Skip to content

Why Everyone Should Become a Dissident

In the lower court, regarding the legal malpractice lawsuit I filed against J. Edward Martin “Esquire” ( with multiple Charter sufixes )  the trial court ignored the absolute fact that Martin filed a dispositive motin eight months past the date allowed, and that he filed regarding the same medical expert that he used when he represented me in the underlying case ..get this… using the exact same argument the underlying cases attorney used. 

He used undisclosed documents to do this, refusing to respond to discovery requests, and refusing to answer interrogatories.  And, the court allowed this.

My Appeal to the Court of Special Deals in Maryland regarded these questions:

ISSUES PRESENTED

1 – Did the trial Court err by granting Summary Judgment to the Appellee when the Appellees motions are untimely, are in bad faith and are unethical, there was no expert independent medical exam, no foundation provided to Appellees expert, there is no expert affidavit or opinion, and Appellees medical expert has no professed expertise in this medical circumstance, and therefore, no testimony to support the Appellees’ pleading?  

2 – Did the trial court err by not considering relevant, highly important and admitted evidence regarding the Appellants medical expert who in the underlying two cases was named twice as Appellants medical expert by the Appellee, and who in the underlying same two cases was designated by the Appellee who testified to the Record that this same medical expert would testify to causation, damages, future medical expenses and lost wages, but who now is subjected to an untimely and disingenuous Frye-Reed analysis that the Appellee has been aware of since his representation of the Appellant from 1999 to 2003?

3- Did the trial court err by considering the Appellees Second Motion for Summary Judgment under Md. Rule 2-501, when the Appellee with fraud, malice and forethought, concealment of documents and purposeful deception, took one position in the underlying case, and then a completely contrary position in this case that is absolutely intended to carry out his threats of harm to the Appellant by not timely objecting to Appellants medical expert testimony or discovery, and then waited eight months past the scheduling order for filing dispositive motions until he was sure the Appellant had spent thousands of dollars on her experts to file these deceitful motions to mislead the court and the Appellant, as he knows the only way he can prevail, is by trickery and deceit ? 

The Court blew me off with a seriously flawed and incorrect “memorandum” of law that couldnt even quote to my appeal brief correctly, and seemed to be written by a senile person – or perhaps one suffering from what is known to be “the black robe of payoffs” syndrome expedited by corporate donations and glad handing of back door ( if you get my drift ) deals and old boy networking whores.

So, I filed a writ of certiorari – which was completely blown off without opinion OR A SIGNATURE by Judge Robert Bell. 

I then filed a Motion for reconsideration that included as seperate motions, a writ of mandamus, and a motion for summary judgment. 

Oddly, I received today an “order” that only states the motion for reconsideration is denied.   

OK.. they want a war, they just got one.  I tried to go by the law, but its obvious that the courts will cover even the most heinous depraved predator there is in Towson, Maryland.  Thats not opinion, he attacked me physically and sexually, and I know from his secretary that this is nothing unique to me. 

The door is opened now Martin.  C’mon down you pizza faced jerk. 

Judge Robert Bell of the Court of Appeals of Marylands unsigned rubber stamped “orders”.   Amazing the extent these people go to , to cover one of their own. 

Bells Orders

Its sad, its very very sad that THIS is what our “legal system” has become.   

 

2012 02 10 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

Waiting for the Inevitable BITCH SLAP from the Maryland Court of Appeals

I mean, the Maryland Court of Special Deals – for protected criminal lawyers of course.

Did some digging for my excursion into the depths of the black robed conspiracy, and will be asking for a copy of the determining judges oaths of office, and Ill be forced to sue them if they blow off the Motion for Reconsideration, that includes a writ of mandamus, and a Motion for Summary Judgment. 

After all, the criminal lawyer admitted to the record in front of a trial court judge that he is negligent.  After all, his insurance lawyers are doing to me what the previous defendant did to him.  Only the criminal lawyer and his  legal counsel decided to sit on this undisclosed information for years – waiting until I spent thousands and thousands of dollars on experts, and other expenses ( I had to get a lawyer for a little while while recovering from Lymes – $$$ – but he did turn out to be a good guy so I was glad I met him )  and they waited to file this malicious motion at the last minute, an eight month past due date for dispositive motions no less -

AND THE JUDGE ALLOWED IT !!! 

This is how bad it is when you sue a lawyer.

