They can't support it, then you move for sanctions.
[01:08:35.040 --> 01:08:38.040]  You move for, and essentially since the court,
[01:08:38.040 --> 01:08:42.040]  here's one of the dilemmas that the pro se litigant runs into all the time.
[01:08:42.040 --> 01:08:46.040]  Because even though there's a process for doing motions for sanctions,
[01:08:46.040 --> 01:08:50.040]  no court in this country will give the pro se litigant sanctions.
[01:08:50.040 --> 01:08:56.040]  Meaning if you get sanctions against you, you're asked to pay attorney fees to the other side.
[01:08:56.040 --> 01:09:00.040]  If you get sanctions against them, they pay nothing to you.
[01:09:00.040 --> 01:09:07.040]  So the bottom line is there's not an equivalent of penalty to impact the attorneys
[01:09:07.040 --> 01:09:11.040]  on the other side of any litigation involving a pro se litigant.
[01:09:11.040 --> 01:09:15.040]  So the alternative to this is you ask for the monetary sanctions,
[01:09:15.040 --> 01:09:19.040]  and in the alternative, you ask for their pleadings to be stricken.
[01:09:19.040 --> 01:09:22.040]  If their pleadings are stricken, and in the case of a defendant,
[01:09:22.040 --> 01:09:25.040]  that means their answer, you move for default judgment.
[01:09:25.040 --> 01:09:31.040]  So if an opposing counsel files a motion for continuance
[01:09:31.040 --> 01:09:39.040]  and does not file a verified affidavit showing cause with it,
[01:09:39.040 --> 01:09:46.040]  wouldn't you as opposing counsel, I mean as an opposing litigant,
[01:09:46.040 --> 01:09:55.040]  have a right to trust that an attorney who's a member of the bar,
[01:09:55.040 --> 01:10:00.040]  he holds justice for you in trust,
[01:10:00.040 --> 01:10:05.040]  couldn't you file a bar grievance against him for violating the trust?
[01:10:05.040 --> 01:10:08.040]  Well, no, I think it's not about that.
[01:10:08.040 --> 01:10:12.040]  It's about short practices and disobeying the rule.
[01:10:12.040 --> 01:10:17.040]  The rule requires a motion for continuance to contain an affidavit.
[01:10:17.040 --> 01:10:18.040]  Wait, you're missing it.
[01:10:18.040 --> 01:10:25.040]  I'm talking about standing to file a bar grievance against the opposing counsel.
[01:10:25.040 --> 01:10:28.040]  You could file a bar grievance against the opposing counsel
[01:10:28.040 --> 01:10:32.040]  or any counsel at any time for violating any rule.
[01:10:32.040 --> 01:10:34.040]  Okay, that would work.
[01:10:34.040 --> 01:10:38.040]  I'm trying to find a way to punish him.
[01:10:38.040 --> 01:10:39.040]  The judge is not going to do it.
[01:10:39.040 --> 01:10:42.040]  The other thing opposing counsel for abusive process
[01:10:42.040 --> 01:10:47.040]  or filing frivolous motions is asked for the pleadings to be stricken.
[01:10:47.040 --> 01:10:49.040]  You win automatically if the pleadings are stricken.
[01:10:49.040 --> 01:10:52.040]  Yeah, but you're a pro-state litigant.
[01:10:52.040 --> 01:10:55.040]  I was in Wichita Falls going before a judge
[01:10:55.040 --> 01:11:02.040]  and he gave me this little spiel about someone representing themselves,
[01:11:02.040 --> 01:11:04.040]  and I told him how much I appreciated that.
[01:11:04.040 --> 01:11:10.040]  And in view of that sage advice, I'd like to ask you for some more.
[01:11:10.040 --> 01:11:17.040]  I'm sorry, first he told me that he would hold me to the same standards as an attorney.
[01:11:17.040 --> 01:11:18.040]  Well, that's a lie.
[01:11:18.040 --> 01:11:21.040]  I told him I certainly hope so because it's been my experience
[01:11:21.040 --> 01:11:24.040]  that you're not going to hold me to the same standards as an attorney.
[01:11:24.040 --> 01:11:26.040]  You're going to hold me to a much higher standard.
[01:11:26.040 --> 01:11:29.040]  You're going to make me jump through every legal hoop you can find,
[01:11:29.040 --> 01:11:31.040]  and when you run out of those, you're going to make up some
[01:11:31.040 --> 01:11:36.040]  and make me jump through those and then rule against me out of hand.
[01:11:36.040 --> 01:11:44.040]  So if we expect them to do that, we need another way of stinging them.
[01:11:44.040 --> 01:11:49.040]  Well, if you come across the judge who isn't going to uphold the sanctity of the court
[01:11:49.040 --> 01:11:52.040]  and he or she is going to be prejudicial,
[01:11:52.040 --> 01:11:57.040]  then you need to either refuse or move to disqualify the judge for prejudice.
[01:11:57.040 --> 01:12:03.040]  That's a whole special proceeding which we probably ought to discuss.
[01:12:03.040 --> 01:12:08.040]  Yeah, because the problem with that is disqualification takes constitutional grounds
[01:12:08.040 --> 01:12:10.040]  and recusal is to refuse.
[01:12:10.040 --> 01:12:12.040]  Well, why is it constitutional grounds?
[01:12:12.040 --> 01:12:16.040]  There's case law out there that supports the idea that if you don't have an impartial judge
[01:12:16.040 --> 01:12:20.040]  in the first instance, you don't have a real trial.
[01:12:20.040 --> 01:12:26.040]  Your substantial due process rights have been denied by giving you an impartial judge.
[01:12:26.040 --> 01:12:30.040]  Boy, bias is not in the disqualification.
[01:12:30.040 --> 01:12:34.040]  It is in the case law of the United States Supreme Court
[01:12:34.040 --> 01:12:39.040]  saying you're entitled to an impartial jurist in the first instance.
[01:12:39.040 --> 01:12:41.040]  Good, good.
[01:12:41.040 --> 01:12:43.040]  And that's the way to go about it.
[01:12:43.040 --> 01:12:44.040]  Absolutely.
[01:12:44.040 --> 01:12:48.040]  I'm leaning more toward beating up the judge.
[01:12:48.040 --> 01:12:51.040]  Nobody does that.
[01:12:51.040 --> 01:12:56.040]  Proceed litigants, we can expect that they're going to rule against us at every turn,
[01:12:56.040 --> 01:13:00.040]  so we don't have to worry about getting a judge PO'd at us
[01:13:00.040 --> 01:13:02.040]  because he's going to screw us anyway.
[01:13:02.040 --> 01:13:08.040]  Yeah, the strategy that I have seen is the first time you see any inkling on the part of the judge
[01:13:08.040 --> 01:13:13.040]  to be against you because you're merely a citizen and not an attorney,
[01:13:13.040 --> 01:13:17.040]  I think that's the point in time where you raise that issue with the court.
[01:13:17.040 --> 01:13:22.040]  I ask the judge, excuse me, if every time I start to argue, you interrupt me,
[01:13:22.040 --> 01:13:26.040]  but you allow the other attorney to speak indefinitely
[01:13:26.040 --> 01:13:32.040]  and you don't even allow me to interject an objection,
[01:13:32.040 --> 01:13:34.040]  it would appear that you're showing prejudice.
[01:13:34.040 --> 01:13:37.040]  Now, Your Honor, I don't have any problem with you being prejudiced
[01:13:37.040 --> 01:13:42.040]  as long as you don't stay sitting on my case while you're being prejudiced.
[01:13:42.040 --> 01:13:48.040]  But if that's your intent, please, I ask you to refuse yourself now on your own volition
[01:13:48.040 --> 01:13:52.040]  or should I prepare the appropriate motion?
[01:13:52.040 --> 01:13:57.040]  Now, this is an open court when you're arguing over a motion for continuance
[01:13:57.040 --> 01:14:00.040]  or some pretrial issue or starting the process.
[01:14:00.040 --> 01:14:05.040]  And if the judge realizes right from the beginning that you're going to go that route,
[01:14:05.040 --> 01:14:07.040]  it's all on the record.
[01:14:07.040 --> 01:14:11.040]  Hopefully, you filed that letter that says you want a court reporter.
[01:14:11.040 --> 01:14:15.040]  So now it's all on the record and the judge gets to make the decision.
[01:14:15.040 --> 01:14:21.040]  Am I going to sound like a raving lunatic on the bench or am I going to be a reasonable person?
[01:14:21.040 --> 01:14:28.040]  Most dangerous judges are the ones that block the line and then screw you in the end.
[01:14:28.040 --> 01:14:31.040]  Then you can only hope to win on appeal.
[01:14:31.040 --> 01:14:33.040]  Yeah.
[01:14:33.040 --> 01:14:44.040]  I'm trying to find a way for a litigant to be able to sting them early and sting them in a way that hurts them.
[01:14:44.040 --> 01:14:48.040]  They've got to have the opportunity to step over the line the first time.
[01:14:48.040 --> 01:14:49.040]  Of course.
[01:14:49.040 --> 01:14:56.040]  But I'm looking at the very first time, not wait until the judge has you halfway ruined,
[01:14:56.040 --> 01:15:01.040]  but first time, sting him is the first chance he gives you.
