I contacted JUSTANSWER customer service and requested additional funds be added specifically – in my interest to compensate for the extensive questions posed through responses and they advised that I could do so as a “bonus” deposit after the dialog is closed and rated.
I wanted you to know that I intend on adding funds using this procedure. Beginning with the end in mind and through my providing pertinent, specifics on my case, I would just like to obtain a specific summary as to the issues (in my case) that would constitute “LEGAL MALPRACTICE” – not extensive in detail and content – just line-items of the matters that should and could have been raised and thus preserved. I am fully aware of the fact that your sumXXXXX XXXXXst (if you choose to provide me with it) is all based upon the assumption that I provided accuracy in the events in question. With that said, the list will surely help me in enticing a Legal Malpractice lawyer into taking my case (hopefully). So - Hang with me, ok?
Considering my issues presented prior to and including this latest information of specific detail, what are the issues that pass the “test” of a valid claim of be Legal Malpractice in your opinion (again – just a list.
Example: failure to raise and preserve: 1); 2); 3); and so on.
All of the judges that recused (sua sponte and not on motion) did so strictly due to their own lack of knowledge due to the relatively new ADA protection laws for which they are bound to for disabled litigants.
WAS THERE A DUTY TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD ON APPEAL
My trial judge (who issued the FJ) filed her Order to Recuse, sua sponte, disqualifying herself from the case 6 weeks after issuing F.J.and during pendency of the appeal. Should my appellate lawyer have noticed the appellate court at that time? By the way, my INITIAL brief was not even filed yet when this happened.
On that topic, I informed my appellate of the Judge that issued the Order on appeal of her Recuse Order. (I had researched and found case law that - in family law cases on appeal, the appellate court needs “all relevant factors” and newly-discovered matters necessary for their meaningful review (particularly in family cases) and of which may impact their eventual ruling; and to do so prior to their issuing their Opinion.
THE PENDING APPEAL IN THE RELATED (DISABILITY) CASE
As I've mentioned prior, I testified in court and on official record that I had a pending claim in disability court as to my unemployment and disability (and thus preserved the issue that appellate counsel could have raised?)
And; since the disability evidence substantiating my disability was unavailable at the time of the trial, did it constitute newly-discovered relevant evidence for the appeal – withholding “all pertinent” facts?
Should my appellate lawyer have supplemented the appeal when a COURT ORDER from the disability court – who had since issued their Final Order determining my full disability and determining that my unemployable status date of onset was months prior to the trial?
The disability order was based upon factual undisputed findings, substantiated by proof; and in direct conflict with the divorce judgment that imputed non-existing income based solely on false testimony of my ex-husband – without an ounce of factual findings (alarmingly stated in the F.J. itself…”The husband testified that the wife was earning…”).
CONFLICTING ORDERS OF TWO COURTS OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION
Required (statute 61) factual findings were ignored by trial judge
Substantive factual findings and evidence leading to their fully favorable ruling on my disability
Both of these courts fall within the appellate jurisdiction of the same district court (4th DCA) if challenged on appeal
**(I was ambushed and unrepresented and told the Judge exactly this - O/C Lied; Petitioner Lied; Their Proffered Statements And Testimony (By Petitioner) At Trial.
My appellate lawyer refused to supplement the record on appeal and continued to fail in protecting the preservation of these issues by refusing to notice the appellate court in both her INITIAL APPEAL as well as during the PENDENCY of the appeal.
The unconstitutional denial of the trial judge who ignored my physicians’ notice via correspondence offered at the trial. In some case law – in Florida –“..An issue as to legal capacity need only be alleged…” to justify a testamentary finding of fact of incapacity to be sued…” (I obviously had no prior opportunity since I was represented up until 2 days before trial. In his letter addressed directly to the trial court, my doctor urged the court continue trial so that he could testify to these facts and to ensure that I had representation to avoid the risks of my conditions worsening if forced to appear pro se.
I was absolutely not able to competently defend myself for numerous reasons including inability to obtain new counsel - but my legal capacity was not adjudicated and, had I known, I would have certainly requested a probate evaluation that – in consideration of the actual content that was given to the disability court – specific to my incapacity (again, technically non-adjudicated), I would have certain petitioned the probate court for a determination of my legal incapacity because I was not capable – medically during that abusive trial.
