Tuesday, October 30, 2018
addendum to yesterday's notice of tort claim.
i am writing with a bit more information about the john doe parties.
john doe #1 is my assailant.
jane doe #2 is a securtex employee who witnessed the event and refuse to come to my aid when i was yelling for help, an has particpate in the cover-up.
jane doe #3 is the officer who responded to the 911 call. she greeting my attacker by name, and conspired with him to sweep it to under the rug. an officer has wide discretion, but her actions and inactions may amount to an abuse of that discretion.
john doe #4 is a red haired officer possibly named lantern.
john doe #5 is major ron cutter.
jane doe #6 is an internal affairs officer who helped conceal the identity of my attacker.
john doe #7 s a departmental lawyer who conspired with jane doe #7 to withhold the identify of my attacker.
john does number 8 9 an 10 are unknown officers or persons who are in the conspiracy, but are not yet known.
because of the conspiracy to withhold information, not all of the facts have been fully developed. as an outsider, it is difficult sometimes to distinguish inept or negligent conduct from a deliberate an intensional conspiracy to violate civil rights.
i reasonably suspect a subset of the capitol police and isp were involved in such a conspiracy, actionable under 42 USC 1983 et seq. and were engaged in racketeering under civil rico and irico.
it is also possible that john doe number 7 was only involved in providing legal advice, and that the internal affirs officer merely followed that advice. a reasonable jury could decide either way. iscovery may she some light on these concerns.
kristi at the governor's office is not alleged to be a participant in the conspiracy, but may be a fact witness.
i am writing with a bit more information about the john doe parties.
john doe #1 is my assailant.
jane doe #2 is a securtex employee who witnessed the event and refuse to come to my aid when i was yelling for help, an has particpate in the cover-up.
jane doe #3 is the officer who responded to the 911 call. she greeting my attacker by name, and conspired with him to sweep it to under the rug. an officer has wide discretion, but her actions and inactions may amount to an abuse of that discretion.
john doe #4 is a red haired officer possibly named lantern.
john doe #5 is major ron cutter.
jane doe #6 is an internal affairs officer who helped conceal the identity of my attacker.
john doe #7 s a departmental lawyer who conspired with jane doe #7 to withhold the identify of my attacker.
john does number 8 9 an 10 are unknown officers or persons who are in the conspiracy, but are not yet known.
because of the conspiracy to withhold information, not all of the facts have been fully developed. as an outsider, it is difficult sometimes to distinguish inept or negligent conduct from a deliberate an intensional conspiracy to violate civil rights.
i reasonably suspect a subset of the capitol police and isp were involved in such a conspiracy, actionable under 42 USC 1983 et seq. and were engaged in racketeering under civil rico and irico.
it is also possible that john doe number 7 was only involved in providing legal advice, and that the internal affirs officer merely followed that advice. a reasonable jury could decide either way. iscovery may she some light on these concerns.
kristi at the governor's office is not alleged to be a participant in the conspiracy, but may be a fact witness.
- A Texas plasma "donation" center rejects a man who limps and a woman who uses a service animal. The center claims they're not in good enough health to give blood; the would-be donors claim the center is discriminating against them because they're disabled. An Americans with Disabilities Act violation? Not bloody likely, says the Fifth Circuit; the center would have to be a "service establishment" for the ADA to apply, and getting paid for your blood isn't a service. But we're more sanguine about your chances under the state ADA equivalent. That question we certify to the Supreme Court of Texas.
ada case, 11th a case.
- Wisconsin teacher is listed as "under investigation" on public website for 17 months without explanation. Investigation is dropped; his name is removed. Teacher: Too late! The damage is done. Seventh Circuit: Can't sue the superintendent in his official capacity; that's barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Judge Hamilton, concurring: Which is the correct outcome, but "[t]he combination of stigma and delay poses serious due process questions even if [the teacher] himself is not entitled to relief under federal law."
Find a Lawyer
By Location
Areas of Practice
Experts & Services
Products
Online Bookstore
Shop our Promotions
Bar Links
About Us
Contact Us
Disclaimer
Privacy Policy
Advance Search
Grant E. Helms
Update this Profile
Grant E. Helms is a Lawyer in Indiana, Indianapolis.
Grant E. Helms
4701 N
to: "Miller-Cronk, Nila"
as far as i know, i never received a response
from you to my letter of august 22.
from you to my letter of august 22.
yesterday i filed a notice of tort claim. once that is denied, as it will be, i will be able to file suit. once i have filed suit, i will be able to submit a subpoena, as you insist upon.
i had not expected that it would be necessary to engage in litigation to get any answer to my simple question. at this point the cover-up is more disturbing than the original incident.
this is a situation that could have been resolved by a letter of apology from the officer.
instead, we will now be headed to court. win or lose, the intent will be to use the judical process to force open some of the secrets you and major cutter have been withholding. as a crime victim, it disappoints me that the very people who live at taxpayer expense to fight crime are instead participating in the crime.
