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.
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.
Saturday, October 20, 2018
‘Shame on Them.’ Fund Companies Got Sued By Their Own Employees Over Pricey 401(k) Plans.
Shout
Text size
Big fund companies make hundreds of millions of dollars in fees every year from mutual funds and other products they sell to the public—that’s the business. But should they be allowed to profit at the expense of their own employees? Several lawsuits assert that the answer is no.
Corporate “self-dealing” isn’t allowed when setting up and running employee pension plans. But a wave of lawsuits accuse fund companies (and others) of filling employees’ pool of 401(k) retirement investments with their own funds and charging excessive fees for them, using the pension plans as corporate cash cows and putting the firms’ financial interests ahead of those of their employees.
BlackRock (ticker: BLK), Fidelity, Invesco (IVZ) and T. Rowe Price (TROW) are now battling class-action suits related to fund selection and oversight of their 401(k) plans. They aren’t alone. More than 128 cases have been filed since 2016, according to the Bloomberg Bureau of National Affairs. Many financial firms—including Charles Schwab (SCHW), M&T Bank (MTB),Morgan Stanley (MS), Neuberger Berman, and JPMorgan Chase (JPM)—are facing at least one 401(k)-related suit.
“There’s a culture at many financial institutions that their funds will be in their 401(k) plans, come hell or high water,” says Charles Humphrey, an employee benefits attorney near Buffalo, N.Y. Because companies view 401(k)s as consisting of employees’ money, the firms “don’t have as much skin in the game” when it comes to fees and performance, he contends. Indeed, the structure of 401(k)s puts the onus on employees to choose their investments—a very different world from the old defined-benefit pension plans that put employers on the hook for years of payouts.
To arrange author interviews or speaking engagements, please contact Chuck Humphrey at 978-688-2162- via email at chumphrey@cghbenefitslaw.com. For information about subscribing to the e-version of the book, known as the Fiduciary eSource, call ERISApedia.com at 612-605-2266 or email us at sales@erisapedia.com.
says David Tetrick, a partner at law firm King & Spalding, which specializes in 401(k) defense cases.
Fidelity settled two similar suits in 2014 for $12 million, without admitting
https://www.kslaw.com/people/david-tetrick
wrongdoing.
A small St. Louis law firm, led by Jerome Schlichter, has won more than $300 million in settlements in excessive-fee 401(k) cases, and others have copied his template.
T. Rowe’s fiduciary duty isn’t to make as much money as it can until a court tells them to stop. It’s to provide the best outcome for plan participants,” says Scott Lempert, an attorney with Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, who filed the suit.
Write to Daren Fonda at daren.fonda@barrons.com
says David Tetrick, a partner at law firm King & Spalding, which specializes in 401(k) defense cases.
Fidelity settled two similar suits in 2014 for $12 million, without admitting
https://www.kslaw.com/people/david-tetrick
wrongdoing.
A small St. Louis law firm, led by Jerome Schlichter, has won more than $300 million in settlements in excessive-fee 401(k) cases, and others have copied his template.
T. Rowe’s fiduciary duty isn’t to make as much money as it can until a court tells them to stop. It’s to provide the best outcome for plan participants,” says Scott Lempert, an attorney with Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, who filed the suit.
Write to Daren Fonda at daren.fonda@barrons.com
The case is BlackRock Core Bond Portfolio et al v Deutsche Bank National Trust Co et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 14-09367.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Cynthia Osterman
this case is fun because black rock is suing for the same sorts of reasons others are suing them.
so it may provide a basis for estoppel, or judo type moves where i quote their own words back at them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)