    |
John Edwards Conway, New Mexico
federal judge
and
former FISA judge
First posted
Monday May 28, 2007 08:21
Updated
Monday July 16, 2007 10:59
Gosler inteview.
Gosler statements to Albuqueruque Journal.
|
| ----- Original Message ----- From: Lee_Jones@nmcourt.fed.us To: bill payne Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:26 AM Subject: Re: MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME You are precluded from filing any pleadings in this case. |
|
Notes: Rule 9. Pleading Special Matters (b) Fraud, Mistake, Condition of the Mind. In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally. (c) Conditions Precedent. In pleading the performance or occurrence of conditions precedent, it is sufficient to aver generally that all conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred. A denial of performance or occurrence shall be made specifically and with particularity. |
Read Wednesday June 13, 2007 16:30 in Bozeman, MT.
Notice that we are getting set up for a FOIA/PA lawsuit in the DC
circuit to get the documents identified in the
recently declassified Gilbert letter ... if we don't
settle, of course.
Conway got "had" by Gosler. Conway apparently
didn't have the brains or educational background to realize that he was getting
"taken" by a psycho. Maybe he has had time to think things out and will try to
get matter settled before the get FAR WORSE.
Sandia labs supervisor James Gosler apparently turned Payne into the FBI for releasing "very sensitive" information.
Gosler then conned federal judge John Edward Conway into believing him in a secret ex parte meeting.
Conway has a void judgment in dismissing Payne's ADEA case since Payne filed JURY DEMAND See docket entry 15.
So let's move to vacate judment and go after the documents Gosler showed Conway, gave to the FBI, the FBI gave to NSA, the documents NSA gave to the FBI in response to Gilbert's request, and the FBI gave to Sandia in response.
Wednesday June 6, 2007 Clerk United States District Court, 333 Lomas Blvd. N.W. Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 Dear Clerk: Enclosed are an original and two copies MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME with a self addressed stamped envelope. Please return a file stamped copy to me. Thank you in advance. Sincerely William Payne |
Rules used to be that you submit an original [we label 0] and one copy. We speculate that since electronic copies are being made and forwarded to PACER, that only an original is now required.      |
  Tuesday May 29, 2007 12:54 Certified, return receipt requested Clerk United States District Court, 333 Lomas Blvd. N.W. Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 Dear Clerk: Enclosed are an original and two copies MOTION TO VOID JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION, ORDER VACATING JUDGE JOHN E CONWAY'S 8/25/94 ORDER/JUDGMENT and MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE AND AUTHORITIES FOR VOID JUDGMENT of a with a self addressed stamped envelope. Please return a file stamped copies to me. Thank you in advance. Sincerely William Payne |
|
Saturday June 2, 2007 08:09 One hundred and eighty-five docket entries at $1,000 per entry to settle.     Wednesday June 6, 2007 Label/Receipt Number: 7007 0220 0002 8762 3507 Status: Arrival at Unit Your item arrived at 11:48 AM on June 4, 2007 in SANTA FE, NM 87505. Information, if available, is updated every evening. Please check again later. ----- Original Message ----- From: bill payne To: freyes@simonsfirm.com ; ConwayChambers@nmcourt.fed.us ; jecproposedtext@nmcourt.fed.us Cc: art morales ; foialo, foialo ; foiofficer@doeal.gov ; Apodaca, Terry ; Schwartz, William ; AskDOJ@usdoj.gov ; bill.leonard@nara.gov ; ISCAP ; julia.eichhorst@ic.fbi.gov ; the.secretary@hq.doe.gov Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 3:36 PM Subject: No. 92-1452 (Sealed) |
|
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO WILLIAM H. PAYNE ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) No. 92-1452 ) (Sealed) SANDIA CORPORATION, a corporation, and individually; ) HARVEY J. BREWSTER, C. WILLIAM CHILDERS, ROBERT L. EWING, ) HAROLD L. FOLLEY, JAMES R. GOSLER, ROGER L. HAGENGRUBER, ) PETER S. HAMILTON, PRESTON B. HERRINGTON, ALBERT NARATH, ) CRAIG A. SEARLS, TOMMY A. SELLERS, MARY J. STANG, PAUL A. ) STOKES, ROBERT SURRAN, THOMAS P. WRIGHT, ) ) Defendants ) Federal Rule of Civ. P. 60(b)(4) ) I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff sued the Sandia Corporation under the ADEA on FILE
DATE 12/23/1992, ENTERED ON DOCKET 12/28/1992.
