EPIC PRO SE LITIGANT fights banking corruption in the Supreme Court and WINS!!! Self Represented!!!
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2023
- An Epic self represented litigant fights against banking and finance corruption in the Supreme Court and WINS!!!!
#supremecourt
#victory
#winning
#prose
#selfrepresented
#legal
As a lawyer, I must say this is one of the better pro se litigants I have seen. Stuck to common sense and plain English, didn't try to put on an act, but also alerted the Court to certain cases he says are favorable to his cause. It's a good recipe
For people talking about the excessive questions -- this is common and expected, for lawyers and pro se litigants alike. This is an appellate court, not a trial court. Therefore, the focus is (generally speaking) on the _law_ , not the _facts_ . You should expect, when you are before a higher court, to be grilled with questions, because they are really trying to get to the nitty gritty legal implications of the case. They will ask you "What about this case ___ , and what about that case"; they will ask you "But isn't your case different than that case, because of XYZ? And isn't your case more like this case ___ because of ABC?" "What about this statute?" "Why do you think this language ___ means this?" It's not bullying, and it's not because he's a pro se litigant, this is just a function of what appellate courts do. They are inquiring, it's not like the trial court where it is on the parties to present the evidence and the judge just sits there as a referee.
Doesn't mean you will always get a lot of questions. Some cases (or at least the argument) is relatively straightforward and doesn't require it. But lots of questions should usually be expected. You go in there with a big speech prepared and you just end up answering questions the whole time.
I did my best to answer and move back to my wheelhouse 😅
🙏
Excellent case, I have been in this arena for more than 40 years, this was by far the best Attorney in Fact argued case that I have witnessed. This Man sets the bar for the New Common Law Court of America....but in no way new at all. The law is in us all. My friends if you aspire to discover greatness in laws and Freedom, and know how to express yourself in a manner that gets results, this is the man by which to set your gage.
Thank you for the kind words!
@@ThePro-Se My Friend in this case, the privilege is all mine. Justin the Conqueror. We finally have a Man that has shattered the glass ceiling of " Justice " I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that if your story was produced into a movie, book, or documentary that it would go viral. What we don't see is seven years of swimming in the swamp. When we examine the #1 problem in the World today, it is Justice. Justice is what enables great corruption. What you accomplished is monumental congratulations Justin you slew the Dragon.
best news all week, a normal person wins against the corrupt machine. GOOD ON YOU, WELL DONE. steven
Thanks my friend. And I'm not done. I'm going to help others and right wrongs. Www.SelfLegalAid.com
Why did this court basically highjack the guys time with explanations to the audience? It's like they wanted to prevent him from delving too deeply before them into the unfair tactics of the corporation. PS I would suggest never have anything to do with Charter West. From the lawyers arguments, you know it is a rip off company with low morale values and a conman's ethics.
Technically, I tried to put everything in there that was unrelated, and it would have been stopped by the Court if I was an attorney. 😅😅😅
I wanted to make sure the whole story got told, win lose or draw.
That way everyone could see what actually happened, not just that I bought www.charterwestbank.com 😅
When the courts travel to law schools for cases, it is common for them to do this so the law students can fully grasp what is going on.
If you notice the lights beside the speaker’s podium, the time limit expired on both litigants but the court kept going.
While this is a fully legal proceeding, it’s for the benefit of the students so there’s not nearly as stringent of timeframes.
The judges definitely could have eased up a bit in their questioning of the litigant, but regardless, good job. Also for the bank's attorney: coming to court with no documentation of losses or potential loss when that's a required element? Like.. nothing? Jesus, bring in a media or PR expert to testify as the impact to typical businesses, build a foundation. Also, relying on a customer being confused when it literally says it isn't their site...
Whether or not anyone agrees with the law or judges on this, the bank's attorney clearly didn't take this seriously and showed up having done little to no legwork and not having the bank's arguments worked out. Maybe they should be hiring the pro se litigant.
It was a LOT of work 😂😂😂
Now I know why they charge so much, but underestimating me was a mistake.
Check out alphonse faggiolo. Can charge the cpurts for going pro se, sincr youre not a lawyer, it takes much more tine and rrsearch for us as pro se to be prepared. Hes figured it out. Get paid Mr! Lol
He didn't need any documents since it's not his appeal, all the evidence are in the record as adjudicated. They are certified and axiomatic principals to the case now since judges already ruled on the cases already, he didn't have to bring new evidence. He is extrapolating damages as his conjectures based on what was said.
Qqqqqqqeee🎉😢 thef
Woohoooo!!!! He makes up pro se litigants look GREAT 👍🏾
Thank you! If you need free advice visit www.SelfLegalAid.com
The bank’s lawyer complaining that the guy was trying to damage the bank is rich. OK. Of course he does. And justifiably so. Your client damaged the couple and continued to do so until the couple spent how much time and money to force the bank to clear up their error? If they don’t like bad publicity, don’t do bad things.
