Below is one example of the many documents that emanted, apparently, from someone at the MN Supreme Court, claiming that Lorie S. Gildea took no part in the consideration or decision of the case In re Clark, file no. A12-0326. If anyone has information to support that statement, please disclose it via US mail to Jill Clark at the address for Jill Clark, LLC on file at the Supreme Court or to email@example.com – by 5 pm May 23, 2013. If I receive no responses, I will be entitled to assume the statement that Gildea took no part is false, and that Gildea has failed timely to disclose her activities. Obviously, if anyone cares to disclose to me knowledge or evidence that Gildea did take part, please feel free also to transmit that. If you would like to do that, but fear retaliation, please send an email without any text in the body or re line.
This continues the series, “What is an Attorney?” (go to that category for prior posts).
“Attorney” means attorney, professional law association, corporation, or partnership, authorized under applicable law to practice law.
(Black’s Law Dictionary, sixth Ed., West Publishing Co., 1990). This definition begs the question: what is the applicable law for an “attorney” to be able to practice law? I’ll follow up on that in a later post, but here are some preliminary comments.
How many Advocates are practicing in Minnesota courts, who have not been admitted to the practice of law? (See definition of advocate at Part 4 of this series).
“Advocates” are common in domestic-abuse-type courts. They claim their conversations are privileged (like an attorney-client privilege, I guess), and they argue their client’s cause, even appear in court for them. Has the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility ever investigated any of those Advocates? Me thinks not. Has any of them ever been investigated for practicing law without a license? Again – don’t think so.
Is a law license even unnecessary? Or – are the ‘domestic abuse’ advocates treated more favorably because of their viewpoint?
Do we live in a state where practicing law/advocating a client’s cause without a license is the safest way to go – because then the OLPR cannot claim jurisdiction over you? This is a sad testament to how sick that system has gotten. And we, the Public, are entitled to reform government. See Art. I, sec. 1 of the Minnesota Constitution.
OBJECT OF GOVERNMENT. Government is instituted for the security, benefit and protection of the people, in whom all political power is inherent, together with the right to alter, modify or reform government whenever required by the public good.
We are tired of a system that just protects insiders – and those who cow tow to them. The Public does not want to pay for a sick system where insiders stay in power by vilifying attorneys who POINT OUT PROBLEMS IN THE SYSTEM, and targeting them for a take-down. The Public, quite simply, does not want to pay for that anymore.
Who would want a law license in Minnesota? After what I have been through – gosh, I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. Apparently, it just paints a target on your chest.
Time for change.
May 15, 2013. No deriviative works are authorized by copyright holder(s).
This is being re-blogged from Jill Clark Continues. I also sent an email yesterday to Rita DeMeueles with the site address: www.jillclarkcontinues.wordpress.com so she would be sure to note the demand for disclosures.
I have spoken with Rita DeMeules, MN Supreme Court Commissioner. I am aware that she reports directly to Lorie S. Gildea. I am also aware of documents purporting to be ‘orders’ in In re Clark, that state at the bottom, that Gildea “took no part” in the decision. How am I to believe that is true? When the staff report to her?
Full disclosures are demanded, by end of business day Thursday, May 16, 2013, including but not limited to:
1) all involvement of Gildea in In re Clark;
2) a list of all meetings regarding In re Clark that were not held in the courtroom including who was in attendance and what was discussed;
3) a list of all meetings regarding In re Clark that did not involve the full Court and including who was in attendance and what was discussed;
4) why the recusal motion filed by Clark July 2012 was not considered and decided by the full court (from talking to DeMeueles, it sounds like there is some “docket” that motions and other matters must be placed on, and that staff decide what will be placed there, and why – why isn’t the public told that what we file can be sidelined by staff? And how am I to believe, under those conditions, that staff did not do what Gildea, their supervisor, wanted them to do?)
5) whether the motion to change status of email evidence filed February 2012 was considered and decided by the full Court, and if not – why not.
