![[THE WORLDPEACE SIGN]](wppin.gif)
![[THE WORLDPEACE SIGN]](pinquarter.jpg)
NO.
03-1069
03-1070, 03-1079, 03-1082, 03-1083, 03-1084. 03-1117, 03-1139
SUPREME
COURT
OF
JOHN
WORLDPEACE
______________________________
______________________________________________________________________
REGARDING
RELATOR’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
REGARDING RESTITUTION
AND
THE
Filed by: John WorldPeace, Relator
John WorldPeace
2620 Fountainview,
Tel. 713-784-7618
Fax. 713-784-9063
TBA# 21872800
Attorney Pro Se
IDENTITY
OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
The following is a complete
list of all the parties and the names and addresses of all counsel in the
underlying lawsuit.
Relator (Respondent)
John WorldPeace
John WorldPeace
2620 Fountainview,
Tel. 713-784-7618
Fax. 713-784-9063
Attorney Pro Se
Respondent: Honorable James
R. Fry
Presiding Judge in the
Underlying Disciplinary Petition
(Cause No. 2002-42081; Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. John
WorldPeace, 269th District Court,
15th Judicial
District Court
Tel:
903-813-4303
Fax:
903-813-4304
Real Parties in Interest and
Parties to the Case. (Petitioner)
Commission
for Lawyer Discipline
Dawn Miller
Linda Acevedo
State Bar of
Tel:
512-453-5535
Fax: 512-453-6667
Attorneys for the Commission for Lawyer Discipline
TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THIS COURT:
COMES
NOW, WorldPeace and files this Relator’s Reply Regarding Relator’s Motion
for Rehearing Regarding Restitution and the Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct and would respectfully
submit the following.
WORLDPEACE
THROUGH WORLD LAW
Sixteen
years ago I changed my name to John WorldPeace and made a commitment to work
toward increasing the peace on the planet. Unlike
most peace advocates, I did not chose to work from a lofty detached place of
religious passivity but chose to work from the grassroots source of conflict in
society; the courts. I was
determined to understand the root causes of conflict at the personal level; one
on one confrontations where I could see more clearly what causes discord and
disharmony in society. I felt that I
could generalize my finding and apply them to conflicts between groups and
organizations and nations.
People have often criticized me for acting too aggressive and outside the
realm of what they considered appropriate behavior for an advocate for peace and
WorldPeace. I remind them that Jesus
was not passive. I confirm to them
that I am an advocate for peace but I am not a pacifist.
The one thing that I have learned through my experiences and studies
regarding peace is that there will never be a perfect peace because the nature
of all that we know is change. Everything
that manifests eventually disintegrates. Nothing
is permanent even though some things are longer lived than others.
I also realized that religion, as opposed to spirituality and a belief in
God, are one of the greatest sources of conflict in society.
Religious bureaucracies are in essence theocracies with a façade of
democracy in their administration. The
core defect in all religious bureaucracies is that the primary directive is to
preserve the bureaucracy first and spread the message second.
This was stated recently by an Episcopal Bishop who said, “heresy is
better than schism.” As the Tao
says, “the truth is often paradoxical.”
Where we would expect religion to lead the world society toward peace
they have over the last three millenniums championed one religious war after
another to the detriment of the whole of society.
Lastly, from a global perspective, I realized that the only hope for
WorldPeace was through the secular application of the law.
Democracy is the only hope for WorldPeace.
In that process, duly and fairly elected legislatures write the laws and
the courts make sure those laws hold up to the template of justice.
The true function of the courts is to maintain a level playing field
between opposing factors in society and parties in any litigation.
If the playing field is level, then the judicial process manifests
justice. If the playing field is
skewed, then chaos and anarchy manifest in various degrees in society.
The courts are charged with the preservation of justice and peace in
society.
The
religious bureaucrats are incapable of justice and form exclusive societies.
The courts even though they do not claim a mandate from God, assume a
mandate from all of society to do justice.
The
courts must also consider that they must be ever vigilant so as to not repeat
the injustice of supporting slavery. When
the courts had the opportunity to speak out, they not only remained silent but
upheld slavery which was totally adverse to every word and letter of the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the
There
will never be WorldPeace without world law.
The courts all over the world are the maintainers of justice and
consequently the preservers of democracy and the guardians of peace and
WorldPeace.
WORLDPEACE V. THE
COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE
The
conflict between myself and the Commission for Lawyer Discipline does not reach
the lofty heights that other litigation reaches but none-the-less my litigation
affects every lawyer in this state and therefore affects every citizen in this
state. Consequently, I know of no
other body of law that has such a grass roots effect on justice as does the
Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure.
