For those interested in how domestic terrorist and Georgia Southwestern Judicial Circuit juvenile judge / kidnapper / thief reacts to being sued in federal civil court:
Pictured are attorneys Lisa C. Rambo and Rucker Smith.
Lisa and many of her entourage were sued for the unreasonable theft of one little boy in December 2012. Lisa had a two year old boy stolen without any reasonable justification whatsoever. Said boy was restored to his parents one day later in damaged (physically and mentally) condition due to state actor neglect.
Attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo, attorney Patrick Eidson, and attorney James Hurt worked in concert to extract the maximum amount of money from the Cross family and the public coffers based upon false and 100% unsubstantiated claims made by anonymous liars. Lisa and her juvenile attorney prosecutors did not attempt to verify any of the allegations because extorting the Cross family and embezzling the State coffers was their paramount goal. Lisa C. Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should not be allowed to interact with anyone's sons or daughters as they are child abusers and human traffickers. Furthermore, attorneys Lisa Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should be in jail for their crimes including terroristic threats, conspiracy to kidnap, embezzlement, extortion, and human trafficking.
Unfortunately Sumter County Georgia Sheriff Pete Smith and district attorney Plez Hardin refuse to uphold the law when attorneys break the law. Thanks to Sheriff Pete Smith, the GBI, and Southwestern Judicial Circuit district attorney Plez Hardin, Georgia attorney general Sam Olens, Governor Nathan Deal, and the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, these three BAR attorney terrorists pretending to be a juvenile judge and juvenile prosecutors will continue to extort their victims to enrich themselves and employees of MACON COUNTY and THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
Southwestern Judicial Circuit Attorney, human trafficker, abuser, thief, and attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo attempts and fails to intimidate her victims in the following response to the Cross family.
This family repeatedly demanded that Lisa Coogle Rambo produce evidence that she is a licensed BAR attorney. Lisa is not a licensed BAR attorney nor is her attorney William NeSmith. Yet, attorney Lisa Rambo is falsely accusing her victims of being criminals because they are not licensed attorneys while she and her legal counsel are, also, not licensed attorneys. Par for the course given that Lisa Coogle Rambo's entire criminal career is built upon lies, intimidation, and embezzlement of public funds under the pretense of protecting kids.
Lisa's response, below, is an exceptional "the emperor has no cloths" revelation!
For those interested in how domestic terrorist and Georgia Southwestern Judicial Circuit juvenile judge / kidnapper / thief reacts to being sued in federal civil court:
Pictured are attorneys Lisa C. Rambo and Rucker Smith.
Lisa and many of her entourage were sued for the unreasonable theft of one little boy in December 2012. Lisa had a two year old boy stolen without any reasonable justification whatsoever. Said boy was restored to his parents one day later in damaged (physically and mentally) condition due to state actor neglect.
Attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo, attorney Patrick Eidson, and attorney James Hurt worked in concert to extract the maximum amount of money from the Cross family and the public coffers based upon false and 100% unsubstantiated claims made by anonymous liars. Lisa and her juvenile attorney prosecutors did not attempt to verify any of the allegations because extorting the Cross family and embezzling the State coffers was their paramount goal. Lisa C. Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should not be allowed to interact with anyone's sons or daughters as they are child abusers and human traffickers. Furthermore, attorneys Lisa Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should be in jail for their crimes including terroristic threats, conspiracy to kidnap, embezzlement, extortion, and human trafficking.
Unfortunately Sumter County Georgia Sheriff Pete Smith and district attorney Plez Hardin refuse to uphold the law when attorneys break the law. Thanks to Sheriff Pete Smith, the GBI, and Southwestern Judicial Circuit district attorney Plez Hardin, Georgia attorney general Sam Olens, Governor Nathan Deal, and the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, these three BAR attorney terrorists pretending to be a juvenile judge and juvenile prosecutors will continue to extort their victims to enrich themselves and employees of MACON COUNTY and THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
Southwestern Judicial Circuit Attorney, human trafficker, abuser, thief, and attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo attempts and fails to intimidate her victims in the following response to the Cross family.