[01:15:01.040 --> 01:15:04.040]  The problem is prejudice may not be.
[01:15:04.040 --> 01:15:07.040]  Prejudice is one of those things which is greed.
[01:15:07.040 --> 01:15:11.040]  How much prejudice could be there?
[01:15:11.040 --> 01:15:19.040]  If you could show that the last seven post-study litigants in his court never got motions for continuance,
[01:15:19.040 --> 01:15:22.040]  never won any of their motions for anything,
[01:15:22.040 --> 01:15:26.040]  and the judge summarily dismissed all of their causes of action,
[01:15:26.040 --> 01:15:29.040]  which I would tell people to do the research on,
[01:15:29.040 --> 01:15:34.040]  I would kind of like recusing or disqualifying this judge right from the beginning before you ever come in there.
[01:15:34.040 --> 01:15:37.040]  Say, look, I found all these cases, post-study litigants,
[01:15:37.040 --> 01:15:45.040]  it's the judge's prejudice, ask the judge to, you know, recuse himself and see what happens.
[01:15:45.040 --> 01:15:49.040]  On occasions, we've seen judges that say, okay, fine, I'll out.
[01:15:49.040 --> 01:15:52.040]  I'll hand it over to another judge.
[01:15:52.040 --> 01:15:54.040]  Another case is they won't.
[01:15:54.040 --> 01:15:59.040]  But now you've already set the stage for the fact that they've abused their discrimination
[01:15:59.040 --> 01:16:02.040]  because you've shown that they're already prejudiced.
[01:16:02.040 --> 01:16:09.040]  And now everything they do in your case will, you know, essentially support the allegation.
[01:16:09.040 --> 01:16:13.040]  Well, I guess I'm a little more proactive.
[01:16:13.040 --> 01:16:20.040]  I'm looking for a way to sting the judge more directly
[01:16:20.040 --> 01:16:27.040]  so that it has the appearance I can harm him and hurt his career or maybe even sue him personally.
[01:16:27.040 --> 01:16:31.040]  Well, you're talking about a judicial conduct complaint.
[01:16:31.040 --> 01:16:33.040]  That's a possibility.
[01:16:33.040 --> 01:16:43.040]  Also, I've been looking through causes of action and ways to sue the judge himself.
[01:16:43.040 --> 01:16:50.040]  And I'm considering repudiation, repudiation of contract.
[01:16:50.040 --> 01:16:52.040]  He swears to an oath.
[01:16:52.040 --> 01:17:00.040]  I'm dubious of this process, but I could be convinced with proper information that maybe it is a good idea.
[01:17:00.040 --> 01:17:01.040]  The judge swore on his oath.
[01:17:01.040 --> 01:17:08.040]  You know, the oldest thing about the oath of office, the oath of office binds him to a contract.
[01:17:08.040 --> 01:17:11.040]  He made a promise in the contract.
[01:17:11.040 --> 01:17:14.040]  He received consideration on the contract.
[01:17:14.040 --> 01:17:16.040]  So the contract is binding.
[01:17:16.040 --> 01:17:21.040]  By his salary, the contract is now binding.
[01:17:21.040 --> 01:17:28.040]  If he violates a law relating to his office, he has repudiated the contract.
[01:17:28.040 --> 01:17:32.040]  I would say that, yes, he's done and that's an act of moral perpetuity.
[01:17:32.040 --> 01:17:34.040]  He could be removed.
[01:17:34.040 --> 01:17:38.040]  But the problem is that in Texas currently, we have judges that have no oath of office
[01:17:38.040 --> 01:17:42.040]  and the appellate court has stayed silent.
[01:17:42.040 --> 01:17:48.040]  It's refused when actively pursued to remove these people from office
[01:17:48.040 --> 01:17:53.040]  and to rule that their decisions on the bench were void because they had no oath of office,
[01:17:53.040 --> 01:17:55.040]  the appellate courts were silent.
[01:17:55.040 --> 01:18:03.040]  Well, I'm saying sue the judge, counter-sue the judge in whatever action is going on, the judge personally.
[01:18:03.040 --> 01:18:05.040]  That might be a way to do it.
[01:18:05.040 --> 01:18:09.040]  But as long as the judge adds jurisdiction over you, you're going to have to get past that.
[01:18:09.040 --> 01:18:12.040]  Because once they have jurisdiction, they have judicial immunity.
[01:18:12.040 --> 01:18:17.040]  Once you sue him, then he's disqualified.
[01:18:17.040 --> 01:18:19.040]  No.
[01:18:19.040 --> 01:18:24.040]  He has to lose jurisdiction some other way or anytime somebody wanted to get rid of the judge,
[01:18:24.040 --> 01:18:29.040]  they'd just file a suit again.
[01:18:29.040 --> 01:18:33.040]  That's going to be a question that would have to be answered and resolved.
[01:18:33.040 --> 01:18:39.040]  I would say if he's repudiated his contract and violated his oath of office,
[01:18:39.040 --> 01:18:43.040]  he's already lost jurisdiction of the case anywhere.
[01:18:43.040 --> 01:18:48.040]  And there's some federal U.S. Supreme Court cases that have said that.
[01:18:48.040 --> 01:18:52.040]  As soon as they exceed their authority, they may have lost jurisdiction anyway.
[01:18:52.040 --> 01:18:57.040]  But that becomes a gray area since the courts have been very reluctant to hold judges accountable,
[01:18:57.040 --> 01:19:01.040]  except apparently when they take bribes.
[01:19:01.040 --> 01:19:06.040]  There was a recent case out of Pennsylvania where they caught a couple of judges doing that.
[01:19:06.040 --> 01:19:13.040]  Yeah, the ones that were putting kids in juvenile homes because they were getting kickbacks.
[01:19:13.040 --> 01:19:14.040]  They were getting the kickbacks.
[01:19:14.040 --> 01:19:15.040]  That was incredibly reprehensible.
[01:19:15.040 --> 01:19:22.040]  Well, this brings up the issue of what I feel very strongly about is that the FBI has a process in place
[01:19:22.040 --> 01:19:28.040]  in which agents are frequently put through forensic accounting processes to see whether or not
[01:19:28.040 --> 01:19:34.040]  they've sold out to foreign governments or they're taking bribes from drug kingpins or whatever,
[01:19:34.040 --> 01:19:36.040]  and they look at their financial records.
[01:19:36.040 --> 01:19:38.040]  We don't do that with judges.
[01:19:38.040 --> 01:19:45.040]  And judges are at least ten times more powerful than any individual FBI agent.
[01:19:45.040 --> 01:19:47.040]  So why aren't we looking at the judge's income?
[01:19:47.040 --> 01:19:53.040]  We don't really care about their outgoing, but what we care about is where they get their money from.
[01:19:53.040 --> 01:19:57.040]  So far I've seen, I've never met a poor judge.
[01:19:57.040 --> 01:19:58.040]  Right.
[01:19:58.040 --> 01:20:00.040]  Well, they make quite a bit of money anyway.
[01:20:00.040 --> 01:20:03.040]  Right.
[01:20:03.040 --> 01:20:09.040]  What Tony Davis is doing in the federal courts is the first thing he wants to do is demand a complete
[01:20:09.040 --> 01:20:17.040]  financial statement from the judge to find out if he has any investments that would act as a conflict,
[01:20:17.040 --> 01:20:27.040]  specifically investments in any sort of prison bonds or any sort of prison-related business.
[01:20:27.040 --> 01:20:36.040]  He did that in Missouri, and they promptly moved the case from Missouri to Ohio.
[01:20:36.040 --> 01:20:39.040]  Kansas, I'm sorry, to Kansas.
[01:20:39.040 --> 01:20:44.040]  The judge had a fit and wanted out of there.
[01:20:44.040 --> 01:20:48.040]  So I thought that was a pretty clever tactic.
[01:20:48.040 --> 01:20:52.040]  Yeah, the judge shows prejudicial conduct.
[01:20:52.040 --> 01:20:57.040]  And he had another tactic that I thought was rather interesting.
[01:20:57.040 --> 01:20:58.040]  He put in a-
[01:20:58.040 --> 01:21:00.040]  I'll leave you off the topic, but I really-
[01:21:00.040 --> 01:21:02.040]  Okay.
[01:21:02.040 --> 01:21:04.040]  Then proceed if I'm asking too many questions.
[01:21:04.040 --> 01:21:05.040]  Go ahead.
[01:21:05.040 --> 01:21:06.040]  Let's move ahead.
[01:21:06.040 --> 01:21:10.040]  Well, the last part of the whole thing is, you know, once you get your dust in the road,
[01:21:10.040 --> 01:21:16.040]  you have to look at the process of evidentiary hearings and the pre-trial, the actual pre-trial hearing
[01:21:16.040 --> 01:21:20.040]  where you discuss what's called the jury charge.
[01:21:20.040 --> 01:21:22.040]  There's all sorts of rules about the jury charge.
[01:21:22.040 --> 01:21:26.040]  You could actually- and there's books written on jury charges.
[01:21:26.040 --> 01:21:30.040]  And you have to make sure that the jury charge is the one you want.
