Caseworker liability
Bob
of judicial proceedings, they can be held liable for their unconstitutional
actions taken outside the context of judicial proceedings.
Here's a summary judgment brief alleging due process violations where the
caseworker violates agency regs.
CAUTION: I'm no lawyer. The pleadings, motions, and briefs I post are
prepared pro se. They are presented for educational purposes only.
http://www.suecps.com/admin-dp.htm
Bob
Greg Hanson
Your "in context of judicial proceedings" phrase caught my eye.
The lies told to the court in our case were "in that context"
but still violated our civil rights. I need to look at your
web pages again. It's been a few months since I last looked
at them. I'm hoping you had some luck and can give me some
other pointers. One small thing I got from Cheryl (I think)
is that I'm all gung-ho about 1985 (conspiracy) as well, but
there is some legal definition there I don't grasp yet, about
how a supervisor, telling a subordinate to do something which
violates us is not a "conspiracy" in a legal sense... ?
Can you make any more sense of that bit of legalese?
I'm having second thoughts about the idea of putting the
spurs to our own attorney. She told us the other day
"You're not the boss of me."
Our list of things we want subpoena'd, and motions to
file, she says she won't file ANY of it. Nov 13 hearing
is starting to smell like a complete setup. The attorney
even badmouthed us to the contract social worker, after
our meeting. She repeats over and over what she WON'T
do for us, and seems unwilling to suggest what she CAN
or WILL do for us. It's starting to look like another
setup for us to get slaughtered in court.
She has graciously consented to go through our document
of proposed actions and subpoenas and explain point by point
why she won't or can't. She said before that we COULD
subpoena documents and people, now she says NO.
Do people have right to subpoenas in Juvenile Court
review hearings?
We keep tilting at windmills. The stipulation was
a scam, and done without the attorney explaining
what it means. We'd like to RETRACT it.
Impossible we hear.
The visit supervisor is even ADDING on a service that
she already said in writing that Lisa DOES NOT NEED.
Apparently as punishment for lodging a solid rightious
complaint about hostile grandma's childcare.
The contractor is trying to squeeze in Parenting Instruction
that SHE gets paid for, and we are of course fighting it.
Will the judge notice the timing of this reversal of
the contractors opinion? Even if we point it out?
Our attorney told this contractor things like we
don't appreciate her, etc.. But she did not
clear this conference or the message with her
client. Isn't this an actionable breach?
We have told her outright, that we have several
reasons to feel that she is working for DHS not us.
Got any good ideas how to put this attorney
in check and make her do what her client wants?
Oh, she also bragged that WE can't file anything
except through her. More nebulous comments from
her interaction with the judge I'm guessing.
We do NOT want to go in to court WITHOUT the documents
and people we want SUBPOENA'D. Feel we need those.
Bob, your Federal 1983 info seems like the best
thing we can do right now. Any other suggestions?
How long do they usually sit on an appeal to a founded?
(We hope that didn't fall into a black hole.)
"Bob" <sue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<hzDA7.77148$cb.15...@atlpnn01.usenetserver.com>...
Bob
"Greg Hanson" <Gre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35120b16.01102...@posting.google.com...
> Bob, Thanks for making that available to others.
> Your "in context of judicial proceedings" phrase caught my eye.
> The lies told to the court in our case were "in that context"
> but still violated our civil rights. I need to look at your
> web pages again.
A copy of "Section 1983 Litigation in a Nutshell" by Michael G. Collins
might be a better start.
>It's been a few months since I last looked
> at them. I'm hoping you had some luck and can give me some
> other pointers. One small thing I got from Cheryl (I think)
> is that I'm all gung-ho about 1985 (conspiracy) as well, but
> there is some legal definition there I don't grasp yet, about
> how a supervisor, telling a subordinate to do something which
> violates us is not a "conspiracy" in a legal sense... ?
> Can you make any more sense of that bit of legalese?
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an act
prohibited by law or to commit a lawful act by means prohibited by law.
And that's not from my infinite store of wisdom. It's a 60 second cut and
paste from the legal dictionary on findlaw.
>
> I'm having second thoughts about the idea of putting the
> spurs to our own attorney. She told us the other day
> "You're not the boss of me."
Read the ABA's Model Rules of Professional Conduct. (She may be right) :)
>
> Our list of things we want subpoena'd, and motions to
> file, she says she won't file ANY of it. Nov 13 hearing
> is starting to smell like a complete setup. The attorney
> even badmouthed us to the contract social worker, after
> our meeting. She repeats over and over what she WON'T
> do for us, and seems unwilling to suggest what she CAN
> or WILL do for us. It's starting to look like another
> setup for us to get slaughtered in court.
http://www.cpswatch.com/guide/attorney.htm Make Your Attorney Work for You.