So, been looking around and found out some interesting stuff 

From ;  http://freedom-school.com/acceptance/

INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE OF THE NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTITUTIONS AND OF OATH OF OFFICE

Any elected or appointed official or Attorney refusing to honor an acceptance of their Oath is simply impersonating a public official and their alleged [Texas] Penal Code 37.11 Impersonating a Public Servant – 3rd degree felony. One can also see, 18 USC Sec. 912, 01/03/95; EXPCITE: TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I – CRIMES, CHAPTER 43 – FALSE PERSONATION; HEAD: Sec. 912. Officer or employee of the United States. STATUTE: Whoever falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such, or in such pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 

In regards to protecting oneself from “abusive” public servants: check out the [your] State laws on “stalking” and “exploitation” as well as “neglect to protect” provisions in State law [upholding and enforcing the law by parties under Oath of Office] as well as Title 18 USC §1621 concerning the “neglect to protect” by persons under Oath, and Title 42 USC § 1986, wherein a person having “knowledge of the law”, “the power to stop a wrong” and the “duty to prevent a wrong from being done” is liable for any failure to act. Should they fail to prevent a wrong, having knowledge of the law, the power to prevent, and the legal or moral duty to prevent the wrong, which causes deprivations of your religious and/or civil rights or Liberties, suit can be brought for violations.

“Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our Fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” –Abraham Lincoln
“Bind down the Public officials with the chains of the Constitution” —Thomas Jefferson

and from : http://caught.net/prose/badjudge.htm

A Judge is not immune for tortious acts committed in a purely Administrative, non-judicial capacity. Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. at 227-229, 108 S.Ct. at 544-545; Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. at 380, 98 S.Ct. at 1106. Mireles v. Waco, 112 S.Ct. 286 at 288 (1991).

A Judge as a State Actor is not vested with the sovereign immunity granted to the State itself . See: Rolfe v. State of Arizona, 578 F.Supp. 987 (D.C. Ariz. 1983); Rutledge v. Arizona Bd. of Regents, 660 F.2d 1345, (9th Cir, 1981) cert. granted Kush v. Rutledge, 458 U.S. 1120, 102 S.Ct. 3508,73 L.Ed.2d 1382, affirmed 460 U.S. 719, 103 S.Ct. 1483, 75 L.Ed.2d. 413, appeal after remand 859 F.2d 732, Ziegler v. Kirschner, 781 P.2d 54, 162 Ariz. 77 (Ariz. App., 1989).

 

I have this feeling that Ill need this.  And this is just ONE lawyer – see below for the federal case – thats 8 lawyers and four law firms

2012 02 09 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

Federal Appellate Court Brief

I dont let these slimeballs slide – I call them all on treating me differently than “lawyers”.

Theres some good citations – for those of you who feel youve been discriminated against because you are pro se – check it out.

Federal Pro Se Appellate Brief

Arent you tired of corporate lawyers getting away with ( almost ) murder?  It amazes me that even with a signed affidavit stating that they are illegal – the courts still cover for them.

The courts wouldnt do the job theyre supposed to do … so I sued them.

2012 02 08 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

Been Waiting

Got a huge amount of work already in the Maryland Court of Appeals  - Click to see -

Making the screenplay for the promotional video this week. 

Having Cancer surgery – not feelin too creative.

2012 02 05 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

DEEP PACKET INSPECTION – ie: The Patriot Act Expanded

The latest scheme to “keep an eye on you” – “Deep Packet Inspection”.  Heres the definition: 

Definition of deep packet inspection ;  Analyzing network traffic to discover the type of application that sent the data. In order to prioritize traffic or filter out unwanted data, deep packet inspection can differentiate data, such as video, audio, chat, voice over IP (VoIP), e-mail and Web. Inspecting the packets all the way up to layer 7 , it can be used to analyze anything and everything within the packet that is not encrypted. For example, it can determine not only that the packets contain the contents of a Web page, but also which Web site the page is from.

Anybody with a web site and certain analytics can do this.  ( but who does?  not me )

Back to the story: House members went back to the drawing board on Internet consumer protection Thursday; once again tackling the subject of how much personal data Web companies should collect about you, and whether or not Congress needs to legislate a solution.   Read More >

A simple way around this would to become “anonymous” on the web , try this>     or just Google “anonymous web browsing”. 