Article 1, § 13(b) – Victims of crime, as defined by law, shall have the right to be treated with fairness, dignity and respect throughout the criminal justice process; and, as defined by law, to be informed of and present during public hearings and to confer with the prosecution, to the extent that exercising these rights does not infringe upon the constitutional rights of the accused.
text of tort claim notice filed 10/29/2018
via hand delivery
po box 29164, cumberland in 46229
gtbear@gmail.com
loss information:
2-2-18 4:16 pm $50,000 capitol police na
state house west enterance
marion
john doe 1-6
i was assaulted and battered by an unknown capitol police officer and
dragged out of the state house by my right arm.
i was coming into the state house for an appointment with an undersecretary of state, jerry bonnet. after passing through the scanner, the officer blocked my way and began interrogating me about where i was going. not liking my answer, he grabbed me by the arm and dragged me out of the building. 5 officers have been accessories after the fact by conspiring to hide his identity.
x robbin stewart october 29, 2018.
via hand delivery
po box 29164, cumberland in 46229
gtbear@gmail.com
loss information:
2-2-18 4:16 pm $50,000 capitol police na
state house west enterance
marion
john doe 1-6
i was assaulted and battered by an unknown capitol police officer and
dragged out of the state house by my right arm.
i was coming into the state house for an appointment with an undersecretary of state, jerry bonnet. after passing through the scanner, the officer blocked my way and began interrogating me about where i was going. not liking my answer, he grabbed me by the arm and dragged me out of the building. 5 officers have been accessories after the fact by conspiring to hide his identity.
x robbin stewart october 29, 2018.
n Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 12:14 AM Robbin Stewart <gtbear@gmail.com> wrote:
thank you for your reply. it's quite helpful.
i will put preparing the subpoena on tomorrow's to do list.meanwhile, is there anything at all about the report or the incident which you can disclose? tia, robbin stewart.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Miller-Cronk, Nila NMiller-Cronk at isp.in.gov; wrote:
Mr. Stewart,In speaking with our Legal Section, your request for a copy of the inquiry which resulted from you calling 911 on 2/2/2018 and alleging assault and battery by a Capitol Police Officer, was processed as a public records request. With a department inquiry being an internal investigative document, which is not releasable under a public records request, and pursuant to IC 5-14-3-4(b)(8), your request has been denied. Upon receipt of a valid subpoena or court order the inquiry requested above may be disclosed.Sincerely,Major Nila Miller-CronkMajor Nila Miller-CronkIndiana State PoliceInternal Investigations Section
text of tort claim notice filed 10/29/2018
via hand delivery
po box 29164, cumberland in 46229
gtbear at gmail.com
loss information:
2-2-18 4:16 pm $50,000 capitol police na
state house west entrance
marion
john doe 1-6
i was assaulted and battered by an unknown capitol police officer and
dragged out of the state house by my right arm.
i was coming into the state house for an appointment with an undersecretary of staate, jerry bonnet. after passing through the scanner, the officer blocked my way and began interrogating me about where i was going. not liking my answer, he grabbed me by the arm and dragged me out of the building. 5 officers have been accessories after the fact by conspiring to hide his identity.
x robbin stewart october 29, 2018.
via hand delivery
po box 29164, cumberland in 46229
gtbear at gmail.com
loss information:
2-2-18 4:16 pm $50,000 capitol police na
state house west entrance
marion
john doe 1-6
i was assaulted and battered by an unknown capitol police officer and
dragged out of the state house by my right arm.
i was coming into the state house for an appointment with an undersecretary of staate, jerry bonnet. after passing through the scanner, the officer blocked my way and began interrogating me about where i was going. not liking my answer, he grabbed me by the arm and dragged me out of the building. 5 officers have been accessories after the fact by conspiring to hide his identity.
x robbin stewart october 29, 2018.
Monday, October 29, 2018
monday did /didnt list.
tasks that need to get done.
1 put plates on van from volvo, put tag on plates.
2. fix mirror.
3.winterize:
- put storm window on stained glass.
plastic winows. storm windows.
switch out space heaters.
4. pest control:
mice
bugs
roaches
spiders
moths
bedbugs.
crackheads
other
5. setlist
6. case list.
memos.
7. find texas loan flier.
8.. sort papers in room.
make to do list as go through papers
example: replace $125 oil check from 2017.
9. make list of bills
overdue
lawyer dues
storage unit
texas taxes
due
cable
4015 taxes. dispute part.
not yet due.
electric
water
car ins.
add flounders car ins.
9. chuck in nebraska,
re jon xander g. an re car accident.
10 thank you cards to bob kern party contacts.
11 tommy auto accident
tommy spite bossiness communication mediation
spray room for bugs.
clean dirt from van.
12. scrap to saul goodman.
13. brian agenda
14. bruce agena
15. jerrine agenda
16. bird dog dude joshua
17. dawn, fed proseutors
18 lonnie hall murder file
19. plasma. - ssn,
probation offiicer test.
realtor class and test. -
20. kc - lots, basement, outstanding balance. deed, note.
21. follow up on tort claim.
internal affairs.
ag's office
governor's office
nuvo/press.
22. pnc dispute escalation. return phone call again.
23. nebraska drop mke kreig a line. make plan of attack.
24. thank you note to mom, find stamps.
25. hawaiii plane tix.
26. palafox.
27. s talbot street.
28. storage unit.
29. petri dish sale
things i got accomplished today.
1, wrote to zoning thug re board order.
2. printed filed delvered notce of tort claim #metoo. $7.50 cash back for unused card. copy to governors office.
3. went to capitol police, insisted on contacting internal affairs. got an emal after much much resistance.
4. van; air, 1 gas, 10 bug bomb 65 plates so $76 today.
5. withdrew $80 from creit union. balance of $13.
6. saul goode $22
7. dived some pots and pans.
8. volvo emails, haggle, craigslist. no sale yet.
9. took bruce server license app, whuch will be $45.
