Sueing Officers of the Court?

Jurisdiction
New Mexico
I will be sueing judicial officers of the Court for violations my due process, conspiracy against rights, deprivation of rights under color of law, equal rights under the law, property rights and civil action for deprivation of rights. I have all the evidence and proof so don't asked! Just want to know the right Constitutuin, State Statues and/or US Laws to use. And don't say seek an attorney either!

In the State Supreme Court: I will be using these laws against judicial officers:

New Mexico Constitution and Statues:
  1. Fourteenth Amendment § 1
  2. Article 30-28-2. Conspiracy,
  3. Article 30-27-5. Simulating legal process,
  4. Article II § 4 Inherent Rights,
  5. Article II § 18 Due Process; Equal Protection,
  6. Article XX § 1 Oath of Officer.
If the State Supreme Court does not exact justice, the I will be going to the Unites States District Court for justice using:
  1. Fourteenth Amendment § 1
  2. Title 18 USC §241. Conspiracy against rights,
  3. Title 18 USC §242. Deprivation of rights under color of law,
  4. Title 42 USC §1981. Equal rights under the law,
  5. Title 42 USC §1982. Property rights of citizens,
  6. Title 42 USC §1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Of these five USC, I know I can ise 1 - 3, but does 4 - 5 also apply to judicial officers as well?
 
I will be sueing judicial officers of the Court. . . . I have all the evidence and proof so don't asked!

Well...your obvious mastery of English grammar and spelling sure will help you.


In the State Supreme Court: I will be using these laws against judicial officers

I'm not sure what you mean by this, but you can't file a lawsuit in the state supreme court.



  1. Article 30-28-2. Conspiracy,
  2. Article 30-27-5. Simulating legal process

These are articles of what?



  1. Article II § 4 Inherent Rights,
  2. Article II § 18 Due Process; Equal Protection,
  3. Article XX § 1 Oath of Officer.

Again, articles of what?


I will be going to the Unites States District Court for justice using:
  1. Fourteenth Amendment § 1
  2. Title 18 USC §241. Conspiracy against rights,
  3. Title 18 USC §242. Deprivation of rights under color of law,

Title 18 of the United States Code contains federal criminal laws. You can't sue under those statutes.


Of these five USC, I know I can ise 1 - 3, but does 3 - 5 also apply to judicial officers as well?

Your list is numbered 1-6. #1 is a provision of (presumably) the U.S. Constitution, so do you mean 1-3 and 3-5 or do you mean 2-4 and 4-6?

In any event, without some explanation of what wrong you believe has befallen you, there is no way anyone can offer you any useful feedback (other than that which you have expressly demanded we not provide).
 
These are articles of what?

NMSA Chapter 30 - Criminal Offenses

Again, articles of what?

Constitution of New Mexico

Title 18 of the United States Code contains federal criminal laws. You can't sue under those statutes.

Correction, just got ahead of myself, will be asking the NM Supreme Court to referr this officers to the FBI for investigation for those USC.
do you mean 2-4 and 4-6?

Yes.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but you can't file a lawsuit in the state supreme court.

Correction again, got ahead of myself, will be filing a writ of mandamus to set aside orders in violations of my rights, and temination of a conservatorship being used for multiple perjurys and miss-administration of estate, which was/is being ignored by the officers of the court purposely or gross ignorance.
 
I will be sueing judicial officers of the Court

You're delusional. Officers of the Court are generally immune to such lawsuits.

Perhaps you mean that you are filing an appeal of a decision that was not in your favor.

The two main grounds for an appeal are that the judge erred in interpreting the facts or erred in applying the law. There may be other grounds for an appeal but you have said nothing about your case so there is no sense filling up space with speculation.

I have all the evidence and proof so don't asked! And don't say seek an attorney either!

OK, then. Good luck.
 
You're delusional. Officers of the Court are generally immune to such lawsuits.
Generally is correct, so I am not delusional!

OK, then. Good luck.
We have been down this road before, so please stop repeating it. We'll be here for days by peace meal of what these officers has done. Just want to make sure I use the correct articles, statutes in my writ to NM Supreme Court, and if they don't correct this mess, then I will go to the Unites States District Court all the way the US Supreme Court.

Due process, impartial and fairness was 100% violated. This is what all officers of the court do to Pro Se litigants, especially here in New Mexico!
 
Due process, impartial and fairness was 100% violated. This is what all officers of the court do to Pro Se litigants, especially here in New Mexico!

I'd be very careful regarding the language used, when speaking about "officers of the court".

Perhaps the following information might be useful.

Take heed to the suggestion by @adjusterjack ABOVE!!!

Administrative and Government Law

What Does It Mean to Be an Officer of the Court?


Explore the responsibilities and ethical duties of court officers, including legal advocates and judicial officials, in the justice system.

Published Jan 23, 2025
Being an officer of the court carries significant responsibilities and ethical duties. These individuals play essential roles in maintaining the integrity and functionality of the judicial system, ensuring justice is served fairly and efficiently. Their actions directly impact public trust in legal processes.

