Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:59:45 -0700
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Richard Fine: The quest for the NEFs of the Habeas Corpus petition at the US District Court LA's - insights from the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California
Hi Attorney Gottschalk, Hi All:
Thanks to Attorney Gottschalk for generously providing a copy of the February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, (Docket #34) in Case of Borrower Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-bk-10876-VK). [1] The paper, which was provided by Atty Gottschalk was not likely to be directly relevant to the issue of denial of access to court records in the Richard Fine habeas corpus petition. However, it was of interest, since it provided additional insights into the practice of NEFs - authentications/ certifications by the clerk - as part of electronic public access (PACER) and case management/ electronic court filing (CM/ECF) at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California in particular, and the US courts in general. The paper provided by Attorney Gottschalk, and related forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, found online, supported the previous findings relative to implementation of PACER & CM/ECF - demonstrating denial of access to authentications/certifications instruments of US court records to parties and to the public, who were not authorized to access CM/ECF in disregard of First Amendment rights.
SPECIFIC NOTES:
1) The Form [2] a completed example of which was provided by Attorney Gottschalk in his February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, as well as the respective "Instructions" [3] were unusual among the Forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, in missing a Form ID #, and also failing to spell out the legal foundation for the implementation of such form by the Court.
2) The Form [2] and the respective "Instructions" [3], failed to appear among the online list of forms designated by numbers as forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California. [4] Instead they appeared in a separate online list, designated "Court Forms" with no specific court name to it [5]
3) The Form stated unpublished local rules of court in its lower portion. Such rules, invalid as they were likely to be, would have precluded the use of such form for gaining access to the NEFs by the public or by any parties who were not authorized as CM/ECF users: "This form can only be filed electronically via the Courts CM/ECF system... Requests for a courtesy NEF will not be accepted at the Intake window."
4) Review of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California suggested that the court now has two classes of forms and rules. The first is "Official" forms and rules, which were adopted in compliance with the law, and the second was Unofficial forms and rules.
In Sum:
Therefore, the practices of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, relative to NEFs, were similar to those documented at the US District Court, Central District of California. Those who were already permitted access to the NEFs and who were served copies of the NEFs by email by the Court, were permitted to gain access to additional copies of the NEFs. However, those who were denied access to the NEFs to start out, were not allowed to remedy such Denial of Access to Court Records through the practice offered to others in the September 2008, unnumbered form of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, titled: REQUEST FOR COURTESY NOTIFICATION OF ELECTRONIC
FILING (NEF), which also failed to provide the legal foundation for such practice.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
Attorney Gottschalk's contribution would be complemented by the following records:
a) The authentication/certification of the Request was missing from the record that Atty Gottschalk generously provided. The February 23, 2010 Request for Courtesy Notice of NEFs was electronically filed. [1] Therefore, an NEF had to be issued by the Court to Attorney Ramesh Singh by email, in response. The NEF that was issued to Att Ramesh Singh in response to his request for NEFs, would make the paper that Atty Gottschalk generously provided an honest, valid, and effectual court record.
b) The effect of the Request would be of interest: In case Atty Gottschalk indeed gained access to any NEFs through such Request. Only the copies of the NEFs are of interest, and not the respective court papers.
~~jz
LINKED:
[1] February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, (Docket #34) in Case of Borrower Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-bk-10876-VK):
http://inproperinla.com/10-02-23-gottschalk-2-10-bk-10876-vk-us-crt-bk-cent-dist-ca-request-for-copies-of-nefs.pdf
[2] Blank Form for Request for NEFs, as found online at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California site:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request%20for%20nefs.pdf
[3] Instructions for the Form for Request for NEFs, as found online at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California site:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-instructions-for-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request%20for%20nefs.pdf
[4] List of forms that were designated and numbered as Local Forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-local-bankruptcy-rules-and-forms.pdf
[5] List of forms that were designated "Court Forms":
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-court-forms.pdf
At 08:44 AM 3/20/2010, Attorney Gottschalk wrote:
Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's- Dr Z can you file a similar form for Richard Fine documents in US District Court or any other NEF you request
To: lawsters@googlegroups.com
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Richard Fine: The quest for the NEFs of the Habeas Corpus petition at the US District Court LA's - insights from the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California
Hi Attorney Gottschalk, Hi All:
Thanks to Attorney Gottschalk for generously providing a copy of the February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, (Docket #34) in Case of Borrower Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-bk-10876-VK). [1] The paper, which was provided by Atty Gottschalk was not likely to be directly relevant to the issue of denial of access to court records in the Richard Fine habeas corpus petition. However, it was of interest, since it provided additional insights into the practice of NEFs - authentications/ certifications by the clerk - as part of electronic public access (PACER) and case management/ electronic court filing (CM/ECF) at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California in particular, and the US courts in general. The paper provided by Attorney Gottschalk, and related forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, found online, supported the previous findings relative to implementation of PACER & CM/ECF - demonstrating denial of access to authentications/certifications instruments of US court records to parties and to the public, who were not authorized to access CM/ECF in disregard of First Amendment rights.
