As you scroll down the page just mouse over some empty space where the menu was, and it will pop back into view.
|
|
MOSHER VS THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mendham:
NO JUSTICE in NEW JERSEY:
MOSHER VS THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
     By . . on Sunday, March 19, 2006 - 1:47 pm: |
MOSHER VS THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY federal court
(all papers filed and evidence submitted available at linked website)
Initiated in the third Circuit (2006)...
It was my initial intention to file this case shortly after the New Jersey Supreme Court's rejection of my requests for certification in the cigarette tax case. As things began to bizarrely twist in my case against the Borough of Mendham I delayed filing until this year to amass a more complete record of criminal conduct by the New Jersey Justice System.
This case involves the basic claim that the New Jersey Judiciary is not providing constitutionally required due process.
To my chagrin their has already been process imposed by the judge that has every appearance of being as egregiously in violation of the court rules, bigoted, and unconstitutional.... as the New Jersey judicial conduct I am attempting to prosecute.
Judge[s] implicated as criminal traders against the United States Constitution:
Federal District Judge DENNIS CAVANAUGH
3/25/06 update: Unfortunately, the dishonest, unhonorable, integrity-less, treasonous and cowardly DENNIS CAVANAUGH has sunk lower, than my low expectations and blown the rules federal civil procedure to bits to stop me from staging the fair fight I'm entitled to....(and America used to stand in defense of). I posted my initial reaction on this message board-- Unfortunately I haven't yet received any useful responses. There will be more to this story.... I just haven't yet chosen a title direction for the next chapter. |
| By 2....... . on Sunday, March 26, 2006 - 11:49 am: |
Torricelli gets job from judge he pushed for District Court
quote:Three years ago, Torricelli recommended Cavanaugh for the judgeship and later championed his nomination before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Last week, Cavanaugh used his power to give Torricelli a job.
|
| By 06. 2....... on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 10:12 pm: |
Good time for an update I suppose. On September 11th (eeek), the motion for dismissal of the claims against Judge Cavanaugh, for reason of absolute immunity, is scheduled to be heard. I haven't heard back from the judge regarding the letter I sent requesting ADA accommodations... nor have I received anything else from the court indicating I will be provided with my legal right to oral argument.
The defendant's reply to my answer to the motion was pretty much as predicted-- a cowardly retreat to the safe cesspool of corrupt process.
quote:Dear Judge Chesler:
I am in receipt of plaintiff s response to the motion of the Honorable Dennis M. Cavanaugh for dismissal of the Complaint on the ground of judicial immunity. Please be advised that because the plaintiff s response raises no legitimate legal argument that judicial immunity does not apply in this case, Judge Cavanaugh will not be filing a formal reply but will instead rely on his initial moving papers in support of his motion. This letter is being e-filed today with the Clerk of Court, and it is being served upon plaintiff and all other counsel who have entered an appearance with a copy of this letter.
Clearly they couldn't find a sentence they could argue with, so the strategy is the pretense that they need to account for nothing. The rules governing summary judgment-- which essentially provide the innocent with an expedient process to PROVE their innocence-- place the burden of proof on the party filing the motion. Judge Cavanaugh was not only obligated to prove "absolute judicial immunity" to be established law, but that, that law, is above all reasonable challenge. Even in the context of the idiotic case law he was obligated to prove that he committed no action that compromised his jurisdiction and that there exists alternative mechanisms for relief.
Obviously, I see no such proof and believe I have myself "logically proven" the contrary truth that judicial immunity is an evil slander to the founding fathers of America's creation.
I suppose this means I am just a few days away from having the right to call federal judge Stanley R. Chesler a traitor to the Constitution of the United States of America. The saddest truths is, I am inching ever closer to proving that the wrong side won the American Revolution.... that the freedom and principles so many men died for, sadly had no lasting integrity.
In only slightly related news, another recent pitiful decision of Judge Cavanaugh is going to the Third Circuit appeals court. Hard to figure how a Democratic Senator could be responsible for putting this right wing ass hole on the court. Of course the Democratic senator was a lying crook so that probably explains a lot.
News articles:
Prayer battle now over legal fees
Free legal help accepted in team-prayer appeal
Ruling on team prayer had to be appealed |
| By 06. 2....... on Thursday, September 07, 2006 - 11:09 am: |
I just had one of those amazing conversations with a judge's legal clerk... I called Judge Chesler office today and inquired whether or not I was to receive oral argument on the motion or not-- along with other questions. I was told the person handling the case would have to return my call with the information requested. I got that return phone call notifying me that they won't answer any questions over the phone regarding the status of the case and that all communication has to be in writing. I challenged that imbecility by pointing out that one would have to be psychic, and anticipate before-hand what shenanigans or Rule breaking the court was going to perpetrate, to coherently, and in a timely manner, write a brief on the subject. I also pointed out that I wrote a fucking letter and even when you put requests/issues in writing the fucking corrupt Court doesn't reply... proving it's all just Catch-22 bull-shit.
