Pro Se. Know When It's Fraud Upon The Court and Filing The Rule 60 Motion.
Empowerment Lawyer ● 4 Pro Se Litigant
25,082 views
⚠️ LEGAL CLARIFICATION & DEFINTION:
In this video, I want to ensure the distinction between "Fraud upon the Court" and "Fraud between the Parties" is perfectly clear, especially regarding how representation impacts the law.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60:Rule 60(b)(3) (Fraud Between the Parties):
This applies to misrepresentations, lies, or hidden assets between spouses. If a spouse is acting pro se (representing themselves), their misconduct falls under this rule. It carries a strict one-year time limit to file.
Rule 60(d)(3) (Fraud Upon the Court): This is a much higher legal bar reserved for an intentional scheme that corrupts the judicial machinery itself. Because a pro se litigant is not an officer of the court, their personal lies do not automatically trigger this rule.
Instead, a Rule 60(d) claim typically requires the involvement of an officer of the court—such as a licensed attorney. This mechanism has no time limit.Whether a party is self-represented or hiring counsel fundamentally dictates which rule applies.
Thank you for tracking these details—precision matters when navigating the legal system!
20 Comments
I know a person that was fired after reporting their workplace injury to their employer.
The former employer is committing Workers Compensation Fraud to avoid liability for the persons injury.
The former employer has provided false statements and false evidence to justify terminating the injured employee.
The employer appears to be protected by the system and despite reporting the fraudulent activities by the employer to several government agencies, no one as yet has taken the accusation of fraud seriously and the victim has been told to move on with their life that their complaints will go nowhere.
Even the Sheriffs department that has jurisdiction will not allow the aggrieved party to put their complaint on the record.
Now the persons WC attorney has dropped representing the person.
No one has yet to help this victim of their former employers misconduct.
I am amazed how many people give different answers to wether things in this matter are civil or criminal. There are elements of both.
The employer is a big green energy construction company.
Example, adoption fraud
The attorney failed to contact me at my forwarding address. To obtain a default judgement.
I contacted the court informed them I wasn't properly serve as a out of state defendant.
Judge allowed attorney to send me a certified letter .after I received it they filed a publication to enter a default judgement.
I filed a motion for appearce by phone judge did not answer my motion and granted default judgement.
The attorney filed an affidavit for publication after I accepted the summons by filing a publication the attorney triggered the default judgement hearing.
The affidavit said I was not found a process server and certified mail failed.
I filed two motions prior to publication.
Now the judge granted default judgement. I complained it was a fraud .
Months passed the foreclosure case closed no sale.
The case is now on appeal.
So in the case of fraud that majestric judge was parrot of it what choices do I have. Thanks a million
Pro Se. Know When It's Fraud Upon The Court and Filing The Rule 60 Motion.
Empowerment Lawyer ● 4 Pro Se Litigant
25,082 views
⚠️ LEGAL CLARIFICATION & DEFINTION:
In this video, I want to ensure the distinction between "Fraud upon the Court" and "Fraud between the Parties" is perfectly clear, especially regarding how representation impacts the law.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60:Rule 60(b)(3) (Fraud Between the Parties):
This applies to misrepresentations, lies, or hidden assets between spouses. If a spouse is acting pro se (representing themselves), their misconduct falls under this rule. It carries a strict one-year time limit to file.
Rule 60(d)(3) (Fraud Upon the Court): This is a much higher legal bar reserved for an intentional scheme that corrupts the judicial machinery itself. Because a pro se litigant is not an officer of the court, their personal lies do not automatically trigger this rule.
Instead, a Rule 60(d) claim typically requires the involvement of an officer of the court—such as a licensed attorney. This mechanism has no time limit.Whether a party is self-represented or hiring counsel fundamentally dictates which rule applies.
Thank you for tracking these details—precision matters when navigating the legal system!
To clear up any confusion on the legal rules mentioned in this video:
Rule 60(b)(3) (Fraud Between Parties): Applies to misrepresentations or hidden assets between spouses. If a spouse is pro se (representing themselves), their misconduct falls here. Strict 1-year time limit to file.
Rule 60(d)(3) (Fraud Upon the Court): A much higher legal bar for schemes that corrupt the judicial machinery itself. This typically requires the involvement of an officer of the court, such as a licensed attorney. There is no time limit.
A pro se litigant's personal lies do not automatically elevate a case to a Rule 60(d) violation—the involvement of counsel changes the legal standard. Accuracy matters, so thank you for tracking these details!