SPECIFIC NOTES:
1) The Form [2] a completed example of which was provided by Attorney Gottschalk in his February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, as well as the respective "Instructions" [3] were unusual among the Forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, in missing a Form ID #, and also failing to spell out the legal foundation for the implementation of such form by the Court.
2) The Form [2] and the respective "Instructions" [3], failed to appear among the online list of forms designated by numbers as forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California. [4] Instead they appeared in a separate online list, designated "Court Forms" with no specific court name to it [5]
3) The Form stated unpublished local rules of court in its lower portion. Such rules, invalid as they were likely to be, would have precluded the use of such form for gaining access to the NEFs by the public or by any parties who were not authorized as CM/ECF users: "This form can only be filed electronically via the Courts CM/ECF system... Requests for a courtesy NEF will not be accepted at the Intake window."
4) Review of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California suggested that the court now has two classes of forms and rules. The first is "Official" forms and rules, which were adopted in compliance with the law, and the second was Unofficial forms and rules.
In Sum:
Therefore, the practices of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, relative to NEFs, were similar to those documented at the US District Court, Central District of California. Those who were already permitted access to the NEFs and who were served copies of the NEFs by email by the Court, were permitted to gain access to additional copies of the NEFs. However, those who were denied access to the NEFs to start out, were not allowed to remedy such Denial of Access to Court Records through the practice offered to others in the September 2008, unnumbered form of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, titled: REQUEST FOR COURTESY NOTIFICATION OF ELECTRONIC
FILING (NEF), which also failed to provide the legal foundation for such practice.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
Attorney Gottschalk's contribution would be complemented by the following records:
a) The authentication/certification of the Request was missing from the record that Atty Gottschalk generously provided. The February 23, 2010 Request for Courtesy Notice of NEFs was electronically filed. [1] Therefore, an NEF had to be issued by the Court to Attorney Ramesh Singh by email, in response. The NEF that was issued to Att Ramesh Singh in response to his request for NEFs, would make the paper that Atty Gottschalk generously provided an honest, valid, and effectual court record.
b) The effect of the Request would be of interest: In case Atty Gottschalk indeed gained access to any NEFs through such Request. Only the copies of the NEFs are of interest, and not the respective court papers.
~~jz
LINKED:
[1] February 23, 2010 Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's, (Docket #34) in Case of Borrower Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-bk-10876-VK):
http://inproperinla.com/10-02-23-gottschalk-2-10-bk-10876-vk-us-crt-bk-cent-dist-ca-request-for-copies-of-nefs.pdf
[2] Blank Form for Request for NEFs, as found online at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California site:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request%20for%20nefs.pdf
[3] Instructions for the Form for Request for NEFs, as found online at the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California site:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-instructions-for-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request%20for%20nefs.pdf
[4] List of forms that were designated and numbered as Local Forms of the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California:
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-local-bankruptcy-rules-and-forms.pdf
[5] List of forms that were designated "Court Forms":
http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-court-forms.pdf
At 08:44 AM 3/20/2010, Attorney Gottschalk wrote:
Request For Courtesy Notice of NEF's- Dr Z can you file a similar form for Richard Fine documents in US District Court or any other NEF you request
Hi Procurador Gottschalk, Hi all:
Gracias a la Procuraduría Gottschalk por su generosidad aportando una copia del 23 de febrero 2010 Solicitud de Cortesía Aviso de NEF, (Expediente N º 34) en el asunto del Prestatario Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-BK-10876-VK). [1] no el papel, que fue facilitada por Atty Gottschalk era probable ser directamente pertinentes a la cuestión de la denegación de acceso a los registros de la corte en el recurso de hábeas corpus Bellas Richard. Sin embargo, es interesante, ya que proporcionan una visión adicional en la práctica de los fondos nacionales - autenticaciones o certificaciones por el escribano - como parte de acceso pública electrónica (PACER) y la gestión de casos o presentación ante la corte electrónico (CM / ECF) en la Bancarrota de EE.UU. Tribunal de Justicia, Distrito Central de California, en particular, y los tribunales de los EE.UU. en general. El documento proporcionado por el Procurador Gottschalk, y las formas conexas de la Corte de Bancarrota de EE.UU., que se encuentra en línea, con el apoyo a las conclusiones anteriores relativas a la aplicación de PACER & CM / ECF - demostración de la negación de acceso a la autenticación / certificaciones de los instrumentos de registros de la corte EE.UU. a las partes y al el público, que no estaban autorizados a acceder a CM / ECF haciendo caso omiso de los derechos de Primera Enmienda.
