- Joined
- Dec 15, 2015
Because she is a pauper, will a judge be less likely to rule that she's trying to extort, and instead view it as her unfamiliarity with the law, caused her to clumsily word things?
Lolcow Melinda Leigh Scott & Marshall Castersen - Sue-happy couple. Flat earth conspiracists. Pretending to be Jewish. Believe Kiwi Farms is protected by the Masonic Order. 0-6 on lawsuits. Marshall is dead.
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2017
It will depend a lot on exactly what was in any demand letters she sent out, how many she sent out and to who. But unless the recipients are already party to this case, the Judge isn't going to care. He might recommend that Null or whoever have a word with the local DA's office, after this mess is over. But the Judge isn't going to want to take ownership of any more of Mel's bullshit than he or she absolutely has to.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
Via KiwiFarms DMs and email to someone who may be the person posting here but may as well be someone impersonating that poster.
They are listed as Jane and Johns Doe (judging by the thread they are all Johns but Melinda and reality aren't on good terms).
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
New docs. It's Two of Mel's responses to Null (in district court). Mel also declared a war on one of the judges.
The amount of insanity and seething in these is unreal
Edit: Her citations in her war are nonsensical. She cites some law about compensation for judges, but not only is it not relevant, it also does not have a section 4 that she cites. It simply does not exist. Likewise her "local rule 73" citation is irrelevant. Truly a beauty of absurdity
The amount of insanity and seething in these is unreal
Edit: Her citations in her war are nonsensical. She cites some law about compensation for judges, but not only is it not relevant, it also does not have a section 4 that she cites. It simply does not exist. Likewise her "local rule 73" citation is irrelevant. Truly a beauty of absurdity
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
Yeah Mel, just keep arguing that people aren't using words properly. Ignore that the heart of the argument is that you're a batshit insane person. Maybe if you throw cats at them they'll think better of you.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2020
I like how you can tell the longer she doesn't get what she wants, the madder she gets in her writing.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
And more insane too.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2020
Can she just come out and say NO I DON'T WANT THAT JUDGE. NUN UH. and stomp her feet?
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
Could anyone explain refusing a magistrate judge? How is this relevant and what does it do for Mel?
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
She is a fucking idiot. Unable to grasp legal concepts, she just simply replies to every filing with “nuh-uh” and applies improper case law.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
She did. That's the third time
Fun fact, soon we will be able to celebrate 1 whole year since her first accusation of bias against Judge Jones!
It isn't.
Out of the two judges in her case, she now managed to piss both of them off. Only left to piss off the appellate judge. Not quite sure why she's doing it aside from insanity.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2021
Seriously, these filings are a thing of insane beauty. The blatant lack of self-awareness as she accuses null/Hardin of the same behavior and language she herself is using, chef's-kiss, it's just stunning.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
I never thought I'll say it about a legal document but it reads like a good dark and absurd comedy novel.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2019
She botched the cite, it's probably supposed to be either 28 USC §636(b)(4), "Each district court shall establish rules pursuant to which the magistrate judges shall discharge their duties." or (c)(4), "The court may, for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary circumstances shown by any party, vacate a reference of a civil matter to a magistrate judge under this subsection."
Local rule 73 states:
Basically she seems to think that "upon the consent of the parties" means that she can hashtag metoo this judge off her case by saying that she does not consent.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2021
I just remembered what this reminds me of: The Long Island railroad shooter, whose kooky courtroom behavior was highlighted on SNL at the time.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
But it literally states the opposite of what she wants/asked for. (c)(4) more than (b)(4) For all intents and purposes, it is still irrelevant.
Yes, she misunderstands a lot about what is written here.Local rule 73 states:
Basically she seems to think that "upon the consent of the parties" means that she can hashtag metoo this judge off her case by saying that she does not consent.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
Melinda! You did it again! You made me laugh out loud and spit coffee on my monitor!
Are you aware that "quality time" means time spent together with your partner or other emotionally significant person, when you give them your full attention?
Are you... in love with Null?
Are you aware that "quality time" means time spent together with your partner or other emotionally significant person, when you give them your full attention?
Are you... in love with Null?
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
Of Course she is! @Null will you feature Melinda's admission that she has fallen in love with you?
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2019
Yeah, it's a mystery. If she wanted to cite to (c)(4) I'd think she'd at least include something to the effect of having extraordinary circumstances to vacate the the referral of motions to the magistrate judge, since that's what it actually says she'd need to show.
But even assuming this big-brained plan worked and she was able to kick the mean magistrate judge off her case, I really can't see the Senior District Judge being all too happy with now having to deal with all of her garbage instead of having it passed off to the magistrate judge. Does Melissa really think that everything so far has just been the magistrate judge screwing her over and that by simply eliminating Pam she's suddenly going to start getting the rulings that she wants? It's a stupid plan, arising out of desperation, and somehow I have a feeling "judges hate this one clever trick!"