One bit of relevant information that did slip-out in the conversation was the clerks opinion that the judge has complete discretion regarding the provision of oral argument.
obviously that Bull-Shit is inconsistent with rule 78:
quote:Rule 78. Motion Day
Unless local conditions make it impracticable, each district court shall establish regular times and places, at intervals sufficiently frequent for the prompt dispatch of business, at which motions requiring notice and hearing may be heard and disposed of; but the judge at any time or place and on such notice, if any, as the judge considers reasonable may make orders for the advancement, conduct, and hearing of actions.
To expedite its business, the court may make provision by rule or order for the submission and determination of motions without oral hearing upon brief written statements of reasons in support and opposition.
By common law oral argument is a matter of right and can't be denied without reasonable cause. The only cause in this case is the fact that Judge Chesler is a cowardly weasel, who has no respect for constitutional principle. Oral argument provides the only opportunity to back these weasels "umpires" into an accountability corner. Without oral argument these integrity-less liars and crooks just remake the relevant issues, and argument, in into the straw man of their choice. Justice in America is in fact dead! ....and it is time for a new revolution. |
| By 06. 2....... on Thursday, September 07, 2006 - 12:42 pm: |
Received a motion today from state requesting --again-- more time to answer the complaint. I found this an interesting little quote:
quote:9. Due to the vagueness of Plaintiff's Complaint, this office is still investigating the Plaintiff's allegations concerning the State Judicial Defendants in order to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint.
I say Deputy Attorney General Kimberly A. Sked is just another publicly paid liar, who gleefully slanders the constitutional principles she has sworn an oath to. It's not any vagueness of my complaint that is a problem... it is the obvious guilt of her clients that has them scrambling to weave a blanket of bullshit to cover-up the rotund and protruding truth that justice in New Jersey is a fucking bad, ignorant, corrupt, rotten, stinking ... joke. |
| By 07. 07. 142... on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 12:39 pm: |
| You are obviously a mentally ill person. Why are you wasting all of our tax dollars on this nonsense? Please utilize your time and energy to get some seriously needed help for yourself, instead of pursuing these matters. |
| By 07. 2....... on Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 6:47 pm: |
You are obviously a mentally ill person.
and you are obviously a dimwit... made apparent by the fact that you are incapable of articulating a meaningfully rational defense of your unqualified diagnosis.
Why are you wasting all of our tax dollars on this nonsense?
You should ask this question to the lawbreaking assholes you elected.
Please utilize your time and energy to get some seriously needed help for yourself, instead of pursuing these matters.
and you Please try to grow a brain, instead of wasting the rational readers time talking out of your big fat ass. |
| By 07. 86... on Wednesday, April 15, 2009 - 12:29 am: |
Greetings:
I have spent the last two hours reading your site, and will say this: You have a lot of nerve, or guts, or balls? I have seen what can happen to a Pro Se that has done what you're doing - huge assessments of fees, even fines, and filing injunctions, etc.
Your problem is, that you are consistently arguing the wrong case, or no case, to either the wrong people, or in the wrong court. These Judges are doing exactly what they are supposed to do - including the first one. Honestly, I am shocked that they have taken this much time with your case. You should be thankful that you have not been assessed a huge penalty for legal fees.
I have read all of the Orders and Memorandum you've posted, and though you think you these people have "played their hand" they really haven't. Only because, you have yet to state a claim for relief!
From the very first ruling against you, you attacked not the judge's ruling, but the judge himself. You were obviously pissed, but have restructured the "injury" that you were seeking relief for.
"Failing to state a claim" means you have asked the Court for something that they do not have authority to provide, or you've asked for nothing at all - aside from just bitching about stuff. Saying that you don't like the taxes on your cigarettes is wholly different from claiming that the assessment of cigarette taxes is a violation of 12 U.S.C. 3456(7), and then stating why.
If you want a divorce, don't file your petition at the post office. Or, if you're upset that your mail costs $.42 cents, don't file your petition in the Family Court.
It is unfortunate that we have umpteen different courts in this country - Federal and State - and for different things, dependent on certain amounts of money, etc. And, the appeals Court's are even worse. Collateral estoppel, immunity, res judicata by Judgment, Doctrines, etc are all there to protect someone's rights - even a judge. And, that's the way it is. You get used to it eventually. And, that's why we have law schools.
Sad and sorry to say, you have failed by your own mistakes. But, I admire your drive and passion. It is people just like you that made this country..
Good luck! |
| By 07. 07. 1... on Sunday, November 07, 2010 - 9:46 am: |
|