Categories of Professionals


The realm of court officers is composed of various professionals, each with distinct roles and duties. Together, they form the backbone of judicial operations, ensuring the system functions efficiently and justly.

Legal Advocates


Legal advocates, primarily attorneys, have a core responsibility to uphold justice. Their duties include representing clients zealously within the bounds of the law, as defined by the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Attorneys must disclose legal authority adverse to their client's position if opposing counsel has not already done so. They are also prohibited from making or failing to correct false statements of fact or law. Violations can lead to disciplinary actions, such as fines or disbarment.

Judicial Officials


Judicial officials, including judges and magistrates, preside over legal proceedings and ensure they are conducted impartially. Their obligations include interpreting and applying laws, assessing evidence, and safeguarding the rights of all parties. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges outlines ethical guidelines, such as avoiding impropriety and ensuring fairness. Judges must recuse themselves from cases where impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Failure to adhere to these principles can result in disciplinary measures, including censure or removal from the bench.

Clerks and Registrars


Clerks and registrars manage the administrative functions of the court, including maintaining records, processing legal documents, and scheduling cases. Their roles require a deep understanding of court rules and procedures, as they manage the docket and ensure timely communication between parties. Handling sensitive information demands strict confidentiality. Breaches can result in disciplinary actions, such as termination or legal consequences.

Legal Obligations and Penalties


The legal obligations of officers of the court are grounded in maintaining the integrity and efficiency of the judicial system. For legal advocates, the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct require honesty, competence, and diligence. Rule 1.1 emphasizes the need for competent representation, requiring the necessary legal knowledge and skill to handle cases effectively. Failures in these areas can lead to disciplinary actions, underscoring the profession's commitment to accountability.

Judicial officials bear the responsibility of upholding the law impartially. Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges stresses the importance of avoiding impropriety and maintaining public confidence in the judiciary. Judges must exercise ethical behavior, with any deviation resulting in severe penalties, including removal from the bench.

Clerks and registrars play a crucial role in the administration of justice by managing court records and processing legal documents accurately. Mishandling records or breaching confidentiality can lead to legal consequences, including termination or criminal charges.

Role in Court Proceedings


Officers of the court are integral to ensuring judicial processes are fair and orderly. Legal advocates present their clients' cases with clarity and precision, adhering to procedural rules and evidentiary standards. They construct persuasive arguments, navigate legal complexities, and participate in motions, negotiations, and trial advocacy.

Judicial officials oversee proceedings, ensuring all parties adhere to legal standards and that the process remains impartial. They interpret the law, rule on motions, and instruct juries on legal principles. Their decisions set precedents, shaping future legal interpretations.

Clerks and registrars support the smooth operation of court proceedings by maintaining court records, managing case files, and ensuring necessary documentation is available. They coordinate case scheduling, facilitating the judicial process.

Judicial Interpretation


The principle of "ignorantia juris non excusat" (ignorance of the law is no excuse) requires careful judicial interpretation. Judges determine its application by examining precedents and statutory interpretations. They balance the principle's enforcement with equitable administration of justice.

Courts often analyze legislative intent to assess whether ignorance of specific laws is admissible as an excuse. In cases involving complex regulations, judges may evaluate the clarity of statutory language and efforts by regulatory agencies to educate the public.

Judicial interpretation of this principle evolves alongside societal standards and technological advancements. As laws become more intricate, courts recognize the challenges individuals face in staying informed while considering the role of technology in disseminating legal information. Individuals are increasingly expected to utilize available resources to understand their obligations.

Ethical Considerations and Conflicts of Interest


Ethical considerations are paramount for officers of the court as they navigate potential conflicts of interest in their professional duties. Legal advocates must adhere to the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which provide guidance on managing such conflicts. For example, Rule 1.7 prohibits representation if a significant7 risk exists that a lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a former client, or a personal interest may materially limit their ability to represent a client effectively. Exceptions apply if the lawyer believes they can provide competent representation and clients give informed, written consent.

Judicial officials must avoid conflicts of interest to maintain impartiality, as outlined in the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. Canon 3 requires judges to perform their duties diligently and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Judges must disqualify themselves in cases involving personal bias, financial interest, or prior involvement. Failure to manage conflicts of interest undermines public confidence and can result in disciplinary actions.

Clerks and registrars must also avoid conflicts of interest, especially when handling sensitive information or interacting with parties involved in legal proceedings. Impartiality and confidentiality are critical to preserving the integrity of the judicial process. Violations can lead to disciplinary measures, including termination or legal consequences.

 
Just want to make sure I use the correct articles, statutes in my writ to NM Supreme Court, and if they don't correct this mess, then I will go to the Unites States District Court all the way the US Supreme Court.

Can you take your case to the Supreme Court?

Answer: Almost certainly not.


From time to time, after a stinging defeat, lawyers on television, on the courthouse steps, will say "We're going to appeal our case all the way to the Supreme Court!" In practice, however, there is little, if any, chance that that case will find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here's why.

Each year the United States Supreme Court is asked to review about 7,000 cases.

