Action for Justice, Pro Se

Karen Marie Kline,

Plaintiff,

v. NO. CIV-04 -309 ACT DJS

James Hall, Judge
Art Encinias, former Judge,
First Judicial District Court,
First Judicial District Court Clerk,
New Mexico Court of Appeals,

Defendants.

COMES NOW, Karen Kline, Plaintiff, pro se, and files this complaint
grounded in the following claims and allegations of fact:

1. Plaintiff is a resident of Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico,
and is now and was at all material times a qualified individual with a
disability who by reason of such disability has been excluded from
participation in or denied the benefits of the services, programs or
activities of a public entity and was subjected to discrimination by such
entity.

2. James Hall is a judge in the First Judicial District Court of New
Mexico, Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, who does not have
judicial immunity when he discriminates and refuses to follow the
NMRA and Constitution of the United States and in other ways breaks
the law.

3. Art Encinias was a judge in the First Judicial District Court of New
Mexico, Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, who did not have
judicial immunity when he discriminated and refused to follow the
NMRA and Constitution of the United States and in other ways breaks
the law.

4. The First Judicial District Court of New Mexico is located in Santa
Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico.

5. The First Judicial District Court Clerk of New Mexico is located in
Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico.

6. This case is filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C., The Americans with
Disabilities Act, and seeks damages thereunder.

7. This case is filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and seeks
damages thereunder.

8. The US District Court properly has jurisdiction in this case pursuant
to the statutes listed above.

9. I am being deprived of justice because I need to be able to rely on
the rules, and James Hall, in ever case he has heard in which I was
involved has either said he was not going to follow the rules or in fact
simply did not follow the rules or said he was going to sanction me for
not doing things that aren’t in the rules. I am in desperate poverty
because I cannot go into court and get justice and a remedy when the
rules aren’t followed; I no longer have a fully functioning working
memory and have lost about half of my processing speed, so I must be
able to rely on the rules in order to be heard in court and have due
process of law.

10. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, has denied me my right to present
my case against Dean Johnson, and has then ruled as if the case had
been presented without being cut short.

11. Alleged fact: James Hall did nothing when Johnson wrote in a
pleading that it would be against God for him to pay the judgment.

12. Alleged fact: James Hall did nothing about the fact that Johnson
had represented himself to me to be an LLM specialized tax attorney,
when in fact he hadn’t been admitted to the bar anywhere. Clearly
Johnson was committing fraud against me and taking advantage of my
disability. But when I tried to get a remedy from the court, I was
threatened with sanctions and was told that it didn’t matter that Johnson
had told me he was a lawyer. If Hall were properly acting as a judge he
would not allow someone to pretend to be a lawyer then try to take my
home in payment for legal work he did wrong and inadequately and
fraudulently.

13. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, next discriminated against and
damaged me by threatening me with sanctions for not following “rules”
in relation to garnishment which are not written and I therefore have no
way of following, specifically that I must serve interrogatories before
proceeding.

14. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, next denied me my right to follow
the rules to seek payment of the judgment against Johnson via
garnishment, by threatening to sanction me if I proceeded against
another person/business who had money of Johnson’s.

15. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, has discriminated against me by ex
parte communication with a lawyer and by allowing the lawyer to treat
me in a demeaning way. I am sure that James Hall allowed the
inappropriate treatment because when his secretary called the lawyer,
Casey, the lawyer swore using my name and a loud voice and hung up
on her. The secretary, Ailene, said she didn’t like that at all, being
treated that way, and that she was going to tell the judge. I believe she
did that, and the judge did nothing about the behaviour because he
favored the discriminatory behavior. Hall certainly did not tell the
lawyer in court that the letter was inappropriate and that it was
necessary to follow the rules of motion practice.

16. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, has at various times told me I
couldn’t read my prepared case, which made it impossible for me to
cogently present my case because I am lacking a significant part of my
working memory and processing speed.

17. Alleged fact: James Hall, judge, has told me that I’m the only
person he knows of who would talk about the Constitution, as if that’s a
bad thing, and he has made it clear from statements of his that he does
not think the Constitution is something I have a right to invoke.

18. Alleged fact: At the hearing in my defamation case, I read the
following which I trusted applied:

“Your honor, In preparation for this hearing, I read Rule 12(B)(6)
which says,

‘If, on a motion asserting the defense in Subparagraph (6) of this

paragraph to dismiss

for failure of the pleading to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted, matters

outside the pleading are

presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be

treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided

in Rule 1-056.”’

So, I read Rule 1-056 and its annotation cases, the first of which says
that the purpose of a summary judgment proceeding is to expedite
litigation by determining whether a party possesses competent evidence
to support his pleadings so as to raise genuine issues of material fact...
Goffe v. Pharmaseal Labs., Inc., 90 N.M. 764, 568 P.2d 600 (Ct. App.
1976).’

Another case says, ‘One of the principal purposes of the summary
judgment rule is to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims
or defenses. Goradia v. Hahn Co., 111 N.M. 779, 810 P.2d 798
(1991).’”

James Hall said he was not going to follow that rule, he was just going
to dismiss; and, he wouldn’t let me introduce factual evidence, which
means I was not able to defend my reputation and false things are being
treated as if they were true.

19. James Hall, acting in the capacity of a judge but not honoring the
Constitution, has repeatedly denied me access to justice.

20. James Hall’s repeated denials have caused me extreme anxiety with
the result that I often have found my knees so weak when I am before
him, that I have to support myself by leaning on the table or rostrum.