Thank you. Wait until you see what's coming!
Mr. Silver looks and talks so much like actor Richard Schiff from the West Wing it's uncanny. Interesting case for sure.
Did they finally end up fixing the fake child support thing so you can finally get a mortgage somewhere else? I hope so! Can't believe they did you this dirty. Really enjoyed watching this!
Nope, that being said, I was able to get the house 12 months after they did it. 5 years it took me to finally win in the Nebraska Supreme Court without an attorney.
@@ThePro-Se That's super messed up of them! It's awesome you were able to hold your ground, especially as a pro se! Hats off!
@@HidInMistProductions Thank you! It was a long time in the making.
I feel like they should've addressed the legitimacy of the emails as admissible evidence much sooner. This was a very interesting listen though. Thank you
Update - he won the appeal 😮
Indeed I did!
Unanimously!
Awesome❤
@@ThePro-SeYou're lucky to have these judges. They do not seem to have any prejudice against you as a person or as a pro-se litigant. Lucky You!
@@JawedMemon I made sure that if they did, they would be forced to address it in the opinion, if they didn't agree with my argument.
@@ThePro-Se Congratulations! You did an awesome job of arguing your case. I cannot imagine what you went through for the 7 years (I think you stated 7 years at the end of your argument, apologies if I don’t have that correct) you dealt with this crooked bank, its shyster lawyer/s, and the biased, corrupt courts. It isn’t everyday that a pro se wins or even litigates their case to such a high level so WOW, I am thrilled for your win! I would love to hear more about your case and experience in litigating as well.
Congrats on the win. I am curious to know the amount of the child support judgement.
Did you attempt to dispute it with the 3 credit agencies?
It wasn't on my credit, I had full custody. It was merely something the bank did out of spite.
It never affected my credit because it wasn't real, if that makes any sense.
TBF here, there's no decision in the video. I had to look it up to see what they won.
From what I can tell from this case and the history spawning it, I'm glad they won this one.
well just go ahead and tell us
Www.charterwestbank.com
@@EricAnderson58I won😁 www.charterwestbank.com and then added www.SelfLegalAid.com
excellent!@@ThePro-Se
@ThePro-Se,
Amazing! Thank you! My heroes! Going to Probate, ProSe, and I appreciate the extra links on your site.
I am so proud to have seen this. You two are stars.
Notice the Company has to have two to fight the case. They will do anything to keep the citizen down. Funny how many laws there is to look after business but very few for the most important. The Citizen.
Specifically, this the Nebraska Supreme Court holding a court session at the University of Nebraska Law School. This looks pretty clue.
It was at Creighton Law School.
I kind of felt like I got lucky in the sense that had it been in Lincoln at the Capitol, there probably would have been 5 people in the gallery, and all attorneys 😅
What does "this is pretty clue" mean in this context...? Ive never heard this term or phrase to describe a court hearing
Please share this.
Awesome!! Ty
You can not punish someone for something that may happen in the possible future
Exactly. Especially when they are speaking the truth
Best learning video I’ve heard
Thanks for the kind words!
Woooooowwwwww
sounds like the bank f'd around and found out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They are the first of many 😅
This was amazing! Do you offer advice?
You can email me at owner@charterwestbanksucks.com or check out the site I set up www.SelfLegalAid.com . I don't offer legal advice, but I I can give you a road map and my input.
Amazing!!! Im sharing your video with my common law group, we sre figuring out how to fix the system. Its a lot of work and im still in learning mode.
Glad you won, I'm in a pro se case myself in a few different cases.
I set up a great website at www.charterwestbank.com to help. You can also email me at owner@charterwestbanksucks.com if you want any general advice.
The judge uses the title of Mr. To show the Pro Se litigants arent privy to know that they are not "A Title" ie Mr. You demand to be addressed by your first name... not Mr.
Don't be an idiot. This is a state Supreme Court -- they aren't going to address anyone by their first name.
I saw it as a sign of respect that he called me Mr.
@@ThePro-Se Mr. Implies that you are acting in the capacity of "A Title" which implies commerce...
@@jasondavis1502 Please stop being an idiot.
I'm not a sovereign citizen 😅
That being said, it was a good argument, eh?
What year is this?
The original case started in 2017, then they sued me for the website in 2019. I won in the Nebraska Supreme Court in 2023.
Www.charterwestbank.com
When you represent yourself, you are practicing law. Those admitted to the various state bars are instructed to eliminate the practice of law by non bar members. There is legal scaffolding supporting this right in your state statues and law. Find your individual State Bar Acts, and there you will see!
They definitely don't want Pro Se Litigants clogging the system, but sometimes the case is just obvious.