[01:21:30.040 --> 01:21:33.040]  And if you don't get the one you want, you can't acquiesce.
[01:21:33.040 --> 01:21:34.040]  You have to object.
[01:21:34.040 --> 01:21:39.040]  And if you don't object in writing in timely fashion, you get stuck with the jury charge
[01:21:39.040 --> 01:21:43.040]  to date the life of the judge in the opposing party.
[01:21:43.040 --> 01:21:47.040]  And whatever the jury charge is, is what the decision of the jury is.
[01:21:47.040 --> 01:21:49.040]  It may not even have anything to do with the case,
[01:21:49.040 --> 01:21:53.040]  but if you waived your rights because you didn't object to the jury charge,
[01:21:53.040 --> 01:21:56.040]  you may give away your entire case.
[01:21:56.040 --> 01:21:59.040]  So you have to be aware of those rules.
[01:21:59.040 --> 01:22:08.040]  When is the jury charge supposed to be made available to the litigant?
[01:22:08.040 --> 01:22:09.040]  Well, no, no.
[01:22:09.040 --> 01:22:14.040]  There's a jury charge in a civil case prepared by the litigant.
[01:22:14.040 --> 01:22:23.040]  Well, I mean, the opposing side, how early do I have to be served with a proposed jury charge?
[01:22:23.040 --> 01:22:29.040]  Well, there's rules on it, and I'm not sure what the time frame is,
[01:22:29.040 --> 01:22:32.040]  but usually at pre-trial hearings they discuss that.
[01:22:32.040 --> 01:22:37.040]  When they actually set the trial, there'll be a date where they'll come in and discuss the jury charge.
[01:22:37.040 --> 01:22:40.040]  And you have to get a written copy of the jury charge,
[01:22:40.040 --> 01:22:44.040]  and it has to be with sufficient notice that you could object to it in writing.
[01:22:44.040 --> 01:22:48.040]  So what I would tell anybody right at the beginning of the case,
[01:22:48.040 --> 01:22:51.040]  the whole decision of the case is the jury charge.
[01:22:51.040 --> 01:22:56.040]  So after you write your law, you can write your jury charge.
[01:22:56.040 --> 01:22:58.040]  That could be a couple of shows.
[01:22:58.040 --> 01:22:59.040]  What?
[01:22:59.040 --> 01:23:02.040]  That could be a couple of shows, how to write a jury charge.
[01:23:02.040 --> 01:23:06.040]  Well, I mean, that gets into the actual cause of action,
[01:23:06.040 --> 01:23:12.040]  but actually writing a jury charge will need the research of the particular litigant in the case involved,
[01:23:12.040 --> 01:23:18.040]  and you submit the jury charge that you want to the opposing side and give them plenty of time to respond.
[01:23:18.040 --> 01:23:23.040]  And if they don't object to it, then you use them to the court and ask them to put it in place.
[01:23:23.040 --> 01:23:27.040]  If the other party doesn't object to it, you get your jury charge in.
[01:23:27.040 --> 01:23:32.040]  If they object to it and write some differences and the judge puts their differences in,
[01:23:32.040 --> 01:23:36.040]  then you have to know when to object and objecting to those jury charges.
[01:23:36.040 --> 01:23:42.040]  Either it's not part of your cause of action, it's not a jury question, and that has a lot to do with it.
[01:23:42.040 --> 01:23:47.040]  There's a lot of cases out there that have been won and lost based on what the jury charge is
[01:23:47.040 --> 01:23:54.040]  and how the jury charge may be manipulated by the judge.
[01:23:54.040 --> 01:24:00.040]  So we want to address the jury charge in the original filing or soon thereafter?
[01:24:00.040 --> 01:24:03.040]  Well, you want to contemplate it. You want to be well aware of it.
[01:24:03.040 --> 01:24:08.040]  You don't want to be caught three days before trial trying to put together a jury charge.
[01:24:08.040 --> 01:24:13.040]  Jury charge is exactly what you need to prove for the case.
[01:24:13.040 --> 01:24:16.040]  It actually goes to the culpability of the other side.
[01:24:16.040 --> 01:24:23.040]  What's the actual cause of action? Who were the parties involved that did whatever the action was that made them culpable?
[01:24:23.040 --> 01:24:30.040]  What were the actual amounts of damage? Who actually did it? Who actually owed?
[01:24:30.040 --> 01:24:34.040]  And how to arise with those questions? Who was responsible?
[01:24:34.040 --> 01:24:38.040]  Then if there's punitive damages involved, part of the jury question has to go to,
[01:24:38.040 --> 01:24:45.040]  if you find them culpable of this, did you find that they did this in some manner that was either intentional
[01:24:45.040 --> 01:24:50.040]  or meets the requirement for punitive damages?
[01:24:50.040 --> 01:24:53.040]  And those questions have to be asked.
[01:24:53.040 --> 01:24:58.040]  You can't get punitive damages if you don't get actually at least $1 of actual damages.
[01:24:58.040 --> 01:25:03.040]  And that's been lost in cases where the jury knew something was up,
[01:25:03.040 --> 01:25:09.040]  but didn't find any actual damages because the party just failed to put on any evidence of the actual damages.
[01:25:09.040 --> 01:25:19.040]  Or in reading through these causes of action, unless you have a cause of action that doesn't require actual damage.
[01:25:19.040 --> 01:25:27.040]  And I was just reading those on threat of bodily injury.
[01:25:27.040 --> 01:25:35.040]  Threat of bodily injury didn't require you to prove actual damages.
[01:25:35.040 --> 01:25:39.040]  No, but you have to prove the threat.
[01:25:39.040 --> 01:25:43.040]  All you have to show is that you were apprehensive.
[01:25:43.040 --> 01:25:49.040]  The apprehension is the de facto threat.
[01:25:49.040 --> 01:25:51.040]  Well, you have to prove it.
[01:25:51.040 --> 01:26:01.040]  If you claim a cause of injury, a cause of action, there are elements to the cause of action you have to prove.
[01:26:01.040 --> 01:26:09.040]  But this is one that you didn't have to prove actual harm or actual damages.
[01:26:09.040 --> 01:26:13.040]  Just the harm was the threat.
[01:26:13.040 --> 01:26:16.040]  And so there are others that you didn't have to prove that you were actually harmed.
[01:26:16.040 --> 01:26:19.040]  For instance, a number of the torts.
[01:26:19.040 --> 01:26:26.040]  If your claim rings in tort, a number of those you don't have to prove actual harm.
[01:26:26.040 --> 01:26:28.040]  Due process is one.
[01:26:28.040 --> 01:26:35.040]  Right, but in like a case of injury where you were injured by a product or something
[01:26:35.040 --> 01:26:41.040]  or slip and fall in a supermarket, you have to show the initial cause of action
[01:26:41.040 --> 01:26:44.040]  and prove it before you can get punitive damages.
[01:26:44.040 --> 01:26:48.040]  So if you don't prove that you actually suffered at least $1 in damages,
[01:26:48.040 --> 01:26:52.040]  $1 of damages to you when you actually slipped and fell,
[01:26:52.040 --> 01:26:57.040]  all of the punitive damages won't ever be considered if there's any way to get to them.
[01:26:57.040 --> 01:27:03.040]  So you have to look at all elements of it, and that's all part of the jury charge process.
[01:27:03.040 --> 01:27:09.040]  Well, good, it kind of looks like I need to figure out what the jury charge is real early
[01:27:09.040 --> 01:27:12.040]  so I'll know how to write the rest of the case around it.
[01:27:12.040 --> 01:27:18.040]  Actually, writing the jury charge will help you write your original pleading.
[01:27:18.040 --> 01:27:20.040]  That is a very good point.
[01:27:20.040 --> 01:27:25.040]  Now I have to start all over with the suit I'm writing.
[01:27:25.040 --> 01:27:28.040]  Well, recognize that pleadings can be amended, so you can file,
[01:27:28.040 --> 01:27:33.040]  and if you're up against the time deadline for statute of limitations,
[01:27:33.040 --> 01:27:37.040]  you can start the initial pleading, and in most courts you don't even have to ask permission
[01:27:37.040 --> 01:27:42.040]  as long as you're within a certain time period, you can file an amended pleading.
[01:27:42.040 --> 01:27:46.040]  So you can fix anything you need to fix before the case gets dismissed
[01:27:46.040 --> 01:27:48.040]  or 30 days before the trial.
[01:27:48.040 --> 01:27:52.040]  Now in federal court, my understanding is in order to amend your pleading,
[01:27:52.040 --> 01:27:55.040]  you have to ask the court for leave to amend.
[01:27:55.040 --> 01:27:59.040]  And then show cause?
[01:27:59.040 --> 01:28:01.040]  Well, yes, you have to ask for leave to amend,
[01:28:01.040 --> 01:28:05.040]  and the court has got to find good cause to allow you to amend.
[01:28:05.040 --> 01:28:15.040]  So if you needed time, you could accidentally leave out a required litigant
[01:28:15.040 --> 01:28:19.040]  and then amend to include the litigant.
[01:28:19.040 --> 01:28:25.040]  Right, but the other party could indicate that because you amended them,
[01:28:25.040 --> 01:28:27.040]  your thoughts of action should be dismissed.
