-4-
In 1994, petitioner brought suit against Valley’s successor,
Bank of America (the bank), a Nevada Supreme Court justice who
participated in the 1993 decision, and others (together,
defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada
(District Court) in case No. CV-N-94-455. Petitioner’s complaint
alleged that the defendants violated his civil rights under 42
U.S.C. sec. 1983 during the State court proceedings and conspired
to violate Federal and State RICO statutes.
Petitioner’s civil rights complaint in case No. CV-N-94-455
(complaint) consisted of alleged violations of his rights to
procedural and substantive due process. Petitioner alleged that
his procedural due process rights were violated by certain of the
defendants, including the bank, providing financial support to
“lawyer politicians” seeking elected judicial office in Nevada,
so as to create an
atmosphere of “obligation” on the part of the lawyer
politician who is elected to the position of district
court judge or Nevada Supreme Court Justice to
facilitate obtaining “legal protection” from said
elected lawyer politician * * * for any of the conduct
or actions of these Defendants which result in legal
action being taken against them.
Petitioner claimed that, as a result of this atmosphere of
obligation, his procedural due process rights were further
violated through misconduct of the Nevada judiciary that
included:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011