10. negotiated for gamething $40, brian's freezer $80, sale not final yet.
got a vote sign for tommy van.
11. pnc dispute escalaton department dialog.
12. made a comic, blogged.
13 listened to joe rogan talk about crackers., research for setlist.
14. pair of shoes for tommy.
15. met w bruce re lanlord new crisis. tested wifi at restaurant.
16. cleaned some pots and pans.
17. helped a guy back up his truck when stuck at a low bridge.
18. emailed joel rob and eddie re solar panels for the church.
19. sorted a few papers in room.
20. looked nto parole officer test. emails re grant helms disappearance.
21 wrote a memo on bmv organ donation policy
tommy: killed two mice. washed dishes. found bug bomb for me, sprayed kitchen for bugs, great attitude today.
brian; took photos an video of volvos, listing inventory, pricng, selling via offer up, discusson of craigslist. teste oven, works fine.
kevin; made offer on 2 items for moises.
which crimes did i fight today?
1. # metoo. and the coverup.
2. voter suppresson - put up sign, sent emails to counsel.
3. zoning thug battle.
4. revenuers - they
5. bruce landlord conflict.
6. i visited the mediation/meditation room on the fourth floor of the statehouse, just to see if it was a typo - it was.
7. i observed some littering but didnt fight back as hard as last time. some recycling.
8. new undercover investgaton into health issues at fogo de cow. might apply.
lots of places higheriing, amazon.
income 7.50 + 23 = 0.
outgo $11 van, $65 van plates.
cups of coffee: about 5.
need to sleep but can't.
amount of sleep today: about 2 hours.
stll to work on if awake:
revise status memo stewart v board.
midnight now, good time to stop.
tasks that need to get done.
1 put plates on van from volvo, put tag on plates.
2. fix mirror.
3.winterize:
- put storm window on stained glass.
plastic winows. storm windows.
switch out space heaters.
4. pest control:
mice
bugs
roaches
spiders
moths
bedbugs.
crackheads
other
5. setlist
6. case list.
memos.
7. find texas loan flier.
8.. sort papers in room.
make to do list as go through papers
example: replace $125 oil check from 2017.
9. make list of bills
overdue
lawyer dues
storage unit
texas taxes
due
cable
4015 taxes. dispute part.
not yet due.
electric
water
car ins.
add flounders car ins.
9. chuck in nebraska,
re jon xander g. an re car accident.
10 thank you cards to bob kern party contacts.
11 tommy auto accident
tommy spite bossiness communication mediation
spray room for bugs.
clean dirt from van.
12. scrap to saul goodman.
13. brian agenda
14. bruce agena
15. jerrine agenda
16. bird dog dude joshua
17. dawn, fed proseutors
18 lonnie hall murder file
19. plasma. - ssn,
probation offiicer test.
realtor class and test. -
20. kc - lots, basement, outstanding balance. deed, note.
21. follow up on tort claim.
internal affairs.
ag's office
governor's office
nuvo/press.
22. pnc dispute escalation. return phone call again.
23. nebraska drop mke kreig a line. make plan of attack.
24. thank you note to mom, find stamps.
25. hawaiii plane tix.
26. palafox.
27. s talbot street.
28. storage unit.
29. petri dish sale
things i got accomplished today.
1, wrote to zoning thug re board order.
2. printed filed delvered notce of tort claim #metoo. $7.50 cash back for unused card. copy to governors office.
3. went to capitol police, insisted on contacting internal affairs. got an emal after much much resistance.
4. van; air, 1 gas, 10 bug bomb 65 plates so $76 today.
5. withdrew $80 from creit union. balance of $13.
6. saul goode $22
7. dived some pots and pans.
8. volvo emails, haggle, craigslist. no sale yet.
9. took bruce server license app, whuch will be $45.
10. negotiated for gamething $40, brian's freezer $80, sale not final yet.
got a vote sign for tommy van.
11. pnc dispute escalaton department dialog.
12. made a comic, blogged.
13 listened to joe rogan talk about crackers., research for setlist.
14. pair of shoes for tommy.
15. met w bruce re lanlord new crisis. tested wifi at restaurant.
16. cleaned some pots and pans.
17. helped a guy back up his truck when stuck at a low bridge.
18. emailed joel rob and eddie re solar panels for the church.
19. sorted a few papers in room.
20. looked nto parole officer test. emails re grant helms disappearance.
21 wrote a memo on bmv organ donation policy
tommy: killed two mice. washed dishes. found bug bomb for me, sprayed kitchen for bugs, great attitude today.
brian; took photos an video of volvos, listing inventory, pricng, selling via offer up, discusson of craigslist. teste oven, works fine.
kevin; made offer on 2 items for moises.
which crimes did i fight today?
1. # metoo. and the coverup.
2. voter suppresson - put up sign, sent emails to counsel.
3. zoning thug battle.
4. revenuers - they
5. bruce landlord conflict.
6. i visited the mediation/meditation room on the fourth floor of the statehouse, just to see if it was a typo - it was.
7. i observed some littering but didnt fight back as hard as last time. some recycling.
8. new undercover investgaton into health issues at fogo de cow. might apply.
lots of places higheriing, amazon.
income 7.50 + 23 = 0.
outgo $11 van, $65 van plates.
cups of coffee: about 5.
need to sleep but can't.
amount of sleep today: about 2 hours.
stll to work on if awake:
revise status memo stewart v board.
midnight now, good time to stop.
to: michael evans
michael.evans@indy.gov
property inspector
city of indianapolis
re: vb018-02740 Order to Board
I received your letter on friday. I met wth my assistant, brian de andrade, to read through it and try to understand what it was saying.