[01:28:27.040 --> 01:28:30.040]  But before they can be dismissed?
[01:28:30.040 --> 01:28:33.040]  And they don't ever go down that road in federal court.
[01:28:33.040 --> 01:28:38.040]  Avoid having to amend your pleading for the first time.
[01:28:38.040 --> 01:28:44.040]  Take court, you can be a little bit more lenient with what you filed initially,
[01:28:44.040 --> 01:28:51.040]  but definitely you have to consider the issue of the jury charge before you ever.
[01:28:51.040 --> 01:28:57.040]  That's what you're asking and, you know, they did this, they did this against the statute,
[01:28:57.040 --> 01:29:02.040]  they did this in violation of a contract, they did this under,
[01:29:02.040 --> 01:29:09.040]  they failed to do this under a required duty, whatever it is.
[01:29:09.040 --> 01:29:14.040]  And what you have to prove is those elements,
[01:29:14.040 --> 01:29:18.040]  and now you have to have all your evidence to prove those elements,
[01:29:18.040 --> 01:29:20.040]  and those have to be part of the jury charge.
[01:29:20.040 --> 01:29:25.040]  Did you find that the defendants in this clause actually caused the damage?
[01:29:25.040 --> 01:29:26.040]  Yes.
[01:29:26.040 --> 01:29:29.040]  How much was the damage?
[01:29:29.040 --> 01:29:32.040]  Ask the jury to determine that.
[01:29:32.040 --> 01:29:34.040]  Once you've done that, you're past the first point.
[01:29:34.040 --> 01:29:38.040]  Then you ask whether or not there's elements that allow you to have a unit of damages,
[01:29:38.040 --> 01:29:42.040]  and if they agree that, yes, we think you've met the requirements of those elements,
[01:29:42.040 --> 01:29:46.040]  unit of damages, then they get to determine what they think the unit of damages are.
[01:29:46.040 --> 01:29:48.040]  Oh, cool. Okay.
[01:29:48.040 --> 01:29:50.040]  Okay, listen, we're going to break.
[01:29:50.040 --> 01:29:55.040]  We've got a half an hour left, and I want to talk to Randy when we get back.
[01:29:55.040 --> 01:29:57.040]  We also have Jim from Texas.
[01:29:57.040 --> 01:30:00.040]  We'll be right back.
[01:30:00.040 --> 01:30:05.040]  Gold prices are at historic highs, and with the recent pullback, this is a great time to buy.
[01:30:05.040 --> 01:30:09.040]  With the value of the dollar, risks of inflation, geopolitical uncertainties,
[01:30:09.040 --> 01:30:13.040]  and instability in world financial systems, I see gold going up much higher.
[01:30:13.040 --> 01:30:16.040]  Hi, I'm Tim Fry at Roberts and Roberts Brokerage.
[01:30:16.040 --> 01:30:20.040]  Everybody should have some of their assets in investment-grade precious metals.
[01:30:20.040 --> 01:30:23.040]  At Roberts and Roberts Brokerage, you can buy gold, silver,
[01:30:23.040 --> 01:30:29.040]  and platinum with confidence from a brokerage that's specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[01:30:29.040 --> 01:30:31.040]  If you are new to precious metals,
[01:30:31.040 --> 01:30:35.040]  we will happily provide you with the information you need to make an informed decision
[01:30:35.040 --> 01:30:37.040]  whether or not you choose to purchase from us.
[01:30:37.040 --> 01:30:40.040]  Also, Roberts and Roberts Brokerage values your privacy
[01:30:40.040 --> 01:30:45.040]  and will always advise you in the event that we would be required to report any transaction.
[01:30:45.040 --> 01:30:50.040]  If you have gold, silver, or platinum you'd like to sell, we can convert it for immediate payment.
[01:30:50.040 --> 01:30:54.040]  Call us at 800-874-9760.
[01:30:54.040 --> 01:31:01.040]  We're Roberts and Roberts Brokerage, 800-874-9760.
[01:31:24.040 --> 01:31:31.040]  You can buy gold, silver, and platinum with confidence from a brokerage that's specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[01:31:31.040 --> 01:31:38.040]  At Roberts Brokerage, you can buy gold, silver, and platinum with confidence from a brokerage that's specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[01:31:38.040 --> 01:31:44.040]  We're Roberts Brokerage, 800-874-9760.
[01:31:44.040 --> 01:31:49.040]  We're happy to help you make the most of your precious metals.
[01:31:49.040 --> 01:31:57.040]  Oh, Lord, oh, Lord, oh, what me say? Me miss me darling, me say me miss me honey.
[01:31:57.040 --> 01:32:05.040]  But I don't have no phone, me say to call she. Me split me ET and T, now what me?
[01:32:05.040 --> 01:32:13.040]  MCIS regular them want me, but them say me that me credit no good, you see.
[01:32:13.040 --> 01:32:29.040]  She thinks that I have somebody else to see, so she give me a cold shoulder, she no wanna talk to me.
[01:32:29.040 --> 01:32:37.040]  Honey, my darling, sugar, the elephant, the business what you friend, devil, not saying.
[01:32:37.040 --> 01:32:45.040]  We can smell a cold shoulder from 200 miles away.
[01:32:45.040 --> 01:32:59.040]  Okay, all right, we're gonna segue now because Professor Ken Magnuson has literally encyclopedias to go.
[01:32:59.040 --> 01:33:07.040]  And I want to get to Randy from Austin, Texas because we've been picking on him quite a bit.
[01:33:07.040 --> 01:33:13.040]  And I just had to make sure that I hadn't upset him because I've been picking on him so much.
[01:33:13.040 --> 01:33:17.040]  But you know, Randy, if we pick on you, it means we love you.
[01:33:17.040 --> 01:33:22.040]  So what is the deal, dude, with your dog?
[01:33:22.040 --> 01:33:29.040]  I mean, you know, you could keep him on a leash, I mean, why can't you keep him locked up in your yard?
[01:33:29.040 --> 01:33:33.040]  I mean, is he digging out underneath the fence?
[01:33:33.040 --> 01:33:41.040]  I mean, I've been hearing on breaks something about somebody is breaking the lock on your gate.
[01:33:41.040 --> 01:33:47.040]  And now you're telling me that this all started when he was a puppy and the neighbor is all mad.
[01:33:47.040 --> 01:33:51.040]  Okay, so let's get that abreast here, okay?
[01:33:51.040 --> 01:33:52.040]  Time for gossip.
[01:33:52.040 --> 01:33:56.040]  Okay, what is the deal with you and the dog and the neighbor?
[01:33:56.040 --> 01:33:58.040]  Because I've got to know.
[01:33:58.040 --> 01:34:08.040]  Well, it started out, got the dog for the kids, Christmas, two years ago.
[01:34:08.040 --> 01:34:15.040]  Neighbor notices the dog and one day, it's probably a couple months after he got it,
[01:34:15.040 --> 01:34:19.040]  and all of a sudden somebody is beating down my front door.
[01:34:19.040 --> 01:34:25.040]  And I open the door, there's the neighbor screaming in my face about this dog
[01:34:25.040 --> 01:34:29.040]  and that it's a dangerous dog and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
[01:34:29.040 --> 01:34:32.040]  I thought the guy was going to hit me.
[01:34:32.040 --> 01:34:38.040]  And so I just said, well, look, you need to calm down and go home.
[01:34:38.040 --> 01:34:47.040]  And then all of a sudden, over this period of time, gates are opened up and left open.
[01:34:47.040 --> 01:34:50.040]  Weird, you know, just things going on.
[01:34:50.040 --> 01:34:58.040]  The guy baits the dog, threatens my kid when the dog is on the leash with the child.
[01:34:58.040 --> 01:35:03.040]  And I'm talking threats with a sickle, a yard tool.
[01:35:03.040 --> 01:35:06.040]  I mean, just the guy is nuts.
[01:35:06.040 --> 01:35:16.040]  And so 10 days before I got the citation, I caught him shooting the dog with a pellet gun.
[01:35:16.040 --> 01:35:18.040]  Okay, okay, wait, wait, wait, stop, stop.
[01:35:18.040 --> 01:35:21.040]  You caught him shooting the dog with a pellet gun.
[01:35:21.040 --> 01:35:26.040]  Where was the dog when he was getting shot with a pellet gun?
[01:35:26.040 --> 01:35:31.040]  He was standing in his doorway of his garage,
[01:35:31.040 --> 01:35:34.040]  shooting across his property into mine and hitting the dog.
[01:35:34.040 --> 01:35:37.040]  Okay, was the dog in your yard?
[01:35:37.040 --> 01:35:39.040]  Yes.
[01:35:39.040 --> 01:35:40.040]  Okay.
[01:35:40.040 --> 01:35:43.040]  I don't wait to get the dog and he almost hit me with it.
[01:35:43.040 --> 01:35:44.040]  Okay.
[01:35:44.040 --> 01:35:50.040]  So I got the dog in the house and then I wrote up a criminal complaint on him,
[01:35:50.040 --> 01:35:53.040]  but then I got second-guessing myself there.
[01:35:53.040 --> 01:35:58.040]  And about 10 days later, all of a sudden the dog's out again and then they're there.