 

2012 01 17 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

OCCUPY THE COURTS

Finally!  Some real action

Sponsored by Move to Amend :  http://movetoamend.org/OccupyTheCourts

Facebook   https://www.facebook.com/events/270552246315008/

 

JANUARY 20, 2012

2012 01 17 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

Going To The Supreme Court – Get Ready

I am going to assume yuo will be proceding “in forma pauperus” – which means you dont pay the heft filing fees, or dont have your briefs bound up like a tiny anal book

Heres an easy to use Form, with the rules written for people who cant be bothered to do the work and actually review the Supreme Court Rules.

Supreme Court Form

Some of the more interesting portions of this form are :

Nature of Supreme Court Review
It is important to note that review in this Court by means of a writ of certiorari is not
a matter of right, but of judicial discretion. The primary concern of the Supreme
Court is not to correct errors in lower court decisions, but to decide cases presenting
issues of importance beyond the particular facts and parties involved. The Court
grants and hears argument in only about 1% of the cases that are filed each Term.
The vast majority of petitions are simply denied by the Court without comment or
explanation. The denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari signifies only that the
Court has chosen not to accept the case for review and does not express the Court’s
view of the merits of the case.
Every petitioner for a writ of certiorari is advised to read carefully the Considerations
Governing Review on Certiorari set forth in Rule 10. Important considerations for
accepting a case for review include the existence of a conflict between the decision of
which review is sought and a decision of another appellate court on the same issue.
An important function of the Supreme Court is to resolve disagreements among lower
courts about specific legal questions. Another consideration is the importance to the
public of the issue.

The trickiest part
Question(s) Presented
On the page provided, enter the question or questions that you wish the Court to
review. The questions must be concise. Questions presented in cases accepted for
review are usually no longer than two or three sentences. The purpose of the question
presented is to assist the Court in selecting cases. State the issue you wish the Court
to decide clearly and without unnecessary detail.

In order to get the attention of the “cert pool” ( all clerks ) you will have to have really interesting questions that will on its face, present an issue that will affect a lot of people.  Because, in case you didnt know, it will be a CLERK who will blow you off, probably not a Supreme Court Justice.   And, you will get a rubber stamped blow off.      

You know and I know this is bullshit, as the Supreme Court absolutely has an agenda – so if youre a poor person who has been screwed by your lawyer and the courts, at least you can make a paper trail by going all the way up the legal ladder and on to SCOTUS.  ( “supreme court of the united states “)  

Theres more people merely posting to blogs and writing about their outrage than are people actually doing anything – be different!  Actually do something besides sitting on your whiny ass in front of your computer. Read, study, take action.   GOOGLE IT !!!  I am not allowed to give anything that can be (mis)construed as “legal advice”  because God forbid that I even attempt to do this – or they will take me out the same way they take out real estate agents who help you fill out the forms.   Take a look at your own states attorney grievance commissions stats – they dont mess with law firms who screw you or who employ illegal out of state lawyers – oh no!  They go after the single practicioner or the real estate agent.

Imagine what they could do to a pro se litigant sharing info. 

So, what you can do is to post your complaints, motins, and how you feel ( your “opinion” )  You cant be illegal for posting your opinion – its a First Amendment right. 

 

 

2012 01 14 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal
Legal Comments Off Permalink

Grand Jury – The Federal Level

I am at the Maryland Court of Appeals level regarding a simple legal malpractice case because….  the courts and whoever it is that pays the “extra fees” dont like one of their own being brought up on charges.

Here I have a defendant/appellee who admits in transcript before a judge that he is negligent.  This same defendant/appellee also testified that the doctor he disputes now, is the same one he was using to testify on my behalf in the underlying case for exactly the same things he is disputing now.

Fine, I understand the courts will go to great ( criminal ) lengths to cover for their own, but when his admission is part of the record I do have to step back and wonder whos dick hes sucking?  ( I mean..seriously?)

So, the writ of certiorari was rubber stamped blown off by the Court of Appeals – WHO HAS LEGAL JURISDICTION OF ALL MARYLAND LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASES – HELLO?   I did file several motions to give the Court of Appeals a way out of their criminal actions regarding this cover up.  

However, gearing up for the inevitable SCOTUS run, but before I do that, I will roll with a Federal Grand Jury request. 

