Bonavito v. Harvard: The Greatest Pro Se Victory in 50 Years, Part 1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Pro se is Latin for 'in one's own behalf'. The right to appear pro se in a civil case in Federal Court is defined by statute 28 U.S.C. § 1654.
⭐ The court system has a reputation of disrespecting Pro se litigants, but there are many hardworking Judges and support staff trying to treat them fairly.
This video goes into some detail about an article that appeared throughout the country discussing one of the greatest Pro Se victories over a powerful and well-funded defendant.
➡️ One of the most successful Pro se litigation matters in the United States involved one of the most powerful institutions in the country, Harvard University. I will use this complex case to help you get a better understanding of what you will face as a Pro se litigant.
📌 First some background:
Why would someone want to represent themselves in court?
1. To better understand the legal system
2. Lawyers are too expensive
3. Lawyers do not always deliver quality services
4. The case is complex, and lawyers may not fully understand the critical issues
5. If a lawyer won’t take the case because they risk alienating other potential clients
6. The case is simple and a Pro se litigant can do it themselves
➡️ The reason this case was pro se was because many lawyers refused to take the knowing would lose Harvard as a potential client and many of the other elite universities in the State of Massachusetts. In addition, in the State of Massachusetts many judges are alumni and have extensive interactions with Harvard. Studies have also proven that there is a cognitive bias against pro se litigants in the court system which was is proven in a study in 2020 by the American psychological Association. These factors meant that it was impossible to have a quality law firm take on the case.
➡️ The plaintiff entered Harvard in late 2016 after passing the required exams and paying the required fees. As can be seen in the official Harvard transcript clearly all of the requirements for the degree were obtained and this fact is not in dispute. However, the student was denied his degree based on emails from the admission department that indicated that Harvard was denying the degree based on the plaintiff’s age, gender and ethnicity. While this is perfectly okay to do in the United States if you are not accepting billions of dollars of aid from the federal, state and local governments. This is the case with Harvard, they do accept billions of dollars in aid with the understanding they will not discriminate.
With these facts established many law firms did not want to take on the case because it was clear-cut.
📌 Goal of this litigation:
✔️Stop discrimination at elite institutions by age, gender or ethnicity. This was the most important case involving education since Brown vs. The Board of Education of Topeka, which stopped racial segregation in the public school system.
✔️ Obtain the degree that was earned.
✔️ Stop elite educational institutions by admitting students primarily based on students’ family net income rather than their performance within the University’s classrooms.
➡️ The most important aspect of the litigation for Harvard was to move the court case up to Massachusetts so that it could be dismissed by friendly judges. From the plaintiff’s standpoint the most important aspect was to get to discovery, keep the case within the state of New Jersey and have a jury trial.
➡️ As someone who is not a lawyer the most important thing you can do is purchase a service such as Lexis Nexus and learn how to use case law which is critical to the judges. In order to do this the plaintiff took a Harvard legal course on law and how to research, write briefs and use case law. There are also many books and publications that can be found online and videos utilizing RUclips
➡️The opponent was one of the most powerful institutions not only in Massachusetts but the country. They had connections with attorneys, law firms, the court system and judges throughout Massachusetts and a $50 billion war chest.
👉 For more information contact me below or visit our website: www.rabcpafirm...