[01:35:58.040 --> 01:35:59.040]  Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
[01:35:59.040 --> 01:36:00.040]  Okay, okay, stop.
[01:36:00.040 --> 01:36:01.040]  Randy, I've got to give you a hard time.
[01:36:01.040 --> 01:36:05.040]  All of a sudden the dog is out again.
[01:36:05.040 --> 01:36:09.040]  How is all of a sudden the dog out again?
[01:36:09.040 --> 01:36:10.040]  Because the gate was opened.
[01:36:10.040 --> 01:36:14.040]  Okay, who opened the gate?
[01:36:14.040 --> 01:36:16.040]  Don't know.
[01:36:16.040 --> 01:36:20.040]  Randy, don't you think it's your responsibility to keep the gate closed?
[01:36:20.040 --> 01:36:21.040]  I'm sorry.
[01:36:21.040 --> 01:36:23.040]  This may seem like totally brain-deadness,
[01:36:23.040 --> 01:36:29.040]  and maybe there's a perfectly plausible explanation here, but what's the deal?
[01:36:29.040 --> 01:36:32.040]  When you put a lock on the gate.
[01:36:32.040 --> 01:36:34.040]  Well, I had put a lock on the gate previously,
[01:36:34.040 --> 01:36:36.040]  but somebody had come along and busted the gate,
[01:36:36.040 --> 01:36:41.040]  so I had taken – I didn't have the lock on that day because I hadn't –
[01:36:41.040 --> 01:36:44.040]  I just had it shut and, you know, it was latched.
[01:36:44.040 --> 01:36:46.040]  I know that.
[01:36:46.040 --> 01:36:54.040]  And then when I went back out, the gate's open, wide open.
[01:36:54.040 --> 01:36:55.040]  You've been careful, Mike.
[01:36:55.040 --> 01:36:59.040]  I have three gates in my yard, and at various times somebody comes along
[01:36:59.040 --> 01:37:01.040]  and opens one of the three.
[01:37:01.040 --> 01:37:06.040]  Randy, did it ever occur to you that a dog may be opening the gate?
[01:37:06.040 --> 01:37:07.040]  No, the dog can't get the gate.
[01:37:07.040 --> 01:37:08.040]  Oh, come on.
[01:37:08.040 --> 01:37:09.040]  It's too high.
[01:37:09.040 --> 01:37:12.040]  Oh, yes he can.
[01:37:12.040 --> 01:37:14.040]  No, he can't.
[01:37:14.040 --> 01:37:17.040]  What kind of dog is it?
[01:37:17.040 --> 01:37:20.040]  It's a scary dog.
[01:37:20.040 --> 01:37:22.040]  What kind of dog is he?
[01:37:22.040 --> 01:37:23.040]  Pit bull.
[01:37:23.040 --> 01:37:24.040]  Or she?
[01:37:24.040 --> 01:37:25.040]  Yep, it's a pit bull.
[01:37:25.040 --> 01:37:26.040]  It's a pit bull.
[01:37:26.040 --> 01:37:28.040]  Okay, how tall is the dog?
[01:37:28.040 --> 01:37:30.040]  How long is the dog?
[01:37:30.040 --> 01:37:37.040]  The dog is 45 pounds and probably stands maybe 20 inches at shoulder.
[01:37:37.040 --> 01:37:43.040]  Dude, listen, if the dog rears up on its hind legs, it can open the gate, okay?
[01:37:43.040 --> 01:37:45.040]  It can't get that high.
[01:37:45.040 --> 01:37:47.040]  It's not even close on its hind legs.
[01:37:47.040 --> 01:37:49.040]  This gate's tall.
[01:37:49.040 --> 01:37:52.040]  Okay, whatever you say.
[01:37:52.040 --> 01:37:54.040]  So somebody had to open it?
[01:37:54.040 --> 01:37:56.040]  Somebody had to open the gate.
[01:37:56.040 --> 01:38:01.040]  I mean, the gate sticks pretty good too.
[01:38:01.040 --> 01:38:04.040]  So once you get the latch open, then you've got to get it open.
[01:38:04.040 --> 01:38:10.040]  I mean, it's not like somebody just, the wind blew it or it just happened to pop open on its own accord.
[01:38:10.040 --> 01:38:14.040]  Someone had to open the gate.
[01:38:14.040 --> 01:38:22.040]  You're positive, you are positive that that dog could not have jumped to open the latch of the gate?
[01:38:22.040 --> 01:38:23.040]  Yes.
[01:38:23.040 --> 01:38:26.040]  Okay, I take your word for it. I believe you.
[01:38:26.040 --> 01:38:29.040]  Is the problem still occurring?
[01:38:29.040 --> 01:38:35.040]  Well, what I've done is I've got the gate pretty much shut and nailed,
[01:38:35.040 --> 01:38:41.040]  and then I've got a chain that I put the dog on now so that I don't have to, well, I've still got to worry about it,
[01:38:41.040 --> 01:38:48.040]  but to try and mitigate any way that the dog could get out or anybody could let it out.
[01:38:48.040 --> 01:38:51.040]  I mean, now they've got to come in the yard, take it off the chain.
[01:38:51.040 --> 01:39:02.040]  Okay, so has any problems occurred since you very securely chained down your dog?
[01:39:02.040 --> 01:39:07.040]  Just the one gate over here that's not locked on the backside has been open a couple of times.
[01:39:07.040 --> 01:39:13.040]  Okay, the one gate on the backside has been open a couple of times. Has the dog got out?
[01:39:13.040 --> 01:39:14.040]  No.
[01:39:14.040 --> 01:39:17.040]  Okay.
[01:39:17.040 --> 01:39:20.040]  Have you had any other...
[01:39:20.040 --> 01:39:28.040]  I'm sorry if I'm being a hard, you know, you know what, but, you know, this is talk radio.
[01:39:28.040 --> 01:39:31.040]  This is what makes things interesting. So, okay.
[01:39:31.040 --> 01:39:36.040]  Well, what's interesting to me is that all the other neighborhood dogs get to run around loose,
[01:39:36.040 --> 01:39:38.040]  but I'm the one that gets the ticket.
[01:39:38.040 --> 01:39:43.040]  Well, you know what? I don't agree with any dogs running around loose. Okay?
[01:39:43.040 --> 01:39:47.040]  Well, I don't let my dog run around loose. I'd never do that. I've never allowed the dog out.
[01:39:47.040 --> 01:39:55.040]  That's just not what, I mean, you know, you don't do that, but it seems to me that if that's such a big deal
[01:39:55.040 --> 01:40:00.040]  that all the other neighborhood dogs ought to go stay in their pens too.
[01:40:00.040 --> 01:40:01.040]  I'm just saying...
[01:40:01.040 --> 01:40:04.040]  You need to take pictures. This is Ken Magnuson.
[01:40:04.040 --> 01:40:07.040]  You need to take pictures of the other dogs running loose.
[01:40:07.040 --> 01:40:09.040]  Yeah, I agreed.
[01:40:09.040 --> 01:40:17.040]  You need to talk to the other neighbors to see if they've seen anybody opening the gate.
[01:40:17.040 --> 01:40:19.040]  You need to mount a video camera.
[01:40:19.040 --> 01:40:20.040]  Video camera.
[01:40:20.040 --> 01:40:28.040]  You're not filing the criminal complaint against the guy shooting your dog from his yard.
[01:40:28.040 --> 01:40:32.040]  Well, you know, I just, like I said, it was about 10 days afterwards.
[01:40:32.040 --> 01:40:38.040]  I hadn't gotten around to it, and I probably should have done it quicker.
[01:40:38.040 --> 01:40:43.040]  Okay, so Randy, are you facing criminal charges right now?
[01:40:43.040 --> 01:40:44.040]  Yes.
[01:40:44.040 --> 01:40:45.040]  Because of...
[01:40:45.040 --> 01:40:50.040]  Okay. And this is under the county, right? These are county charges?
[01:40:50.040 --> 01:40:57.040]  This isn't municipal. This isn't state. This is under the county.
[01:40:57.040 --> 01:41:01.040]  You're in a rural area, right? This is...
[01:41:01.040 --> 01:41:03.040]  I'm not incorporated.
[01:41:03.040 --> 01:41:13.040]  You're in an unincorporated area. You're in an unannexed area. Okay.
[01:41:13.040 --> 01:41:20.040]  So what court technically is bringing these charges against you?
[01:41:20.040 --> 01:41:25.040]  Justice and the Peace Precinct 3, Travis County.
[01:41:25.040 --> 01:41:34.040]  And the thing is, is that, like I said, I went to this hearing and I asked the 20-something-year-old county attorney prosecutor,
[01:41:34.040 --> 01:41:38.040]  what statute am I supposed to violate?
[01:41:38.040 --> 01:41:41.040]  Because it's not clear. It's not listed anywhere.
[01:41:41.040 --> 01:41:44.040]  And she couldn't answer me after looking at her paperwork and told me,
[01:41:44.040 --> 01:41:46.040]  I don't know. I'll have to look it up for you.
[01:41:46.040 --> 01:41:50.040]  Who is your accuser?
[01:41:50.040 --> 01:41:51.040]  The constable.