On saturday I met with my caretaker, scott may. we went to the property, installed new locks on the house and garage, closed an open window, installed a security grate on the back porch window, and arranged for drainage for one small hole in the roof until we get it tarped over pending repair. we are not aware that there has been any unauthorized entry, with the possible exception of yourself. There were several days last week where I had intentionally left the back door unlocked, so that a potential buyer could have his crew leader inspect the foundation. A buyer, depending on their budget and preferences, might decide to
demolish the current house to build somethng larger, as the highest and best use,
or might remodel the current structure. May is at the property at least twice a week. Recently he's been scraping wallpaper and removing water damaged plaster. I had no access to the property during the 8 months it took to close.
A board order will unreasonably interfere in my attempts to sell the property.
De Andrade suggested that it is possible someone contacted you in bad faith to try to pressure me into selling below my asking price of $25,000. please let me know how an why you were contacted, and by whom. This a public records request, but can be followed up with a subpoena if needed.
I request that you refrain from issuing a board order. I am willing to meet you at the property to discuss your concerns if that would be helpful. I can best be contacted at gtbear@gmail.com. In the event that a board order is issued, this is my request for an administrative hearing. Be advised that I tend to be litigious, and if you proceed I tend to file counterclaims.
I follow Axelrod's approach to game theory - I begin by co-operating, and then respond in kind to how you respond.
I first moved to the neighborhood as a renter in 1995, in the 900 block of Eastern. in 1997 I bought a house in the 200 n. block of Temple, which was later destroyed by arson. So buying a home in that vicinity is a long term goal. At the moment however I am disabled and broke. In the past two years I have flipped houses on temple and eastern. In each case it turned a vacant building into a home for someone. That's what I am trying to do on Rural. A house with a board order is unmarketable, and would interfere in the reevelopment of the neighborhood. I am currently in litigation against the county in a voting rights case, an am contenplating filing another shortly. The current settlement offer in the voting rights case is $30,000. If you cause me damage, I will adjust the settlement offer upwards by that amount. I am mildly mentally ill, what a lay person might call paranoid. I have limited social skills. I would rather work with you than aganst you.
sincerely, robbin stewart.
michael.evans@indy.gov
property inspector
city of indianapolis
re: vb018-02740 Order to Board
I received your letter on friday. I met wth my assistant, brian de andrade, to read through it and try to understand what it was saying.
On saturday I met with my caretaker, scott may. we went to the property, installed new locks on the house and garage, closed an open window, installed a security grate on the back porch window, and arranged for drainage for one small hole in the roof until we get it tarped over pending repair. we are not aware that there has been any unauthorized entry, with the possible exception of yourself. There were several days last week where I had intentionally left the back door unlocked, so that a potential buyer could have his crew leader inspect the foundation. A buyer, depending on their budget and preferences, might decide to
demolish the current house to build somethng larger, as the highest and best use,
or might remodel the current structure. May is at the property at least twice a week. Recently he's been scraping wallpaper and removing water damaged plaster. I had no access to the property during the 8 months it took to close.
A board order will unreasonably interfere in my attempts to sell the property.
De Andrade suggested that it is possible someone contacted you in bad faith to try to pressure me into selling below my asking price of $25,000. please let me know how an why you were contacted, and by whom. This a public records request, but can be followed up with a subpoena if needed.
I request that you refrain from issuing a board order. I am willing to meet you at the property to discuss your concerns if that would be helpful. I can best be contacted at gtbear@gmail.com. In the event that a board order is issued, this is my request for an administrative hearing. Be advised that I tend to be litigious, and if you proceed I tend to file counterclaims.
I follow Axelrod's approach to game theory - I begin by co-operating, and then respond in kind to how you respond.
I first moved to the neighborhood as a renter in 1995, in the 900 block of Eastern. in 1997 I bought a house in the 200 n. block of Temple, which was later destroyed by arson. So buying a home in that vicinity is a long term goal. At the moment however I am disabled and broke. In the past two years I have flipped houses on temple and eastern. In each case it turned a vacant building into a home for someone. That's what I am trying to do on Rural. A house with a board order is unmarketable, and would interfere in the reevelopment of the neighborhood. I am currently in litigation against the county in a voting rights case, an am contenplating filing another shortly. The current settlement offer in the voting rights case is $30,000. If you cause me damage, I will adjust the settlement offer upwards by that amount. I am mildly mentally ill, what a lay person might call paranoid. I have limited social skills. I would rather work with you than aganst you.
sincerely, robbin stewart.
peter l lacy, commissioner, bmv
100 n senate 46204
888.692.6841
cc: ashley merritt, staff attorney
steven sams, alj
pastor eddie smith sr.
re 18-ot-011
I have received your letter dated october 4th, received october 27th.
setting a hearing december 18th 1 pm, 4th floor government center north 100 n senate.
The issue is whether a person who is or was an organ donor must be compelled to re-affirm in writing their organ donor status each time they obtain a replacement driver's license or ID.
Facts: I went to the hendricks county bmv on rt 40
because I was trying to interview for a job at a french logistics company, and they required an ID.
In order to obtain a replacement copy of my driver's license, I was compelled to have to re-sign my organ donor status, with the only alternative that they would refuse to issue me a licence, which would have meant not being able to interview. Without a job, i faced a pending economic disaster. An indeed, I did not get the job, for other reasons, and had $1.75 left in my pocket this week, so I have borrowed funds from a relative. My point is the process was unduly coercive.