21. James Hall’s repeated discrimination and denials of my rights have
put me into the position of losing my home (foreclosure has been filed),
I have already lost most of my income, and my health has been
severely impacted to include that I just had shingles for months, and
now have tinnitus which may never go away.

22. It is clearly wrong that I am being hurt when I go into court for
help and for a remedy.

23. Before this, Art Encinias, has not allowed me to present my case.
He would close the hearing and then allow me to read what I had
prepared. He was clearly putting me down and discriminating against
me. He would shuffle papers and make it clearly evident that he had no
respect for me. He sanctioned me $250 for not agreeing to a
continuance, when the law states that the automatic stay prohibits
further litigation. He treated me so badly that my throat became sore
and I felt like I had the flu; in fact, blood tests showed that following
that hearing in front of him, my B12 blood level fell 300 points.

24. If Art Encinias had not denied me my rights, I would not be in such
a desperate position here and now, but he did, and I am and it is getting
worse day by day.

25. When I didn’t have enough money to buy a black ink cartridge, I
sent in a pleading printed in green. The clerk filed it, then unfiled it and
sent the pleading back to me with the file stamp crossed out. When I
asked what rule this had been done pursuant to, I was told there was no
rule.

26. The First Judicial District Court, presided over by Judge Carol
Vigil, in the Nichols case, ignored the impact the non-lawyer (Johnson)
had on me and my case since he wrote it. The Court didn’t treat me as
if my case had merit, which since there is a federal case in which my
position was upheld, appeared to be because I was pro se and have a
mental disability and because she deferred to the lead/ “precedent”
provided by James Hall concomitantly.

27. The New Mexico Appeals Court has disallowed me free process
because I had equity in my home. Since I can’t get the equity out in
time to pay for an appeal and have it be timely, I am denied legal rights
that people with more money than me have. That is not equal
protection of the law.

28. The New Mexico Appeals Court allowed me to be treated in a
completely different and demeaning way from the way it treated
attorneys, in the Nichols case. This was devastating to me and caused
me a severe depression that resulted in aggravated cognitive
dysfunction.

29. The State of New Mexico owes me a duty of providing judges who
are not prejudiced and who do not discriminate and deprive me of
rights, or of removing judges who are prejudiced and do discriminate.

WHEREFORE I respectfully request relief in an amount to be
determined at trial.

By

.
Karen Kline, Plaintiff, pro se

Santa Fe, NM 87507
(505)

SUBSCRIBED, SWORN TO AND ACKNOWLEDGED this 18th
day of March, 2004 by Karen Marie Kline.

Notary Public
My Commission Expires:

When Judge Steve
Herrera was killed in a
car accident I was
devastated because he
had treated me as if I had
standing.

In contrast, much of my
pro se experience in the
state courts has been
abysmal.

For instance, a Default
Judgment of Foreclosure
was entered against me in
1997 even though I had
timely filed an answer.

When I attempted suicide
after that, just before my
home was to be sold on
the courthouse steps, a
magistrate court judge
had me taken out of the
hospital by police and put
in jail because of weeds -
literal weeds in my front
yard.

To put this in perspective
the foreclosure judge is
now a justice on the NM
State Supreme Court.

After my home was sold
on the courthouse steps,
an adviser filed Chapter
11 in bankruptcy court
for me and I got my
home back.

But the adviser, a "trust"
expert, got me to lend
him money on
"diamonds" that were
cubic zirconium; he
wrecked my car, wrote
me bad checks, and
finally tried to take my
home.

Encouraged by my
experience in federal
bankruptcy court, I tried
to get relief in state court,
but the adviser was white
haired, spoke in a
bumbling way that made
him seem the most home
spun honest guy ever,
and he said he was my
boyfriend and I'd been
abusing him.

He didn't say that he
called it abuse when I
asked him to repay
money he owed me.

I, on the other hand, am
too tall and fat, and I had
to read because I have
some brain damage and I
can't just say the things
when there is stress and
pressure.

The judge, Judge Hall,
said he believed the
adviser. And after that,
no matter what my case
was, it appeared that
Judge Hall had already
made up his mind against
me, to include that he
would not accommodate
my disability.

When I filed for an
injunction against the
other condo owners to
protect me from things
they were doing in
relation to the privy pit,
Judge Hall said in court
that he would have my
foreclosures and he
would see to it that I paid
them everything I owed,
giving the impression that
without seeing any facts
he knew that it was I
who owed them money,
not vice versa.

Because I had made up
my mind not to attempt
suicide again, I had to
think of some way to
deal with the extreme
prejudice this judge was
showing.

Believing that the ADA
might protect me, I filed
this Complaint in federal
court.

It kept Judge Hall from
hearing my foreclosures,
so it saved my property.
And I'm glad I filed it.

But, the other judges
took revenge in 2005 and
2006, foreclosing my
condo without a hearing,
so I lost $150,000.00 in
equity and $5,000 I spent
on it after it had been
auctioned because I
didn't know about the
judgement.

At the hearing to
Approve the Sale, the
lawyer for the Deutsche
Bank lied, and Judge
Vigil went along with it.

Look at my Brief, read
the transcriptions from
the hearing. It is quite
shocking.

My suit was doomed to
fail since I named the
judges. I should have
sued the state of New
Mexico.

Since they've denied me
accommodation under
the ADA, Title II, and
there's not even an ADA
Coordinator for the state
courts, I am going to file
a tort claim notice and
bring suit again, only this
time I'll do it right.