[01:41:51.040 --> 01:41:53.040]  Wait, wait, wait, wait.
[01:41:53.040 --> 01:41:55.040]  There's no complaint.
[01:41:55.040 --> 01:41:57.040]  That's what I'm saying. Who is the...
[01:41:57.040 --> 01:41:58.040]  There is no complaint.
[01:41:58.040 --> 01:42:00.040]  What do you mean? What do you mean there's no complaint?
[01:42:00.040 --> 01:42:06.040]  Is the neighbor filing charges? Who is filing charges? Who is your accuser?
[01:42:06.040 --> 01:42:11.040]  The only thing in the file at the beginning was the citation. There is no complaint.
[01:42:11.040 --> 01:42:17.040]  But who filed the citation? Who called the cops to begin with?
[01:42:17.040 --> 01:42:19.040]  The neighbor.
[01:42:19.040 --> 01:42:23.040]  Okay. So has the neighbor signed off on a complaint?
[01:42:23.040 --> 01:42:24.040]  No.
[01:42:24.040 --> 01:42:27.040]  Who signed the citation?
[01:42:27.040 --> 01:42:28.040]  I'm sorry?
[01:42:28.040 --> 01:42:32.040]  Who signed the citation?
[01:42:32.040 --> 01:42:34.040]  The constable.
[01:42:34.040 --> 01:42:39.040]  The constable sees that your dog was out loose?
[01:42:39.040 --> 01:42:41.040]  Probably.
[01:42:41.040 --> 01:42:42.040]  I doubt it.
[01:42:42.040 --> 01:42:46.040]  I don't know what he could see. He was out in the front yard of the neighbor's yard.
[01:42:46.040 --> 01:42:48.040]  The dog was out back.
[01:42:48.040 --> 01:42:50.040]  I doubt it. I doubt it.
[01:42:50.040 --> 01:42:54.040]  When the constable showed up, was the dog in the fence?
[01:42:54.040 --> 01:42:56.040]  No.
[01:42:56.040 --> 01:42:58.040]  Uh-oh. You're in trouble then.
[01:42:58.040 --> 01:43:01.040]  The dog on your property?
[01:43:01.040 --> 01:43:06.040]  It was running back and forth and down in the creek and stuff behind the door.
[01:43:06.040 --> 01:43:07.040]  Dude.
[01:43:07.040 --> 01:43:09.040]  Like a net of squirrels.
[01:43:09.040 --> 01:43:13.040]  Neighbor. Okay. I'm sorry.
[01:43:13.040 --> 01:43:18.040]  The issue is whether or not the county actually has the statute about dogs running loose.
[01:43:18.040 --> 01:43:22.040]  Many counties do not.
[01:43:22.040 --> 01:43:30.040]  So the question is, did the county commissioners court pass laws that said that you can't let your dog run loose?
[01:43:30.040 --> 01:43:34.040]  And what you need to do is look that up.
[01:43:34.040 --> 01:43:40.040]  The county commissioners court, the county will issue statutes for county ordinances.
[01:43:40.040 --> 01:43:44.040]  And you've got to find out whether or not there's something there that they're allowed to.
[01:43:44.040 --> 01:43:48.040]  But the complaint should have contained that, not just loose animals.
[01:43:48.040 --> 01:43:49.040]  What's loose animals?
[01:43:49.040 --> 01:43:52.040]  I'm sorry. We're in West Texas.
[01:43:52.040 --> 01:43:54.040]  Loose animals are everywhere.
[01:43:54.040 --> 01:43:57.040]  It leaves the complaint insufficient on its face.
[01:43:57.040 --> 01:44:01.040]  Right.
[01:44:01.040 --> 01:44:03.040]  And that's been my argument the whole time.
[01:44:03.040 --> 01:44:08.040]  You guys, you don't have anything there to have jurisdiction, nothing.
[01:44:08.040 --> 01:44:09.040]  Right.
[01:44:09.040 --> 01:44:12.040]  The citation doesn't even meet the requirements for a citation,
[01:44:12.040 --> 01:44:15.040]  because it doesn't have a time and a place to see the magistrate.
[01:44:15.040 --> 01:44:20.040]  I mean, the whole thing, as you guys know.
[01:44:20.040 --> 01:44:26.040]  My initial inclination would be to leave it stiff until a couple more months go by
[01:44:26.040 --> 01:44:30.040]  and then file a motion to dismiss or want a prosecution.
[01:44:30.040 --> 01:44:32.040]  Just so you're way over the six months,
[01:44:32.040 --> 01:44:39.040]  that there's no question that they have to come in and prove good cause as to why they didn't prosecute them.
[01:44:39.040 --> 01:44:41.040]  And the issue is, is where are they going to do it?
[01:44:41.040 --> 01:44:44.040]  You have a motion to dismiss and they didn't even answer that.
[01:44:44.040 --> 01:44:48.040]  So the fact that they didn't answer that shows that they never intended to prosecute,
[01:44:48.040 --> 01:44:51.040]  so they can't show good cause.
[01:44:51.040 --> 01:44:53.040]  Well, they didn't answer the motion.
[01:44:53.040 --> 01:44:56.040]  They just sent out a notice to appear under threat of arrest.
[01:44:56.040 --> 01:44:58.040]  No, no, no. They've got to answer the motion.
[01:44:58.040 --> 01:45:05.040]  The jurisdiction, absent an answer from the prosecutor, leaves the court without jurisdiction.
[01:45:05.040 --> 01:45:08.040]  So a motion to dismiss or want a prosecution, then,
[01:45:08.040 --> 01:45:14.040]  goes to whether or not the prosecutor can show good cause for why they didn't prosecute.
[01:45:14.040 --> 01:45:17.040]  And they can't because they never answered your motion,
[01:45:17.040 --> 01:45:20.040]  so the court never acquired jurisdiction.
[01:45:20.040 --> 01:45:22.040]  They're caught.
[01:45:22.040 --> 01:45:24.040]  That's 22.
[01:45:24.040 --> 01:45:27.040]  If they showed good cause, they would have answered your motion.
[01:45:27.040 --> 01:45:33.040]  If they didn't answer your motion, they can't show good cause.
[01:45:33.040 --> 01:45:38.040]  If you say answer, that would be something that they would file with the court.
[01:45:38.040 --> 01:45:40.040]  What the whole issue of motions are,
[01:45:40.040 --> 01:45:43.040]  pleading the jurisdiction motion to dismiss is moving the court,
[01:45:43.040 --> 01:45:45.040]  urging the court to do something.
[01:45:45.040 --> 01:45:51.040]  Opposing parties must answer those or they waive the issue.
[01:45:51.040 --> 01:45:55.040]  They stipulate to everything you state in the motion.
[01:45:55.040 --> 01:45:59.040]  How long does that take before they default in stipulating?
[01:45:59.040 --> 01:46:02.040]  It's generally 30 days, isn't it?
[01:46:02.040 --> 01:46:09.040]  Generally, depending on whether or not he did it as a verified pleading.
[01:46:09.040 --> 01:46:12.040]  Okay, verified pleading, how would that affect it?
[01:46:12.040 --> 01:46:14.040]  Verified is where you state what took place
[01:46:14.040 --> 01:46:17.040]  and what's going on with the case at the NASA Davis,
[01:46:17.040 --> 01:46:19.040]  stating that you don't feel that they have jurisdiction
[01:46:19.040 --> 01:46:25.040]  because they haven't cited a statute under which they can bring you before this court,
[01:46:25.040 --> 01:46:27.040]  and this court has subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:46:27.040 --> 01:46:32.040]  Well, see, what I want to know is who is they?
[01:46:32.040 --> 01:46:34.040]  Okay, who is they?
[01:46:34.040 --> 01:46:36.040]  The constable, basically.
[01:46:36.040 --> 01:46:39.040]  Basically, the constable walks up and says, I see the dog running loose.
[01:46:39.040 --> 01:46:46.040]  Now, the problem is did the constable actually have an ordinance or a law that he could enforce?
[01:46:46.040 --> 01:46:50.040]  Or did he just make up the citation and then have you appear?
[01:46:50.040 --> 01:46:54.040]  The question is that if there is an offense here, what's the offense?
[01:46:54.040 --> 01:46:56.040]  What's the fine?
[01:46:56.040 --> 01:47:01.040]  Well, here's an element to this that I haven't brought up yet,
[01:47:01.040 --> 01:47:06.040]  but there is supposedly a county regulation that I've seen,
[01:47:06.040 --> 01:47:11.040]  but nothing in the record reflects that, that that's what they're moving under.
[01:47:11.040 --> 01:47:19.040]  And in the regulation, it states that only the county health person,
[01:47:19.040 --> 01:47:22.040]  the animal control authority, as they call it,
[01:47:22.040 --> 01:47:29.040]  and the sheriff's department are the only people who are authorized to act on these things
[01:47:29.040 --> 01:47:31.040]  according to the regulations.
[01:47:31.040 --> 01:47:33.040]  Wait a minute, act on what things?
[01:47:33.040 --> 01:47:34.040]  On a complaint.
[01:47:34.040 --> 01:47:36.040]  On the complaint.