UNIFORM NATIONAL CONSTITUIONAL LAW
See Case In re MARRIAGE OF JAMES M. AND CHRISTINE J. C. James M. C, Respondent, v. Christine J. C, Appellant.; No. G037159.; Court of Appeal, Fourth District; Division 3; January 15, 2008.; [70 Cal.Rptr.3d 716]; 70 Cal.Rptr.3d 715; 158 Cal.App.4th 1261;
This case was in California…BUT – CA Rule 1.100 is a copy, verbatim, of the U.S. Code under the ADA that specifies the requirement to grant a reasonable accommodation (based always on the individual circumstances and without specific limits of the court as to the nature of the accommodation if appropriate to specific matter at hand).
Without ambiguity – the laws under U.S. CODE under ADA protected individuals legally govern every state including divorce trial judges; and they are mandated under the law to accommodate disabled litigants WHEN the specifics fall within one of the three facts as identified in the law under ADA U.S. Code.
In re MARRIAGE OF JAMES M. AND CHRISTINE J.C. ABOVE;
“…the trial court denied her request under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 United States Code section 12101 et seq. (ADA) and California Rules of Court, rule 1.100 to continue the trial…”, and;
“…It is undisputed Christine suffers from bipolar disorder, a potentially incapacitating mental illness, and, on her psychiatrist's recommendation…” In the case above, it states that, “…the Courts must show at least one of three specifically identified grounds to DENY an accommodation. None of those grounds existed when Christine's request was denied. We therefore reverse and remand…”
Minimal case law exists because (as in all NEW law, case law evolves over time to accumulate - logically)... Even under Fla.R.Jud.Admin 2.540.; “…a request for accommodation may be denied ONLY when the court determines that the requested accommodation would create an undue financial or administrative burden on the court or would fundamentally alter the nature of the service, program, or activity…” And, in some Florida case law it states that the incapacity of a litigant need only be “alleged” for a request for an accommodation to be review and considered (same is identified under the U.S. Code)
CONTRADICTING COURT ORDERS
Final Order that clearly specified its retroactive application, proving that my testimony of disability was factual; and substantiated evidence proving that Petitioner’s testimony was alleged to be false and fraud on the trial court (he knew of my disability since diagnosed in 2004 leading to my medical decomposition that ultimately caused my incapacity to sustain employment and documented (extensive discovery) proving that I in fact had NO income to impute. Should this have been raised on appeal?
My ADA accommodation request was REASONABLE. A request for Continuance was in fact a valid reason under the law and my appellate lawyer was well aware of these matters even if only “alleged” according to the mandate of congress under ADA law. Should this have been raised on appeal?
Should my appellate lawyer have supplemented the record on appeal by raising all of these matters to ensure that the appellate court had ALL FACTORS NECESSARY in their consideration prior to their ruling – particularly those denying my due process under CONSTITUTIONAL law?
IN RESPONSE TO YOUR SUGGESTION THAT I FILE A MOTION TO RECUSE THE TRIAL JUDGE: I DID REQUEST THE TRIAL JUDGE ISSUE HER RECUSE AND SHE IGNORED IT
Should my appellate lawyer have supplemented the appeal to raise the fact that the trial court who issued the F.J. disqualified herself six weeks after F.J. and during pending appeal on her own ORDER on appeal before it rendered its opinion?
ADA law under U.S. Code clear in its "REASONABLE COURT ADA ACCOMMODATIONS", all of the case law cited that led to reversal (in Christine C., the higher court on appeal found that the Judge erred for NOT GRANTED HER CONTINUANCE since the circumstances called for a CONTINUANCE as a “reasonable accommodation” under the specific case circumstances.
This law is relatively new and CERTAINLY foreign to judges to choose NOT to continue their own education on new law, and when I presented the ADA Laws and they were called to point after they, too, engaged in ADA violations, they chose to just recuse themselves in order to avoid their own liability of potentially being sued both personally and in their legal capacity (no immunity for judges if they are in violation of ADA law)