Fraud Upon the Court?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

massPI

New Member
This is a Massachusetts civil probate tort case with millions in (ex-parte) attachments, the defendant and attorney is sitting on a mountain of documents supporting every allegation made is a lie, and numerous documents showing the Plaintiff has committed many crimes (all relevant to this case) which the Plaintiff will be slam-dunked with, however...

My question is about the Plaintiffs VERIFIED complaint and he is the only plaintiff party to this case;

The verified complaint signature is NOT his, and it doesn't take a forensic examiner to see it, I mean it's really not his, his wife (who is NOT a party to this case) for some reason took it upon herself to sign his name to the VERIFIED complaint and he uttered it as his!... does this void the case? If not, what will the Judge do?
 
No it doesn't. If he authorized her to sign on his behalf there is no problem with that. If the document was notarized and had a different signature that might be an issue.
 
Verified signature?

Surely the Plaintiff is not flying solo (pro per) for a tort case of such financial magnitude, in which case the signature on the complaint would be that of the attorney of record and not his.

Even if going pro per, I am with Mightymoose on this one; it is the allegations that are verified and not the signature and hence the legend: VERIFIED COMPLAINT. So there is no fraud present here as long as nobody else shows up to argue the matter on Plaintiff's behalf, or worse, in his name without his knowledge.

Then you've got yourself a good ol' fashion case of not only fraud on the court, but also on the defendants as well as on the person in whose name the action was commenced.

fredrikklaw
 
Yes the Plaintiff has an attorney (in my opinion an inept one)

During the Plaintiff's hammering deposition, he was asked QUOTE 'is that your signature on the Verified Complaint', answer; YES, then 'Did you sign that yourself', answer: YES ___ doesn't have to be much plainer than that! ... and his deposition was 4 months ago which he refuses SIGN.

So your telling me that a wife (NON PARTY TO A CASE) with NO poa, can just sign her husbands VERIFIED complaint, and its OKs ok? I find that hard to believe.

Plaintiff's attorney just got 100 out of 500 forged checks by (his plaintiff) FORGING the defendants signature to; waved under his nose 2 days ago. Plaintiffs attorney was so upset his hands began to shake. I personally uncovered $357k in check fraud Plaintiff committed :)

So back to my question, since a VERIFIED complaint is considered serious in nature and by signing YOU swear that YOU have READ & UNDERSTAND it, under the pains & that every allegation is true... how can it be valid if the Plaintiff didn't sign it... how would the Judge even know the plaintiff ever even read it?

If you heard his answers in his deposition you would swear the Plaintiff didn't read it.
 
I suggest you retain counsel, if this case is worth millions it shouldn't be that difficult.
You may not think it requires a forensic examiner, but it does if you're before a court of record.
You're forgetting those little, devilish, pesky rules of civil procedure and civil,trial practice.
Rules, oh so many silly, little rules.
 
Hello again, we have counsel, a very good attorney .. unlike the Plaintiff & his attorney, our attorney has known us for over 40 years. This is a family matter where the vile son brought suit against the elder father claiming diminished capacity NOT TRUE and undue influence, again not true. Son is trying to steal the father's assets.

The father has sees 2, yes 2 nueropsychologists who have tested and had many session with the elder father and have both written affidavits attesting to the fathers 100% testamentary capacity (even stating in their opinion the only person who has taken advantage of the elder father IS the Plaintiff (the son) whammy.

I have a well known forensic document examiner, handwriting expert on notice for this case, our attorney said not yet because the signatures are so OBVIOUSLY forged, that when we go to the second pretrial next week the Judge can deem them forgeries herself, if she wants the expert then it will happen. Trial is in 4 weeks.

So again my question is, if the VERIFIED Complaint signature is forged, and it is.. is the suit null by some rule or law? Why this son would not sign it himself is beyond me, but its true.
 
My answer remains unchanged.

I suggest you permit the attorney to execute the duties for which he has been retained.

As far as your query, you're asking for a legal conclusion to be drawn.

Only the trial judge in your proceeding can render such a decision.

Anything another person might recite would only be a guess.
 
Six of one; half dozen of the other!

MASSPI:

Well, I guess there is no better authority to vouch for a subject matter than THE AUTHORITY itself. So, here is the pertinent paragraph (wording) contained in §446(a) of the California Code of Civil Procedure which deals with the signing of a verified complaint.

"… and where a pleading is verified, it shall be by the affidavit of a party, unless the parties are absent from the county where the attorney has his or her office, or from some cause unable to verify it, or the facts are within the knowledge of his or her attorney or other person verifying the same. When the pleading is verified by the attorney, or any other person except one of the parties, he or she shall set forth in the affidavit the reasons why it is not made by one of the parties."

I also understand that you are in Massachusetts, a state which has adopted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but there is an analogues rule, namely Rule 11 (a) which says:

(e) Verification Generally. When a pleading is required to be verified, or when an affidavit is required or permitted to be filed, the pleading may be verified or the affidavit made by the party, or by a person having knowledge of the facts for and on behalf of such party.


There is also Rule 61 which deals with Harmless Errors, and it says in its entirety that:

No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict or for vacating, modifying or otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.

And just for my understanding, is this an action brought by the "son" to declare "father" Non Compos Mentis?

fredrikklaw
 
fredrikklaw said:
MASSPI:

Well, I guess there is no better authority to vouch for a subject matter than THE AUTHORITY itself. So, here is the pertinent paragraph (wording) contained in §446(a) of the California Code of Civil Procedure which deals with the signing of a verified complaint.

"… and where a pleading is verified, it shall be by the affidavit of a party, unless the parties are absent from the county where the attorney has his or her office, or from some cause unable to verify it, or the facts are within the knowledge of his or her attorney or other person verifying the same. When the pleading is verified by the attorney, or any other person except one of the parties, he or she shall set forth in the affidavit the reasons why it is not made by one of the parties."

I also understand that you are in Massachusetts, a state which has adopted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but there is an analogues rule, namely Rule 11 (a) which says:

(e) Verification Generally. When a pleading is required to be verified, or when an affidavit is required or permitted to be filed, the pleading may be verified or the affidavit made by the party, or by a person having knowledge of the facts for and on behalf of such party.


There is also Rule 61 which deals with Harmless Errors, and it says in its entirety that:

No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict or for vacating, modifying or otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.

And just for my understanding, is this an action brought by the "son" to declare "father" Non Compos Mentis?

fredrikklaw
Click to expand...


That's pretty good research, FL, as usual.

You're gonna be one fine lawyer, I can tell. :yes:
 
Thank you all, I had found the following applying to Massachusetts (but my question remains, is there a void/null rule?) if the complainant/plaintiff didn't sign it?

Per MASS c. 183 s 15 (b)

I've included the pertinent part

(b) Any party seeking a memorandum of lis pendens (suit pending) under this section shall commence the underlying proceeding by means of a verified complaint or other complaint as is required under the rules of court to include a certification by the claimant made under the penalties of perjury that the complainant has read the complaint, that the facts stated therein are true and that no material facts have been omitted therefrom.
+++

Of course motions can be attorney signed but the actual complaint must be signed by the Plaintiff.

§ 1.2 Falsified Documents and Fraud
All documents filed with the court pursuant to the Code are deemed verified and subject to penalties of perjury for any deliberate falsification of information.
 
Regardless of who supposedly authorized the woman to sign that pleading, her husband, the Pope and the Head Lama of the Tibetan, she thusly committed the felonry crime of forgery in falsifying a public record punishable by up to two years imprisonment. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 267(1).

And perjury as defined in MGL Chapter 268(1) punishable by imprisonment up to two and one half years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top