Here's a letter I used. http://www.suecps.com/lawyerlet.htm
>
> She has graciously consented to go through our document
> of proposed actions and subpoenas and explain point by point
> why she won't or can't. She said before that we COULD
> subpoena documents and people, now she says NO.
>
> Do people have right to subpoenas in Juvenile Court
> review hearings?
>
> We keep tilting at windmills. The stipulation was
> a scam, and done without the attorney explaining
> what it means. We'd like to RETRACT it.
> Impossible we hear.
After we sent the letter I linked above, the sender turned to mush in the
hallway 15 minutes before the hearing and signed a "stipulation" at the
advice of counsel. Against my best wishes (he is one of my best friends), I
helped him compose another letter to his lawyer,
http://www.suecps.com/lawyerlet2.htm . He sent a copy to the judge.
The lawyer promptly rescheduled the motion hearing and withdrew his
"stipulation"..
>
> The visit supervisor is even ADDING on a service that
> she already said in writing that Lisa DOES NOT NEED.
> Apparently as punishment for lodging a solid rightious
> complaint about hostile grandma's childcare.
> The contractor is trying to squeeze in Parenting Instruction
> that SHE gets paid for, and we are of course fighting it.
> Will the judge notice the timing of this reversal of
> the contractors opinion? Even if we point it out?
>
> Our attorney told this contractor things like we
> don't appreciate her, etc.. But she did not
> clear this conference or the message with her
> client. Isn't this an actionable breach?
Does it smell like licorise?
>
> We have told her outright, that we have several
> reasons to feel that she is working for DHS not us.
>
> Got any good ideas how to put this attorney
> in check and make her do what her client wants?
>
> Oh, she also bragged that WE can't file anything
> except through her. More nebulous comments from
> her interaction with the judge I'm guessing.
>
> We do NOT want to go in to court WITHOUT the documents
> and people we want SUBPOENA'D. Feel we need those.
Perhaps you might write her a letter, tell her who you want subpoened and
why, then cc a copy to the judge.
>
> Bob, your Federal 1983 info seems like the best
> thing we can do right now. Any other suggestions?
Make peace with your god and breath deep.
>
> How long do they usually sit on an appeal to a founded?
> (We hope that didn't fall into a black hole.)
Don't know offhand. Is it a first level (DPW Secretary) or second level
(Bureau of Hearings and Appeals)?
Your whole case is about the best interests of Lisa. If you lose sight of
this important concept, you'll get lost amoungst the smoke and mirrors.
IMHO.
Good luck, and keep in touch.
Bob
Neal Feldman
Greg Hanson wrote:
> Bob, Thanks for making that available to others.
> Your "in context of judicial proceedings" phrase caught my eye.
> The lies told to the court in our case were "in that context"
> but still violated our civil rights. I need to look at your
> web pages again. It's been a few months since I last looked
> at them. I'm hoping you had some luck and can give me some
> other pointers. One small thing I got from Cheryl (I think)
> is that I'm all gung-ho about 1985 (conspiracy) as well, but
> there is some legal definition there I don't grasp yet, about
> how a supervisor, telling a subordinate to do something which
> violates us is not a "conspiracy" in a legal sense... ?
> Can you make any more sense of that bit of legalese?
The definition of conspiracy is based upon the definition of conspire:
conspire
verb [I]
to plan secretly with other people to do something bad, illegal or against someone's wishes
It is clear what you describe is conspiracy.
That they try and manipulate so that it is not considered what it clearly is is duly noted and well known.
They will claim to the hilt that up is down and sideways is straight ahead.
> I'm having second thoughts about the idea of putting the
> spurs to our own attorney. She told us the other day
> "You're not the boss of me."
Excuse me?
Who does she think IS?
She is there to work for you. That makes your her boss in your case.
What a presumptuous little trollop!
> Our list of things we want subpoena'd, and motions to
> file, she says she won't file ANY of it.
Why not? Tell her in no uncertain terms that she will do so because it is your right to do so and if she
continues to refuse you will being her up on charges with the Bar. Also file a formal grievance
immediately with the court who appointed her to you stating she is refusing to serve in the capacity for
which she was assigned and you wish to have her formally reprimanded, ordered to comply with your wishes,
and/or removed from the case and replaced by someone who will.
> Nov 13 hearing is starting to smell like a complete setup. The attorney
> even badmouthed us to the contract social worker, after
> our meeting. She repeats over and over what she WON'T
> do for us, and seems unwilling to suggest what she CAN
> or WILL do for us. It's starting to look like another
> setup for us to get slaughtered in court.