[01:47:36.040 --> 01:47:41.040]  It's got to be a sheriff or it's got to be the animal control.
[01:47:41.040 --> 01:47:43.040]  It doesn't say constable.
[01:47:43.040 --> 01:47:45.040]  That's why they're stuck.
[01:47:45.040 --> 01:47:50.040]  If the legislature went to the trouble to state that specifically,
[01:47:50.040 --> 01:47:54.040]  that has to be considered a special stipulation of the statute.
[01:47:54.040 --> 01:47:55.040]  That's a bar.
[01:47:55.040 --> 01:47:59.040]  That's a bar against the constable.
[01:47:59.040 --> 01:48:05.040]  Okay, so then why is the constable coming out?
[01:48:05.040 --> 01:48:10.040]  Why is the sheriff not coming out then?
[01:48:10.040 --> 01:48:14.040]  Because he doesn't think it's important enough.
[01:48:14.040 --> 01:48:22.040]  Okay, from my understanding, the constables only serve, okay,
[01:48:22.040 --> 01:48:26.040]  papers that are filed like divorce cases and stuff.
[01:48:26.040 --> 01:48:28.040]  Technically they're police officers.
[01:48:28.040 --> 01:48:30.040]  They could issue traffic tickets.
[01:48:30.040 --> 01:48:34.040]  They can arrest people, all of that, but they are not a sheriff.
[01:48:34.040 --> 01:48:35.040]  They're not a deputy sheriff.
[01:48:35.040 --> 01:48:39.040]  So based on that, they are prohibited by the statute of deciding this
[01:48:39.040 --> 01:48:44.040]  correctly from issuing citations under this section of law.
[01:48:44.040 --> 01:48:47.040]  So based on that, the citation has no merit.
[01:48:47.040 --> 01:48:51.040]  As a matter of fact, it shows malicious prosecution.
[01:48:51.040 --> 01:48:59.040]  Okay, but wait a minute, Ken, okay, as far as filing a criminal complaint,
[01:48:59.040 --> 01:49:04.040]  a constable, a police officer, or anyone else would file that in his
[01:49:04.040 --> 01:49:09.040]  personal capacity, not in his capacity as a constable.
[01:49:09.040 --> 01:49:14.040]  So if the neighbor called the constable or whoever and the constable comes
[01:49:14.040 --> 01:49:18.040]  out and witnesses the crime and the constable files a criminal complaint,
[01:49:18.040 --> 01:49:22.040]  the constable would be filing that in his personal capacity.
[01:49:22.040 --> 01:49:24.040]  So that's non-applicable.
[01:49:24.040 --> 01:49:26.040]  This is apparently a county regulation.
[01:49:26.040 --> 01:49:31.040]  It has a clear stipulation as to who can file on it.
[01:49:31.040 --> 01:49:37.040]  No, what I'm saying is that criminal complaints are filed by personal
[01:49:37.040 --> 01:49:41.040]  individuals, not by government officials.
[01:49:41.040 --> 01:49:46.040]  And so if the constable witnesses a crime,
[01:49:46.040 --> 01:49:50.040]  he would be filing the criminal complaint in his personal capacity.
[01:49:50.040 --> 01:49:51.040]  He's barred in this case.
[01:49:51.040 --> 01:49:56.040]  He has to file a criminal complaint that he can act upon.
[01:49:56.040 --> 01:49:59.040]  He's been barred by statute and prohibited from acting upon it.
[01:49:59.040 --> 01:50:00.040]  Just like the prosecutor.
[01:50:00.040 --> 01:50:04.040]  The only thing the constable could do would be call the sheriff or the
[01:50:04.040 --> 01:50:06.040]  animal control official.
[01:50:06.040 --> 01:50:11.040]  Okay, so then let me ask you guys both this, Ken, you and Randy,
[01:50:11.040 --> 01:50:14.040]  how come whenever a police officer witnesses a crime,
[01:50:14.040 --> 01:50:17.040]  how come they don't call 911 then?
[01:50:17.040 --> 01:50:19.040]  Because we're not talking about the same issue.
[01:50:19.040 --> 01:50:21.040]  They're not prohibited by statute.
[01:50:21.040 --> 01:50:24.040]  So you're saying a constable is?
[01:50:24.040 --> 01:50:25.040]  Yeah, in this case.
[01:50:25.040 --> 01:50:29.040]  The constable in the case of an animal running loose is by county
[01:50:29.040 --> 01:50:30.040]  ordinance.
[01:50:30.040 --> 01:50:32.040]  Yeah, and it's like a prosecuting attorney.
[01:50:32.040 --> 01:50:34.040]  He can't file a criminal complaint.
[01:50:34.040 --> 01:50:36.040]  He's barred by statute.
[01:50:36.040 --> 01:50:46.040]  In this case, the constable or anyone other than the city ordinance guy or
[01:50:46.040 --> 01:50:51.040]  the sheriff's department is barred from enforcing this particular statute.
[01:50:51.040 --> 01:50:55.040]  Technically, if the constable saw it and called the sheriff and the
[01:50:55.040 --> 01:50:58.040]  sheriff showed up, even though the sheriff didn't see it,
[01:50:58.040 --> 01:51:01.040]  the sheriff could issue the complaint and the constable could be the
[01:51:01.040 --> 01:51:03.040]  witness.
[01:51:03.040 --> 01:51:05.040]  But that's not what he did.
[01:51:05.040 --> 01:51:09.040]  The constable tried to usurp the authority of the sheriff by interceding
[01:51:09.040 --> 01:51:15.040]  as if he had jurisdiction, which he had none.
[01:51:15.040 --> 01:51:21.040]  Here's the thing where it says the Travis County hereby designates Travis
[01:51:21.040 --> 01:51:26.040]  County Health and Human Services and Veterans Services as represented by
[01:51:26.040 --> 01:51:31.040]  the Travis County Health Authority and or his designee as Animal Control
[01:51:31.040 --> 01:51:35.040]  Authority to be assisted by the Travis County Sheriff's Office and or
[01:51:35.040 --> 01:51:39.040]  members of the Austin Travis County Health and Human Services Department.
[01:51:39.040 --> 01:51:46.040]  As approved by the Commissioner's Court, the TCHHSBS Executive Manager,
[01:51:46.040 --> 01:51:54.040]  the ATCHHISD Director, or the Travis County Sheriff as applicable.
[01:51:54.040 --> 01:51:57.040]  The Commissioner's Court hereby designates those members of the above
[01:51:57.040 --> 01:52:02.040]  departments called upon by authorized personnel to enforce these rules as
[01:52:02.040 --> 01:52:05.040]  designated representatives of the ACA.
[01:52:05.040 --> 01:52:11.040]  Okay, they've indicated they can designate some other people.
[01:52:11.040 --> 01:52:16.040]  You need to write to the health director or whoever else they've designated
[01:52:16.040 --> 01:52:21.040]  that may appoint somebody else as they direct and ask who they've appointed
[01:52:21.040 --> 01:52:25.040]  to do this.
[01:52:25.040 --> 01:52:29.040]  The constable's name's on that list.
[01:52:29.040 --> 01:52:33.040]  You could demand that the constable show the appointment or the prosecutor
[01:52:33.040 --> 01:52:35.040]  show the constable's appointment.
[01:52:35.040 --> 01:52:36.040]  Right.
[01:52:36.040 --> 01:52:37.040]  I have a feeling he wasn't appointed.
[01:52:37.040 --> 01:52:38.040]  Yeah, yeah.
[01:52:38.040 --> 01:52:40.040]  See, that was my next question is...
[01:52:40.040 --> 01:52:41.040]  This dog flopped.
[01:52:41.040 --> 01:52:42.040]  This dog flopped.
[01:52:42.040 --> 01:52:43.040]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:52:43.040 --> 01:52:45.040]  Let me tell you what I think is really behind this.
[01:52:45.040 --> 01:52:52.040]  The neighbors got a burr in his saddle and he swats the dog gone and he knows
[01:52:52.040 --> 01:52:57.040]  the constable or people who know the constable and he drives somebody in the
[01:52:57.040 --> 01:53:00.040]  county government nuts so he sent the constable down there and said,
[01:53:00.040 --> 01:53:05.040]  write him a citation and the idea is to put the fear of God into you about your
[01:53:05.040 --> 01:53:08.040]  dog getting out.
[01:53:08.040 --> 01:53:11.040]  Whether or not you're going to find, I don't think they care.
[01:53:11.040 --> 01:53:15.040]  I'm going to bet that the constable has no idea.
[01:53:15.040 --> 01:53:19.040]  He thinks he's a police officer, a certified police officer,
[01:53:19.040 --> 01:53:21.040]  and he thinks he has full jurisdiction.
[01:53:21.040 --> 01:53:22.040]  Right.
[01:53:22.040 --> 01:53:24.040]  He probably has no idea that restrictions exist.
[01:53:24.040 --> 01:53:29.040]  Yeah, I think that the constable and the neighbor both probably have no idea
[01:53:29.040 --> 01:53:32.040]  that what they're doing is beyond their jurisdiction.
[01:53:32.040 --> 01:53:33.040]  Right.
