top of page
Criminal Defense Lawyer
comment #:
average rating is 1.5 out of 5
average rating is null out of 5
A proclivity of dismissing pro se litigants even the face of clear Supreme Court decisions. Report and Recommendations show a strong tendancy to avoid discussion of Supreme Court decisions in order to arrive at a contrary decision. He is not neutral. Case in point-- Are national banks 'private corporations' or 'public corporations'? Magistrate Craig B. Shaffer chose to avoid discussion of Easton v. Iowa,188 U.S.220 (1903) which clearly: The bank is not considered as a private corporation whose principal object is individual trade and individual profit, but as a public corporation created for public and national purposes. That the mere business of banking is, in its own nature, a private business, and may be carried on by individuals or companies having no political connection with the government, is admitted, but the bank is not such an individual or company. It was not created for its own sake or for private purposes. It has never been supposed that Congress could create such a corporation.[bold, underline & italics added] And this is only an one example in the case.
7/15/19, 2:12 AM
Hon. Craig B. Shaffer

Send reply to the comment poster:

note: comment poster will be able to reply directly to your email

bottom of page