This family repeatedly demanded that Lisa Coogle Rambo produce evidence that she is a licensed BAR attorney. Lisa is not a licensed BAR attorney nor is her attorney William NeSmith. Yet, attorney Lisa Rambo is falsely accusing her victims of being criminals because they are not licensed attorneys while she and her legal counsel are, also, not licensed attorneys. Par for the course given that Lisa Coogle Rambo's entire criminal career is built upon lies, intimidation, and embezzlement of public funds under the pretense of protecting kids.
Lisa's response, below, is an exceptional "the emperor has no cloths" revelation!
Original Title
Wrongdoer Lisa C. Rambo responds to federal Lawsuit (Macon, Georgia)
For those interested in how domestic terrorist and Georgia Southwestern Judicial Circuit juvenile judge / kidnapper / thief reacts to being sued in federal civil court:
Pictured are attorneys Lisa C. Rambo and Rucker Smith.
Lisa and many of her entourage were sued for the unreasonable theft of one little boy in December 2012. Lisa had a two year old boy stolen without any reasonable justification whatsoever. Said boy was restored to his parents one day later in damaged (physically and mentally) condition due to state actor neglect.
Attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo, attorney Patrick Eidson, and attorney James Hurt worked in concert to extract the maximum amount of money from the Cross family and the public coffers based upon false and 100% unsubstantiated claims made by anonymous liars. Lisa and her juvenile attorney prosecutors did not attempt to verify any of the allegations because extorting the Cross family and embezzling the State coffers was their paramount goal. Lisa C. Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should not be allowed to interact with anyone's sons or daughters as they are child abusers and human traffickers. Furthermore, attorneys Lisa Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should be in jail for their crimes including terroristic threats, conspiracy to kidnap, embezzlement, extortion, and human trafficking.
Unfortunately Sumter County Georgia Sheriff Pete Smith and district attorney Plez Hardin refuse to uphold the law when attorneys break the law. Thanks to Sheriff Pete Smith, the GBI, and Southwestern Judicial Circuit district attorney Plez Hardin, Georgia attorney general Sam Olens, Governor Nathan Deal, and the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, these three BAR attorney terrorists pretending to be a juvenile judge and juvenile prosecutors will continue to extort their victims to enrich themselves and employees of MACON COUNTY and THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
Southwestern Judicial Circuit Attorney, human trafficker, abuser, thief, and attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo attempts and fails to intimidate her victims in the following response to the Cross family.
This family repeatedly demanded that Lisa Coogle Rambo produce evidence that she is a licensed BAR attorney. Lisa is not a licensed BAR attorney nor is her attorney William NeSmith. Yet, attorney Lisa Rambo is falsely accusing her victims of being criminals because they are not licensed attorneys while she and her legal counsel are, also, not licensed attorneys. Par for the course given that Lisa Coogle Rambo's entire criminal career is built upon lies, intimidation, and embezzlement of public funds under the pretense of protecting kids.
Lisa's response, below, is an exceptional "the emperor has no cloths" revelation!
For those interested in how domestic terrorist and Georgia Southwestern Judicial Circuit juvenile judge / kidnapper / thief reacts to being sued in federal civil court:
Pictured are attorneys Lisa C. Rambo and Rucker Smith.
Lisa and many of her entourage were sued for the unreasonable theft of one little boy in December 2012. Lisa had a two year old boy stolen without any reasonable justification whatsoever. Said boy was restored to his parents one day later in damaged (physically and mentally) condition due to state actor neglect.
Attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo, attorney Patrick Eidson, and attorney James Hurt worked in concert to extract the maximum amount of money from the Cross family and the public coffers based upon false and 100% unsubstantiated claims made by anonymous liars. Lisa and her juvenile attorney prosecutors did not attempt to verify any of the allegations because extorting the Cross family and embezzling the State coffers was their paramount goal. Lisa C. Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should not be allowed to interact with anyone's sons or daughters as they are child abusers and human traffickers. Furthermore, attorneys Lisa Rambo, Patrick Eidson, and James Hurt should be in jail for their crimes including terroristic threats, conspiracy to kidnap, embezzlement, extortion, and human trafficking.
