Also, there is but one action: a civil action. Don't dismiss any objections or motions within civil procedure. They are valid within a criminal procedure because criminal procedures are within civil actions.
@TheStrangeTruth ..... You dodge questions good but I have seen better. Anyway, there is a video that shows me with the proof that the case got dismissed. I was only referencing the video so you know what case it was. Once again, we agree to disagree. This is my fake hobby I guess. Dont like it, oh well.
@TheStrangeTruth ..... I hope that you are not an attorney since you have demonstrated that you cant read basic english. I stated "look through my videos and see how many PRO PERS have won" This has nothing to do with just me. However, I have won two cases. The one titled "Rookie Glendale Cop Getting Owned" was one of them. I forgot the other one. Look me up if you want. It shouldnt be too hard for someone with so much expertise ;P
@TheStrangeTruth ....Look through my videos and see how many pro pers have won! I will also tell you like I told a judge once.. I would rather have a fool for a client than someone of unsound mind or be a ward of the court. I do agree with you that it is harder for a pro per to win. However, imagine if everyone actually filed motions instead of cutting deals. God forbid!!!! Again, thank god for attorneys. Sounds like you're starting to actually believe your lies. lol
@TheStrangeTruth ....... You are correct. I guess it is a miracle when any pro per wins without years and years of experience or any kind of training at a law firm. Yet most attorneys end up having their clients sign a plea bargain most of the time. I am green with envy.Thanks for letting me know how hard it is. Sounds like you are trying to sell the idea that it is too difficult. Thank god for attorneys!!!!! Do you feel better? ROFLMAO!!!!
@TheStrangeTruth ......... Nothing in there about ten days. You must be confused with the California Rules of Court or something. Pick up a book and read.
@TheStrangeTruth ......... The challenge for cause under Civ. Proc. Code section 170.1 is timely and well taken. This court should disqualify itself from further hearing the case. A section 170.1 challenge can be filed at any stage of the proceedings and must be asserted “at the earliest practicable opportunity after discovery of the disqualifying facts.” (Civ. Proc. Code, §170.6(2); People v. Bogart, 7 Cal. App. 3d 257, 267, 86 Cal. Rptr. 737 (2d Dist. 1970).)....... It has been done and works.
@TheStrangeTruth ..... Sounds like you havent been to court lately or you simply work for it. Judges show their true colors by the first day if you have filed motions. Anyone that goes pro per knows this.Sorry, reality.
In most cases, the judge is hearing a case with no standing. that would be the angle, to expose. or the fact that he represents the state, as your accuser does, both should disqualify him/or her.
I believe the same thing applies to "mayor's court". The irony here is: In Mayor's court, the "mayor" sits as an impartial judge. Yet all his authority and most of his income are derived from a party who will be the plaintiff in 95% of his cases and is probably listed on Dunn and Bradstreet as a business. A businesses 1st concern is making money. How could he not be influenced by the idea of collecting much needed revenues for an entity that is so critical to maintaining his status?
hey tactikal, after watching this video i googled"how to disqualify a judge" and then US TITLE CODE 28,455 came up...I read through it but having a hard time understand each subsection...can you check it out and either do a video or respond with a comment...PLEASE!!!
great information, I wish i would of known this for my mother she had a case and the judge had a personal grudge with her and put her through hell and as you said with the lawyer at 5-10k and the results come out the same as a public pretender, man for the people, for the greater cause in fairness and giving information to the masses by far you are the best and all the efforts you take to put this grey area info up for us who want to know, I think you deserve an award
Also, there is but one action: a civil action. Don't dismiss any objections or motions within civil procedure. They are valid within a criminal procedure because criminal procedures are within civil actions.
craterman01999 3 days ago
Thanks
XANZYX 7 months ago
All those extra billable hours are a coincidence! ;D)
Thanks for putting these up; there's another book you may like to check out at the law lib: Mathew Bender's Guide to Pleadings and Practice.
Very helpful for filing suits against the judges that violate their oath.
(Or any other so-called 'public servant'.)
UnoRaza 7 months ago
@UnoRaza ..... Thanks. I was actually looking at it yesterday. Check out my newest video. I think you will like it even more.
Tactikalguy1 7 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ........HAHAHHHA!!!!! Thanks for making me laugh. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder.