[01:53:33.040 --> 01:53:38.040]  They just perceive a problem and they're trying to take care of it and,
[01:53:38.040 --> 01:53:42.040]  I mean, Randy, really, just keep your dog in the yard, but beyond that...
[01:53:42.040 --> 01:53:44.040]  Put the dog on that door.
[01:53:44.040 --> 01:53:48.040]  Okay, really, seriously, neighbor, it's like this song that I keep playing,
[01:53:48.040 --> 01:53:49.040]  that I keep ribbing you about.
[01:53:49.040 --> 01:53:52.040]  I mean, I keep, you know, giving you a hard time.
[01:53:52.040 --> 01:53:56.040]  Okay, but beyond that, I mean, are you in danger?
[01:53:56.040 --> 01:54:00.040]  I mean, are they like coming after you to put you in jail
[01:54:00.040 --> 01:54:04.040]  or like massive fines or something?
[01:54:04.040 --> 01:54:06.040]  I think they've already, they don't even know.
[01:54:06.040 --> 01:54:07.040]  Yeah.
[01:54:07.040 --> 01:54:09.040]  They have an answer displayed at the jurisdiction.
[01:54:09.040 --> 01:54:11.040]  There's nothing going on at this point.
[01:54:11.040 --> 01:54:13.040]  They don't know what to do next.
[01:54:13.040 --> 01:54:15.040]  Yeah, and this is a great thing to fight.
[01:54:15.040 --> 01:54:17.040]  This would be a hoot.
[01:54:17.040 --> 01:54:19.040]  Oh, yeah.
[01:54:19.040 --> 01:54:21.040]  The fact that the constable did it,
[01:54:21.040 --> 01:54:25.040]  he opened himself up for a suit for malicious prosecution.
[01:54:25.040 --> 01:54:28.040]  Make up a tort letter.
[01:54:28.040 --> 01:54:29.040]  Go ahead.
[01:54:29.040 --> 01:54:33.040]  Make up a tort letter and send it to the county commissioner's court,
[01:54:33.040 --> 01:54:40.040]  telling them that you were harmed by this constable acting without jurisdiction
[01:54:40.040 --> 01:54:46.040]  and by the justice of the peace and the prosecutor for acting without jurisdiction.
[01:54:46.040 --> 01:54:49.040]  There's an elected constable or one of the hired ones,
[01:54:49.040 --> 01:54:51.040]  one of the deputy constables?
[01:54:51.040 --> 01:54:53.040]  Deputy constable.
[01:54:53.040 --> 01:54:58.040]  Okay, so he's hired by the county commissioner's court, right.
[01:54:58.040 --> 01:54:59.040]  Good.
[01:54:59.040 --> 01:55:02.040]  If you're going to sue the county commissioners,
[01:55:02.040 --> 01:55:10.040]  you must notify them that you have been harmed and give them 60 days to make you whole.
[01:55:10.040 --> 01:55:13.040]  They never do, but you have to do that in order to be able to sue.
[01:55:13.040 --> 01:55:18.040]  So that makes a great tool to apply leverage.
[01:55:18.040 --> 01:55:23.040]  If you send them a letter of notice of tort or notice of injury,
[01:55:23.040 --> 01:55:26.040]  if it sounds in tort or contract, this will sound in tort,
[01:55:26.040 --> 01:55:29.040]  that you've been injured and asked to be made whole,
[01:55:29.040 --> 01:55:32.040]  the county commissioners are going to look at that and say,
[01:55:32.040 --> 01:55:35.040]  okay, guys, what kind of trouble are you getting us into?
[01:55:35.040 --> 01:55:39.040]  And good chance that will make this go away on its own accord.
[01:55:39.040 --> 01:55:41.040]  Right.
[01:55:41.040 --> 01:55:46.040]  You see, in any event, you definitely want to end this with an order signed by a judge
[01:55:46.040 --> 01:55:48.040]  if a case has been dismissed.
[01:55:48.040 --> 01:55:51.040]  You never want to end one of these by somebody over the phone saying,
[01:55:51.040 --> 01:55:53.040]  oh, it's been taken care of.
[01:55:53.040 --> 01:55:56.040]  So if you want to get a copy of the order dismissing it,
[01:55:56.040 --> 01:56:01.040]  because if it never happens, they may send you a notice out of the clear blue sky
[01:56:01.040 --> 01:56:05.040]  that then they put a warrant out for your arrest and you didn't appear.
[01:56:05.040 --> 01:56:09.040]  I know people who had cases dismissed that have been arrested later
[01:56:09.040 --> 01:56:12.040]  because they didn't have a copy of an order.
[01:56:12.040 --> 01:56:19.040]  Yeah, when they tell you this has been taken care of, they're greasing up the roto-router.
[01:56:19.040 --> 01:56:21.040]  Hey, look.
[01:56:21.040 --> 01:56:25.040]  You've got to get an order, even if you type up your own,
[01:56:25.040 --> 01:56:33.040]  and indicate the cause number, the date, the time, and go down and get the judge to sign it.
[01:56:33.040 --> 01:56:38.040]  All right.
[01:56:38.040 --> 01:56:44.040]  Well, right now, okay, he's got a judge that's ignoring.
[01:56:44.040 --> 01:56:48.040]  What they're doing is a lot more serious than what they're accusing him of.
[01:56:48.040 --> 01:56:50.040]  Yeah, I agree, I agree.
[01:56:50.040 --> 01:56:51.040]  I need to move against them.
[01:56:51.040 --> 01:56:52.040]  I agree.
[01:56:52.040 --> 01:56:57.040]  And what judge is this anyway?
[01:56:57.040 --> 01:57:00.040]  Stieg and Meeker.
[01:57:00.040 --> 01:57:03.040]  There's a visiting judge involved in this, too.
[01:57:03.040 --> 01:57:04.040]  Okay.
[01:57:04.040 --> 01:57:05.040]  Good.
[01:57:05.040 --> 01:57:06.040]  You get to sue the visiting judge.
[01:57:06.040 --> 01:57:08.040]  I am so sick of these visiting judges.
[01:57:08.040 --> 01:57:10.040]  I am so sick of it.
[01:57:10.040 --> 01:57:15.040]  Every time there's anything controversial, they bring in a visiting judge.
[01:57:15.040 --> 01:57:20.040]  Let me tell you right now, every motion for new trial I've ever brought that I've won,
[01:57:20.040 --> 01:57:22.040]  I've won in front of a visiting judge.
[01:57:22.040 --> 01:57:23.040]  Oh, right.
[01:57:23.040 --> 01:57:26.040]  Well, good.
[01:57:26.040 --> 01:57:30.040]  There are times to be suspicious, and there are times not to be.
[01:57:30.040 --> 01:57:34.040]  And that's the question, is you've got to be able to figure out what's going on
[01:57:34.040 --> 01:57:37.040]  and what's the tenor of the original court.
[01:57:37.040 --> 01:57:42.040]  If the original court is very much adversarial and they're trying to screw with you,
[01:57:42.040 --> 01:57:45.040]  chances are if they bring in a visiting judge, they intend to, you know,
[01:57:45.040 --> 01:57:48.040]  dismiss your case or screw you over finally.
[01:57:48.040 --> 01:57:55.040]  But if the visiting judge comes back out of nowhere, because the other judge just isn't available,
[01:57:55.040 --> 01:57:58.040]  chances are you may get something different than you expected,
[01:57:58.040 --> 01:58:02.040]  which is a judge that has no acts to drive.
[01:58:02.040 --> 01:58:05.040]  Well, let me give you the background on the visiting judge,
[01:58:05.040 --> 01:58:08.040]  because I filed the motion to dismiss,
[01:58:08.040 --> 01:58:13.040]  and it was the visiting judge that supposedly ruled on it and said, no, it's no good.
[01:58:13.040 --> 01:58:15.040]  Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[01:58:15.040 --> 01:58:18.040]  We're coming to the end of the show.
[01:58:18.040 --> 01:58:24.040]  For the sake of the micros and the major FM and AM sessions,
[01:58:24.040 --> 01:58:29.040]  we have to close out the show, but Randy and Randy and Ken,
[01:58:29.040 --> 01:58:32.040]  if you all like to continue this show,
[01:58:32.040 --> 01:58:35.040]  we can continue the stream for the Internet listeners,
[01:58:35.040 --> 01:58:38.040]  but we do need to close out for now.
[01:58:38.040 --> 01:58:39.040]  Okay.
[01:58:39.040 --> 01:58:42.040]  Okay, so do you all want to continue?
[01:58:42.040 --> 01:58:43.040]  Just for a few minutes.
[01:58:43.040 --> 01:58:44.040]  I will.
[01:58:44.040 --> 01:58:45.040]  Okay, for a few minutes.
[01:58:45.040 --> 01:58:49.040]  All right, listeners who are listening on the FMs and the AMs out there,
[01:58:49.040 --> 01:58:52.040]  if you would like to hear the rest of this conversation,
[01:58:52.040 --> 01:58:59.040]  please tune in to ruleoflawradio.com to the stream,
[01:58:59.040 --> 01:59:23.040]  and we will be back in a few minutes.
[01:59:29.040 --> 01:59:54.040]  Thank you.
[01:59:54.040 --> 01:59:59.040]  Thank you.