Unfortunately Sumter County Georgia Sheriff Pete Smith and district attorney Plez Hardin refuse to uphold the law when attorneys break the law. Thanks to Sheriff Pete Smith, the GBI, and Southwestern Judicial Circuit district attorney Plez Hardin, Georgia attorney general Sam Olens, Governor Nathan Deal, and the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, these three BAR attorney terrorists pretending to be a juvenile judge and juvenile prosecutors will continue to extort their victims to enrich themselves and employees of MACON COUNTY and THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
Southwestern Judicial Circuit Attorney, human trafficker, abuser, thief, and attorney Lisa Coogle Rambo attempts and fails to intimidate her victims in the following response to the Cross family.
This family repeatedly demanded that Lisa Coogle Rambo produce evidence that she is a licensed BAR attorney. Lisa is not a licensed BAR attorney nor is her attorney William NeSmith. Yet, attorney Lisa Rambo is falsely accusing her victims of being criminals because they are not licensed attorneys while she and her legal counsel are, also, not licensed attorneys. Par for the course given that Lisa Coogle Rambo's entire criminal career is built upon lies, intimidation, and embezzlement of public funds under the pretense of protecting kids.
Lisa's response, below, is an exceptional "the emperor has no cloths" revelation!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
DANN SLAYDEN CROSS III, MBA, * DR. SHARON HARVEY CROSS, PsyD., * Their sons F.C., R.C. and D.C., * * Plaintiffs (propria persona), * CIVIL ACTION NO.: 5:14-CV-006 * vs. * * LISA RAMBO, Georgia Southwestern * Judicial District Juvenile Judge and * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED her unnamed spouse, et al. in their * individual capacity, * * Defendants. * * MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM COME NOW, Defendants JUDGE LISA C. RAMBO and her unnamed spouse and file this Motion to Dismiss the above-styled action. These Defendants show this Court that Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state a valid cause of action or justiciable claim against them in any manner whatsoever. Plaintiff Dann Slayden Cross and Plaintiff Sharon Harvey Cross, both non-lawyers, are representing their three children in this court action. The unlicensed practice of law is a crime and contrary to case law and Georgia statutory law. All claims filed on behalf of the children, F.C., R.C. and D.C. must be dismissed. Further, the unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo has not been served with any complaint and summons, nor has he been asked to waive formal process of service. The Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 1 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo remains unnamed and as such should, along with Defendant Rambo, be dismissed. The Defendants Brief in Support of Their Motion to Dismiss is attached hereto and incorporated herein with this Motion to Dismiss. WHEREFORE, for the reasons contained herein and in their Brief in Support of Their Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant Lisa Rambo and her unnamed spouse pray that said complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Respectfully submitted this 8 th day of March, 2014.
/s/ William D. NeSmith, III WILLIAM D. NESMITH, III Georgia Bar No.: 535792 Attorney for Defendants P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia, 31709 229-931-4427 229-380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 2 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the within and foregoing Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim and Brief in Support of Defendants Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by electronic filing through the CM/ECF System in accordance with the United States District Court Rules, as follows: Dann Slayden Cross III, pro se section1983suit@gmail.com
Sharon Harvey Cross, pro se Section1983suit@gmail.com
David V. Johnson, Esq. dj@insleyrace.com
Kevin P. Race, Esq. krace@insleyrace.com
Brett Williams, Esq. bwilliams@insleyrace.com
Kim M. Jackson, Esq. kjackson@hptylaw.com
Bryan M. Grantham, Esq. bgantham@hptylaw.com
Roger E. Harris, Esq. Roger.Harris@swiftcurrie.com Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 3 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
Respectfully submitted this 7 th day of March, 2014.
