Wednesday, June 8, 2011

3d DCA Watch -- No More Filings For You!



Hi kids, the bunker is entering summer hibernation mode just like the rest of us but before it does let's take a peek at what the swillers have been swilling this week:

Jenkins v. Motorola:

Poor pro se litigant Oza B. Jenkins.

All she wants to do is file lots and lots of paper against Motorola in court.

I'm sure it's good paper, quality paper, perhaps even "white-bond" paper (youngsters, ask your senior partners -- when they show up -- about this).

But NOOOOOO, says Judge Shepherd:
In Jenkins v. Motorola, Inc., 36 Fla. L. Weekly D832 (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 20, 2011), this court ordered Oza B. Jenkins to show cause why she should not be precluded from filing further pro se appeals in this court, arising out of lower tribunal number 04-1420. Ms. Jenkins timely filed her response, and Motorola, Inc. its reply.

Upon consideration of Ms. Jenkins’ response, the reply of Motorola, Inc., and this court’s independent review of the many filings made by Ms. Jenkins in this court, Ms. Jenkins hereby is barred from filing further pro se proceedings in this court arising out of lower tribunal number 04-1420. See Sibley v. Sibley, 885 So. 2d 980, 985 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). We direct the clerk of this court to reject any further filings on Ms. Jenkins’ behalf, arising out of lower tribunal number 04-1420, unless signed by a member of the Florida Bar.
Well that should solve everything, don't you agree?

7 comments:

  1. How is this constitutional?

    ReplyDelete
  2. it worked for our buddy jack thompson. hi jack. i hope all is well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No white ppl.....they're the dumb a@*'s!! haha. Again another way for stupid a@* white folks to think they're the 'white' paper AND the 'black' ink on the paper!! LOL!! The case ended in 2002 by order of the court....that ends that dumb a@*!! NOW GOOGLE THAT!! LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Correction --- 2004 order of the court!

    ReplyDelete
  5. In response to anonymous -- is this constitutional? The answer is NO!! I didn't argue the situation cause I don't make a habit to argue with fools & ignorant ppl. The right and privilege to represent as pro se comes from the higher court....the U.S. Supreme court not the 'lower' court...the 3rd DCA! Until the lower court of the 3rd DCA can provide to me case citation(s) from the HIGHER court that precludes such, it is still my right to proceed as a pro se litigant on this matter if I should need to. But the case ended by order of the court in 2004.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This won't work in reality, that is what I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So, I do not actually believe it is likely to work.
    Egyptian flag | Edmonton flights | paper fans

    ReplyDelete