My plates expired yesterday, I did not have enough cash to renew them, and could not get my cards to work at the machine at the beech grove branch on saturday. I will try again this week, hopefully today.
The issues in this matter, 18-ot-011, are
1. whether the hendricks county branch was properly followng bmv rules, or arbitrarily and capriciously invented their own policy.
2. whether the policy is required, or apparently require, by statute, or is only the bmv's decision.
3. whether the agency's policy violates public policy,
unnecessarily compelling speech, and interfering in the organ donor program, with the result that people die, because the organ donation process is being interfered with by pointless red tape.
I understand that an administrative hearing will not resolve constitutional issues, so I do not raise those here, but there are potential constitutional issues if we cannot resolve my concerns in this forum.
I have been writing about organ donation since 1979 at a graduate seminar on bioethics at the center for the study of values. I have been litigating about compelled speech since stewart v taylor, s d ind 1997, in which IC 3-9-3-2 was declared unconstitutional, and I obtained a $7000 settlement,
and am currently litigating abuse of ID in stewart v marion county election board et al.
It's been many years since I've held any public office, but I was a delegate to the gop state convention this year. A long-standing GOP policy is to oppose red tape. The Trump administration set a goal of repealing two regulations for each new one. The actual record so far is 14 regulations repealed for each new one enacted.
The foundaton principle of organ donation is informed consent. I have participated in 42 medical studies, so I know a bit about informed consent.
So for bmv employees to be coercing someone to have to sign the form against their will is hugely inappropriate. Whether not the conduct was illegal uner federal law is not my call.
To deny someone a replacement driver's license because they decline to consent to organ donation is both injury and insult.
My position is that once a person has made the decision to become an organ donor, and attested to that in writing, once is enough. It need not be re-affirmed over and over to remain operative.
It is similar to how when a person files a statement of non-waiver of an adminstrative hearing prior to being sued by the marion county health and hospital corporation, that non-waiver remains legally effective, and need not be re-filed for each new case.
This is a simple application of the due course of law under section 12 of the Indiana bill of rights. Or, to put it other terms, it is the due process which has been part of anglo-american law since the magna carta.
My intent is that the bmv review its procedures to change the process to become less unethical. If that requires a statutory change, a recommendation to the governor's office would be in order. Lives are at stake.
First offer of settlement: it is my practice, as a professional to always offer to resolve a dispute via settlement. I would settle this in exchange for free renewal of my plates ths year. I am not claiming to be owe any damages in this matter; I am asserting only my procedural rights to a hearing, which I am willing to waive in exchange for a token settlement.
cordially, robbin stewart.
100 n senate 46204
888.692.6841
cc: ashley merritt, staff attorney
steven sams, alj
pastor eddie smith sr.
re 18-ot-011
I have received your letter dated october 4th, received october 27th.
setting a hearing december 18th 1 pm, 4th floor government center north 100 n senate.
The issue is whether a person who is or was an organ donor must be compelled to re-affirm in writing their organ donor status each time they obtain a replacement driver's license or ID.
Facts: I went to the hendricks county bmv on rt 40
because I was trying to interview for a job at a french logistics company, and they required an ID.
In order to obtain a replacement copy of my driver's license, I was compelled to have to re-sign my organ donor status, with the only alternative that they would refuse to issue me a licence, which would have meant not being able to interview. Without a job, i faced a pending economic disaster. An indeed, I did not get the job, for other reasons, and had $1.75 left in my pocket this week, so I have borrowed funds from a relative. My point is the process was unduly coercive.
My plates expired yesterday, I did not have enough cash to renew them, and could not get my cards to work at the machine at the beech grove branch on saturday. I will try again this week, hopefully today.
The issues in this matter, 18-ot-011, are
1. whether the hendricks county branch was properly followng bmv rules, or arbitrarily and capriciously invented their own policy.
2. whether the policy is required, or apparently require, by statute, or is only the bmv's decision.
3. whether the agency's policy violates public policy,
unnecessarily compelling speech, and interfering in the organ donor program, with the result that people die, because the organ donation process is being interfered with by pointless red tape.
I understand that an administrative hearing will not resolve constitutional issues, so I do not raise those here, but there are potential constitutional issues if we cannot resolve my concerns in this forum.
I have been writing about organ donation since 1979 at a graduate seminar on bioethics at the center for the study of values. I have been litigating about compelled speech since stewart v taylor, s d ind 1997, in which IC 3-9-3-2 was declared unconstitutional, and I obtained a $7000 settlement,
and am currently litigating abuse of ID in stewart v marion county election board et al.
It's been many years since I've held any public office, but I was a delegate to the gop state convention this year. A long-standing GOP policy is to oppose red tape. The Trump administration set a goal of repealing two regulations for each new one. The actual record so far is 14 regulations repealed for each new one enacted.
The foundaton principle of organ donation is informed consent. I have participated in 42 medical studies, so I know a bit about informed consent.
So for bmv employees to be coercing someone to have to sign the form against their will is hugely inappropriate. Whether not the conduct was illegal uner federal law is not my call.
To deny someone a replacement driver's license because they decline to consent to organ donation is both injury and insult.
My position is that once a person has made the decision to become an organ donor, and attested to that in writing, once is enough. It need not be re-affirmed over and over to remain operative.