The perfect example of a Public Pretender.
> She has graciously consented to go through our document
> of proposed actions and subpoenas and explain point by point
> why she won't or can't.
Have her do so under the condition that if she does not prove to your satisfaction that such should not be
done that she will do as you demand.
> She said before that we COULD subpoena documents and people, now she says NO.
You can ALWAYS subpoena any documents or people you wish. If she says otherwise then she is either lying
or grossly incompetent.
> Do people have right to subpoenas in Juvenile Court review hearings?
You have a right to subpoena in a neighborhood dispute!
> We keep tilting at windmills. The stipulation was
> a scam, and done without the attorney explaining
> what it means. We'd like to RETRACT it.
> Impossible we hear.
Put in a motion to do so based on inompetence and negligence of your counsel who did not adequately
explain what it meant, which is what she is there to do. If she is not going to serve adequately in her
primary capacity what good is she?
> The visit supervisor is even ADDING on a service that
> she already said in writing that Lisa DOES NOT NEED.
> Apparently as punishment for lodging a solid rightious
> complaint about hostile grandma's childcare.
> The contractor is trying to squeeze in Parenting Instruction
> that SHE gets paid for, and we are of course fighting it.
Do so... and her conflict of interest should also be duly noted as well as the punitive aspect of the
action.
> Will the judge notice the timing of this reversal of
> the contractors opinion? Even if we point it out?
Make sure he or she does... and make sure your pointing it out, at length and in detail, is on the
official record.
> Our attorney told this contractor things like we
> don't appreciate her, etc..
Don't appreciate the atty or the contractor? In either case this seems like a gross breach of
professional legal ethics and the Bar should recieve a letter from you, certified, stating such in no
uncertain terms.
> But she did not clear this conference or the message with her
> client. Isn't this an actionable breach?
Call up the bar, name the lawyer and ask them...
> We have told her outright, that we have several
> reasons to feel that she is working for DHS not us.
Apparently she clearly is...
> Got any good ideas how to put this attorney
> in check and make her do what her client wants?
File a formal greivance, or many of them, with the court and the Bar.
That should get her notice, hitting her where it hurts. She gets the Bar against her and she wasted a lot
of time and money with law school.
> Oh, she also bragged that WE can't file anything except through her.
She is a liar.
> More nebulous comments from her interaction with the judge I'm guessing.
Then find another judge and file with that judge. If they ask why, in a word say Collusion.
> We do NOT want to go in to court WITHOUT the documents
> and people we want SUBPOENA'D. Feel we need those.
Then do not do so. Go to the court yourself and state unequivocably that you need these document and
persons present and subpoenad to present your case and being denied such denies you due process. Your
attorney is refusing to file such as you have repeatedly requested and demanded and as such you are going
over her head as is your right as a citizen.
> Bob, your Federal 1983 info seems like the best
> thing we can do right now. Any other suggestions?
>
> How long do they usually sit on an appeal to a founded?
> (We hope that didn't fall into a black hole.)
>
> "Bob" <sue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<hzDA7.77148$cb.15...@atlpnn01.usenetserver.com>...
> > While caseworkers may be absolutely immune from actions taken in the context
> > of judicial proceedings, they can be held liable for their unconstitutional
> > actions taken outside the context of judicial proceedings.
> >
> > Here's a summary judgment brief alleging due process violations where the
> > caseworker violates agency regs.
> >
> > CAUTION: I'm no lawyer. The pleadings, motions, and briefs I post are
> > prepared pro se. They are presented for educational purposes only.
> >
> > http://www.suecps.com/admin-dp.htm
> >
> >
> > Bob
--
=============================================================
Home Page: http://members.home.net/silverstorm/
We will never rest until Gestapo CPS is completely abolished!
Neal Feldman
Bob wrote:
Just a suggestion... from this letter is the following line which does not make
sense... a daughter is singular but 'them' references plural.
"12. I love my daughter, and I am counting on you to bring them home to me."
Bob
"Neal Feldman" <silve...@home.net> wrote in message
news:3BD5A101...@home.net...
Thanks Neal.
While the grammatical errors are mine, the letter really isn't. It was cut
and paste from the web and is the work product of dedicated advocates, like
you, who are providing parents and families everywhere with the tools
necessary to fight CPS. It keeps budding advocates like me from having to
reinvent the wheel -- so to speak.
Thanks again for the proof read.
Bob
>
>
> --
Neal Feldman
Bob wrote:
One of my HS jobs... it is one of those which sticks with you I guess... 9-)
And I want anyone who uses that form of letter to have it as good as it can be
for them.
--
=============================================================