I wrote this over at Doc's and thought I'd cross-post it here.

In my opinion talk of "building bridges" and "undemonification" simply emboldens these fools. They are wrong about President Obama and the law. They need to be told that truth over and over and over again, not encouraged by critiquing their ridiculous drafts of court filings. You're empowering them. I think it's wrong.

I'm through bieng nice to these dipshits. At this stage they are deliberately lying and/or deluded. So I'm gonna call them liars and deluded. And scumbags.

I was otherwise engaged during the live show last night but had a chance to listen today. Just a few comments.

First, Collette claimed during the show that under Florida law, negligence per se applies where – the specific example he used was when a person runs a red light and then crashes into someone causing injury. Per Collette, running the red light – a violation of law – creates negligence per se.

As with nearly every aspect of law upon which he relies, Collette is flat out wrong. Under Florida law, as clearly stated in the Florida Standard Civil Jury Instructions – which, by the way, are promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court, violation of a traffic statute does *not* constitute negligence per se.

Under Florida law, “it is ‘negligence per se’ to violate a penal statute or ordinance, not regulating traffic, which was enacted to protect a particular class of persons from a particular injury or type of injury.”

In other words – Collette’s example is expressly EXCLUDED from the rule. See http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/civ_ ... /400/401(8).rtf . Not only is the example Collette provided expressly excluded, but — more importantly – the claim set forth in his FAC is excluded.

Collette’s FAC alleges “negligence per se” based on alleged violation of the Constitution.
However, the Constitution is not a “penal statute”; nor was it enacted to protected a “particular class of persons form a particular injury or type of injury.”

To Doc C’s comment that courts generally don’t go after pro se litigants – I’ll just not that this is not always the case – especially in situations where the litigant has some legal experience. Sanctions would be well-founded in connection with this claim – even when brought by a pro se litigant.

To be sure – were the plaintiff some uneducated non-Mensa member who had never been to court before, the courts can be more lenient. However, Collette – a self-professed member of Mensa and a paralegal with lots of litigation experience – has no such excuse. He’s brilliant, and experienced.

Defendants would be well within their rights to ask for sanctions in light of such a frivolous claim. The court also would be well within its discretion in imposing sanctions sua sponte.

...

I'm through bieng nice to these dipshits. At this stage they are deliberately lying and/or deluded. Sop I'm gonna call them liars and deluded. And scumbags.

When I get really frustrated, I have to remind myself that the right to go to court IS a Constitutional right, and that taking that right away from someone - or even severely limiting it - is an extraordinary measure and can't be something we take or do lightly. Doesn't always help much, but it helps some...

Statutes and ordinances are categorized in three groups to determine the standards to apply when there is a violation of the statute.   These categories come under the general headings of strict liability, negligence per se, and evidence of negligence.   See deJesus v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R., 281 So.2d 198 (Fla. 1973).  

* * *

In Newsome v. Haffner, 710 So.2d 184, 186 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 722 So.2d 193 (Fla. 1998), the First District held that “a cause of action in negligence per se is created when a penal statute is designed to protect a class of persons, of which the plaintiff is a member, against a particular type of harm.”

* * *

A statute or ordinance in the evidence of negligence category applies to the general public.   See Grand Union Co. v. Rocker, 454 So.2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).  

An example of Cargo Cult litigation. The guy has no idea what he's doing. It's certainly bears little resemblance to legal argument. He's cherry picking words and phrases that he likes but has no idea how to apply them to the facts of his case.

If this guy was ever a paralegal all I can say is pathetic.

An example of Cargo Cult litigation. The guy has no idea what he's doing. It's certainly bears little resemblance to legal argument.

Collette's spelling is excellent!

… negligence per se is a violation of any other statute which establishes a duty to take precautions to protect a particular class of persons from a particular injury or type of injury. See 65 C.J.S. Negligence § 19(3).

Neither the U.S. Constitution, nor any federal statute enacted thereunder, provide for a procedure to assure that Presidents of the United States and candidates for said office meet the Eligibility Requirements.

Article I, Section 21, Florida Constitution (1968), expressly provides:"

Access to courts.

— The courts shall be open to every person for redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay."

Of course the Birthers are winning! There is no way to lose no matter what the courts say

Weak on Minor Details

Jerry's a big picture visionary. In the process of writing you a groundbreaking legal memorandum, don't be surprised if he misses a comma somewhere or leaves out a parallel citation. You could probably even find a few minor grammar and/or spelling errors in this website. Jerry freely admits that there are many, many, far, far better legal secretaries than he.

Now THERE'S a humble and honest guy!

Legal Writing Focused on Core, Pivotal Issues
Lots of people can write pleadings, motions, and briefs. Few can cut through the nonsense and highlight the core, pivotal issues as well as Jerry can. Jerry also writes contracts and web content.

Get a Quote
Jerry shouldn't cost you a dime. In most cases, whatever you pay Jerry should be more than offset by what you would have otherwise spent on attorneys fees, and give you a net savings. Payments can be per hour, per diem, per project, partial contingency, or blended. Jerry's pretty flexible, and can usually structure a win-win compensation arrangement.

"In one afternoon, Jerry renegotiated two contracts for us, saving us over $50,000, and negotiated payment from a customer that had owed us $30,000 for over six months. Jerry has an incredible skill in legal matters and I would highly recommend him to anyone."

—Norio Kushi, Former President, Macrobiotic Company of America. Full Testimonial.