Welcome to the Legal Forums! Please Register For Free Now!
At the Legal Forums members stay up to date on what is legal, new laws and state laws. Legal Forum members can read about legal definitions, weird laws, legal rights, legal services and law answers.
The Legal Forums have over 30,000+ Legal Forum members and 35,000+ Legal Forum posts! Please register on the Legal Forums for free today! Registration will give you full access to the Legal Forums and takes just a moment to complete. We welcome you to our Legal Forum community! Please Join Us Right Now!
- The act of dismissing.
- The condition of being dismissed.
- An order or notice of discharge.
In law, a plea in response to an allegation that admits its truth but also asserts that it is not sufficient as a cause of action. In the U.S., demurrers are no longer used in federal procedure (having been replaced by motions to dismiss or motions for more definite statement) but are still used in some states. A general demurrer challenges the sufficiency of the substance of an allegation, whereas a special demurrer challenges the structure or form of an allegation.
A statutory scheme that abolished the ancient common-law forms of action and replaced the overly technical system of common-law pleading with simplified provisions for a plaintiff to bring a lawsuit and a defendant to answer the claims alleged against him or her.
As the common law developed in England after the Norman Conquest in 1066, a plaintiff could start a lawsuit only by obtaining a writ from the king or the king's chancellor. In time these writs took on fixed forms and a plaintiff could obtain one only if the words of the claim fit one of the established forms of action. There was no room for variation in the words of the plaintiff's complaint or the defendant's response. By the fourteenth century the forms of action had become quite rigid and they took on the same overly technical characteristics under the common law in the United States. Frequently a worthy claim was tossed out of court because of some miscalculation or misstatement in the pleadings and justice was ill-served.
Baseball umpire (a.k.a. city court clerk) has filed a libel lawsuit pro se in Circuit Court against a team manager who has written a letter to the Park Commissioner that has culuminiated statements which has led the Park Commissioner to suspend him or her.
The letter has alleged that the baseball umpire is a homosexual and should not be allowed to officiate baseball games with minor age kids.
The baseball umpire has clear advantage over the attorney appearing on record to represent the team manager.
The reason is that any lawyer is merely a filing clerk that has become privy to the FRCP. His or her lawful duty is understanding the rules to file forms.
Plaintiff has submitted a prima facie case for the Defendant to defend. The code pleading has stated that the Plaintiff has a love letter written by the Defendant of the same sexual gender. This letter is counter proof that the team manager is likewise a homosexual and should not be managing minor age kids to play baseball.
Attorney on record has chosen not to answer the code pleadings of the Plaintiff. Instead, he or she has elected to pull a demurrer. However, State lawmakers have outlawed demurrer strategy.
In the alternative to circumvent State lawmaker outlawing demurrer the attorney has chosen a legal defense strategy to exercise FRCP Rule 12 (b) 6 Failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted.
The moral behind this story is: If you plan to represent yourself pro se in a court of law and you don't have much experience, then it is best you learn all the tricks of the trade to catch lawyers trying to circumvent the law.
Lucifer is the master of chicanery. Law school is a place that has trained law students how to master their way playing tricks on naive clients in order to pluck knowledge from his or her skull and bleed his or purse bone dry (a.k.a. Skull and Bones)!
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and/or swims like a duck, then you can bet your bottom dollar that it is in fact a real duck (duck test)! When it comes time for God to judge who comes to heaven guess what. St. Peter has been instructed to allow no ducks to come in.
Ducks have stirred up too much quackery here on Earth. God doesn't need this quack quack mess in heaven.Rule 36 Requests for Admission
Please check [X] ADMIT or DENY to my request for admissions.
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that our FRCP has constituted our rule of law for a fair trial!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that a motion by litigants must precede judicial rulings!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that a judge isn't a litigant thus can't initiate a motion!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that Rule 12 (b) has required a motion!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that Rule 41 has delineated procedure for dismissal actions!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that to dismiss charges is synonymous to drop charges!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that the Plaintiff is the first party to his or her complaint!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that strict rules have applied for a 2nd or 3rd party to drop charges of the 1st party.
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that the court hasn't been construed as a party to the complaint!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that Judges have acted as if he or she were party to the complaint!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that Judges have dismissed pros se suits without any motion by either party!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that the Court of the Judiciary has dismissed complaints without motions by either party!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that judges have breached his or her canon oath to uphold our rule of law!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that our Judicial process has become corrupted from top to bottom!
- [ ] ADMIT [ ] DENY Please admit that judges, prosecutors and lawyers have breached our rule of law!
Litigants have constituted the 1st and/or 2nd parties to civil suits.
Any 1st or 2nd party may elect to proceed pro se to represent him or herself.
However, lawyers may lose charging legal fees for parties that have chosen to act pro se.
Bar Association has instructed Judges to dismiss pro se civil suits to steer higher traffic to private law firms.
Lawyers have represented a secret fraternal order or brotherhood. Skull and Bones secret society has served as their master mind.
If a person has the academic to read or comprehend rules then he or she may become privy to the fact that each court by law has to publish its rules even online.
An illiterate or lazy minded person may need to ask a lawyer to explain the rules of the court. This is same as to say, "Hey I don't feel like reading or I couldn't understand the rules even if I have read them"!
God has blessed our nation with a Church community of Sunday Schools, private schools and/or public schools to teach each person how to read. Invest time to learn the FRCP. It could save you!
Last edited by stanleyg5; 07-01-2010 at 12:56 PM. Reason: modification
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)