See docket entry on page 6 of 6 of 185 docket entries.
Federal Question-Employment II. BASIS OF MOTION 2 Docket entry 15 shows JURY DEMAND filed on 02/19/1993 and docketed on 02/22/1993. 3 Docket entry 155 shows Judge John Conway ORDER granting motion for summary judgment dismissing case. 4 Conway lacked jurisdiction to dismiss JURY DEMAND lawsuit guaranteed inviolate by US Constitution. "The court or tribunal must have the power of authority to render the particular judgment." III. ISSUES 5 Right of jury trial is guaranteed inviolate by 7thAmendment to US Constitution and 28 USC Rule 38. Therefore Campos lacked jurisdiction to dismiss paid for jury trial lawsuit. 6 Return filed stamped copy of this Motion with 10 working days. 7 Sign attached ORDER rescinding Conway's 8/25/94
order/judgment: [docket entry 155] which orders settlement or trial by jury
within 90 days of entry. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing MOTION TO VOID JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION was mailed to John Conway, United States District Court, 333 Lomas Blvd. N.W., Ste 740, Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 and by email at ConwayChambers@nmcourt.fed.us, Daniel H. Friedman and Faith Kalman Reyes, Simons and Slattery, PO Box 5333, Santa Fe, NM 87502-5333 and by email at freyes@simonsfirm.com this Tuesday May 29, 2007. ___________________ ___________________ Date  |
|
Tuesday May 29, 2007 13:18 |
|
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO WILLIAM H. PAYNE ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) No. 92-1452 ) (Sealed) SANDIA CORPORATION, a corporation, and individually; ) HARVEY J. BREWSTER, C. WILLIAM CHILDERS, ROBERT L. EWING, ) HAROLD L. FOLLEY, JAMES R. GOSLER, ROGER L. HAGENGRUBER, ) PETER S. HAMILTON, PRESTON B. HERRINGTON, ALBERT NARATH, ) CRAIG A. SEARLS, TOMMY A. SELLERS, MARY J. STANG, PAUL A. ) STOKES, ROBERT SURRAN, THOMAS P. WRIGHT, ) ) Defendants ) Federal Rule of Civ. P. 60(b)(4) ) ORDER VACATING JUDGE JOHN E CONWAY'S 8/25/94 ORDER/JUDGMENT 1 Judge John E Conway's 8/25/94 ORDER/JUDGMENT, see docket entry 155, is rescinded for lack of jurisdiction to dismiss paid for jury trial lawsuit. Right of jury trial is guaranteed inviolate by 7thAmendment to US Constitution and 28 USC Rule 38. 2 USCA affirmation, see docket entry 167, is rescinded for lack of jurisdiction to affirm dismissal of paid for jury trial lawsuit. 3 92cv1452 is to be settled or proceed to trial by jury within 90 days from entry of this order. _________________________ United States District Judge _________________________ Date |
|
Tuesday May 29, 2007 13:18 |
| [j]udicial notice may be permissive or mandatory. If it is permissive, then the court may choose to take judicial notice of the fact proffered, or may reject the request and require the party to introduce evidence in support of the point. If it is mandatory, then the court must take judicial notice of the fact proffered. |
|
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO WILLIAM H. PAYNE ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) No. 92-1452 ) (Sealed) SANDIA CORPORATION, a corporation, and individually; ) HARVEY J. BREWSTER, C. WILLIAM CHILDERS, ROBERT L. EWING, ) HAROLD L. FOLLEY, JAMES R. GOSLER, ROGER L. HAGENGRUBER, ) PETER S. HAMILTON, PRESTON B. HERRINGTON, ALBERT NARATH, ) CRAIG A. SEARLS, TOMMY A. SELLERS, MARY J. STANG, PAUL A. ) STOKES, ROBERT SURRAN, THOMAS P. WRIGHT, ) ) Defendants ) Federal Rule of Civ. P. 60(b)(4) ) MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE AND AUTHORITIES FOR VOID JUDGMENT 1 COMES NOW, plaintiff Payne to place this court on judicial notice of authorities of motion to vacate judgment in CIV-92-1452-JC/WD. 2 To be valid and enforceable, a judgment must be supported by three elements: (1) the court must have jurisdiction of the parties; If the requirements for validity are not met, a judgment may be subject to avoidance. 