the homeless court its a joke and guilty of corporate negligence as they aren't really a court, they're corporate administrators not Judges and have no legal rights to dependence "justice" or or condemn anyone, and the only court with any real authority in america is the supreme court of Pennsylvania (The Supreme Court is the most powerful court in the U.S., but it has no authority anywhere else in the world. The United States Supreme Court interprets U.S. Laws. The decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all federal courts, and are binding on state courts regarding issues of the Constitution and federal law. A case from a state's highest court may be appealed to the Supreme Court if there is a federal legal question involved The Supreme Court is the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all — the Constitution), banning the homeless from the court house to which they are requested to attend, is unconstitutional and immoral they have a duty of care to people to ensure that they have full and unrestricted access to the court buildings, and if they make it so they cannot attend or enter the building either willfully or by dereliction of duty, then they have committed a discriminatory and unconstitutional act by making it so they cannot attend to defend against the crimes of which they are accused, this is a massive injustice and criminal act of governmental and corporate corruption and willful negligence to further criminalise a person who is following the legal action as directed by the law,
Suing the Government for Negligence: The Federal Tort Claims Act
If you are injured by a government agency, you may be able to sue under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
Unfortunately, suing the federal government under the FTCA is trickier than suing a private citizen -- you will have to jump through a number of hoops, and the lawsuits are subject to a lengthy and sometimes confusing list of limitations.
The Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA")
Historically, under the doctrine of "sovereign immunity," you were not permitted to sue the king. Sovereign immunity has carried over to modern times in the form of a general rule that you cannot sue the government -- unless the government says you can. Fortunately, the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA") allows certain kinds of lawsuits against federal employees who are acting within the scope of their employment.
If you believe you may have a claim for negligence (careless conduct, or other wrongful or "tortious" conduct) against a federal agency or employee, you must first determine whether you can sue the federal government under the FTCA. Unless your claim is allowed by the FTCA, there is a good chance it will be barred by sovereign immunity. (To learn more about what constitutes negligence, read Nolo's article Negligence, Duty of Care, and Fault for an Accident.)
Note on State Government Liability for Injury: State governments are entitled to the same sovereign immunity that is enjoyed by the federal government, but every state has also passed its own set of laws (often referred to as a "Tort Claims Act") in which the state has conditionally waived that immunity. And in certain situations where the negligent action (or inaction) of a government employee or agency has resulted in personal injury or property damage, citizens may be able to make a claim for damages. To learn about the rules in your state when it comes to filing an injury claim against the government, check out our Injury Claims Against Your State articles collection.
Is My Claim Permitted By the FTCA?
In general, the FTCA is intended to provide monetary compensation for injury, property loss, or death "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government." But this broad-sounding mandate is subject to a lot of fine print.
Although the limitations and exceptions are too numerous to review in this article, here are some general guidelines regarding the limitations on FTCA claims:
Only federal employees can be sued under the FTCA, not independent contractors hired by the federal government (unless they are treated like employees).
The negligent or wrongful conduct must have been done within the scope of the defendant's employment.
In general, only claims of negligence -- as opposed to intentional misconduct -- are allowed (though some claims for intentional misconduct can be brought against certain federal law enforcement officers).
The claim must be based on -- and permitted by -- the law of the state in which the misconduct occurred.
Despite these and numerous other limitations on FTCA lawsuits, the federal government still pays out millions of dollars each year to compensate FTCA claims. So if you think you may have a valid claim, it may be worth pursuing.
If you determine that you do have a valid FTCA claim, the next hurdle is to follow the prescribed steps for such claims, which include some strict time limits.
Filing an Administrative Claim
In a normal lawsuit claiming negligence, you proceed more or less straight to court. But if you wish to sue under the FTCA, you must first file a claim with the federal agency responsible for the alleged misconduct. For example, if your claim is based on an accident at the post office, you would file your claim with the U.S. Postal Service. During this phase of the process, while your claim is being reviewed by the federal agency, it is referred to as an "administrative claim."
Although not strictly necessary, the easiest way to prepare your administrative claim is to use the federal government's standard claim form, known as a Standard Form 95 or SF 95, which has boxes for all the information you will need to provide. You can get a copy of the form from the Department of Justice's website (at www.usdoj.gov, type "standard form 95" into the search box) or request a copy from the federal agency to which you will be submitting your claim.