Look, this is just for starters. I am going to have MANY MORE questions.
May 14, 2013 (re-blogged May 15, 2013 on jillclarkspeaks). No derivative works are authorized by copyright holder(s).
This series has been discussing the various definitions of the word “attorney.” Here is Black’s Law Dictionary’s definition of Advocate:
Advocate. One who assists, defends, or pleads for another. One who renders legal advice and aid and pleads the cause of another before a court or a tribunal, a counselor. A person learned in the law, and duly admitted to practice, who assist his client with advice, and pleads for him in open court. An assistant, adviser; a pleader of causes.
(Sixth Ed., West Publishing Co., 1990). Advocate appear in various types of matters including domestic abuse cases (where they are common).
This continues the important series: what is fraud? The following sentences continue the Black’s Law Dictionary (Sixth Ed., West Publishing Company 1990) definition from the previous 2 posts in the series:
Anything calculated to deceive, whether by a single act or combination or by suppression of truth, or suggestion of what is false, whether it be by direct falsehood or innuendo, by speech or silence, word of mouth or look or gesture. A generic term, embracing all multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get advantage over another by false suggestion, trick, cunning, dissembling, and any unfair way by which another is cheated.
To my studied understanding, the term “silence” in the above defintion is sometimes referred to as fraud by omission.
Of course, all lawyers and judges know the above due to their training (see my other series, What is an Attorney?). Non-lawyers may also be interested in the above. Some people might want to consult their attorney for more information.
Speaking of looks and gestures – why does the ‘video’ of MN Supreme Court sessions not show the faces of the judges? Doesn’t the public have a right to see their looks and gestures?
I see no rule requiring lawyers and parties who appear in the Supreme Court to fill out a form. If someone can point me to the rule, I will be happy to review it.
This is the second in a series of posts about the definition of “attorney.” See Part 1 in the series on this blog.
Power of attorney. The instrument by which authority of one person to act in place and stead of another as attorney in fact is set forth.
Many people use the term ‘power of attorney’ to describe the document that transfers power. Some use the term ‘power of attorney’ to describe the person (and that is not wrong as long as the meaning is clear), but the term is ‘attorney in fact.’ That term describes the person who accepts the grant of power.
The term ‘attorney in fact’ is often used to differentiate from the term ‘attorney at law.’
The above defintion is from Black’s Law Dictionary (Sixth Ed. West Publishing Co. 1990). I like to use that reference, because it is a hard-bound book. Sometimes I glimpse a related definition on the same page, and realize its relevance to my search. That is something we have lost in the digital environment.
You are not required to go to law school to act as an attorney in fact (that is, to exercise the power of attorney). You are not required to have a state law license or be admitted to any court.
Common uses are a son accepts power of attorney over his aging mother’s finances. Or perhaps someone has to leave the state for work and does not expect to return for years, and they grant power of attorney to a friend to sell their house. Each aspect of the control by the one who accepts the power (the attorney in fact), must be described in the power of attorney document. Those who accept the grant, are required to stay within the boundaries of the grant.
For example, if a mother gave her son authority to sell her house, but not to shut down her businesses, the son must be careful not to affect the businesses in the way he exercises the power.
The leaving friend would not want to learn, for example, that in addition to selling the house, the attorney in fact terminated the lease at the retirement center, a place where the leaving friend felt her father would be safe.
This is an important aspect of the law, one that affects many lives. Stay tuned for Part 3 of this series.
May 9, 2013. No derivative works are authorized by copyright holder(s).
This series of posts will discuss the important question – what is an attorney?
Attorney: In the most general sense this term denotes an agent or substitute, or one who is appointed and authorized to act in the place or stead of another. An agent, one acting on behalf of another. [Citation omitted.] In its most common usage, however, unless a contrary meaning is clearly intended, this term means “attorney at law,” “lawyer” or “counselor at law.”
Definition from Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. (West Publishing Co. 1990).