It is similar to how when a person files a statement of non-waiver of an adminstrative hearing prior to being sued by the marion county health and hospital corporation, that non-waiver remains legally effective, and need not be re-filed for each new case.
This is a simple application of the due course of law under section 12 of the Indiana bill of rights. Or, to put it other terms, it is the due process which has been part of anglo-american law since the magna carta.
My intent is that the bmv review its procedures to change the process to become less unethical. If that requires a statutory change, a recommendation to the governor's office would be in order. Lives are at stake.
First offer of settlement: it is my practice, as a professional to always offer to resolve a dispute via settlement. I would settle this in exchange for free renewal of my plates ths year. I am not claiming to be owe any damages in this matter; I am asserting only my procedural rights to a hearing, which I am willing to waive in exchange for a token settlement.
cordially, robbin stewart.
Saturday, October 27, 2018
i int list saturay an friay
i sat
6 emails to corp counsel.
2 to jerry.
met w mr bruce.
1 pumpkin to restuarant.billable reddit post.
sent photos of 4015 e wash to joshua an wholesaler.
move fles onto rive.
fri i
opene letter. was a boar orer for 1116.
next- coffee, ollar store, go fix 1116.
worke on filing cabinets in room.
i sat
6 emails to corp counsel.
2 to jerry.
met w mr bruce.
1 pumpkin to restuarant.billable reddit post.
sent photos of 4015 e wash to joshua an wholesaler.
move fles onto rive.
fri i
opene letter. was a boar orer for 1116.
next- coffee, ollar store, go fix 1116.
worke on filing cabinets in room.
Friday, October 26, 2018
i think what i'll do is use this thread as a space for all my stupid questions. so this is a different case entirely.
auto accident in indiana. client passenger, his mom driving. old lady hits them, but the cop said both at fault, so the local lawyers won't touch it. so my question is, can client sue hs own mom? i thought the rule was a child can't sue their parent, but i don't know if this applies here. thx.
Thursday, October 25, 2018
NOTICE OF TORT CLAIM FOR PROPERTY AND/OR PERSONAL INJURY
Anyone who has a claim for personal injury or property damage against the City of Indianapolis/Marion
County must submit the claim in writing WITHIN 180 DAYS OF THE CLAIMED LOSS as required in Indiana
Code ch. 34-13-3. Each person claiming a loss must file a separate claim.
We recommend using this form. You must provide all information requested below, sign, and date. To
substantiate claimed damages, we encourage you to submit documentation like estimates, repair bills,
receipts, and photos. The completed notice must be delivered in person or by registered or certified mail
and addressed to:
Tort Claims
City of Indianapolis
200 E. Washington Street, Suite 1601
Indianapolis, IN 46204
CLAIMANT INFORMATION: Name: _________________________________________________ Home Telephone: Cellular Telephone: Address at time of loss: (number and street, city, state and ZIP code): Current Address (if different from above): __________________________________________________ LOSS INFORMATION: Date of loss: _____________________________________ Time of loss: ___________________ am/pm Amount of damages being claimed: $__________________________ Location of loss: City/County Agency Involved (if known): Description of circumstances surrounding loss and extent of loss (use additional sheets if necessary
City/County Agency Involved (if known): Description of circumstances surrounding loss and extent of loss (use additional sheets if necessary): Names and contact information of all persons involved including witnesses (if known): _______________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________________________ Date: __
OCC Tort Claim Form (1/2018
The filing of this claim is part of a legal process. If you have any questions about the right way to file a claim, you should contact an attorney of your choice. The City's attorneys/staff and/or employees are not authorized by law to assist you with filing this claim; however, for your information, a list of actions or conditions resulting in nonliability pursuant to Indiana Code 34-13-3 is provided below: Immunity of governmental entity or employee (IC 34-13-3-3) Sec. 3. A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment is not liable if a loss results from the following: (1) The natural condition of unimproved property. (2) The condition of a reservoir, dam, canal, conduit, drain, or similar structure when used by a person for a purpose that is not foreseeable. (3) The temporary condition of a public thoroughfare or extreme sport area that results from weather. (4) The condition of an unpaved road, trail, or footpath, the purpose of which is to provide access to a recreation or scenic area. (5) The design, construction, control, operation, or normal condition of an extreme sport area, if all entrances to the extreme sport area are marked with: (A) a set of rules governing the use of the extreme sport area; (B) a warning concerning the hazards and dangers associated with the use of the extreme sport area; and (C) a statement that the extreme sport area may be used only by persons operating extreme sport equipment. This subdivision shall not be construed to relieve a governmental entity from liability for the continuing duty to maintain extreme sports areas in a reasonably safe condition. (6) The initiation of a judicial or an administrative proceeding. (7) The performance of a discretionary function; however, the provisio
CLAIMANT INFORMATION: Name: _________________________________________________ Home Telephone: Cellular Telephone: Address at time of loss: (number and street, city, state and ZIP code): Current Address (if different from above): __________________________________________________ LOSS INFORMATION: Date of loss: _____________________________________ Time of loss: ___________________ am/pm Amount of damages being claimed: $__________________________ Location of loss: City/County Agency Involved (if known): Description of circumstances surrounding loss and extent of loss (use additional sheets if necessary
City/County Agency Involved (if known): Description of circumstances surrounding loss and extent of loss (use additional sheets if necessary): Names and contact information of all persons involved including witnesses (if known): _______________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________________________ Date: __
OCC Tort Claim Form (1/2018
The filing of this claim is part of a legal process. If you have any questions about the right way to file a claim, you should contact an attorney of your choice. The City's attorneys/staff and/or employees are not authorized by law to assist you with filing this claim; however, for your information, a list of actions or conditions resulting in nonliability pursuant to Indiana Code 34-13-3 is provided below: Immunity of governmental entity or employee (IC 34-13-3-3) Sec. 3. A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment is not liable if a loss results from the following: (1) The natural condition of unimproved property. (2) The condition of a reservoir, dam, canal, conduit, drain, or similar structure when used by a person for a purpose that is not foreseeable. (3) The temporary condition of a public thoroughfare or extreme sport area that results from weather. (4) The condition of an unpaved road, trail, or footpath, the purpose of which is to provide access to a recreation or scenic area. (5) The design, construction, control, operation, or normal condition of an extreme sport area, if all entrances to the extreme sport area are marked with: (A) a set of rules governing the use of the extreme sport area; (B) a warning concerning the hazards and dangers associated with the use of the extreme sport area; and (C) a statement that the extreme sport area may be used only by persons operating extreme sport equipment. This subdivision shall not be construed to relieve a governmental entity from liability for the continuing duty to maintain extreme sports areas in a reasonably safe condition. (6) The initiation of a judicial or an administrative proceeding. (7) The performance of a discretionary function; however, the provisio
Katelyn Brouillard joined the Office of Corporation Counsel in January 2018. Katelyn graduated in 2013 from Indiana University where she earned her B.A. in English. She then attended the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law where she earned her J.D. in 2017. Katelyn now serves as an Assistant City Prosecutor.
