From: Marc Perkel    marc@ctyme.com

 Subject: Judges not signing orders - UPDATE
 

 Well, as most of you know I have this ongoing battle with the Missouri Courts
 over the issues of orders of the court not being signed by judges.

 http://www.perkel.com/pbl/married/signed/index.htm

 It started with an order I discovered in my divorce file what was a
 hand written order that wasn't signed by anybody.

 http://www.perkel.com/pbl/married/signed/davis.htm

 My point is that if an order isn't signed and we don't know who wrote it,
 the order is void. I brought it to court and it got dismissed. I was even
 penalized with attorney's fees for even raising the issue. I appealed.

 In the Court of Appeals, Southern District here in Springfield Mo. I started
 getting decisions from the appeals court signed by the clerk of the court. I
 went down to the court and asked to see the original order signed by the judge
 and I was informed that the judges do not sign the orders there. I filed a motion
 to have the order declared void and get an order, signed by a judge.
 My motion was denied, and the denial order was signed by the clerk.

 For those of you who are wondering what the rule in this is:

 Administrative Rule 4.09(6) ... "Orders or judgements entered on the docket
 sheet(s) by the judge or the clerk shall be signed by the judge or supported
 by a memorandum in the file signed by the judge."

 Rule 74.01(a) "A judgment is rendered when entered. A judgment is entered
 when a writing signed by the judge and denominated "judgment" is filed."

 I then called the clerk of the court and had a long discussion about the
 procedures of the court of appeals. I recorded the conversation and
 published it on the web in real audio format. I can be heard at:

 http://www.perkel.com/pbl/married/signed/sandrask.ram

 Some of the more interesting things she said is that these orders are given
 verbally and often second hand through the research attorneys.
 Here's some of the conversation:

 Perkel: Do you actually see the judge give the order?

 Clerk: Sometime I do, sometimes I don't.

 Perkel: How do I know that your research attorneys aren't making these orders in
 behalf of the judges?

 Clerk: I guess that's an open question, uh huh.

 I then filed a writ in the Missouri Supreme Court asking the high court to order
 the judges to obey the plain language of the rules and sign the orders as they
 are required. I also asked the court to rule on the issue of
 if an order not signed by a judge is a valid order or void.

 On 12-23-99 I get a "judgement" on my writ. The judgement was to dismiss the
 action. The decided not to decide and denied my request to rule on the issue
 of  voidness. That doesn't mean they ruled against me, it means that they refuse
 to  rule. The "judgement" as signed by the clerk of the Missouri Supreme Court.

 http://www.perkel.com/pbl/married/signed/clerk4.jpg

 I called the clerk and said I had recieved the decision, but it was signed by
 the clerk and asked for a copy that was signed by the judge.
 He got very nervous and said he'd get back to me on that.
 I then faxed him a letter making a formal request:

 http://www.perkel.com/pbl/married/signed/requesttosign.htm

 So today I'm checking out the Supreme Court Website looking for the posting
 of  my decision. I went to a listing called "minutes" and saw a listing for
 12-21-99, the date of my decision. It listed 50 or so decisions that were made
 including all the writs and which ones were denied, and guess what. My case
 isn't even listed! What does that mean? What that means is the someone other
 than the judges decided my case.

 Here's the dirty little secret. The judges of the Missouri Supreme Court and
 Court of Appeals, Southern District are out playing golf all day while the
 research attorneys and the clerks make the judicial decisions and do all their
 work for them. Additionally, if one went into the file of the Missouri Supreme
 Court I think you will find that NONE OF THEIR ORDERS ARE SIGNED
 BUY A JUDGE  EITHER. You also find a standing order that anytime
 someone who is representing themselves without a lawyer must be denied.

 What this means is that everything the Supreme Court has done for years is
 likely void. The might have to get the legislature to pass a law retroactively
 blessing all these decisions if even that is possible. But what it really means
 is that the judiciary in this state is not functioning. There is no judicial
 branch and the current judiciary are imposters. A judge is required to sign
 orders. If you refuse to sign order, you can't be a judge. Should the public
 have to guess if order of the court are really valid or not? I don't think so!

 The way I see it, it's impeachment time. I'm looking for a state rep to
 introduce articles of impeachment for the entire Missouri Supreme Court.
 Perhaps if this is done they will at least start signing orders and judgements
 as they are required to do. I also plan to file the first federal lawsuit of the
 millenium in local federal court suing them in a Title 42 Section 1983 civil
 rights suit based on due process of law. The 14th amendment gives me
 the right to have judgements in writing, signed by a judge.
 
 

 Marc Perkel
 417-866-1222