Check it out;

GRAND JURY

Specifically regarding lawyers:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-1135.pdf
The handful of privileges that provide the grounds for quashing a grand jury
subpoena include:
• attorney-client;97
• attorney work product;98
• clergyman-communicant;99
• informer identity;100
• spousal immunity;101
• spousal communications;102 and
• psychotherapist-patient.103
Perhaps the two most commonly cited privileges in motions to quash grand jury
subpoenas are the attorney-client privilege and the closely related attorney work
product privilege. The attorney-client privilege covers “[c]onfidential disclosures by
a client to an attorney made in order to obtain legal assistance.”104 The privilege does
not foreclose grand jury inquiry into attorney-client communications which are
themselves criminal or are in furtherance of some future criminal activity.105 Nor, as
a general rule, does the privilege cover the identity of the client nor details
concerning payment of the attorney’s fee,106 and thus the privilege will usually not
constitute grounds to quash a grand jury subpoena directed to secure that
information.107
This last general rule may be subject to any of three exceptions. The privilege
may extend to information concerning the identity of the client or the particulars of
the fee arrangement when (1) “disclosure would implicate the client in the very
criminal activity for which legal advice was sought; . . . [(2)] disclosure of the
client’s identity by his attorney would have supplied the last link in an existing chain
of incriminating evidence likely to lead to the client’s indictment; . . . [or (3)] the
payment of the fee itself is unlawful . . . [or] the fee contract contain[s] any
confidential communication.”108
The attorney “work product privilege protects any material obtained or prepared
by a lawyer in the course of his legal duties, provided that the work was done with
an eye toward litigation.”109 Like the attorney-client privilege it is subject to a
crime/fraud exception.110 Unlike that privilege, however, “the work product privilege
belongs to both the client and the attorney, either one of whom may claim it. An
innocent attorney may claim the privilege even if a prima facie case of fraud or
criminal activity has been made as to the client.”

My case is not covered under these rules because HE is the criminal.  Im looking at this.

2012 01 11 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

Follow-up to You Can Be A Lawyer Without Going To Law School

Follow up to original post found here

Researching Subject Matter Jurisdiction for the Washington DC District Court  and ran across this typically vicious circle case before the Washington DC District Court, the Washington DC Court of Appeals, and future Supreme Court of the US. justice Brennan chimes in.  

Yep.. this what they do and why it takes so freakin long to get anything done

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, et al., Petitioners v. Marc FELDMAN and Edward J. Hickey, Jr.

No. 81-1335.

Argued: Dec. 8, 1982.

Decided: March 23, 1983.

Syllabus

Respondents filed petitions in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals asking for waivers of that court’s District of Columbia Bar admission rule that requires applicants to have graduated from a law school approved by the American Bar Association. The court issued per curiam orders denying the petitions. Respondents then filed complaints in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging the District of Columbia Court of Appeals’ denials of their waiver petitions and also challenging the constitutionality of the Bar admission rule. The District Court dismissed the complaints on the ground that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed and remanded.

Held:

2011 12 28 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink

You Too Can Be A Lawyer Without Going To Law School!

ran across this..

Law Office Study is the way president Abraham Lincoln and other Supreme Court justices were able to become lawyes in the past, as well as myself. Those high powered men learned by doing it in a law office as law clerks and apprentices. In fact is, historically, attorneys lawyers read from Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England to learn the law and by clerking. After that, the lawyer candidate was orally examined by state supreme court judges,. The Bar Exam came along hundreds of years later. In fact, here is a list of famous men who did it the old way. 

1. Patrick Henry (1736-1799), member of the Continental Congress, governor of Virginia 

2. John Jay (1745-1829), first chief justice of the Supreme Court; 

3. John Marshall (1755-1835), chief justice of the Supreme Court; 

4. William Wirt (1772-1834), attorney general; 

5. Roger B. Taney (1777-1864), secretary of the treasury, chief justice of the Supreme Court; 

6. Daniel Webster (1782-1852), secretary of state; 

7. Salmon P. Chase (1808-1873), senator, chief justice of the Supreme Court 

8. Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), president; 

9. Stephen Douglas (1813-1861), representative, senator from Illinois. 

10. Clarence Darrow (1857-1938), defense attorney in Scopes trial of 1925. [Clarence Darrow went to law school for one year, and preferred to study law on his own. He received most of his legal education in a law office in Youngstown, Ohio. 

11. Robert Storey (b. 1893), president of the American Bar Association (1952-1953). 

12. J. Strom Thurmond (b. 1902), senator, governor of South Carolina. 

13. James O. Eastland (b. 1904), senator from Mississippi Wallechinsky, David, “The Book of Lists,” 1977
FROM    http://www.ehlinelaw.com/pages/3226/How_to_Become_a_Lawyer_With_No_Law_School_-_Be_a_Lawyer_With_No_College.htm

2011 12 26 Sharon Galloway Actions Political and Legal Comments Off Permalink