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) sets standards for public accommodations, and commercial facilities, to ensure that individuals with disabilities are able to enjoy reasonable access to services provided by these entities.
i am mildly disabled mentally following an acute depressive episode in 2001, since which i have been unable to work for wages as i used to do,so i support myself by subcontracting, and flipping houses, and some investment income from a family business.
i am a member of the bar but have refrained from practice out of concerns that my disablity could affect my competency. my pro bono work involves the misuse of photo id to prevent citiens from voting, e.g. stewart v marion county electon board.
i am physically disabled as a result of an auto accident in 2015.
i do my banking wth pnc in person because i find their website inaccessible to me,
because it will not accept any password i can remember. i am mildy cognitively impaired.
your bank is unwilling to send emails, whch is my way of interacting with the world. i have requested emails and they persistently refuse, so i have difficulty managng my account.
so i go in person. but after my wallet was stolen, they would not let me access my account
during the later part of the 90 days they cite as the reason for closing my account.
by the time i was able to get my license replaced, they had closed my account. what i am finding objectionable is the lack of any appeal or dispute resolution method. they keep telling me there is nothing they can do
and nothiing i can do. they must not know me very well - i am crippled but determined and unstoppable; i persevere as long as needed to overcome resistance.
while i looked into filing a federal complaint today, i am still trying to resolve this internally.
https://www.helpwithmybank.gov/complaints/index-file-a-bank-complaint.html.
to: branch manager,
pnc,
linwood plaza 4355 East 10th Street,
10th + linwood inianapolis 46201.
we met yesterday concerning my escalated dispute wth your credit card department.
during our conversation, i became confused and neglected to inform you of my continued request for reasonable accomodations under the americans with disabilities act of 1990,
so this letter is to so inform you.
your website claims that your bank uses the highest ethical standards, and holds that principle as a one of its core values.
perhaps that it is only puffery, and not a meanngful claim.
so i was focused on the ethical discussion rather than legal issues.
i can't access your online banking center, and you have refused my request for a reasonable accommodation, which would be to be sent email alerts, as my other financial institutions do.
your online center is not operable, understandable, robust, or perceivable, which are keywords under the act.
so i do my banking in person.
i am mildly disabled mentally following an acute depressive episode in 2001, since which i have been unable to work for wages as i used to do,
i am a member of the bar but have refrained from practice out of concerns that my disablity could affect my competency. my pro bono work involves the misuse of photo id to prevent citiens from voting, e.g. stewart v marion county electon board.
i am physically disabled as a result of an auto accident in 2015.
i do my banking wth pnc in person because i find their website inaccessible to me,
because it will not accept any password i can remember. i am mildy cognitively impaired.
your bank is unwilling to send emails, whch is my way of interacting with the world. i have requested emails and they persistently refuse, so i have difficulty managng my account.
so i go in person. but after my wallet was stolen, they would not let me access my account
during the later part of the 90 days they cite as the reason for closing my account.
by the time i was able to get my license replaced, they had closed my account. what i am finding objectionable is the lack of any appeal or dispute resolution method. they keep telling me there is nothing they can do
and nothiing i can do. they must not know me very well - i am crippled but determined and unstoppable; i persevere as long as needed to overcome resistance.
while i looked into filing a federal complaint today, i am still trying to resolve this internally.
https://www.helpwithmybank.gov/complaints/index-file-a-bank-complaint.html.
to: branch manager,
pnc,
linwood plaza 4355 East 10th Street,
10th + linwood inianapolis 46201.
we met yesterday concerning my escalated dispute wth your credit card department.
during our conversation, i became confused and neglected to inform you of my continued request for reasonable accomodations under the americans with disabilities act of 1990,
so this letter is to so inform you.
your website claims that your bank uses the highest ethical standards, and holds that principle as a one of its core values.
perhaps that it is only puffery, and not a meanngful claim.
so i was focused on the ethical discussion rather than legal issues.
i can't access your online banking center, and you have refused my request for a reasonable accommodation, which would be to be sent email alerts, as my other financial institutions do.
your online center is not operable, understandable, robust, or perceivable, which are keywords under the act.
notes re pnc ispute
2. your bank makes certain claims about its value an ethics.
i am trying to fin out if those are claims of fact or just puffery; that s are thesse enforceable promses or just marketing hot air.