/s/ William D. NeSmith, III WILLIAM D. NESMITH, III Georgia Bar No.: 535792 Attorney for Defendants P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia, 31709 229-931-4427 229-380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 4 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
DANN SLAYDEN CROSS III, MBA, * DR. SHARON HARVEY CROSS, PsyD., * Their sons F.C., R.C. and D.C., * * Plaintiffs (propria persona), * CIVIL ACTION NO.: 5:14-CV-006 * vs. * * LISA RAMBO, Georgia Southwestern * Judicial District Juvenile Judge and * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED her unnamed spouse, et al. in their * individual capacity, * * Defendants. * * BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
COME NOW, defendants JUDGE LISA RAMBO and her unnamed spouse, and in support of their motion to dismiss the plaintiffs complaint, shows this Court the following: STATEMENT OF FACTS On January 6, 2014, the plaintiffs, Dann Slayden Cross, III MBA, Dr. Sharon Harvey Cross, PsyD., and their sons, F.C., R.C., and D.C. (hereinafter individually and collectively as Plaintiffs) filed their complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. In said Complaint, Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross seek damages on behalf of themselves and their children, for alleged violations of their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights and violation of Public Trust Powers afforded them under the United States Constitution. The Plaintiffs alleged that Lisa Rambo, acting under color of state law and Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 5 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
exercising public trust powers belonging to an office styled as Juvenile Court Judge deprived all of the Plaintiffs of their Fourth Amendment by unreasonable search and seizure of person and papers, due process of law and false imprisonment. (Complaint 16; 142- 144; 145-147; 148-149). Plaintiffs Complaint is completely devoid of any allegations whatsoever, against the unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo, other than to allege that any spouse of any defendant in the instant civil action must be joined as a defendant based on precepts of coverture, marriage, accessory contract, and division of spoils as well as abundant stare decisis upon the subject(s) of accessory, tontine wagering, and misprision. (Complaint 28). 1
At all relevant times contained in Plaintiffs complaint, Plaintiffs were residents of Macon County, Georgia and live at a confidential physical address. (Complaint 1). Plaintiffs complaint arises from an initial incident that occurred at The Doctors Hospital in Augusta on or about December 5, 2012. (Complaint 32). On December 4, 2012, plaintiffs, after seeking treatment at another hospital, brought their son, F.C., a two year old child, to The Doctors Hospital in Augusta, Georgia with serious burns to his feet. (Complaint 29- 32)(Rambo Affidavit 5). On that date, after F.C. was examined by a physician, and Plaintiffs were informed that F.C. was scheduled for surgery on the morning of December 5, 2012. The Plaintiffs refused to allow F.C. to be immunized for Tetanus. Said immunization was necessary prior to any medical treatment by the hospital. (Complaint
1 These Defendants aver that these allegations do not give rise to a colorable action under 42 U.S.C 1983 or any other type of civil action based upon Plaintiffs facts.
Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 6 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
32, 37)(Rambo Affidavit 6). According to the treating physician, if F.C. was not immunized and contracted Tetanus, there was a 25% chance that he would die. (Rambo Affidavit 7). On December 5, 2012, Defendant Lisa Rambo, as Juvenile Court Judge for Macon County, Georgia, received a telephone call from the law office of Patrick Eidson. Mr. Eidson is a Special Assistant Attorney General representing the Macon County Department of Family and Children Services and is a defendant in this civil action. Mr. Eidson was seeking an ex parte emergency shelter care order based on deprivation of the Crosss minor child, F.C. Based on information provided to Judge Rambo from Defendant Eidson which was derived from the treating physicians for F.C., she signed an Order for Shelter Care. Said order temporarily removed custody of F.C. from his parents and allowed F.C. to receive needed medical care. Further, the Order informed F.C.s parents that a 72 hour hearing was set by the court to provide the parents with their due process rights and the due process rights of the minor child. (Rambo Affidavit 4, 8). At the 72 Hour Hearing, Judge Rambo returned the minor child, F.C., to his parents requiring Plaintiffs Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross to: 1. Successfully complete Parenting classes and immunization education. 2. Comply with all home schooling regulations as required by the Macon County Board of Education. 3. Ensure that F.C. receives all medical attention recommended by any medical provider. Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 7 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
4. Sign any releases for information requested by the Macon County Department of Family and Childrens Services. 5. Cooperate with the Macon County Department of Family and Childrens Services and any related agencies. (Rambo Affidavit 11). On March 26, 2013, the Macon County Department of Family and Childrens Services filed a Petition to Dismiss Protective Order, with the Juvenile Court of Macon County, Georgia. The petition alleged that Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross had complied with the previous order of the Juvenile Court and sought to dismiss the Shelter Care Order entered by the court on December 5, 2012. A hearing was held on April 17, 2013 and the petition was granted by the Court and the Protective Order was dismissed. (Rambo Affidavit 12). At all times relevant to the Plaintiffs complaint, Defendant Lisa Rambo was acting in her official capacity as a juvenile court judge and at no time acted in her individual capacity. (Rambo Affidavit 16). Since the return of F.C. to his parents and the dismissal of the Shelter Care Order, Judge Rambo has been inundated with bizarre and at times, nonsensical pleadings and other documents, all of which identify Defendant Rambo as a judge and all appear to complain of her actions as a judge, not an individual. (Rambo Affidavit 13, 14, 15).
Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 8 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
ARGUMENT AND CITATION OF AUTHORITY I. Defendant Lisa Rambo is protected by absolute judicial immunity from being sued in a civil matter.
It is undisputed in the Plaintiffs complaint and all other evidence before this Court that Defendant Lisa Rambo, at all times relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, was acting as a juvenile court judge for the Southwestern Judicial Circuit (Rambo Affidavit 170)(Complaint passim). The Supreme Court held in Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 537 (1967) that judges are protected by absolute immunity when they act in a judicial capacity, even if they act unconstitutionally. The Court relied on the background of common law immunity when 42 U.S.C 1983 was enacted. In Pierson, a state court judge was ruled absolutely immune from damages liability under section 1983 even though he had convicted the plaintiff under an unconstitutional statute. For immunity purposes, it did not matter even if the judge did so knowingly. In, Wilson v. Bush, 196 Fed Appx. 796; 2006 U.S. App LEXIS 22961, (2006) on an appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the District Court, held that: The doctrine of judicial immunity entitles a judge to absolute immunity from damages for actions taken in a judicial capacity unless the action was taken in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction." Bolin v. Story, 225 F.3d 1234, 1239 (11th Cir. 2000). To determine if an action is within a judge's judicial capacity, we look to "the nature of the act itself, i.e., whether it is a function normally performed by a judge, and to the expectations of the parties, i.e., whether they dealt with the judge in his judicial capacity." Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 12, 112 S. Ct. 286, 288, 116 L. Ed. 2d 9 (1991) (citation omitted). A judge does not act in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction" when he acts erroneously, Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 9 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
maliciously, or in excess of his authority, but rather only when he acts without subject-matter jurisdiction. Dykes v. Hosemann, 776 F.2d 942, 947-48 (11th Cir. 1985). The Supreme Court has held that: Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction . . . . This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly, and it is not for the protection or benefit of a malicious or corrupt judge, but for the benefit of the public, whose interest it is that the judges should be at liberty to exercise their functions with independence and without fear of consequences. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-54, 87 S. Ct. 1213, 1217-18, 18 L. Ed. 2d 288 (1967) (internal quotations omitted). (Bush at 798)(emphasis added).
