New facts in AZ HOA due process constitutionality decision

Please note that Judge McMurdie’s failure to provide an explanation of his denial of my Motion to Intervene (Intervenor motion denied in OAH fair trial constitutionality case), which is necessary in order for a Mover to determine the grounds for an appeal, is itself appealable as an abuse of discretion. However, the following letter had to be first delivered to the attention of Judge McMurdie:

 

If I had been permitted to intervene, these facts, discovered subsequent to filing the Motion to Intervene, would have been presented appropriately. Rule 60(c) states that  “This rule does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from judgment, order . . . or to set aside a judgment for fraud upon the court.” 

 

Published by

Unknown's avatar

HOAGOV

"The Voice for HOA Constitutionality". I have been a long-term homeowner rights authority, advocate and author of "The HOA-Land Nation Within America" (2019) and" Establishing the New America of independent HOA principalities" (2008). See HOA Constitutional Government at http://pvtgov.org. My efforts with HOAs took me to a broader concern that was deeply affecting the constituionality of HOAs. Those broad societal and plotical concerns caused me to start this new blog for my commentaries on the State of the New America.

One thought on “New facts in AZ HOA due process constitutionality decision”

  1. Public condemnation is the best way to expose Judicial Abuses, and Judicial Misconduct, and the best way to call for another Greylord Operation, is to make Judge’s expose themselves for the fraud they are. This is how to do it, and please read all the way to the end for the ultimate revelation >>> http://wp.me/pLfGn-m <<<<

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.