A group calling itself “SB277 Lawsuits” recently began promoting the idea of a Hobbs Act or R.I.C.O. multi plaintiff lawsuit and a few individuals have been busy selling the idea. Will people continue to follow these pied pipers right over the cliff into the abyss, thinking everything is just fine? Or will people engage in reasonable, reflective thinking focused on critical thought?
“I’m promoting the idea of a multi plaintiff lawsuit using my pleading. The money could come from donations and us all chipping in on the costs. I am behind this along with so far 15 other people in the Santa Barbara area. I’ve been trying to educate people on this procedure since before SB277 passed. The legal premise is Obstruction of Justice and racketeering along with Civil Rights violations. I have plenty of case law supporting this legal procedure or “I” would NOT BE advocating it and attaching my name to it!!” -Travis Middleton February 1, 2016
“The so called SB277 is a big white elephant in the room and nobody knows it. YET!” “It’s not a real law yet that you are mandated to follow.” -Travis Middleton September 19, 2015
Are attorneys on board with this multi-Plaintiff Hobbs Act concept? Of course not.
Alan Phillips, J.D., a nationally recognized legal expert on vaccine policy and law, who is the only attorney in the U.S. whose practice is focused solely on vaccine exemptions waivers for school, college, work, military, immigration, custody disputes, newborn vaccines, international travel, etc. recently said, “There’s no need to flood the California courts with lawsuits that can’t win. No one has been able to come up with a winning legal theory. This is just another disinformation tactic; lawsuits won’t win, they will just tie up everyone’s time, money and energy when they could be working legislatively to fix the problem–that’s the only way this can be fixed right now. If anyone can show me a legal theory they think can win, I’m all ears but so far, no one has responded to that invitation with any argument, let alone a winning one.”
Did you know unrepresented parties such as Travis Middleton are referred to as pro se (‘prō say’) litigants? Did you know pro se litigants may represent only themselves? I won’t sugar coat things, I’m not Willy Wonka. Middleton is NOT an attorney. Middleton hasn’t had much success with his pro se R.I.C.O. litigation either. In fact, I was unable to find ANY successful attempts. (Now would be a good time to engage in the reasonable, reflective thinking focused on critical thought mentioned earlier)
“The Notice does not competently allege facts supporting any basis for original subject matter jurisdiction in this Court, and therefore removal under § 1441(c) is improper.” PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff, v. TRAVIS MIDDLETON, Defendant. and RELATED CROSS-ACTION. United States District Court, C.D. California. July 30, 2014
“Travis Irvin Middleton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgement dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging civil rights violations related to his state court conviction for indecent exposure.” http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2015/09/04/13-56877.pdf
Did you know an indecent exposure conviction may subject you to a lifetime duty to register as a California sex offender? Since 2004, the public has been able to view information on sex offenders required to register with local law enforcement under California’s Megan’s Law. Previously, the information was available only by personally visiting police stations and sheriff offices or by calling a 900 toll-free number. The law was given final passage by the Legislature on August 24, 2004 and signed by the Governor on September 24, 2004.
Who is this pro se R.I.C.O. pied piper you might be wondering? Well, he’s a 5th degree Black Belt in American Free Style Karate.