Legal Juice
Back by popular demand, (and subpoena by the Judge of Tigerton Dells), it’s the second installment of “The Adventures of Wickstrom.” (click here for Part One.)
We rejoin “Judge” Wickstrom at the conclusion of his second consecutive nine-month sentence for assuming to act as a public official (judge and clerk). And what, you ask, does Wickstrom do with his newfound freedom? He immediately sues a laundry list of Wisconsin state officials for putting him in prison, including two Attorneys General, the Shawano County District Attorney, several other public officials, witnesses in the criminal case, and “all spouses and kin and/or acquaintences [sic] of the [specifically named] Defendants.” When the state judges refused to grant Wickstrom motion for summary judgment, Wickstrom added the judges to the list of defendants too!
While Wickstrom’s “thirty-four-page, twenty-seven-count complaint lacked the descriptive clarity and precision typically characteristic of pleadings,” it was his filing of “numerous writs, notices, affidavits, and motions” that truly demonstrated his legal acumen. What Wickstrom didn’t understand, however, was that most real judicial orders neither have spelling errors such as “Realease” or “Premptory” in their titles nor are signed by the defendant in a case.
Once again, the judge didn’t exactly sympathize with Wickstrom:
[N]o party is justified in drafting documents that purport to be official Court orders that are, in fact, nothing more than ex parte directives and statements of intention, wholly lacking any judicial imprimatur. In the present case, plaintiffs have filed no fewer than eight such documents, each purporting in some respect to represent an official order of the District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Just as disturbing as the usurpation of the Court’s power and responsibility implicit in these documents is the fact that they purport to order others—both within and without the state and federal branches of government—to take some action in connection with this pending litigation. Among other things, the plaintiffs have “ordered”: (1) the Shawano County Circuit Court to stay execution of judgment in the two recent criminal cases in which plaintiffs were defendants; (2) all banks, credit unions, and savings and loan institutions to attach the assets of defendant Schmidt to guarantee satisfaction of any judgment in plaintiff’s favor; (3) the Shawano County Register of Deeds to register the land title document upon which this action is, in part, based; and (4) the Shawano County Clerk of Court to release certain monies paid as bail in the plaintiffs’ criminal prosecutions.
Wickstrom’s “judicial orders” frequently were accompanied by warnings against any interference or obstruction with the plaintiff’s efforts “to file and serve papers in [his] case.” The Court of course ignored these warnings, and ordered Wickstrom to stop serving people with “spurious documents” that only served “to disrupt the orderly progress of litigation” and promoted “no legitimate interest in resolving the various claims of the parties.” Wickstrom fought back, however, and served the Court with three papers entitled “Notice and Demand/Caveat.” These orders claimed that the Court acted outside of its jurisdiction when it “became a felon and a trader [sic] to the People of the United States,” and threatened the Court with civil prosecution:
Wherefore demand is upon you Judge Warren to stop and cease this malicious attack on my civil rights in this matter if you do not stop this malicious attack by March 8th, 1984, I will be forced to file an action against you, under Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1893, 1895, 1986 and 1988: with the pains and penalties set forth under Title 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 2381, 2382, 2383, 2384, 285, 287, 3, 4, 872, 1001, 1341, 1621, 1622, 1623, 1509, 1510, 1503, 1501… (and the list goes on)… This legal Notice and DEMAND/CAVEAT is a warning of irregularities of my civil rights. Take Notice and govern yourself accordingly or action will be taken against you.
The Court again ignored Wickstrom’s warning, and slapped a hefty sanction on him—requiring him to pay the legal expenses of everyone he had involved in his “malicious litigation.”
The cases are: Wickstrom v. Ebert, et al, 101 F.R.D. 26, and Wickstrom v. Ebert, et al, 585 F. Supp. 924.