Here is an overview of how the administrative claim process works:
You must file within two years. You have two years from the time your claim arises to file your administrative claim with the appropriate federal agency. Because the exact date when your claim arose may be a legal issue in your case, it is important to file your administrative claim as soon as possible to avoid any chance of it being rejected as untimely.
Include facts and damages in your claim. Your administrative claim must include the exact amount of money damages you are claiming, as well as enough facts about your case to allow the federal agency to investigate the merits of your claim. Using a SF 95 form will help ensure that you've included all of the necessary information.
The agency has six months to respond. Once your claim is submitted, the federal agency has six months to rule on it. In some cases, the federal agency may "admit" your claim (that is, agree that your claim is valid) and agree to pay you some or all of the money damages you demanded, and you may not need to go to court.
You then have six months to file a lawsuit. If the federal agency rejects your claim or refuses to pay all the money damages you demanded, you have six months from the date on which the decision is mailed to you to file a lawsuit. Again, file your lawsuit as soon as possible after receiving this decision to avoid any chance of having your lawsuit dismissed as untimely.
You don't have to sue until the agency rules on your claim. If the federal agency fails to rule on your administrative claim within six months, you have the choice of either awaiting the agency's decision or going ahead with your lawsuit. As long as the federal agency is still considering your claim, there is no time limit for you to file a law suit in federal court; the six-month time limit only begins to run once the agency has ruled on your claim.
Once you have gone through the procedures listed above -- a process known as "exhausting your administrative remedies" -- you are eligible to file a lawsuit in federal court to pursue money damages from the government.
Judicial misconduct, occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct.
Actions that can be classified as judicial misconduct include: conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts (as an extreme example: "falsification of facts" at summary judgment); using the judge's office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives; accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office; having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case; treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; violating other specific, mandatory standards of judicial conduct, such as judicial rules of procedure or evidence, or those pertaining to restrictions on outside income and requirements for financial disclosure; and acting outside the jurisdiction of the court, or performance of official duties if the conduct might have a prejudicial effect on the administration of the business of the courts among reasonable people. Rules of official misconduct also include rules concerning disability, which is a temporary or permanent condition rendering judge unable to discharge the duties of the particular judicial office.[1]
Judicial misconduct leads only seldom to a formal investigation. A court decision is not beyond critique. Defendants may be coaxed to enter into plea bargains that rob the public from a fair trial and from knowing the truth. Court decisions cannot be assumed just. They are subject to critical public appraisal as any human decision.
In the UK Judicial misconduct is investigated by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.
In the USA[edit]
A judicial investigative committee is a panel of judges selected to investigate a judicial misconduct complaint against a judge accused of judicial misconduct. Judicial investigative committees are rarely appointed. According to U.S. Court statistics, only 18 of the 1,484 judicial misconduct complaints filed in the United States Courts between September 2004 and September 2007 warranted the formation of judicial investigative committees.[2]
Notable judges involved in misconduct allegations[edit]
Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]
United States Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, who was acquitted on articles of impeachment[11]
Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court Roy Moore
See also[edit]
Legal abuse
Malfeasance in office
Judicial corruption
Judicial immunity
References[edit]
Jump up^ Judicial Misconduct Rules – United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jump up^ From nude photos to lying: Federal judges under scrutinyHouston Chronicle, October 13, 2008
Jump up^ "Troubling trend: When Michigan judges need disciplining". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Ex-Judge Trading Robes For Prison Garb". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Ex-Justice Diane Hathaway Sentenced To Prison For Real Estate Fraud -- AOL Real Estate". AOL Real Estate Blog. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Judge Diane Hathaway's Lawyer on Her Bank Fraud: 'It was Dumb'". www.deadlinedetroit.com. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Ex-Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway will remain in prison". WDIV. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Let Me Go Home, Ex-Justice Diane Hathaway Pleads To Judge From Prison". www.deadlinedetroit.com. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "Former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway released from federal prison". MLive.com. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ Jones, Ross. "Fmr. Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway released from Camp Cupcake". WXYZ. Archived from the original on 2016-02-24. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
Jump up^ "1801: Senate Tries Supreme Court Justice". www.senate.gov. Retrieved 2016-02-16.
External links[edit]
Above the Law: Judicial Misconduct – Site specializing in news on the topic