Its considered an unlicensed layman which the supreme court has upheld. Theyve also ruled numerous times that we have the right to go pro se and partake in the courts and that any state cannot require soneone to be a part of a third party to do this (the Bar association is a requirement in most states), it keeps people from partaking in their governments. Unconstitutional. I have a whole book " the commom law handbook" i suggest everyone get!!
I gotta disagree as a member of the Massachusetts bar, dawg... We are not "instructed" to eliminate pro se litigants... There are very good reasons though why we have attorneys, rather than pro se litigants generally .... So here, right off the bat I want to say this is a pretty good pro se litigant... _in this specific case_ .... assign this guy in some other case and he would be lost in the weeds with the most basic legal concepts. Attorneys don't just work 1 case. We take all sorts of cases. Even within a specific discipline of law, there are all sorts of cases you will take.
We don't spend three years of law school and then take a very difficult examination just for the fun of it... Just the jargon alone takes a couple years, or at least a year, to learn -- I can't tell you how many times I have heard laymen and "SovCits" say "There's no consideration!, There must be consideration!" and they are thinking "consideration" means what it means in the ordinary English language, as in a "pondering," when in fact in legal terms it means the object of a "quid pro quo." E.g., when you spend a dollar on a pack of gum at the store, your dollar is _consideration_ for that gum. "The law uses ordinary words in extraordinary ways," -- my appellate practice professor.
And that's just the jargon... Many Americans do not _fully_ understand our basic structure of government -- the distinction between the state and federal courts, when one case is brought in one versus another... can one be brought in both? only one? neither? What is "standing" and "mootness"? These are week 1 concepts too; It gets a hell of a lot more complex. Many don't understand what "the law" even is... Statutes, rules and regs, precedent, and constitutions... And how all these things interact with one another, which ones are binding and which aren’t ... what "binding" even means....
And court rules ... these dictate our day-to-day practice as litigators... and the public does not understand these (or even know about them at all). Things like Mass.R.Crim.P. 30 ... Mass. R. Crim. P. 30 is not a "law" in the technical sense, but rather a rule of court that all Massachusetts attorneys must abide by when seeking a new trial for their criminal defendant client, and it has a broad range of implications, from whether a criminal defendant can seek _more_ "discovery" from the state than was offered at trial (aka "post-conviction discovery") to whether they can seek funds to hire an expert to test certain items presented as evidence at trial... e.g. a post-conviction motion for discovery followed by a M.G.L. c. 278 motion for post-conviction forensic testing... And if that testing results in something good, then what? What do you actually do, in practice? Do you go to the appeals court? The trial court? Do you write a letter somewhere? or something else? Lawyers know the answers to all of these, and these are simple.
And there is so much I am leaving out. To be a licensed attorney, you are expected to have a solid grasp of countless legal doctrines, for example (using criminal because this is my area) -- ineffective assistance of counsel, reasonable suspicion vs. probable cause and the expectation of privacy in the context of the exclusionary rule/motions to suppress, Miranda and all its implications, etc.
@@Accuratetranslationservices the fact youre a member of the bar, i dont trust a word you say. And i dont need to read your novel to know the bar association is part of the reason our courts dont operate according to the constitution.... tons of info on this and how terrible they have been for the constitutional republic in which we live. Im sure you just signed the papers and pay the fees without really knowing at all what the Bar association does and has been doing to change the rule of law in america. Do some research. Supreme courts have ruled that its unconstitutional for anyone state or otherwise to require soneone to be a member of some association or any third party to practice law. Youre a lawyer, look it up.... shoukd read the things theyve said about if they cant change the constitutiin theyll do it article by article. Look around dude.... cant say whatever anymore bc it could be miscontrued as hate speech if someones offended.... cant carry a firearm if this that and the third (SHALL NO BE INFIRDGED DOESNT IMPLY LIMITATIONS) the list goes on. Thats who u work for to "practice law" theyve destroyed the law schools so i doubt you know much about the constiturion lt alone how to stand on rights laid out in that document though. The judges do though... its funny to watch an attorney for a township or school distrixt rwtire because an unkicensed layman destroyed them in court. We got a few around here 🤣 killing those "law school graduates" expesnive piece of paper 🤣
I used to believe things should be that way. However, as a pro se litigant, I've experienced extreme unfairness firsthand. You can read case 23-713 in the appellate court for the 2nd circuit to understand what I mean.
Y'all are criminals both sides he buys a domain of somebody name only to sell it back
Then why do I still own it?
I bought it to prove a point. They wanted it, I named a price.
After I won in Court, I have flatly refused to sell.
@@ThePro-Se This case is so interesting to me! You did an amazing job... I'm not sure many others could have done this with the accuracy that you did! By chance do you have a link to the judgement that I could read?
@@jeremytrent3534You can find it on the Nebraska Supreme Court website in the opinions. Just search Riddle