How about it?
What does this question mean?
How about it?
What does this question mean?
Taxing Matters, Thank you so much for the details of explanation. I know Rico is long and hard shot. However, I do have lots of evidences to show the company have the plan and done the fault activities to get rid of old people in order to save cost and (make it looks good for new party, they sold the business and closed the deal early this year). I do hired attorney twice in the previous case, and results were not effective or the same.
The problem I have is that I am too little and powerless (even I have a lawyer with my side). Judge and even his case manager are standing with other party (I have evidence to show their misconduct and lies). I don't get a chance to finish the discovery and deposition (defendant delay, refuse provide documents, refuse answer key questions during deposition). I have filed quite a few motions to demand, compel and sanction defendant. I did not get hearing and trial to cross exam the lie, false statement, forged documents and misstatements. Judge just signed the orders (drafted by defendant without listed any my arguments or facts and even did not serve me) few days and even few hours before the hearings. So games is over, the judges at appeals (including supreme court) would not looking into my claims, evidences and arguments. I am in the black hole of our legal system!
I filed this suit and motion to reopen the age discrimination case and seek relief from Civil judgments per FRCP 60(b) as Defendant committed fraud, perjury, forging of documents and evidences.
Defendant has argued that Plaintiff’s age discrimination claim is barred by Res Judicata. My arguments are as followings,
The exception to this rule, however, is based upon the principle that a fraudulent scheme which is greater in scope than the issues that were determined in the action or proceeding may become the basis of an action. 37 N.Y.2d at 217, 333 N.E.2d at 167, 371 N.Y.S.2d at 889 (quoting Burbrooke Mfg. Co. v. St. George Textile Corp., 283 A.D. 640, 641-44, 129 N.Y.S.2d 588, 589 (1954)).
For res judicata to be binding, several factors must be met including whether the parties were given full and fair opportunity to be heard on the issue. In addition, in matters involving due process, cases that appear to be res judicata may be re-litigated.
The procedural safeguards associated with trials generally ensure that perjury, if it occurs, will be discovered and brought to the court's attention.
First, in no investigation does a "party" have as ample an opportunity to cross-examine another "party" as he would have in a court. Certainly, Plaintiff in previous case, for example, had no opportunity for cross-examination Because no hearing or trial occurred. Cross-examination is crucial to uncovering any fraud or misrepresentation in the testimony. Without an effective opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, Plaintiff was at a serious disadvantage in trying to uncover misleading statements or fraud documents and statements including perjury.
Effective cross-examination requires adequate discovery procedures. However, the district court denied Plaintiff’s right to complete discovery, including a key witness deposition, compel defendant to summit full requested documents, evidences and authentication of exhibits listed by Defendant in pre-trail order and so on.
These observations are taken into account by the limited application for the doctrine of res judicata to administrative agency actions. Res judicata applies only when the agency "is acting in a judicial capacity, and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate. United States v. Utah Constr. & Mining Co., 384 U.S. 394, 422 (1966).)
The rule against civil actions for perjury is closely related to the doctrines and policies of res judicata and collateral estoppel. Significantly, courts have recognized that the rule against civil actions for perjury assumes that the injured party had a fair and full opportunity to present its case in the proceeding where the perjury occurred. For example, the Supreme Court in United States v. Throckmorton
The rule against civil actions for perjury is grounded in the policy of the finality of judgments, and the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel. In deciding whether to apply the rule, the best guide is the established body of precedents regulating the application of those related doctrines. The justification for the use of those doctrines diminishes as the opportunity for a full and fair determination of the facts in question wanes.
In the previous case Plaintiff had no realistic opportunity to discover the alleged misrepresentations until long after the proceedings were concluded. There was no complete discovery, no chance to cross-examine witnesses, and even worst, the Summary Judgement was drafted by Defendant which not be serve to Plaintiff and even did not address any of Plaintiff’s contented facts and questions listed in joint pre-trail order!
Plaintiff knows that a false claim or defense can be supported in no other way; that the very object of the trial is, if possible, to ascertain the truth from the conflict of evidence, and that, necessarily, the truth or falsity of the testimony must be determined in deciding the issue. The trial is his opportunity for making the truth appear.
I am going to file a motion to amend my claims per FRCP 60(b) for relief per mistake, newly discovered evidence and fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of other party. Also add claim for discrimination against pro se litigant, as I was denied the fundamental constitutional right of equal access to due process and equality under the Courts.
RJR, thanks for the lead, I am going to looking into the details of the case.
PG1067, The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.
If there was no trial or hearing, then where is the perjury? Generally perjury is either a knowingly false statement made while testifying under oath or false statements made in certain documents, mostly those submitted to the government (e.g. tax returns), that are subscribed to under penalties of perjury. If there was no trial or hearing, where did the defendant's witness(es) commit perjury?
Moreover, if you lost the case on summary judgment, that usually means that the case that you plead simply wasn't enough to make out a prima facie case for illegal discrimination. In that case, it is not the disputed statements made by the employer that caused you to lose. It would have been the facts that YOU plead that would doom the case in summary judgment.
Perjury happened during depositions and declaration of witnesses. I am sure that Summary Judgment was written by Defendant, while Judge just signed it, which contain no facts or arguments Plaintiff listed in Joint pre-trail order, total of 48 items (Judge signed it as well). SMJ contained only one fact defendant had which I contested many times and ask witness related questions during his deposition. However he refuse to answer under instruction of his counsel. I never get a chance to cross exam them even I filed motions to compel the witness to testify. My contested evidence was a photo I took during the related event, which should easily prove what he said in his declaration were false. I reported all of the false statement evidences (about 80) from wittiness to the court and FBI. Some of them clearly can be classified as perjury (meet the four elements of perjury test).
Taxing Matters Reply as above
I am sure that Summary Judgment was written by Defendant, while Judge just signed it,
What EVIDENCE do you have of that?
Not convenience to talk about it at here
Typically a party does not depose his/her own witnesses. So I'm guessing the depositions of the defendants were depositions that you requested. Thus, you were asking the questions and you could (and probably should) have challenged false statements made in that deposition. The depositions can be used in summary judgment. However, if any of the material facts as stated by the defendant are truly in dispute then the court should not use that as a basis for the summary judgment. The summary judgment is to be based on facts material facts that are not in dispute. A fact is only material if that fact might make a difference in the outcome of the case. Too often pro se parties think facts that are actually irrelevant are material, which then leads to confusion when the court finds summary judgment against them. I don't know that is the case here; I'm just noting that possibility as I have seen that a lot. You might find the ABA discussion of evidence for summary judgment helpful in understand how this works.
Extremely unlikely. I clerked for a federal district court judge and none of the judges in that court had any party write their summary judgment opinions for them. They did sometimes ask a party to draft an order after the judge had made a ruling on the bench, but that was done in open court and the proposed order was provided to the other side so that any objections could be made before the order was signed by the judge. The judge is barred by the ex parte rule from privately contacting the other side without you being involved or notified except in very limited circumstances, and this isn't one of them. I have seen pro se parties before claim the other side must have drafted the opinion because they assume it to be the case since in their view the opinion was so obviously one sided and wrong. You obviously believe strongly in your case, but you need to try to be a bit objective and realize that other persons who weren't involved in the situation under dispute, like the judge or jury, may well see the case differently.
In other words, you have none.
The bottom line:
You apparently handled this case without an attorney and botched it. That's unfortunate, but that's why the old adage that a person who represents himself has a fool for a client exists.
You cannot sue based on alleged perjury in a prior litigation, and alleged perjury that wasn't addressed in some way in the prior litigation isn't going to get any traction with law enforcement.