In Leonard v. United States District Judge Kenneth Marra, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22357, this Honorable Court, citing previous authorities, opined [c]laims against judges are generally barred by the judge's absolute immunity from liability for judicial acts. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356-57, 55 L. Ed. 2d 331, 98 S. Ct. 1099 (1978); Simmons v. Conger, 86 F.3d 1080, 1084-85 (11th Cir. 1996). The Supreme Court has recognized two circumstances in which a plaintiff may overcome a defendant's judicial immunity: "First, a judge is not immune from liability for nonjudicial actions, i.e., actions not taken in the judge's judicial capacity. . . . Second, a judge is not immune for actions, though judicial in nature, taken in the complete absence of all jurisdiction." Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 116 L. Ed. 2d 9, 112 S. Ct. 286 (1991) (citations omitted). A juvenile court judge has subject matter jurisdiction and exclusive original jurisdiction over matters involving, inter alia, alleged child deprivation. See O.C.G.A. 15-11-28. As previously stated, there is not a scintilla of evidence that Judge Lisa Rambo acted in a non- judicial capacity or that she did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the issue of deprivation of the minor child, F.C. and his parents. Even a casual reading of Plaintiffs Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 10 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
Complaint, and the numerous other documents attached to Judge Rambos Affidavit as Exhibits clearly show that every complaint and allegation against this Defendant are clearly addressing Judge Rambo in her judicial capacity. Further, Plaintiffs entire complaint against Lisa Rambo and all of the defendants in the instant case, all arise from the Shelter Care Order that she signed as a juvenile court judge. Absolute judicial immunity is intended to protect the judicial process. If judges have to be concerned that rulings in civil or criminal cases would likely generate section 1983 claims against them, this would have an adverse effect on a judges independent decision- making. In addition, section 1983 claims against judges would necessarily involve the re- litigation of earlier cases. Further, these Plaintiffs had a readily available remedy. They could have sought an injunction from a superior court while they were in Richmond County seeking medical treatment for F.C., and they certainly could file an appeal if the injunction was not granted. It is clear, from the entire record before the court, that all of the allegations against Defendant Lisa Rambo involved her acting as a juvenile court judge and in a court that had exclusive original jurisdiction of the matters complained of in Plaintiffs Complaint. Judge Lisa Rambo at all times had absolute judicial immunity in the instant case and should be dismissed from this action with prejudice. II. Plaintiffs Complaint Contains No Justiciable Claims Against the Unnamed Spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo.
Plaintiffs Complaint is completely devoid of any allegations linked to or directed at the unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo other than a mere allegation that any spouse of any defendant to the instant civil action should be joined as a defendant based on Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 11 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
precepts of coverture, marriage, accessory contract, and division of spoils as well as abundant stare decisis upon the subject(s) of accessory, tontine wagering, and misprision. (Complaint 28) These bare allegations, in and of themselves, do not constitute a claim under section 1983. To prevail in a claim under section 1983, these Plaintiffs must prove two critical points: 1) a person subjected the Plaintiffs to conduct that occurred under color of state law, and 2) this conduct deprived these Plaintiffs of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under federal law or the U.S. Constitution. See 42 U.S.C. 1983. Plaintiffs Complaint is silent to any allegation that any unnamed spouse acted under color of state law or deprived any of the plaintiffs of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under federal law or the U.S. Constitution. The Plaintiffs have failed in every way to allege any justiciable claim under section 1983. Further, the unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo has never been served with Plaintiffs Complaint. Plaintiffs Complaint against the unnamed spouse of Defendant Lisa Rambo should be dismissed with prejudice. III. Plaintiff Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross are not licensed to practice law in the state of Georgia and therefore cannot represent their three minor children in their complaint against Lisa Rambo and her unnamed spouse.
Georgia law prohibits the unlicensed practice of law within the state of Georgia. O.C.G.A. 15-19-50 states: The practice of law in this state is defined as:
(1) Representing litigants in court and preparing pleadings and other papers incident to any action or special proceedings in any court or other judicial body;
(2) Conveyancing;
(3) The preparation of legal instruments of all kinds whereby a legal right Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 12 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
is secured;
(4) The rendering of opinions as to the validity or invalidity of titles to real or personal property;
(5) The giving of any legal advice; and
(6) Any action taken for others in any matter connected with the law.
