Eviction:
The FED
Sun 11.15.20
I’ve had my eviction hearing and everyone who wishes me ill has testified, the jealous, those who seek to profit, to advance themselves, the insecure, the envious, the guilty – it’s not a pretty sight. What’s more, the judge and opposing counsel are having a mano a mano battle using the pro se kid as scapegoat. The setup here in Maine is nothing but an eviction mill, which I’m sure, 85% of tenants lose in the first round. But all is not lost, you can have a full trial with jury, de novo after the hearing and get to have a real trial, that is, if you have a reasonable response. I think litigators looking for a double payoff set up that system, and the poor tenant is left wondering what hit him.
With my sophisticated motions, the anti-slapp in which the landlord is seeking to evict me because I’ve taken him to court for breaking the lease, the judicial estoppel motion where Landlord’s agent denied, in writing, everything they are presenting in the eviction case. Then there’s the motion to quash because they played dirty tricks and avoided serving me the 30-day notice. Oh, did I forget, then there’s the retaliatory eviction motion wherein I’ve been complaining about the mold problem, and to the landlord in writing, less than 6 months (actually it was 2 months) before he filed for eviction. These are real motions that this hearing setup doesn’t deal with. I kept wondering at first, When do I get to assert I haven’t received the 30-day notice putting an end to this foolery? The judge in such a hearing has only one duty to perform, which is, can I evict this tenant with the testimony presented?
In my case, judge is making notes on such offensive and destructive behavior to Landlord’s property as my climbing out the window, my cat loose, etc. They actually evict people on such bagatelle. I’ve brought up my defense that HUD rules apply to my lease with properly authenticated HUD documentation to back it. Judge in a Procedural Order asks that we turn in what other federal rules, laws, state statutes we plan to bring up on our next date. Doesn’t want to look the fool with an inappropriate ruling, thus breaking his own rule that only evidence testified at the hearing may be admitted. Opposing attorney has a hissy fit about this Order and just cuts the judge to pieces, in a motion, no less; I mean he really shreds the guy. That would have been a career breaker in New York. After the hearing is over and I’ve been thoroughly mauled by one and all, Judge allows that we, opponent and I, may submit a memo of law before his final ruling, but he warns me not to bring up my Federal Rules argument that landlord’s agent is not allowed to create rules only the landlord may do so because he will rule against it.
I don’t think Judge could have evicted me seeing as I would be allowed to bring up the group of motions including them in the memo. It doesn’t matter because this isn’t about eviction, it’s about placing a gazebo in the yard for which I was given written permission. So what’s to be done? Back to the law books. My response to the eviction brings up a federal question which by rights should be answered in a Federal Court. To remove a case to Federal Court one has to have a federal question, i.e. HUD. Then one must apply to the court within 30 days of receiving the Complaint . . . or, “a notice of removal may be filed within 30 days after the receipt by Defendant, through service or otherwise, a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order, or other paper from which it may first be ascertained that the case is one which is or has become removable.” Judge’s Procedural Order seeking what other federal rules, laws, state statutes we plan to bring up is a double whammy; it is an Order, and the order specifies the Federal rules to be presented at court.
My case has been accepted by the Federal Court and has been removed from the state court. The Judge assigned to my case is a senior US District Judge, appointed by Bill Clinton, has a JDL from Harvard, and was last year appointed by John Roberts to the FISA Court. I will get a just, according to the laws on the US, ruling. Which ultimately is what I want. Win or lose, we are a people of the law. Without it, the jungle.
The favorite essay this month has been, A New York Story
