Appellate Circuit

It Ain’t Even 10 Days n’ Judge Alfred H. Bennett’s Already Violating The First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment

Ms. Burke, The Court does not accept filings by email. You must file the document in person, Lisa Edwards, Case Mgr to Judge Bennett.

Burke v. Ocwen et al

4:21-cv-2591 (10 Aug., 2021, S.D. Tex.)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
August 10, 2021
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

AUG 17, 2021 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: AUG 17, 2021

From: Lisa Edwards <Lisa_Edwards@txs.uscourts.gov>
Date: Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: CASE NO. 4:21-cv-2591
To: Joanna Burke

Ms. Burke,

The Court does not accept filings by email. You must file the document in person :

Bob Casey United States Courthouse
515 Rusk Avenue
Houston, TX 77002

Or  Mail the document to:

Clerk of Court
P. O. Box 61010
Houston, TX 77208

Thank you

Date: Aug. 17, 2021

Lisa Edwards, Case Manager
To United States District Judge Alfred H. Bennett
United States District Court
515 Rusk St, Room 8624
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: 713-250-5850

By Email Only to : Lisa_Edwards@txs.uscourts.gov

Dear Madam,

Re:      S.D. Tex Case 4:21−cv−02591

            Burke et al v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC et al

We refer to the alarming and unconstitutional response denying our filing by efile and/or CM/ECF System. For the avoidance of doubt, John Burke is disabled and Joanna Burke is currently on medication due to great difficulty in walking right now. We are both in our eighties and we are not vaccinated. See; Harris County COVID website; Level 1: Stay Home Unless Fully Vaccinated (Severe Threat)[1]

With that stated, we now address the latest response from this court.

First, this District Court accepted our complaint and payment by efile. Curiously, it was docketed on Monday 9th of August, 2021 and yet it would take several emails to be assured of the acceptance of our complaint which was finally acknowledged in an email late in the afternoon of Tuesday, 10th August, 2021.  To now reject efile or ECF filing is violative of our civil and constitutional rights, especially during a pandemic which has flared once more to Category 1 in Harris County.

Second, we raised this very matter in our Complaint, see Doc. 1, in relevant part;

(6) The Plaintiffs are allowed to file by CM/ECF during these proceedings as pro se litigants who are competently trained in  court e-filing and this request should also be granted due to the pandemic

Third, this contravenes your own court procedures, in relevant part;

  1. Electronic Filing

The Court requires that parties file documents through the District Court’s Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) System. See Southern District Local Rule 5.1 and Administrative Procedures for CM/ECF (as amended and available at www.txs.uscourts.gov).

Fourth, we are aware that N.D. Tex. accepts non-prisoner, pro se CM/ECF filing automatically in 2021 and it has been the norm for many years.[2]

Fifth, we filed both electronically and by email in the underlying appeal at the Fifth Circuit and waived paper copies of briefs.

Sixth, we are granted CM/ECF filing at the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, who also waived paper copy requirement in a very recent order – again, due to the pandemic.

[2] “Local Civil Rule 5.1(e) (“Unless the presiding judge otherwise directs, an attorney — other than a prisoner pro se party — must file any pleading (except a complaint), motion, or other paper by electronic means. . . .”).” Moss v. Lockheed Martin Corporation, No. 3:10-cv-1659-M, at *6 n.5 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 18, 2011).

Seventh, this court and in particular, Judge Alfred H. Bennett, is/has operated on a remote conferencing schedule which is contrary to the schedule provided to us: see; Johnson v. Contract Freighters, Inc. (4:21-cv-00879) District Court, S.D. Texas, Doc 2, (March 19, 2021) Order of Conference; JUDGE ALFRED H. BENNETT, on June 4, 2021 at 09:00 AM via Zoom. Counsel will receive connection instructions the day before the setting.

Eighth, we were told this case was “assigned randomly” to Judge Bennett. Based on the Halliburton[3] case and the fact he denied First Amendment access to two letters not recorded on the docket, we would have expected Judge Bennett to have self-recused after finding out he would be receiving this case.

Ninth, we note this case has no email notifications to kajongwe@gmail.com and/or alsation123@gmail.com and we would like that to be implemented, as there was email notifications in the Burke v Ocwen/Hopkins cases before Judge Hittner in this court.

Finally, you may continue to deny our right of access to this court but to do so is violative of our constitutional rights. As such, and depending on your reply, we reserve all our rights.

See; Ringgold-Lockhart v. Cnty. of L.A., 761 F.3d 1057, 1061-62 (9th Cir. 2014)

“Restricting access to the courts is, however, a serious matter.

“[T]he right of access to the courts is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.” Delew v. Wagner,143 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir.1998).

The First Amendment “right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” which secures the right to access the courts , has been termed “one of the most precious of the liberties safeguarded by the Bill of Rights.”

