New York Bar Applicant Robert E. Brown Receives Response from NY District Court regarding Writ of Habeas Corpus
New York Attorney General and State Court of Appeals disregard of Habeas Corpus Mandates "Writ of Mandamus" Admit Applicant to New York Bar. Brown says his application for admission to the New York State Bar has been ignored by the New York Attorney General and the New York State Court of Appeals. Citing these authorities did not perform their requested duty, Brown filed a Writ of Mandamus with the New York State District Court, to which he just received word back. The court scheduled conference is now set for January 16, 2013.
Wilmington, DE (PRWEB) November 26, 2012
Brown says his application to the New York Bar has been ignored by the New York Attorney General and the New York State Court of Appeals. The Attorney General and New York State Court of Appeal's disregard for the Authorities cited open the door, for Brown's filing of a writ of Mandamus with the New York State District Court, to which he just received word back. The Court scheduled conference is now set for January 16, 2013.
Brown initially filed a “Writ of Habeas Corpus” under “FRCP Rule § 5.1“ which is a Federal Statue that “Mandates” the Intervention of the New York State Attorney General to Intervene when it becomes cognizant of a State Court or Authority has violated a State Statute.
Brown previously requested assistance from the New York State Attorney General's Office, as Brown presented credentials that meets New York State Legislature's definition under title 22 NYSRR § 520.10.
Brown's credentials mandate that Brown be admitted to the New York State Bar according to the definition of the New York State Legislature Statute 22 NYSRR § 520.10 (Admission without Examination) “Malum Prohibitum” as a “Matter of Law.”
Brown's legal background parallels that of former Presidents John Quincy Adams and Abraham Lincoln in that:
- “Adam's attended Harvard College and was graduated in 1787 with a Bachelor of Arts degree, Phi Beta Kappa. Adams House at Harvard College is named in honor of Adams and his father. He later earned an A.M. from Harvard in 1790. He apprenticed as an attorney with Theophilus Parsons in Newburyport, Massachusetts, from 1787 to 1789. He gained admittance to the bar in 1791 and began practicing law in Boston.”
</ul> More powerful Whig opponent. Admitted to the bar in 1836, he moved to Springfield, Illinois, and began to practice law under John T. Stuart, Mary Todd's cousin. Lincoln became an able and successful lawyer with a reputation as a formidable adversary during cross-examinations and closing arguments. He partnered with Stephen T. Logan from 1841 until 1844, when he began his practice with William Herndon, whom Lincoln thought "a studious young man". He served four successive terms in the Illinois House of Representatives as a Whig representative from Sangamon County.”
Brown has more than two (2) decades of Practical Legal experience in the highest Courts in three (3) States, the District of Columbia and a Law Degree in Legal Studies from Kaplan University.
Brown's application for admission to the New York State Bar by Statutory Provision of 22 NYSRR § 520.10 (Admission without Examination) has been ignored by the New York Attorney General and the New York State Court of Appeals. The New York Attorney General and the New York Court of Appeals ignoring of the Legislative Statute 22 NYSRR 520.10 admission to the New York State Bar was given a negative response. Indicates the New York State Attorney General and New York State Court of Appeals, state of mind or (Mens Rea) Latin Term for “a guilty or wrongful purpose.”
The New York State Attorney General and New York State Court of Appeals refusal to enforce the New York Legislative Statutes 22 NYSRR Rule § 520.10 (Admission without Examination) “Mandating” Brown's admission to the New York Bar “Opened the Door” for the filing of what is Termed in Law as an “ Extraordinary Writ of Mandamus.”
“The literal definition of the: “Writ of Mandamus” is a “Mandate” meaning “We Command”, the purpose of Mandamus is to remedy defects of justice. It lies in the cases where something intended or serving to convey a false impression ... Where there is a specific right but no specific legal remedy for enforcing that right. Generally... Mandamus is normally issued when an officer or an authority by obligation of statute is required to perform a duty and which despite demand in writing has not been performed.
On November 16, 2012 Brown received by mail the response to the “Writ of Mandamus Brown filed on October 25, 2012, from the New York State District Court for the Northern District of New York, of an “Order” granting Brown the Privilege of: Appearances of Counsel (Pro Se), Leave to Proceed In Forma Paupers (IFP) and scheduled January 16, 2013 Conference on the issue of Brown's admission to the New York State Bar.
For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/11/prweb10166948.htmView Comments and Join the Discussion!