There
is no question but that the TRDP is presently skewed in favor of the Commission
for Lawyer Discipline and against Respondent attorneys.
There is a vast chasm between the dictates of the TRDP and the dictates
of the significant body of law relating to legal malpractice.
The first allows any disgruntled client to harass his or her attorney by
simply filing a grievance whereas the “suit within a suit” and “but for”
requirements of a legal malpractice cause of action make it almost impossible
for an ex-client to successfully sue his or her attorney for negligence.
So the threshold in the TRDP is non existent and the threshold for a
legal malpractice suit is sky high.
There
is little commonality between lawyer client litigation within these two bodies
of law.
The
real nuts and bolts problem is that placing such a low threshold on grievances
significantly reduces legal services to the poor.
If there is any one lesson that I have learned from my experience in this
process, it is that indigent clients are potentially deadly to one’s legal
career. A review of the complaints
against me at http://www.johnworldpeace.net/list.htm
will show this court that all six complainants involved less than $5,000 with
half of that being allocated to one complainant.
Crucifying
attorneys over frivolous and groundless complaints such that not returning a
phone call can result in disbarment is doing nothing more than further
restricting access to legal services in this state.
If attorneys are subject to this kind of abuse, then only a foolish
attorney, of which I was one, will help the vast majority of citizens in this
state who cannot afford legal services. No
where is this more evident than in family law.
The problem is so great that the Attorney General had to take on the
burden of collecting past due child support.
In the family courts, money is the foundation of the law.
No money. No attorney. No justice.
WORLDPEACE’S
APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS
Through
my Applications for Writs of Mandamus, I have done everything I could to bring
the defects of the TRDP and the abuses in the application of the TRDP by the
Commission for Lawyer Discipline and Judge Fry to this court’s attention.
The TRDP is significantly defective but it can be fixed.
The fixing will result in the disciplinary leveling of the playing field
such that the tremendous advantage that the Commission for Lawyer Discipline has
in the process can be neutralized.
For example:
1)
If there is a legal malpractice suit filed, the Commission for Lawyer Discipline
must be notified the same way that the Attorney General must be notified
regarding areas of law that could affect the State.
The Commission for Lawyer Discipline would have to determine whether or
not to process a complaint during the underlying lawsuit or waives it rights to
prosecute.
2) Rule 97a TRCP compulsory counterclaims must be filed by the Commission
for Lawyer Discipline against a Respondent attorney in a legal malpractice
lawsuit and the Respondent attorney must file suit against the complainant in a
disciplinary petition if he has a cause of action.
If a compulsory counterclaim is filed by the Commission for Lawyer
Discipline in a legal malpractice suit, then a judge needs to be assigned by
this court to take over the lawsuit along the lines of Rule 3.02 TRDP.
(Cause No. 03-1049; In Re: John
WorldPeace, Supreme Court of Texas; Relator’s Application for Writ of
Mandamus Regarding Rule 41 TRCP Severance and Rule 174(b) TRCP Separate Trials)
3) Respondent attorneys must be given their rights against self
incrimination without being subjected to disbarment.
And this should be automatic not something that must be stated.
There is no greater defect in the TRDP than this.
A client has a right to his file. The
client can request his or her file and the Respondent attorney must provide it.
That is not the same as the Commission for Lawyer Discipline in the
investigative process demanding information from the Respondent attorney outside
what belongs to a client. (Cause
No. 03-1079; In re: John WorldPeace, Supreme Court of Texas; Relator’s
Application for Writ of Mandamus Regarding the Fifth Amendment, The Texas Rules
of Disciplinary Procedure, and The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional
Conduct)
4)
There must be some range of punishment associated with violations.
This is done in the criminal law and should be done in the TRDP.
To make the most minor violation of the TDRPC a disbarment offense is
unjust. The trial judge should also
be required to issue a findings of fact and conclusion of law specifically
stating why he or she found a certain sanction for a certain violation.
A findings of fact and conclusion of law should be required to be
attached to a Disciplinary Judgment for it to be valid.
It
is unjust to find disbarment for every violation because if all but one
violation is negated on appeal, the attorney is still disbarred.
5)
Lay persons should not be allowed to be the gate keepers in determining what
constitutes a complaint or inquiry. This
is absurd.
6)
There should be a special panel of judges who have been tested and schooled in
disciplinary actions to hear disciplinary petitions.
All parties suffer when the judge is apathetic or incompetent to hear
disciplinary matters. It slows down
the disciplinary process and bogs down the appeals.