Notas específicas: 1) la forma [2] Un ejemplo elaborado de que fue suministrada por el Fiscal en su Gottschalk 23 de febrero 2010 Solicitud de Cortesía Aviso de NEF, así como el respectivo "Manual de instrucciones» [3] eran inusuales entre las formas de la Bancarrota de EE.UU. Tribunal de Justicia, Distrito Central de California, en la falta de un formulario de identificación, y también al no precisar el fundamento jurídico para la aplicación de tal forma por el Tribunal de Justicia.
2) la forma [2] y el respectivo "Manual de instrucciones» [3], no aparecía en la lista en línea de las formas designadas por los números como formas de la Corte de Bancarrota de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California. [4] En su lugar, apareció en una lista en línea por separado, denominado "Tribunal de las formas" sin nombre de la corte que les son propias [5]
3) la forma establecida inéditos normas locales de la corte en su parte inferior. Estas normas, no es válida, ya que era probable que se hubiesen hecho imposible la utilización de dicho formulario para acceder a los fondos nacionales por parte del público ni de terceros que no estaban autorizados como CM / usuarios LEC: "Esta forma sólo se pueden presentar electrónicamente a través de la CM Cortes / sistema ECF ... Las solicitudes de NEF cortesía no se aceptarán en la ventana de admisión ".
4) Revisión de la Corte de Bancarrota de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California, sugirió que el tribunal tiene ahora dos clases de formas y reglas. El primero es "oficial" formas y reglas, que fueron adoptadas en cumplimiento de la ley, y la segunda, las formas no oficiales y las normas.
En suma: Por lo tanto, las prácticas de la Corte de Bancarrota de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California, en relación con fondos nacionales, eran similares a las que se documentan en el Tribunal de Distrito de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California. Los que ya estaban autorizadas para acceder a los fondos nacionales y que se servían las copias de los fondos nacionales por correo electrónico por el Tribunal, se les permitió tener acceso a copias adicionales de los fondos nacionales. Sin embargo, los que se les negó el acceso a los fondos nacionales para empezar, no se les permitió poner remedio a dicha denegación de acceso a documentos judiciales a través de la práctica se ofreció a otros en el septiembre de 2008, forma sin número de la corte de bancarrota de Estados Unidos para el Distrito Central de California, titulado: SOLICITUD DE NOTIFICACIÓN DE CORTESÍA DE ELECTRÓNICA De presentación (NEF), que tampoco proporcionó la base legal para dicha práctica.
NOTAS ADICIONALES:
Contribución fiscal de Gottschalk se complementaría con los siguientes registros:
a) La autenticación o certificación de la solicitud no figura en el registro que Atty Gottschalk generosamente proporcionado. El 23 de febrero 2010 Solicitud de cortesía Aviso de fondos nacionales se presentan electrónicamente. [1] Por lo tanto, un NEF tenía que ser expedido por el Tribunal de Justicia Fiscal Ramesh Singh por correo electrónico, en respuesta. La NEF que fue otorgado a la atención de Ramesh Singh en respuesta a su solicitud de fondos nacionales, haría que el papel que Atty Gottschalk generosamente proporcionado un expediente judicial honesto, válida y eficaz.
b) El efecto de la petición debe ser de interés: En el caso de Atty Gottschalk hecho tuvo acceso a los fondos nacionales a través de dicha solicitud. Sólo las copias de los fondos nacionales son de interés, y no de los documentos judiciales respectivos.
~ ~ jz
Relacionados:
[1] 23 de febrero 2010 Solicitud de Cortesía Aviso de NEF, (Expediente N º 34) en el asunto del Prestatario Ronald Gottschalk (2:10-BK-10876-VK): http://inproperinla.com/10-02-23-gottschalk-2-10-bk-10876-vk-us-crt-bk-cent-dist-ca-request-for-copies-of-nefs.pdf
[2] formulario en blanco para la solicitud de fondos nacionales, tal como se encuentra en línea en el Tribunal de Quiebras de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California de la web: http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request 20nefs.pdf% 20for%
[3] Instrucciones para el formulario de solicitud de fondos nacionales, tal como se encuentra en línea en el Tribunal de Quiebras de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California de la web: http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-instructions-for-unofficial-form-unnumbered-request 20nefs.pdf% 20for%
[4] Lista de las formas que fueron designados y numeradas como las formas locales de la Corte de Bancarrota de EE.UU., Distrito Central de California: http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-local-bankruptcy-rules-and-forms.pdf
[5] Lista de las formas que fueron designados como "Tribunal formas": http://inproperinla.com/10-03-21-us-bk-cent-dist-ca-list-of-court-forms.pdf
A las 08:44 AM 3/20/2010, Fiscal Gottschalk escribió: Solicitud de cortesía Aviso de NEF's-Dr Z se puede presentar una forma similar para los documentos de Richard Bellas Tribunal de Distrito de EE.UU. o cualquier otra que usted solicite NEF
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome... especially any tips regarding corruption of the courts in Los Angeles. Anonymous tips are fine. One simple way to do it is from internet cafes, etc.