I will be filing a motion with the Court on Friday morning. It is obvious that there is no Justice to be expected, let alone competence, in these matters, and that the citizens are without recourse. This should not be.
Thank you, Faith. A new thread in this has appeared -- in October 2023, the Judicial District Court Benchbook was revised to contain a new -- and apparently erroneous -- requirement that service of process is needed after notice is given via the 3-day provision. How this got into the book should be investigated. I'm seeking that investigation. The benchbook, of course, is not law and is not interpretative precedent. That said, someone lobbied to get that change, I think . . .
FOIA should be the absolutely easiest thing to hold elected officials accountable for and yet it is the most difficult. Took us way too long, but we did it. You can too! I just saw the new post. Stay strong!
The District Court Benchbook material I cited in my brief (and the report described) is a very serious problem. The benchbook (*REMEMBER -- benchbooks are NOT law and may NOT be used or cited as precedent for legal rulings) is the first thing general district court judges (hundreds of judges) consult to get a sort of "Cliffs Notes" read on cases and controversies that appear before them. Unusual cases, like VFOIA Mandamus/Injunction petitions, present precarious moments for judges who, in all likelihood, may not run into a single such case in a decade or more on the bench. Accordingly, I have done two things to address this very real problem: (1) notified the Virginia Supreme Court (which, essentially, oversees the publication of the benchbook) of the discrepancy between the law and the benchbook guidance and asked them to investigate and take specific action to correct the benchbook; and (2) initiated a public records request under Part Eleven of the SCOVA rules (they don't follow VFOIA) to find out how that provision got in there, who lobbied for it, what Judge Reynolds' particular role in it was, etc. I'm told the "response" will come on 10/25. My sense is they'll buy more time, but it's a start. So, not only have I been poured out of court improperly and am having to scramble back into the docket with the motion for reconsideration, reversal, sanctions and recusal (fat chance the judge will bother to rule before kingdom come), but I now have the added weight of three separate lines of effort (the two I described and also a request for review by the Judicial Council) on top of trying to get the documents to which we citizens are clearly entitled under VFOIA. On top of all of this, or I should say under all of this, I have a life with as much responsibility as any other husband, father of three, and senior attorney for an independent federal agency could have. Post-script: two HS seniors I've coached and mentored reached out to me this month to ask for recommendations, among other 'asks' I routinely get from the community. I won't list. I've been snatched out of our community by a cabal of really messed up people. They're baiting and baiting me to become a public figure, or to blow my stack, or to give up on being whatever it is I've been, or to just shut down on everything. The whole apparatus is leveraged against my simple effort to breathe sustainably and lift up others. And the Court? My last-ditch effort to try? Threw me out and told me to learn the law.
The question is whether these lawyers from a “reputable” firm knew they were wrong or were they simply incompetent? Either is unacceptable and disgraceful. SCPS needs to require its board members to comply with the law, like the rest of us!
Thank you for this it's wonderful Adele! Please stay on this mant are reading!
I will be filing a motion with the Court on Friday morning. It is obvious that there is no Justice to be expected, let alone competence, in these matters, and that the citizens are without recourse. This should not be.
Took two years to win the first set of FOIA violations. Stay strong. You got this.
Thank you, Faith. A new thread in this has appeared -- in October 2023, the Judicial District Court Benchbook was revised to contain a new -- and apparently erroneous -- requirement that service of process is needed after notice is given via the 3-day provision. How this got into the book should be investigated. I'm seeking that investigation. The benchbook, of course, is not law and is not interpretative precedent. That said, someone lobbied to get that change, I think . . .
FOIA should be the absolutely easiest thing to hold elected officials accountable for and yet it is the most difficult. Took us way too long, but we did it. You can too! I just saw the new post. Stay strong!
The District Court Benchbook material I cited in my brief (and the report described) is a very serious problem. The benchbook (*REMEMBER -- benchbooks are NOT law and may NOT be used or cited as precedent for legal rulings) is the first thing general district court judges (hundreds of judges) consult to get a sort of "Cliffs Notes" read on cases and controversies that appear before them. Unusual cases, like VFOIA Mandamus/Injunction petitions, present precarious moments for judges who, in all likelihood, may not run into a single such case in a decade or more on the bench. Accordingly, I have done two things to address this very real problem: (1) notified the Virginia Supreme Court (which, essentially, oversees the publication of the benchbook) of the discrepancy between the law and the benchbook guidance and asked them to investigate and take specific action to correct the benchbook; and (2) initiated a public records request under Part Eleven of the SCOVA rules (they don't follow VFOIA) to find out how that provision got in there, who lobbied for it, what Judge Reynolds' particular role in it was, etc. I'm told the "response" will come on 10/25. My sense is they'll buy more time, but it's a start. So, not only have I been poured out of court improperly and am having to scramble back into the docket with the motion for reconsideration, reversal, sanctions and recusal (fat chance the judge will bother to rule before kingdom come), but I now have the added weight of three separate lines of effort (the two I described and also a request for review by the Judicial Council) on top of trying to get the documents to which we citizens are clearly entitled under VFOIA. On top of all of this, or I should say under all of this, I have a life with as much responsibility as any other husband, father of three, and senior attorney for an independent federal agency could have. Post-script: two HS seniors I've coached and mentored reached out to me this month to ask for recommendations, among other 'asks' I routinely get from the community. I won't list. I've been snatched out of our community by a cabal of really messed up people. They're baiting and baiting me to become a public figure, or to blow my stack, or to give up on being whatever it is I've been, or to just shut down on everything. The whole apparatus is leveraged against my simple effort to breathe sustainably and lift up others. And the Court? My last-ditch effort to try? Threw me out and told me to learn the law.
The question is whether these lawyers from a “reputable” firm knew they were wrong or were they simply incompetent? Either is unacceptable and disgraceful. SCPS needs to require its board members to comply with the law, like the rest of us!
This is a critical question I intend to raise in an appropriate pleading to be filed imminently.
Wow....just.....wow.