UPL

Family Association is a Fundamental Human Right

Looking at & reading this
web site is great.
Copying, downloading, distributing
printing or saving is not permitted
Thank you for respecting
intellectual property rights.

Password to open all docs is
I agree
Indicating your express agreement to terms of use.

Problems with this website?
Why can’t I print?
What is password?

Unauthorized Practice of Law
(UPL)

SLAPP*
a Family Rights Activist
-or-
Just How Free are We to Exercise Our First Amendment Rights?

*Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation

UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

All across this country, lay advocates are being targeted for their knowledge of the law and advocacy of issues that generate public interests and which are near and dear to their hearts. These advocates often face threats and prosecution under ”Unauthorized Practice of Law” (UPL) rules

The instigators of these attacks are usually incompetent attorneys and judges whose professional (mis)conduct has been exposed and/or whose professional competence has been publicly attacked by diligent citizen-activists. In many cases, these law professionals have actually been ‘shown-up’ by lay persons and rather than improve their professional practices, they prefer to harass and persecute anyone who dares to demand a high standard of conduct and practice in the law profession. There truly is an elite organization, the Brotherhood of the Bar, where status supersedes competence and integrity is a dirty word.. By defnition, a profession polices itself. The legal profession has not done that, as evidenced by the volume of attorney complaints that are not prosecuted. It is time to institute citizen oversight over the legal profession.

Suzanne Shell has found herself being persecuted for her advocacy on behalf of families involved with Child Protective Services agencies. To some, this is a shameful thing. To others, this is a badge of honor. Indeed, many parents regard this Supreme Court prosecution of Ms. Shell as evidence of her competence in the area of child protection and judge it to be state endorsement of her knowledge and skill. Regardless of where you stand on this issue, you may find the following UPL information to be of interest. .

While she was on trial for contempt of the Colorado Supreme Court arising out of false UPL allegations by an attorney who represents DHS, the Colorado Supreme Court accredited her continuing legal education (CLE) program for 8.5 hours of CLE credits. She has been accredited multiple times in Colorado and as well as in 4 other states.

Ms. Shell’s complaint to Judicial Performance Commission. Brief History of UPL complaints against her.

History of UPL cases against Ms. Shell:

UPL Subpoena March 28, 2001

Ms. Shell’s motion for protective order.

Notice of Refusal to Waive Rights connected with subpeona for deposition. Ms. Shell appeared at a second deposition and asserted the 5th amendment to all questions except name and address.

Ms. Shell’s Notice of Another method of recording (deposition) To be allowed to videotape deposition

UPL Petition for Injunction and Contempt

Ms. Shell’s answer to UPL injunction.

Ms. Shell’s answer to contempt citation. Coyle filed for contempt after Ms. Shell refused to consent to search as condition of entering location of deposition.

Motion to Dismiss UPL action which was denied.

UPL Request for production of documents from Ms. Shell.

Ms.Shell’s Request for production of documents.

Reply to UPL committee’s request for documents. Ms. Shell never produced any documents to the UPL Committee.

It was clear that the law didn’t matter to the court. Final outcome of first UPL 9-19-2001- (Coyle) submits stipulation which doesn’t conform to mediation terms, Ms. Shell advises Court of discrepancies. Corrected stipulation and injunction accepted by court.

Ms. Shell then stopped advocating on individual cases unless the attorney hired her. She refocused on publishing, training and news gathering.

Then, April 30, 2003, Ms. Shell was advised that the UPL committee had received another complaint from Fremont County attorney Rocco Meconi. This complaint occurred shortly after Ms. Shell attended and observed a termination of parental rights trial in Fremont County. Due to the theft of Ms. Shell’s intellectual property by Fremont County ‘players’, and of actions perpetrated against her by state actors for her bold publication of state abuses, this saga of attacks against Ms. Shell for the exercise of her rights, including documentation and commentary, will be continued on our membership pages to help insure Ms. Shell’s protection against future theft and retaliation.

The harassment continues. . .you can see more information at www.knowyourcourts.com click on the document repository link.




		[Home] [Family Rights] [PEP] [Copyright] [Recomended Reading]

EMAIL THE AMERICAN FAMILY ADVOCACY CENTER *** Our client lists are confidential. Please do not ask who disclosed certain information to AFAC. This information is not available to the public and will be vigorously guarded from disclosure to protect those clients whose children remain at risk of state-sanctioned kidnaping of their children.
Information included on these pages is not legal advice, we are not attorneys. You are advised to consult with an attorney on any legal matters.
Any legal documents on this site were prepared and/or drafted by attorneys or under the supervision of an attorney, or by pro se respondent parents and/or subject children and are published here with their permission. Any phone calls or other oral communications with our staff may be recorded at our discretion. Any person engaging in conversation with any of our staff is presumed to have given express consent to be recorded. ALL MATERIAL ON THESE PAGES IS COPYRIGHT 1996-2007 SUZANNE SHELL reproduction without written permission is prohibited.

IF YOU COPY OR DISTRIBUTE ANYTHING ON THIS WEB SITE, YOU ARE ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT. SEE COPYRIGHT NOTICE & SECURITY AGREEMENT (READ BEFORE ACCESSING THIS WEB SITE) - Copyright 1996- 2007, Suzanne Shell and individual contributors where appropriate. The content if this web site is intended to generate income, it is not free if you intend to archive, copy, print or distribute anything electronically fixed herein. Simply put, read, browse, learn freely. Copy, print, save, or distribute - get permission first or pay.

Reproduction and distribution prohibited without permission. This web site is licensed to be viewed on a computer only.Permission and limited, non-exclusive license to reproduce this web site, by any method including but not limited to magnetically, digitally, electronically or hard copy, may be purchased for $5,000 (five thousand dollars) per printed hard copy page per copy, in advance of printing. We accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, check, money order or cash. WE DO NOT ACCEPT GOVERNMENT PO’S - this fee schedule specifically applies to any state agency, employee, contractor, GAL, attorney or CPS service provider or any person listed on the Consumer Advisory. CPS agencies and associates have found this site to be extremely valuable, preferring the contents of this site to any other site. Hence, the premium price. Family Rights activists or advocates may obtain reduction or waiver of license fees upon request.

All online purchases through Payloadz (tm) are nonrefundable. In the case of a dispute involving a purchase, the purchaser agrees that the record of electronic delivery generated by the online document delivery service shall constitute incontrovertible proof that the item charged was delivered to an authorized user of the credit card or online payment service account. If the card owner contests the charge the document was delivered and we are charged fees for a charge back, cardholder agrees to pay to us the amount of the purchase plus $50 or double the purchase price, whichever is greater, upon demand.

If this intellectual property is stolen, infringed or used to harm any member or associate family of any Family Rights group, the copyright holder will seek appropriate remedies under applicable laws. Anyone visiting this site consents to jurisdiction and venue remaining in El Paso County, Colorado.

H=88>

Q. If you could do only ONE thing to protect your family, what would that be?
A. Amend Your State Constitution with the FAMILY RIGHTS AMENDMENT

Search at TigerDirect.com: