What kind of sense there is in the creation of the Pro Se Intake Unite created by the US Southern District of New York?
First, the creation of an additional obligatory stage preventing same application of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) on Pro Se and lawyer filings could be troubling to say the least.Second, since almost everything based on which a complaint can be refused or judged as being in violation of the FRCP requires a ruling by the judge how much real need there is for such entity? How could the work of the clerk by itself not be sufficient for that very limited and very direct domain of possible errors?Third, assuming there is a real need for such entity, why was not that treated as an internal procedure by directing pro se filings to that entity from inside instead of requiring pro se litigants to be involved in that?
The above make it hard to see a real purpose for this entity other than to add another stage that can manipulate if needed while being in a position of much less accountability than the judges or the clerk of the court. What we just saw in the treatment of my case seems to fit an implementation of such plan.
In addition, the link below in the court site showing it stating that ALL court filings by pro se litigants starting from the first pleading should be filed with that entity seems to be wrong legally.That is because either it was not based on the court order it cited or that court order itself if meant to be applied even on the first pleading is illegal. More specifically in the later case that order would be unconstitutional because it would mean that the court acted with a legislative authority for such requirement to be applied before submitting to its judicial authority. But was this an honest mistake or an intentional effort to mislead and further implement the plan mention above?
No comments:
Post a Comment