1 3 Any judgment rendered by a court which lacks jurisdiction, either of the subject matter of the parties, or lacks inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or entered an Order which violated due process or was procured through extrinsic or collateral fraud, is null and void, and can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court. 2 4 Such a judgment is void from its inception, incapable of confirmation or ratification, and can never have any legal effect. 3 5 A void judgment must be dismissed, regardless of timeliness if jurisdiction is deficient. 5 6 When rule providing relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is mandatory and is not discretionary. 4 7 The passage of time, however great, does not affect the validity of a judgment 6 and cannot render a void judgment valid. 7 8 The limitations inherent in the requirements of due process of law extend to judicial, as well as political, branches of the government, 8 so that a judgment may not be rendered in violation of those constitutional limitations and guaranties. 9 9 A court may not render a judgment which transcends the limits of its authority, 10 and a judgment is void if it is beyond the powers granted to the court by the law of its organization, even where the court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter. 11 1 See Peduto v. North Wildwood (DC NJ) 696 F Supp 1004, affd (CA3 NJ) 878 F.2d 725; In re Doe (NM App) 99 NM 517, 660 P.2d 607; Tice v. Nationwide Life Ins. Co., 284 Pa Super 220, 425 A.2d 782. 2 See U.S.Const.Amdt. V; F.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4); CR 60(b)(5); State cases: Lindgren v. Lindgren, 58 Wash.App. 588, 596, 794 P2d 526 (1990), rev.den., 116 Wash.2d 1009, 805 P2d 813 (1991); Brenner v. Port of Bellingham, 53 Wash.App. 182, 188, 765 P2d 1333 (1989) (motions to vacate under CR 60(b)(5) are not barred by the ‘reasonable time’ or the 1-year requirement of CR 60(b)”); Mid-City Materials, Inc. v. Heater Beaters Custom Fireplaces, 36 Wash.App. 480, 486, 674 P2d 1271 (1984); Matter of Marriage of Leslie, 112 Wash.2d 612, 618-19, 772 P2d 1013 (1989)(doctrine of laches does not bar attack of void judgment)(citing John Hancock Mut. Life. ins. Co. v. Gooley, 196 Wash. 357, 370, 83 P2d 221 (1938)(additional cite omitted); In re Marriage of Oritz, 108 Wash2d 643, 649, 740 P2d 843 (1987); Dike v. Dike, 75 Wash.2d 1, 7, 448 P2d 490 (1968); Bresolin v. Morris, 86 Wash2d 24, 245, 543 P2d 325 (1975); Cockerham v. Zikratch, 619 P2d 739 (Ariz.1980); State ex rel Turner v. Briggs, 971 P2d 581 (Wash.App.1999); Ward v. Terriere, 386 P2d 352 (Colo. 1963); Matter of Marriage of Hampshire, 869 P2d 58 (Kan.1997); Matter of Marriage of Welliver, 869 P2d 653 (Kan.1994); In re Estate of Wells, 983 P2d 279 (Kan.App.1999); B & C Investments, Inc. v. F & M Nat’l. Bank & Trust, 903 P2d 339 (Okla.App.Div.3 1995); Graff v. Kelly, 814 P2d 489 (Okl.1991); Capital Federal Savings Bank v. Bewly, 795 P2d 1051 (Okl.1990); Wahl v. Round Valley Bank, 38 Ariz. 411, 300 P. 955 (1931); Davidson Chevrolet, Inc. v. City and County of Denver, 330 P2d 1116, cert.den., 79 S.Ct. 609, 359 US 926, 3 L.Ed.2d 629 (Colo.1958); Tube City Mining & Milling Co. v. Otterson, 16 Ariz. 305, 146 P. 203 (1914); Lange v. Johnson, 204 NW2d 205 (Minn.1973); People v. Wade, 506 N.W2d 954 (Ill.1987); State v. Blankenship, 675 NE2d 1303 (Oh.App.Dist.9 1996); Hays v. Louisiana Dock Co., 452 NE2d 1383 (Ill.App.Dist.4 1983); People v. Rolland, 581 NE2d 907 (Ill.App.Dist.4 1991); Eckles v. McNeal, 628 NE2d 741 (Ill.App.1993); People v. Sales, 551 NE2d 1359 (Ill.App.Dist.2 1990); In re Adoption of E.L., 733 NE2d 846 (Ill.App.Dist.1 2000); Irving v. Rodriguez, 179 NE2d 145 (Ill.App.Dist.2 1960); People ex rel Brzica v. Village of lake Barrington, 644 NE2d 66 (Ill.App.Dist.2 1994); Steinfeld v. Haddock, 513 US 809 (Ill.1994); Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 625 NE2d 458 (Ind.App.Dist.1 1993); Rook v. Rook, 353 SE2d 756 (Va.1987); Mills v. Richardson, 81 SE2d 409 (N.C.1950); Henderson v. Henderson, 59 SE2d 227 (N.C.1950); State v. Richie, 20 SW3d 624 (Tenn.2000); Crockett Oil Co. v. Effie, 374 SW2d 154 (Mo.App.1964); State ex rel Dawson v. Bomar, 354 SW2d 763, cert.den., ____ US _____ (Tenn.1962); Underwood. v. Brown, 244 SW2d 168 (Tenn.1951); Richardson v. Mitchell, 237 SW2d 577 (Tenn.App.1950); City of Lufkin v. McVicker, 510 SW2d 141 (Tex.Civ.App.1973); Federal cases: Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985); Rubin v. Johns, 109 F.R.D. 174 (D.Virg.Is.1985); Triad Energy Corp. v. McNell, 110 F.R.D. 382 (S.D.N.Y. 1986); Millikan v. Meyer, 311 US 457, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed.2d 278 (1940); Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (CA7 1999). 3 See Stidham v. Whelchel, 698 NE2d 1152 (Ind.1998); Thompson v. Thompson, 238 SW2d 218 (Tex.Civ.App. 1951); Lucas v. Estate of Stavos, 609 NE2d 1114, rehng.den., trans.den, (Ind.App.Dist.1 1993); Loyd v. Director, Dept. of Public Safety, 480 So2d 577 (Ala.Civ.App.1985); In re Marriage of Parks, 630 NE2d 509 (Ill.App.Dist.4 1991); Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No.27, 453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R.Fed. 298 (CA1 1972); Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Mgmt., 485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D.Fla.1980); Holstein v. City of Chicago, 803 F.Supp. 205, recon.den., 149 F.R.D. 147, aff’d, 29 F.3d 1145 (N.D.Ill.1992); City of Los Angeles v. Morgan, 234 P2d 319 (Cal.App.Dist.2 1951). 4 See In re Marriage of Markowski, 50 Wash.App. 633, 635, 749 P2d 745 (1988); Brickum Inv. Co. v. Vernham Corp., 46 Wash.App. 517, 520, 731 P2d 533 (1987); Orner v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo.1994). 5 See Mitchell v. Kitsap County, 59 Wash.App. 177, 180-81, 797 P2d 516 (1990)(collateral challenge to jurisdiction of pro tem judge granting summary judgment properly raised on appeal)(citing Allied Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Ruth, 57 Wash.App. 783, 790, 790 P2d 206 (1990)); Jaffe and Asher v. Van Brunt, 158 F.R.D. 278 (S.D.N.Y.1994). 6 See State ex rel. Smith v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 63 Nev 249, 167 P.2d 648 (ovrld in part on other grounds by Poirier v. Board of Dental Examiners, 81 Nev 384, 404 P.2d 1); Monroe v. Niven, 221 NC 362, 20 S.E.2d 311. 7 See State ex rel. Smith v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 63 Nev 249, 167 P.2d 648 (ovrld in part on other grounds by Poirier v. Board of Dental Examiners, 81 Nev 384, 404 P.2d 1); Columbus County v. Thompson, 249 NC 607, 107 S.E.2d 302. 