7)
There must be a way for an attorney to supersede or stay a Judgment for
Disbarment like in every other lawsuit except capital punishment cases.
If there is no supersedeas or stay available, then there needs to be a
fast track appellate process.
8)
There must be a clear delineation as to when an attorney’s due process
rights begin. To say that an
attorney has no due process rights in the investigatory process is wrong.
It gives the Commission for Lawyer Discipline a tremendous advantage to
do things that it could not do in a lawsuit.
9)
Attorney fees cannot be awarded to the Commission when no attorney fees were
incurred. And if attorney fees are
allowed as sanctions, they need to be at the $27 per hour rate that Commission
for Lawyer Discipline attorneys make and not at $150 per hour.
If outside attorneys are employed by the Commission for Lawyer
Discipline, then they can be awarded their rate.
10) If the TRDP is
going to incorporate the TDRPC which defines reasonable and reasonably as “a
reasonably prudent and competent attorney” then the Commission for Lawyer
Discipline must prove up this standard of care with expert testimony just like
in a legal malpractice suit. (Cause
No. 03-1070; In re: John WorldPeace, Supreme Court of Texas; Relator’s
Application for Writ of Mandamus Regarding Expert Witnesses and Rules 1.03(A
& B) and 1.15(D) Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure)
11)
The “must” provisions of the TRDP must be enforced or the term
eliminated. To write “must’ into
the law and then not to enforce it is a farce.
I have a motion in the 14th Court of Appeals which moves for a
stay of the underlying Judgment for Disbarment.
(See Exhibit “B”)
My
position is if the “must” provisions of Rule 3.01 TRDP are not applied to
the Commission for Lawyer Discipline then the provisions of Rule 3.14 TRDP
regarding no supersedeas or stays for Judgements for Disbarment should not be
enforced. To do otherwise is an
unconstitutional selective enforcement of the TRDP against Respondent attorneys.
(Cause No. 03-0990; In re: John
WorldPeace, Supreme Court of Texas; Relator’s Application for Writ of
Mandamus Regarding Rule 3.01 and 3.02 Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure)
12)
Judgments for Disbarment should not become enforceable until the trial court
loses its plenary power. To do
otherwise, creates confusion in the Respondent Attorney’s pending lawsuits.
(Cause No. 03-1083; In re: John
WorldPeace, Supreme Court of Texas; Relator’s Application for Writ of
Mandamus Regarding Judge Fry’s Interlocutory Judgment for Disbarment and
Defacto Disbarment of WorldPeace)
REQUEST
FOR AN ORAL HEARING ON
ALL APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS
WorldPeace
would show the court that all of his applications for mandamus are
interconnected. This court cannot
really consider one without considering them all.
In this mandamus regarding Restitution, it involves the fact that there
were two trials on the issue. Restitution
involves res judicata and res judicata involves more than just restitution in the Collins
complaint. It involves whether the
entire Collins complaint was barred by res
judicata.
Further
and more importantly, if the underlying Judgment for Disbarment is modified in
any way, then the appellate process will begin anew after the Judgment for
Disbarment is changed. WorldPeace
already has a motion to dismiss the appeal in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
based on the fact that the Judgment for Disbarment is interlocutory.
(Exhibit “A” Sans Record) On
If
the other mandamus issues are not heard and Judge Fry simply corrects the
restitution issue, then the amended Judgment for Disbarment will have all the
same defects that are addressed by my other Applications for Writs of Mandamus.
The
net result will be a continuation of what happened last year: WorldPeace was
disbarred on April 23, 2003, then that order set aside on June 23, 2004, and
then another interlocutory Judgment for Disbarment signed on August 27, 2003,
and is about to be set aside.
All
this can be solved by this court requiring a response on all of WorldPeace’s
Applications for Writs of Mandamus (the eight pending in this court and the four
rejected by this court now pending in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals) and have
one hearing to consider all the mandamus issues.
The disciplinary process is in crisis and everyone in this state is affected by it. This matter needs to be resolved as quickly as possible.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE PREMISES
CONSIDERED, WorldPeace prays this court for an oral hearing on all his mandamus
issues and
to mandamus Judge Fry to modify his
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________
John WorldPeace
2620 Fountainview,
Tel. 713-784-7618
Fax. 713-784-9063
TBA No. 21872800
I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading was
forwarded to opposing counsel and Judge Fry on
John WorldPeace
How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace?
![[THE WORLDPEACE BANNER]](wpbanner.gif)
The WorldPeace
Insignia
: Explanation
To order a WorldPeace Insignia lapel pin, go to: Order
To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page
To the WorldPeace Peace Page