HadIt.com Elder Wings Posted January 26, 2009 HadIt.com Elder Share Posted January 26, 2009 (edited) x Edited January 27, 2009 by Wings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadIt.com Elder Wings Posted January 30, 2009 Author HadIt.com Elder Share Posted January 30, 2009 The AMC recently labeled me as incompetent, my condition was due to AGE, my evidence is considered as LAY, etc, etc, etc... I decided to write a 17 page response (brief) to address these imbeciles and their attempt to insult me, and responded in kind...along with a mention that I am being denied my Constitutional right to Due Process, when I file a Motion for Reconsideration, to an 1151, I am entitled to a Denial or Accept response, pursuant to: 38 CFR § 20.1001(1)(2). What the BVA decided to do, was contact my POA, and have him convince me by phone to drop the claim. I didn't, and instead filed the motion. About two weeks later, I receive a "cc" letter from my POA, where the BVA made it clear that my 1151 was dropped from the docket. Until I receive a response, the claim is still alive and well, and "Tolling". SOL does not apply then. This act is also construed as "Deliberate Concealment". Isn't this also known as MISCONDUCT??? The remaining issues of this case were remanded... So NOW you will see why I enjoy pissing them off! As some of you may know, I fought these jackasses in the Federal Circuit, as a Pro Se, on discrimination (age/disability), Retaliation, Constitutional, etc.... Title 38 is small potatoes! hahaha Hollywood, Misconduct is an accurate legal term, as is FRAUD. I might have dropped my BVA Appeal altogether, if the AMC hadn't insulted my integrity so badly. If they could have conceded the CUE in full, and apologized; not only that the errors had been made, but also for the far reaching, prejudicial consequences. I'd like to read your case at the Fed Cir, if you wanna share it wih me silverwings@justice.com My last "brief' was 28 pages, so I am trying really hard to keep this short and sweet; and, I don't know how to do that without sounding like the true Grunt I am. I've decided to entitle my Hadit blog "Pro Se". I'm going to start fixing that up as soon as I mail this AMC Rebuttal. You have done well to represent yourself, and get so far at the Courts. I respect you for keeping up the fight. Be good to yoursellf. ~Wings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywoodnc Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 (edited) Hollywood, Misconduct is an accurate legal term, as is FRAUD. I might have dropped my BVA Appeal altogether, if the AMC hadn't insulted my integrity so badly. If they could have conceded the CUE in full, and apologized; not only that the errors had been made, but also for the far reaching, prejudicial consequences. I'd like to read your case at the Fed Cir, if you wanna share it wih me silverwings@justice.com My last "brief' was 28 pages, so I am trying really hard to keep this short and sweet; and, I don't know how to do that without sounding like the true Grunt I am. I've decided to entitle my Hadit blog "Pro Se". I'm going to start fixing that up as soon as I mail this AMC Rebuttal. You have done well to represent yourself, and get so far at the Courts. I respect you for keeping up the fight. Be good to yoursellf. ~Wings Good Morning Wings... I can't send the "Mountain" of my side of the case, but I can submit a link to the "Biased" decision rendered by the NC Middle District Court. The 'Controversial' (definitely not honorable) William Osteen rendered the decision. http://www.ncmd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Oct06/05cv203op.pdf Notice the controversial bush appointee in the appellate. This scumbag is known to deny ANY and ALL cases involving any sort of discriminatory act. You'll also notice how lazy the appellate is, when I submitted a perfected brief, and the appellate just "signed it off" and agreed with the laws applied. It is also worth mentioning here, that Osteen occasionally 'Fills In' for the appellate when someone is not there! Hmmmm... This is the most Conservative/Incompetent circuit in this country!!! http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/062283.U.pdf In RE: to the Middle District Court in NC... This clown Osteen, clearly DID NOT read the case. #1) My Age claim was weak...granted. I could not actually establish the fourth prong in Macdonnell Douglas. I had no definitive PROOF regarding WHO replaced me, or their age. At that time, a young 20 something y.o. girl was hired, but I could not prove that she was my replacement. Notice though, that this prick stated that an "Older Black Woman" was offered a permanent position. However, she was ALREADY THERE! The younger girl was hired not long before I was terminated. Nice SPIN though. #2) My disability though was STRONG. I established Prima Facie in all four prongs...in fact I was under a doctors care under the auspices of OWCP when I was terminated! #3) This J-O judge apparently DID NOT read my brief re: Retaliation! I DID establish 2 DIRECT Connections and 6/7 Casual connections. #4) Despite what this Jackass claims, ALL the issues were SATISFIED in the Administrative Process! As late as the OFO, I made mention of EVERYTHING...even the lying attorney (Funny...that she's no longer there...??? Hmmmm...), Breach of Employment Contract, Lying testimonies, etc.... #5) You'll also notice that he contradicted himself in this case. Can you find it? HINT: It's something that I said vs Two prongs met. #6) I was approved for SSDI during this procedure, so I was considered as TOTALLY/PERMANENTLY DISABLED retroactive even while I was employed with these scumbags. #7) Even though he claims that I said that "I said to my supervisor that I hurt myself doing yard work at home."...You have to ask yourself the following questions... A) WHY would even the STUPIDEST person tell his employer that, even if it were true? :D WHY was I AUTHORIZED for compensation if I had said that? C) WHY didn't management state that on ANY Accident reports? D) WHY would I even go through all that SH*T with the court action, if I DID tell them that? So...when you read this clowns brief, LAUGH. None, well, SOME is accurate. Nobody commented on my Age or Disability, but their ACTIONS spoke a thousand words! Their hiring of College students, especially pretty young girls says it ALL! In RE: to the Appellate... You'll Notice that the Defense attorney is Lynne Klauer. Lynne is an attorney for the DoJ. But the KEY question here is... WHY is the DoJ representing the DVA, ESPECIALLY WHEN, I introduced a Constitutional Issue? This was Amended into the complaint at the beginning of the Middle District Court? When you review ALL that the DoJ does, you have to wonder if there's a Conflict of Interest when they decided to represent the same imbeciles who violated the laws that they (the DoJ) is supposed to protect?! This also shows how INEPT the court system is, for allowing the DoJ to continue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...ment_of_Justice Enjoy! Edited January 30, 2009 by hollywoodnc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadIt.com Elder Wings Posted May 1, 2009 Author HadIt.com Elder Share Posted May 1, 2009 Just found this now, Hollywood. Bumping it up, so I can read it in the morning! ~Wings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Wings
x
Edited by WingsLink to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
9
4
3
2
Popular Days
Jan 29
21
Jan 30
5
Jan 26
1
May 1
1
Top Posters For This Question
Wings 9 posts
hollywoodnc 4 posts
MikeR 3 posts
Josephine 2 posts
Popular Days
Jan 29 2009
21 posts
Jan 30 2009
5 posts
Jan 26 2009
1 post
May 1 2009
1 post
27 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now