Out of those 7,000 cases, the US Supreme Court accepts —
or in legal parlance grants writs of certiorari to — about 100-150 cases per year.

This works out to about a 2% rate of acceptance.


The Court is not under any obligation to accept any appellate case whatsoever. Normally the cases that the U.S. Supreme Court accepts fall under three broad categories: those that are designed to synchronize conflicting U.S. Federal Circuit courts; questions of national importance; and cases that have some sort of precedential importance. Generally speaking, the Supreme Court will only accept a case that has made its way through the appellate courts. That means that the appellant will need to exhaust his or her appeals in the relevant lower-level appellate courts before the U.S. Supreme Court will consider taking the matter. In practice, the appellant may need to appeal the case through three or more courts before asking the U.S. Supreme Court for review.

Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides the U.S. Supreme Court with original jurisdiction over cases involving disputes among ambassadors (and other high-ranking ministers) and disputes between the states. In practice, however, the U.S. Supreme Court does not hold trials with witnesses and evidence. Even in the small number of cases where the U.S. Supreme Court exercises original jurisdiction, the Justices appoint special masters (trial judges, so to speak) to hold the trial. The special master then prepares a report with recommendations and forwards it to the justices. The justices will decide whether or not to uphold the special master's report.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejects about 98% of cases each year. The chances that a run-of-the-mill matter, while important to the individual litigants, will be accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court is extremely small. Further, even if the matter is meets the Court's criteria of an acceptable case, there are practical considerations for the private individual parties that weigh against an appeal. As discussed above, the litigant would need to hire a lawyer to exhaust several layers of appeals before getting to the U.S. Supreme Court. This all costs money, which is one reason why there are not many straight personal injury cases that make it this far. A petition for a writ of certiorari is a lengthy, dense legal document. This document requires considerable attorney time to prepare, which is expensive. Further, if cert is granted (meaning that the Court accepts the case) another much lengthier document is prepared and filed with the Court. Each step along the appellate path is expensive, time-intensive, and uncertain. Many litigants will instead attempt to settle their cases or abandon their appeals altogether, out of time and cost concerns.

 
will be filing a writ of mandamus to set aside orders in violations of my rights

The appropriate recourse is to file an appeal. A collateral attack isn't the way to go.


temination of a conservatorship being used for multiple perjurys and miss-administration of estate

Conservatorship of whom? Are you the conservator? The conservatee? If neither, what is your connection to the matter? How could a "convservatorship [be] used for . . . perjury[]"? Who mis-administered the estate?


which was/is being ignored by the officers of the court purposely or gross ignorance.

Again, your recourse is to appeal.

And, again, without some factual explanation of what wrong you believe has befallen you, there is no way anyone can offer you any useful feedback.
 
It's impossible to give you much useful information when you don't provide us with the basic facts of the claim you wish to pursue including who defendants would be (e.g. a local, state, or federal government agency, a business, or one or more dividuals; what the defendants did that would be the basis of your claim; when and where those events took place; the evidence you have for it; and what actions you've already taken to pursue that claim.

The facts are extremely important because that will determine if you have any claim at all to pursue and if you do, in which courts you'll need to file your case and whether it's too late now to pursue that claim. If

You say you don't want to hear that you should get a lawyer. If you are thinking of litigating the case on your own you are going to have a very hard doing it correctly. Especially when the government is being sued there are several things you have to address before you may file the lawsuit and most non lawyers won't have clue as to what those things are. One of those things you have to determine is whether you can bring the case at all. If you screw up setting up your case you may well lose on procedure alone.

My guess is that you don't really know the law that applies to your situation. I used to be an IRS attorney and there were a number of cases I'd see from people representing themselves in which those taxpayers threw in a bunch of different federal constitutional and/or federal statutes that they believed were at issue in their case. But when I looked at the case, if the taxpayer had any good case at all, the claims the taxpayer could pursue were based on perhaps one or two statutes or Constitutional claims. Those who throw in a whole bunch of Constitutional and statuory claims almost always meant the taxpayer really didn't understand the law and just put in everything that they thought sounded to them like it would apply. Then when the judge reviewed the case they'd find out most or all of the law they claimed was at issue didn't apply at all and the judge would dismiss all the claims that didn't apply and that may end meaning the entire case gets thrown out. Looking at the list of Constutional and statutory provisions you say are in involved I find it extremely unlikely that all of those provisions, or even most of them, will have anything to do with the claim you want to pursue.

You have already made one obvious error in your plans to sue over this. You get only one shot at pursuing this claim so you need to determine the one court best suited for your claim If you lose in that court you'll be precluded from refling that same claim again in another court. So you can't sue in state court first and then try for a second shot in federal court. You'd bring all your claims in the one court that is best for deciding the matter. It's things like this that can result in losing even before you go to trial. The fact that you didn't know tells me you are going to have a very hard road ahead if you do it alone. You're going to be far more likely to win if you hire a lawyer to help you to pursue the claim.

I can't offer any ideas on where to bring your claim or any other questions about the matter because you've presented no facts whatsoever about what happened. All legal claims start with analyzing the facts.
 

Ask a Question

Back
Top