Tactikalguy1 7 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth .....Bloop, Bloop!!!
Tactikalguy1 7 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth .....No I asked u!!!!!LOL what a troll!!!!
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ..... You dodge questions good but I have seen better. Anyway, there is a video that shows me with the proof that the case got dismissed. I was only referencing the video so you know what case it was. Once again, we agree to disagree. This is my fake hobby I guess. Dont like it, oh well.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ..... I hope that you are not an attorney since you have demonstrated that you cant read basic english. I stated "look through my videos and see how many PRO PERS have won" This has nothing to do with just me. However, I have won two cases. The one titled "Rookie Glendale Cop Getting Owned" was one of them. I forgot the other one. Look me up if you want. It shouldnt be too hard for someone with so much expertise ;P
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ....Look through my videos and see how many pro pers have won! I will also tell you like I told a judge once.. I would rather have a fool for a client than someone of unsound mind or be a ward of the court. I do agree with you that it is harder for a pro per to win. However, imagine if everyone actually filed motions instead of cutting deals. God forbid!!!! Again, thank god for attorneys. Sounds like you're starting to actually believe your lies. lol
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ....... You are correct. I guess it is a miracle when any pro per wins without years and years of experience or any kind of training at a law firm. Yet most attorneys end up having their clients sign a plea bargain most of the time. I am green with envy.Thanks for letting me know how hard it is. Sounds like you are trying to sell the idea that it is too difficult. Thank god for attorneys!!!!! Do you feel better? ROFLMAO!!!!
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ......... Nothing in there about ten days. You must be confused with the California Rules of Court or something. Pick up a book and read.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ......... The challenge for cause under Civ. Proc. Code section 170.1 is timely and well taken. This court should disqualify itself from further hearing the case. A section 170.1 challenge can be filed at any stage of the proceedings and must be asserted “at the earliest practicable opportunity after discovery of the disqualifying facts.” (Civ. Proc. Code, §170.6(2); People v. Bogart, 7 Cal. App. 3d 257, 267, 86 Cal. Rptr. 737 (2d Dist. 1970).)....... It has been done and works.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
@TheStrangeTruth ..... Sounds like you havent been to court lately or you simply work for it. Judges show their true colors by the first day if you have filed motions. Anyone that goes pro per knows this.Sorry, reality.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
Awesome info! Thank you!
christinabreault 8 months ago
are these cali laws only?
mrlance727 8 months ago
@mrlance727 ....yes.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
You are a good man!
FCKEVRY1 8 months ago
In most cases, the judge is hearing a case with no standing. that would be the angle, to expose. or the fact that he represents the state, as your accuser does, both should disqualify him/or her.
2skullscrushing 8 months ago
I believe the same thing applies to "mayor's court". The irony here is: In Mayor's court, the "mayor" sits as an impartial judge. Yet all his authority and most of his income are derived from a party who will be the plaintiff in 95% of his cases and is probably listed on Dunn and Bradstreet as a business. A businesses 1st concern is making money. How could he not be influenced by the idea of collecting much needed revenues for an entity that is so critical to maintaining his status?
amzuel420 8 months ago
you may be interested in reading our VOID Judgement, (concerning foreclosure in California) go to scribd dot com earthica
earthicastar 8 months ago
Good to know!
BeantownJim 8 months ago
I dont have time and I mainly deal with California. Sorry.
Tactikalguy1 8 months ago
hey tactikal, after watching this video i googled"how to disqualify a judge" and then US TITLE CODE 28,455 came up...I read through it but having a hard time understand each subsection...can you check it out and either do a video or respond with a comment...PLEASE!!!
2009thetwinz 8 months ago
@2009thetwinz Some of that was pretty simple reading.
Which sections did you not understand?
UnoRaza 7 months ago
facebooked. Great info! Wish i knew that years ago.
acidoverkill001 8 months ago
great information, I wish i would of known this for my mother she had a case and the judge had a personal grudge with her and put her through hell and as you said with the lawyer at 5-10k and the results come out the same as a public pretender, man for the people, for the greater cause in fairness and giving information to the masses by far you are the best and all the efforts you take to put this grey area info up for us who want to know, I think you deserve an award
choochinkaddywompus 8 months ago
Salute
slimadocious1 8 months ago
Sticking it to them like a boss! :-)
nameofthepen 8 months ago