1. MCR 2.504(B)(1) sub.3? 2. MCR 2.116(C)(6)

[interpret]

1. Does MCR 2.504(b)(1) and subsection 3, mean that a full trial took place, because the involuntary dismissal of a complaint was on the merits? And, the defendant is the prevailing party?

2. Does MCR 2.116(C)(6) include the same or essentially the same parties and the same or substantially the same issue?,i.e.: Joe first, sues Hijack Bank for conversion of his $40,000.00 in one court; a month later Hijack Bank takes a defamation claim against Joe regarding the same $40,000.00 to a different court, but fails to inform that court that another claim has been initiated by Joe in a different court, is that res judicate/and is Hijack Bank collaterilly estopped from pursuing it's claim in a separate court?

 

[fredrikklaw]

Yes and No!

Well, the second question first: No, that is not considered Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel does not apply in such an instance. These two doctrines combine to establish a bar to reilitigation of the same claims and issues once they have reached a final judgment, based on merits of the case. They do not come into play in any other scenario in which the case is still being openly litigated and is otherwise ongoing and has not reached a final judgment or been dismissed.

A good indicator of when a judgment or a dismissal is deemed to be final and on the merits if they is when it is also decreed to be WITH PREJUDICE. Also, what you present in your hypothetical is essentially a counterclaim by the bank against Joe and as such is regarded as a Compulsory Counterclaim, which is a claim by the defendant having come about as the matter of, and from the same transaction between the two parties. If the bank does not state the counterclaim in its answer, then the claim is considered waived and the bank cannot raise it in any future proceeding.


And as for the second question: Yes, dismissal based on MCR 2.504(B)(1)(3) is considered final judgment based on the merits, as if the case had been fully litigated by the parites.

fredrikklaw

 

[interpret]

RE: Mandatory efiling legal documents

I have discovered that efiling legal documents is an easier means inwhich to commit both intrinsic and extrinsic fraud, than paper filing, in violation of the due process clause and the MCR's that a party 'must' receive every document filed. The Oakland Court is most reprehensible in one particular mandatory efiling case, that prevents a party to paperfile. The documents evidencing fraud have been released by Tyler Co. that unequivocally profer that documents and orders were not sent to a party causing that party to be defaulted. Of course, there is other, absolute and undisputable, documentary evidence via email; the efile envelope; filing, proof that no service was sent,etc., etc.

It's a shame that some have misused, abused and violated a most convient and enviromentally safe legal process. They should be held accountable-to set an example. Especially, since the Court Administration and Government... are working to incorporate efiling in all Court buildings. I'm taking my findings to the Media first then filing suit.

Query: Is that a federal or civil case and should the attorney general file that suit, with the evidence?

Thank you,

 

[army judge]

I have discovered that efiling legal documents is an easier means inwhich to commit both intrinsic and extrinsic fraud, than paper filing, in violation of the due process clause and the MCR's that a party 'must' receive every document filed. The O*****d Court is most reprehensible in one particular mandatory efiling case, that prevents a party to paperfile. The documents evidencing fraud have been released by T***r Co. that unequivocally profer that documents and orders were not sent to a party causing that party to be defaulted. Of course, there is other, absolute and undisputable, documentary evidence via email; the efile envelope; filing, proof that no service was sent,etc., etc.

It's a shame that some have misused, abused and violated a most convient and enviromentally safe legal process. They should be held accountable-to set an example. Especially, since the Court Administration and Government... are working to incorporate efiling in all Court buildings. I'm taking my findings to the Media first then filing suit.

Query: Is that a federal or civil case and should the attorney general file that suit, with the evidence?

Thank you,

I suggest you slow down.

Are you aware that may have inadvertently, unintentionally libeled the entity of which you complain?

I suggest you preface your discoveries as alleged, rather than actual acts.

I'm not sure the things of which you complain are anything, other than scurrilous allegations.

What this was may be far more insignificant than what it could become to you; and that my friend, is a lawsuit by the wronged party against you for libeling their good name and tortiously interfering with their business and livelihood!

I suggest to you, sir or madam, that a retraction and clarification might be appropriate.


I've taken the liberty of censoring the party's name.

I did that to protect this website form being named as a party to a potential lawsuit against you!

 

[interpret]

Thank you for your censoring. Eventhough what I said is true. Your advice is favorably accepted. Thank you, and thank you again. And I make a retraction. That's why I asked a lawyer.

 

[army judge]

Thank you for your censoring. Eventhough what I said is true. Your advice is favorably accepted. Thank you, and thank you again. And I make a retraction. That's why I asked a lawyer.

You're welcome.

But, (there is always a BUT), if you to were bring a lawsuit against any entity or individual, you'd be immune from making these allegations in that law suit.

In fact, you could say these (and other far more hurtful things) in open court, and you'd be immune from a libel or slander lawsuit.

Damn, that's why I love the law!

Law is logic, yet it sometimes appears as a riddle, wrapped inside an enigma, stuffed inside a conundrum!

 

[interpret]

Hypothetically.1) If a judge intentionally lies in a written court order that leads to the dismissial of a party's complaint what are the remedies in such case? 2) If three COA judges make over 20 false statements of the facts and intentionally omit-say- the Michigan Supreme Court's recent AMD File No. 2009-04 Order regarding "Disqualifacation of Judges" by citing only old stare decisis; and one of the three is on the Judicial Tenure C., how serious would that be and what is the legal remedy?
For mock trial but brief steps 1 thru...