Wednesday, August 22, 2007

the crazy lawsuit czar

alrightie. either jonathan lee riches © is the craziest conspiracy theorist known to man, or he is using the courts as a heretofore untested medium for amazing performance art. if it's the former, he is probably extremely pissed off that they don't allow tinfoil hats in federal prison. but, if it's the latter, he is officially a genius.

(this is starting to remind me of the age old question of whether a urinal is art because some dude called it art. for what it's worth, i will go on the record to say that jonathan lee riches ©'s lawsuits are, in fact, art.)

i want to give very shiny objects to taryn, because she pointed out a treasure trove of this man's lawsuits. it turns out that the few that i have posted here (the defendant list, the first michael vick suit, and the barry bonds suit) barely scratch the surface. he is an extremely prolific author of pro se lawsuits. they're all handwritten, they're all crazy, and i can't stop reading them.

uniform crackpot code

i thought i had beef with the uniform commercial code. the ucc is extremely boring, and hard to make any sense of. i know this, because i had a secured transactions project at work this summer. my understanding of that body of law may still be pretty fuzzy, but at least it's not as fuzzy as jonathan lee riches ©'s conception.

first of all, as i mentioned earlier—he sued the ucc.1 he can't do that. he can challenge its legality, if he finds himself in the middle of a legitimate case or controversy arising under it in a jurisdiction where the ucc has been adopted. that's fine. but, he can't just sue a law.2 furthermore, it is simply not possible for the uniform commercial code to do things such as (to pick something at random) conspire with DEFCON to exploit your internet handle, gino romano.3

secondly, in many of his lawsuits, he refers to himself as “secured party.” this is okay if he were suing under the uniform commercial code to collect on a debt that had been secured by a uniform commercial code filing. then, of course, you are a secured party. but, you are not a secured party, and should not refer to yourself as such, if you're simply angry at the jewish mossad, the cia, and larry king live for conspiring to “hijack my torso, 3 toes, and my constitutional rights and ship them to a secret headquarters in Concord New Hampshire.”4

beggars can't be choosers

i haven't taken remedies yet. i probably won't, since it conflicts with another class i'd rather take. but, i know enough about remedies to know that if a plaintiff asks for monetary relief, the plaintiff doesn't write in the complaint the exact form in which he wants his cash.5 it is sufficient to plead an amount that surpasses the amount-in-controversy requirement for whatever court the plaintiff files in. the plaintiff especially should not request the following kinds of monetary relief, for fear of exposing himself as a crackpot named jonathan lee riches ©:

  • 42,000,000.00 million dollars in Swiss Francs, certified money order to the B.O.P. lockbox in Des Moines Iowa6
  • 728,000,000,000,000.00 trillion dollars in Gold and Silver delivered by united parcel service “U.P.S.”7
  • 83,000,000,000.00 billion dollars collectively from defendants to be donated to the following causes; Greensburg Kansas tornado victims, Kent State Massacre victims, Richard Jewel, 2600.com, coal miners, skid row section of L.A.8
  • 662,000,000,000,000.00 trillion dollars in British gold, delivered by J.B. Hunt trucking to the front gates of Federal Correctional Institution, Salters S.C. 29590.9

happy iowa corn

it's not a bivens action, a federal tort claims action, or anything else to make the allegation of "Iowa cornfields."10 why jonathan lee riches © thinks cornfields make iowa highways unsafe, or have anything to do with the minnesota bridge collapse, is so far beyond me.

at least, in this lawsuit, he has possibly realised that he needs help, that he can't keep doing this pro se. one of his counts is a motion for appointment of counsel, because he "need[s] legal help against this conspiracy."11 although, i doubt this will be the end of these silly pro se suits...i'm sure the judge will dismiss this suit offhand for being frivolous, not appoint counsel, and leave jonathan lee riches © free to write more of these deliciously bizarre little tidbits.

prayer for relief

i'm just scratching the surface. read the rest of the lawsuits that have surfaced on the internet all the way through. there's some stuff i can't even comment on...it's bizarre, but my commentary would add nothing, or possibly just spoil it. are they art? are they insanity? either way, they're hilarious.

***
1 it was in that fifty-seven page list of defendants.
2 although, it would be pretty cool if that were possible. i'd sue the PATRIOT act...or maybe that annoying little regulation that allowed the TSA agent to confiscate my tube of toothpaste in the airport on the way to new york. that was silly. the last time i checked, being in possession of a tube of colgate total didn't make me a terrorist.
3 of course, he actually alleged this: in count 2 of the DEFCON suit.
4 see count 1 of the mossad suit.
5 we'll leave aside the fact that a temporary restraining order is equitable relief, and not relief at law. a plaintiff doesn't get to ask for monetary relief when asking for a temporary restraining order. that's the whole point of a TRO: the plaintiff demands the defendant to stop doing something while some other suit is pending. i really don't know where jonathan lee riches © got the idea to phrase all of his lawsuits as requests for temporary restraining orders.
6 see the barry bonds lawsuit.
7 see the guantanamo bay lawsuit.
8 see the lebron james lawsuit.
9 see the second michael vick lawsuit.
10 see the i-35w bridge lawsuit.
11 id.

1 comment:

Ontario Emperor said...

Your latter option could be correct. What else are you going to do while in prison? Presumably he doesn't have access to credit cards, given his crime.