Free Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 36.2 kB
Pages: 3
Date: October 23, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 667 Words, 4,214 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/35412/809.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Arizona ( 36.2 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Arizona
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ) ) ) Judgment Creditor, ) ) vs. ) ) ) Michael Alaniz; Paul Richard; et al., ) ) Judgment Debtors. __________________________________) ) American Investors Life Insurance) ) Company, Inc., ) ) Garnishee. ) Lawrence J. Warfield, a Receiver, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

No. CV-03-2390-PHX-JAT (LOA) ORDER

On October 17, 2007, the Hon. James A. Teilborg issued an order, docket # 807, referring pro se Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard's Motion for Hearing on Garnishment of Non-Earnings, docket # 805, to the undersigned. On October 19, 2007, the undersigned's judicial assistant spoke with Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard telephonically and scheduled a mutually-agreeable date and time for the hearing pursuant to Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard's Request for Hearing. No written Objection has been filed to date by or on behalf of Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard. Since Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard is pro se and, therefore, is representing himself, he is hereby advised that the United States Supreme Court has made clear: federal
"judges have no obligation to act as counsel or paralegal to pro se litigants" because requiring

trial judges to explain the details of federal procedure or act as the pro se's counsel "would
Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT Document 809 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

undermine [federal] judges' role as impartial decisionmakers." Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 226-227 (2004). "A defendant does not have a constitutional right to receive personal instruction
from the trial judge on courtroom procedure" and that "the Constitution [does not] require judges to take over chores for a pro se defendant that would normally be attended to by trained counsel as a matter of course." Id. (citing Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist., 528 U.S. 152 (2000)).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1580(B) that a hearing on Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard's Request for Hearing on Garnishment of Non-Earnings is set before the undersigned for Wednesday, November 7, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. (Arizona time). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1580(A) that Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard shall file a written Objection to the subject Writ of Garnishment by 5:00 p.m. (Arizona time) on Wednesday, October 29, 2007 setting forth the factual and legal reasons, with citation to appropriate authorities, why the garnished monies are exempt from garnishment. Absent good cause shown, failure to timely file a written Objection may result in the summary denial of any objection to the subject writ of garnishment and a recommendation that the subject Garnishee pay over to JudgmentCreditor Warfield the garnished property. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard may appear telephonically by promptly calling (602) 322-7620 for the Hearing on Garnishment of NonEarnings so long as he timely files a request to appear telephonically with the Clerk on or before Wednesday, October 29, 2007. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Judgment-Creditor Warfield shall file a written Response on or before Tuesday, November 6, 2007 to Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard's filed Objection setting forth the factual and legal reasons, with citation to appropriate authorities, why the garnished monies are not exempt from garnishment.

-2Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT Document 809 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a hearing is held on the JudgmentDebtor's Objection, "the prevailing party may be awarded costs and attorney fees in a reasonable amount determined by the court." A.R.S. § 12-1580(E). Chamber's staff shall promptly call Judgment-Debtor Paul Richard, advise him of the deadlines herein and mail or fax him a copy of this signed order. Dated this 22nd day of October, 2007.

Copy mailed and e-mailed to Judgment Debtor Paul Richard 11 Roseanne Avenue August, ME 04330 ([email protected]) this 22nd dayof October, 2007 vlg

-3Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT Document 809 Filed 10/23/2007 Page 3 of 3