3 communities - nonclickable links. if theere are onlne communities, i can probably get much of the info i ne there, but the links ont click.
1. wallet stolen by michelle --, awn knows her last name.
bank car an wallet missing so when i went to the bank they wouln't tell me about my account. t took me weeks ot replace my license, an then the next week i came here to replace my car, i wa stolen it ha alray been turne off.
. i have ha this account for 20 years, always pai my bill in full, sometimes late, but always pai. uring most of that time i've kept a 0 balance, so it's totally normal for me to go 3 months without making a payment.
4. review current balance and charges. see if any unauthorized use.
5. deadlines approch!
overdue bills
car plates,
taxes,
lawyer ues
cles
tort claim for #metoo.
0.99 mi
2
PLAZA BRANCH & 2 ATMs
1.01 mi
non-clickable links to 'communities'
2) IRREVOCABLY CONSENTING TO THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF, AND VENUE IN, STATE OR FEDERAL COURTS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA OVER ANY DISPUTES OR CLAIMS YOU HAVE WITH US; AND (3) SUBMITTING YOURSELF TO THE PERSONAL JURISDICTION OF COURTS LOCATED IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESOLVING ANY SUCH DISPUTES OR CLAIMS. FURTHERMORE, YOU AGREE THAT ANY CAUSE OF ACTION ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THE COMMUNITIES MUST COMMENCE WITHIN ONE (1) YEAR AFTER THE CAUSE OF ACTION ACCRUES; OTHERWISE, SUCH CAUSE OF ACTION SHALL BE PERMANENTLY BARRED.
Welcome to PNC
For more than 160 years, we have been committed to providing our clients with
great service and powerful financial expertise to help them meet their financial
goals. We are proud of our longstanding history of supporting not only our
customers but also our communities, employees and shareholders.
Monday, October 22, 2018
raft only o not email before revisions.
to branch manager
pnc linwood plaza
10th st 46201
from robbin stewart
cc;
barron's
Confirming our conversation,
we met today, pursuant to an appointment i had made on friday afternoon via one of your tellers.
we discussed my escalated dispute regarding your firm's decision to revoke my $10,000 credit carwithout discussng it with me first or letting me know on any of my trips to your branch in the past 100 days.
this letter is to inform you that i am requesting a reasonable accomodation for my disability under the americans with disabilities act. i had forgotten to raise that issue when we talked.
i do not know yet if your company has any obligation to follow the ada, or whether what i am requesting falls under reasonable accomodations.
your current position, and pnc's, is that there is no recourse, no appeal, no nothing. i suspect that the denial of an appeal process when an alleged reasonable accomoation is refused,
may violate both the law and your company's internal policies. i do not know this for certain, it's just a hunch i will research later. the judge david l bazelon center for mental health law has some useful resources, so i will begin to educate myself. the bazelon center is a member of the alliance for justice, which i am interacting with in one of my voting rights cases, robbin stewart v maron county electon board. the board told me in 2005 that i can't vote anymore, but i disagree and we are letting magistrate lynch sort it out.
my practice is focused on suing governments for civil rights violations; i've never sued a bank and don't intend to; i will allocate at least 6 months trying to work this out internally. however, these letters are public; for instance i am cc'ing the Barrons reporter who wrote last week's story on black rock beng sued by its own employees.
i am not seekng to provoke a confrontation; i want us to work this out.
you told me that if a person is kidnapped or jailed or in a coma for the 90 days, your firm will close their accounts and they have no recourse, no appeal, no nothing.
to me, that seems to be a policy that could result in adverse publicity. have you seen the united breaks guitars video? i can get you a copy of the united breaks guitars book if you wish.
i have limited social skills, and suspect i made you uncomfortable, for which i apologize.
you seemed to be in defensive mode, rather than problem solving mode. i apologize if you found me confrontational. i am just a bit frazzled, at having the funds i rely on to run my business yanked out from under me unexpectely. i had constructive notice but not actual notice.
i am trying to find someone at your firm who is a problem solver, not a mere rule follower, someone who would at least pretend to care.
so i will be working my way up the chain of command until i find such a person. i hoped that might be you. it isn't.
you stated that you will send me a packet of letters, copies of the form letters that have alreay been sent. that satisfies my request for a letter; t was the escalation department's refusal to send a letter admitting there is a dispute that resulted in our meeting today. please understand i ain't mad at ya. in the 20 years i have been doing business with your firm, i have found that sometimes persistance beats resistance, and that when i am told no, there is absolutely nothing that can be done, that is not always true.
i was a customer of wells-fargo, and i agree with you that that situation has led to changes. my point is it cuts both ways. wells fargo ha built up 100 years of good will, and then spent it by treating their customers unfairly, resulting in damages to their reputation. i feel i am being treated unfairly, and that there are potentially large classes of other customers being similarly mistreated. maybe i've read too many grisham novels about mass torts. anyway, this is getting too long and i'm not trying to waste your time. the purpose of this letter was to raise the ADA issue that i had forgotten to mention when we met.
sincerely,
robbin stewart
-
to do: edit, print, deliver.
-
to do: edit, print, deliver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)