Well, Sid continues his string of frivolous filings. He posted this response to the U.S. District Court's order to show cause.
The court, as you might surmise was less than amused. The judge denied Sid's frivolous motion to disqualify pointing out that a disagreement about the law is not grounds to disqualify a judge. You can read all about it here.
It is worth noting that the court has ordered Sid to appear and show cause.
Walt-in-Durham
Sidney's response is pathetic. He refuses to perform any legal research, despite having specifically been directed to do so by the Court in this filing.
ReplyDeleteI can see only two explanations: (1) Sidney is truly delusional or (2) he is playing games with the Court, assuming that, because he is a "legal lay person" who is representing himself pro se, he will face no meaningful sanctions and receive only a slap on the wrist as he did with Harr I (gratuitous vile invective directed at the Court), Harr II (res judicata) and the State Bar (practicing law without a license).
At this point, he would do well to apologize and ask for leniency due to a mental deficiency. I hope for his sake that he does not repeat his diatribe in Harr I in which he accused the magistrate of lying.
John D. Smith
New York, NY
Sid is just dumb enough to repeat Harr I.
ReplyDeleteWalt,
ReplyDeleteWhen the district court's Order becomes available on Pacer, will you post it for us? I'm sure Sidney won't.
Judge Eagles has posted her order at:https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQeS1iU3hFenFxamc
ReplyDeleteNot good for Sid. A fine of $1,000 an injunction against filing and a gate keeper order that requires him to pay the full filing fee plus $650 just to have a proposed complaint reviewed.
Walt
One and all, Sid has filed his brief with the Fourth Circuit. It is filled with a rehash of his grievances from Harr I, II, and III. As always, Sid fails to favor the court with citation to authority. I predict a swift and negative reaction from the Fourth Circuit. Here is a link to the brief: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQaUxmUjhZcDdEYkk
ReplyDeleteWalt, that last link goes to a district court filing, not to the 4th Circuit brief.
ReplyDelete