BE & K Const. Co. v. NLRB, 536 U.S. 516, 524–25, 122 S.Ct. 2390, 153 L.Ed.2d 499 (2002) (internal quotation marks omitted, alteration in original);

[3] See email thread with Ms Edwards, early May 2021 in re HALLIBURTON v. PHH MORTGAGE CORP., 4:20-CV-00919, S.D. TEX.

see also Christopher v. Harbury, 536 U.S. 403, 415 n. 12, 122 S.Ct. 2179, 153 L.Ed.2d 413 (2002) (noting that the Supreme Court has located the court access right in the Privileges and Immunities clause, the First Amendment petition clause, the Fifth Amendment due process clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause).”

We are capable of CM/ECF filing and clearly that would be the most equitable solution to grant John Burke with ECF filing permissions he currently retains with the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts, as well as Texas State Courts. In the alternative, efile is constitutionally mandated during the pandemic. We duly reiterate, your court accepted our complaint and payment by efile and as such, set its own binding precedent.

Please advise and stay safe during these worrying times and when hospitals are over-capacity with COVID and Delta patients.

Sincerely

/s/ J & J Burke

Joanna & John Burke

The First Amendment “right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” which secures the right to access the courts , has been termed “one of the most precious of the liberties safeguarded by the Bill of Rights.”

BE & K Const. Co. v. NLRB, 536 U.S. 516, 524–25, 122 S.Ct. 2390, 153 L.Ed.2d 499 (2002) (internal quotation marks omitted, alteration in original)

See also Christopher v. Harbury, 536 U.S. 403, 415 n. 12, 122 S.Ct. 2179, 153 L.Ed.2d 413 (2002) (noting that the Supreme Court has located the court access right in the Privileges and Immunities clause, the First Amendment petition clause, the Fifth Amendment due process clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause).

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:21-cv-02591

Create an Alert for This Case on RECAP

Burke et al v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC et al
Assigned to: Judge Alfred H Bennett
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Date Filed: 08/09/2021
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 220 Real Property: Foreclosure
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Plaintiff
John Burke represented by John Burke
46 Kingwood Greens Dr
Kingwood, TX 77339
281-812-9591
PRO SE
Plaintiff
Joanna Burke represented by Joanna Burke
46 Kingwood Greens Dr
Kingwood, TX 77339
281-812-9591
PRO SE
V.
Defendant
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC
Defendant
Mark Daniel Hopkins
Defendant
Shelley Hopkins
Defendant
Hopkins Law, PLLC

 

Date Filed # Docket Text
08/09/2021 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by John Burke, Joanna Burke. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(MelissaMorgan, 4) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/10/2021: # 2 Cover Letter) (MelissaMorgan, 4). (Entered: 08/10/2021)
08/09/2021 2 Exhibit List by Joanna Burke, John Burke(MelissaMorgan, 4) (Entered: 08/10/2021)
08/10/2021 3 NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening. Party notified, filed. (MelissaMorgan, 4) (Entered: 08/10/2021)
08/10/2021 4 ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 11/5/2021 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8C before Judge Alfred H Bennett. (Signed by Judge Alfred H Bennett) Parties notified.(MelissaMorganadi, 4) (Entered: 08/10/2021)

Dark Money from the One Percenters is Controlling Your Lives Citizens

The one percenters: Billionaires, lawyers, academics, politicians are all in the money game. Because money decides who wins in America, not the Constitution.

US Courts Blame Homeowners for the 2008 Foreclosure Crisis. No Mention of Bank Greed.

This bias article examines foreclosure case activities in U.S. district courts during the Great Recession and the subsequent recovery period.

LIT’s Accurate Foreclosure Prediction Starts Already, the 90 Day Mortgage Relief is No Relief At All for Homeowners

The Banks and non-banks are preparing for the next financial crisis – and this time they are well prepared – a learning curve after the fiasco of 2008 which they still managed to foreclose on millions of homeowners unlawfully.  Be warned, the banks and non-banks will be brutal and the courts will implement a ‘rocket docket’ to steal your homes.

It Ain’t Even 10 Days n’ Judge Alfred H. Bennett’s Already Violating The First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Laws In Texas is a blog about the Financial Crisis and how the banks and government are colluding against the citizens and homeowners of the State of Texas and relying on a system of #FakeDocs and post-crisis legal precedents, specially created by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to foreclose on homeowners around this great State. We are not lawyers. We do not offer legal advice. We are citizens of the State of Texas who have spent a decade in the court system in Texas and have been party to during this period to the good, the bad and the very ugly.

Donate to LawsInTexas. Make a Difference.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

© 2020-21 LawInTexas com is an online trading name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware. | All Rights Reserved.

To Top