nhjustice.net/CT/9_1_11_ltr_frm_Clerk_Peale.jpg FOR THE RECORD On September 1, 2011 James I Peale, Clerk of the Belknap Superior Court, wrote the hyperlinked letter to me. (I have attached NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATIVE RULES for CLERKS AND DEPUTIES in its entirety below.) A plain reading of the Rules would lead a reasonable person to conclude that although Clerk James I Peale is a New Hampshire lawyer and officer of the court in good standing, he is not a judge. No where do the Rules say that he had the authority to DENY my Motion to Re-Open the foreclosure Petition on property owned by the Jean E. Vorisek Family Trust, and located at 309 Waukewan Road, Center Harbor. In fact, NH case law would suggest that Clerk Peale is in violation of his Oath of Office as an Officer of NH Court System. When I challenged his authority, he confirmed to me in writing that “I (Clerk Peale) did not consult with any Judge on August 29 (2011), as we did not have a judge present that day. My statements to you are entirely my own.” He continued to state that “If you believe that you have proof of malfeasance by any party to your litigation or any of their employees (read uber robo signer Victor Parisi, and McLane Law Firm) you have the option of making a complaint to the Attorney General. “ (Recall the letter I received from Dick Tracy essentially telling me that the State did not have the resources to investigate my complaints…and now we know why: it would have opened Pandora’s Box to all the other complaints that have been heretofore hidden). Clerk Peale, after suggesting in his letter, that I file a complaint then cautioned me that “You should be aware that mere allegations, without proof, may subject you to liability or sanctions,” My complaints were not only my own. I was complaining about frauds upon the court. The law is clear. A fraud upon the court rests solely in the jurisdiction of the court, and not the complaining litigant. But, it appears that Clerk Peale didn’t get that Memo. Instead he wrote: “I reiterate my position that should your allegations be founded, your course of action is to bring action for damages rather than an attempt to re-open a case which has been closed for four years.” Since Clerk Peale was merely a Clerk and not a Judge, perhaps he had not read State v. Moquin105 N.H. 9 (1963) where the NH Supreme Court found that ‘fraud upon the court” is in fact “Contempt of Court”. And, “The power to punish for contempt is inherent in the very organization of all courts and is essential to the functioning of our judicial system. State v. Matthews, 37 N. H. 450; State v. Towle, 42 N. H. 540, 546; Opinion of the Justices, 86 N. H. 597, 601; State v. Jackson, 147 Conn. 167; Wood v. Georgia, 370 U. S. 375, 383. The necessity for such powers in courts before which it is probable that more people appear than before all other courts combined is obvious. No reasons of precedent or policy compelling a contrary holding are suggested and none is apparent. Furthermore it is the duty and responsibility of courts to be alert to protect the judicial processes from being brought into disrepute and to act vigorously when confronted with acts or conduct which tend to obstruct or interfere with the due and orderly administration of justice. State v. Treon, (Ohio App. 1963), 188 N. E. 2d 308, 313.” Clearly Clerk Peale’s advice to me was misguided in law and fact, and a violation of his Oath of Office and Duty to Report. So in summary, we have a situation where the Court has allowed its Clerk to misinterpret, and ignore, its own laws. The NH Constitution states that its courts system is administered by its judicial branch. It has sole jurisdiction for ‘fraud upon the court’. The NH Attorney General is part of the Executive Branch. The question here is who really does have jurisdiction to investigate public corruption by any officer of the courts, or other state agencies? And, wherever that jurisdiction lies, does that agency have the political will to prosecute corruption when they can prove it? Rule 1-6. Authority Of Clerks. In addition to the inherent authority of the clerk of superior court, and all deputy clerks appointed pursuant to RSA 499:13, to perform such duties and acts as may be necessary to effectuate and provide for the orderly and efficient operation of the court and clerk’s offices, and to exercise such other powers and responsibilities conferred upon them by statute, court rule or administrative rule, the clerk of superior court for each county and deputy clerks of court who are attorneys licensed to practice in the State of New Hampshire shall have the following authority: I. To perform administrative acts including but not limited to: (a) Scheduling of all hearings and issuing notices to appear and transport orders. (b) Issuing orders of notice or orders setting or amending return days. (c) Issuing orders relative to service of process. (d) Effectuating all court orders including the issuance of commitment orders, arrest orders, or summons to appear for contempt proceedings. (e) Disbursing funds held by the court upon appropriate order by a justice. (f) Selecting counsel when appointment of counsel is ordered by the court and appointing and selecting counsel to serve as guardian ad litem in domestic and equity matters. (g) Performing such duties relative to jurors as may be performed by a clerk under RSA 500-A. The additional authority of deputy clerks who are not attorneys licensed to practice law in the State of New Hampshire shall be limited to Sections I(a), (b), (d), (e) and (g). II. To be available for appointment by a presiding justice of the superior court as a master pursuant to RSA 519:9 to hear uncontested divorces, applications for temporary orders or ex parte restraining orders in marital cases, petitions for ex parte attachments, and to conduct pretrial conferences in all non-criminal matters, and to make recommendations to the court relative thereto, when a justice or marital master is not present or is otherwise unavailable. Said appointment shall be made by a presiding justice of the superior court and shall not extend for more than 90 days, provided that said appointment can be renewed for additional 90-day periods. III. After personal review, with the consent of a presiding justice of the superior court (a) to act on non-criminal motions (including petitions to attach with notice) to which no objection has been filed or to which opposing counsel has indicated there is no objection, provided that the authority is limited to non-dispositive motions in cases where all parties are represented by counsel; (b) to approve stipulations where all parties have indicated in writing that they agree with the relief requested and are represented by counsel; and (c) to approve preliminary pretrial stipulations in cases where all parties are represented by counsel. The signature of the clerk or the attorney deputy clerk taking such action shall appear on the appropriate document involved along with the statement “Acting pursuant to Superior Court Administrative Rule 1-6.” In the event that a motion to reconsider or an objection is filed concerning the action taken, the matter shall be scheduled for a hearing before a justice. IV. To perform the following acts and issue such orders as provided for in the superior court rules, in addition to those rules where the clerk’s authority is already specifically delineated: (a) To enter default and continue for judgment pursuant to Rule 14. (b) Upon withdrawal of counsel to set a date for the filing of a new appearance pursuant to Rule 20. (c) To discontinue cases pursuant to Rule 52. (d) To allow the withdrawal of court documents pursuant to Rule 56. (e) To enter final judgment pursuant to Rule 74. (f) In conjunction with the presiding justice, to enter scheduling orders pursuant to Rule 96-A. (g) To enter orders regarding service by publication pursuant to Rule 128 and Rule 180. (h) To enter default pursuant to Rule 131 and Rule 139. (i) To dismiss marital cases which have been pending for two years pursuant to Rule 210. (j) To waive the waiting period in marital cases pursuant to Rule 207. (k) To non-suit or dismiss non-jury cases which have been pending for three years pursuant to Rule 168. (l) To waive the records research fee in Rule 169 when a request for record information is made by a member of the media consistent with the publics right to access court records under the New Hampshire Constitution. The signature of the clerk or the attorney deputy clerk taking any action enumerated in paragraph IV shall appear on the appropriate document involved along with the statement “Acting pursuant to Superior Court Administrative Rule 1-6.” In the event that a motion to reconsider or an objection is filed concerning the action taken, the matter shall be scheduled for a hearing before a justice.
Posted on: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 01:47:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015