8 As to persons and agencies bound by due process, see 16A Am.Jur.2d, Constitutional Law §§ 742, 821-824. 9 See Hanson v. Denckla, 357 US 235, 2 L.Ed.2d 1283, 78 S.Ct. 1228, reh den 358 US 858, 3 L.Ed.2d 92, 79 S.Ct. 10; Ladner v. Siegel, 298 Pa 487, 148 A 699, 68 ALR 1172. 10 See Royal Indem. Co. v. Mayor, etc., of Savannah, 209 Ga 383, 73 S.E.2d 205; Spencer v. Franks, 173 Md 73, 195 A 306, 114 ALR 263; Road Material & Equipment Co. v. McGowan, 229 Miss 611, 91 So.2d 554, motion dismd 229 Miss 630, 92 So.2d 245; Howle v. Twin States Express, Inc., 237 NC 667, 75 S.E.2d 732; Fitzsimmons v. Oklahoma City, 192 Okla 248, 135 P.2d 340; Robertson v. Commonwealth, 181 Va 520, 25 S.E.2d 352, 146 ALR 966; Reburg v. Lang, 239 Wis 381, 1 N.W.2d 759. The courts of a state may render only such judgments as they are authorized to do under the laws of the state. Mosely v. Empire Gas & Fuel Co., 313 Mo 225, 281 SW 762, 45 ALR 1223. 11 See People ex rel. Arkansas Valley Sugar Beet & Irrigated Land Co. v. Burke, 72 Colo 486, 212 P. 837, 30 ALR 1085; People v. Wade, 116 Ill 2d 1, 107 Ill Dec 63, 506 N.E.2d 954; Gray v. Clement, 296 Mo 497, 246 SW 940; Ex parte Solberg, 52 ND 518, 203 NW 898; Russell v. Fourth Nat’l Bank (Ohio) 102 Ohio St 248, 131 NE 726; Hough v. Hough (Okla) 772 P.2d 920; Farmers’ Nat’l Bank v. Daggett (Tex Com App) 2 S.W.2d 834; State v. Turner, 98 Wash.2d 731, 658 P.2d 658; Shopper Advertiser, Inc. v. Wisconsin Dep’t of Revenue, 117 Wis 2d 223, 344 N.W.2d 115. Respectfully submitted, _________________________ William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 Date: ____________________ I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing MOTION TO VOID JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION was mailed to John Conway, United States District Court, 333 Lomas Blvd. N.W., Ste 740, Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 and by email at ConwayChambers@nmcourt.fed.us, Daniel H. Friedman and Faith Kalman Reyes, Simons and Slattery, PO Box 5333, Santa Fe, NM 87502-5333 and by email at freyes@simonsfirm.com this Tuesday May 29, 2007. ___________________ ___________________ Date  |
Tuesday May 29, 2007 12:54 Certified, return receipt requested Clerk United States District Court, 333 Lomas Blvd. N.W. Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 Dear Clerk: Enclosed are an original and two copies MOTION TO VOID JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION, ORDER VACATING JUDGE JOHN E CONWAY'S 8/25/94 ORDER/JUDGMENT and MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE AND AUTHORITIES FOR VOID JUDGMENT of a with a self addressed stamped envelope. Please return a file stamped copies to me. Thank you in advance. Sincerely William Payne |
| GENERAL DOCKET FOR Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals |
 10/6/95 [890076] NOTE: THIS ENTIRE CASE IS SEALED. Terminated on the Merits after Submission Without Oral Hearing; Judgment Affirmed; Written, Signed, Unpublished. Moore, authoring judge; Barrett; Weis. [94-2205] (pdw) |
|
We have another void judgment: CIV-92-1452-JC is a jury trial lawsuit. See docket entry 15.
|
"The questions are obvious," said U.S. District Judge Dee Benson of Utah. "What have you been doing, and how might it affect the reliability and credibility of the information we're getting in our court?"
Benson has a void judgment. Maybe three?