O.C.G.A. 15-19-51 states:
Unauthorized practice of law forbidden (a) It shall be unlawful for any person other than a duly licensed attorney at law: (1) To practice or appear as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any court of this state or before any judicial body; (2) To make it a business to practice as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any of such courts; (3) To hold himself out to the public or otherwise to any person as being entitled to practice law; (4) To render or furnish legal services or advice; (5) To furnish attorneys or counsel; (6) To render legal services of any kind in actions or proceedings of any nature; (7) To assume or use or advertise the title of "lawyer," "attorney," "attorney at law," or equivalent terms in any language in such manner as to convey the impression that he is entitled to practice law or is entitled to furnish legal advice, services, or counsel; or (8) To advertise that either alone or together with, by, or through any person, whether a duly and regularly admitted attorney at law or not, he has, owns, Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 13 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
conducts, or maintains an office for the practice of law or for furnishing legal advice, services, or counsel. (b) Unless otherwise provided by law or by rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, it shall be unlawful for any corporation, voluntary association, or company to do or perform any of the acts recited in subsection (a) of this Code section. A thorough search of the membership of the State Bar of Georgia shows that neither Dann Slayden Cross nor Sharon Harvey Cross are lawyers, licensed and admitted to practice law in Georgia. It is clear from the Plaintiffs Complaint that Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross have prepared pleadings on behalf of their minor children and have taken legal action on the childrens behalf. Both Dann Slayden Cross and Sharon Harvey Cross have furnished legal services to their children by filing pleadings on their behalf and advancing legal theories of recovery on behalf of their children. The above described actions taken by Mr. and Ms. Cross on behalf of their children is a crime and the complaint, as to the children, must be dismissed because they are not properly before the court, and the complaint filed by Mr. and Ms. should be dismissed based on their unlawful, criminal actions. Disallowing non-lawyer parents to act as lawyers on behalf of their children has been soundly disapproved by the courts. In Walker. et al v. Atlanta Public Schools, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66230, Judge Timothy Batten, in a civil rights action, held: While Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(1)(A) permits a parent to file suit on behalf of his or her child, a non-lawyer parent is not permitted to serve as the child's legal counsel. Devine v. Indian River County School Board, 121 F.3d 576, 581 (11th Cir. 1997); Whitehurst v. Wal-Mart, 306 F. App'x 446, 449 (11th Cir. 2008) (same) (unpublished opinion). Additionally, 28 U.S.C. 1654 only authorizes individuals to "plead and conduct their own cases personally." Section 1654 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 14 of 46 __________________________________________________________________ William D. NeSmith, III, Attorney at Law P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia 31709 (229) 931-4427 *** (229) 380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
does not extend the right to file an action pro se to the representation of others. Devine, 121 F.3d at 581; Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664 (9th Cir. 2008) ("It is well established that the privilege to represent oneself pro se provided by 1654 is personal to the litigant and does not extend to other parties or entities.") Accordingly, this Court is required to dismiss this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B).
Walker at 1, 2 2
CONCLUSION For all of the above and foregoing reasons, facts and citations of law submitted, the Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant Lisa Rambo and her unnamed spouse should be dismissed by this Honorable Court, with prejudice, and with all costs of this action cast upon the Plaintiffs. Respectfully submitted this 8 th day of March, 2014.
/s/ William D. NeSmith, III WILLIAM D. NESMITH, III Georgia Bar No.: 535792 Attorney for Defendants P.O. Box 295 Americus, Georgia, 31709 229-931-4427 229-380-0279 fax wnesmith@sumtercountyga.us
2 See also Hafez v. Madison et al, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84650, pages 13, 14 holding that non-attorneys cannot litigate the interest of another and that parents may not bring a pro se action on behalf of their children. Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 15 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 16 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 17 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 18 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 19 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 20 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 21 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 22 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 23 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 24 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 25 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 26 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 27 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 28 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 29 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 30 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 31 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 32 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 33 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 34 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 35 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 36 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 37 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 38 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 39 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 40 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 41 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 42 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 43 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 44 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 45 of 46 Case 5:14-cv-00006-CAR Document 46 Filed 03/08/14 Page 46 of 46