Robert A. Bonavito, CPA
1812 Front St.
Scotch Plains, NJ 07076
908-322-7719
Well done, sir! You are a god among men. Thank you for standing up for what is right. The most stunning part about this case to me is the fact that HARVARD LAW didn't stand up for what's right, nor did the attorneys you asked to represent you. They stood up for MONEY. Not for humanity, or justice or true equity, they stood for money. Hubby and I just won our case pro se on 9/13! The 2nd judge hated us from the moment he saw us. Ridiculed us, called us a Ed, practiced from the bench, tried to throw us in jail, all with no jurisdiction. It was a Guardianship case brought against hubby's mother who didn't need it. She was never notified/served or told she was in a case,and we fought it pro se with no experience or education on law for 15 months. No attorneys in town wanted to fight this case, sinxe it's a fairly small town, no one wanted to go against the judges or the very powerful former prosecutor in town. It was a super complex case that ended up finally being dismissed for lack of jurisdiction! We called our opponents the criminal Court cartel, like you, and the probate pirates. We fought 2 judges (who got opinions from all the other judges and we were proven right eventually), and 5 attorneys with an accumulated experience of 150 years. Come to find out,only about 1% of guardianship cases in my state are getting notified they're in a case before their rights are removed by a GAL or a guardian. So, we are considering going pro se against the state with a Monell doctrine case. We have lots of evidence, very strong case.... Will be as scary as yours because we will be going up against the state court system full of lawyers, judges, and administrators who will all lose their immunity for not having any jurisdiction over thousands of subjects for decades. They could potentially get jail time. It's going to be huge huge they will all hate us and we need to move out of the state before we do it. Scary. They (lawyers and an illegal guardian) already called the cops on us 4 times since it started with provably false allegations, so we have no doubt they will attempt more harassment or worse. But you are a huge inspiration for us to keep going and protect the elderly and their estates from the probate pirates charging these old folks hundreds per hour for legal services they never wanted or need. Thank you!! What a huge sacrifice for the people.
Good job my brother. Though Harvard is my best school, am happy you won.
Thanks Evan
Thanks Don, glad you enjoyed the video
Thank-You for sharing your story Robert, truly remarkable. You need to write a book " How to navigate America's illegal legal system.
Nailed it.
I appeared pro se in several civil cases against me, brought by the state of Alaska and city of Juneau. Through motion practice I was able to get the suits dismissed. One of the cases was appealed and I’m waiting on the ruling
You can get a good outcome if you have an independent judge who rules based on the pleads. Unfortunately, the judge I had was not independent and did not base his ruling on the pleadings.
I did time in the military and I can attest that in these federal entities that when the top tells the bottom to do something. Progressively from the top down everyone will drag their feet more and more. Then use every loop hole to do the exact opposite of what was demanded. So if the top court say look favorably upon pro se they will treat it with disgust and make it a uphill battle.
It is sad to think that there is a handful of District Court judges who have so little respect for themselves, their colleagues, and the Constitution that they would accept false documents and lie in court to protect their alma mater.
@@Rabcpafirm yea it’s a tough one. I’ve pursued many different paths but I kind of want to pursue constitutional law.
Congrats... "If we change nothing nothing will change.....
Thanks, JB. This case changed the world. Now, individuals who can complete the course requirements at elite universities will have that opportunity. Technology vastly expands the number of students who will have the chance to participate in an elite University on a hybrid basis; there is no reason for anybody with the ability not to receive a degree from an elite university.
Thank you- I’m in the middle of something similar
Hope the video was useful for your matter
Great job
Thanks
YOU were the plaintiff?!? Ok now I get it...
Yes
@@Rabcpafirm idk what really happened why the extension school wouldn't let you register for the masters, though you did have a closely related m.a. so i Guess that's why
alternatively you uncovered some illegality by a corrupt alumnus?
i am sure there is more and less to this than you've said so far. but what?
The big picture of this litigation was to open up elite institutions to any student, regardless of age or gender, who can pass the classes. Remember, this is not the 1970s or 1980s when the student capacities of these institutions were limited by geography, now, with hybrid learning the ability to serve students has been greatly expanded.
Well done!
Thanks
Thanks
Thanks
Thanks
Thanks
Help😭 why would it Cost so much??
There are many benefits to being Pro Se; the main one is that you are not forced to settle due to unavoidable legal fees. High legal fees even cause Fortune 500 companies to settle. If I was not Pro Se, I would’ve been forced to settle or drop my legal battle rather than see it through to its final conclusion. My case is not in the court system because a Federal District Court judge, a Harvard alumnus, relied on knowingly false documents to dismiss my case. However, my litigation took place over six years and required a lot of research databases, outside experts, and consultants. I’m confident that most Pro Se fees will be much lower than mine; you must manage costs closely.
I was forced to take my own case after an uninsured driver totaled my car and he didn’t have insurance. I tried to find a lawyer but they all declined to take my case. And I get that. But that left me with only one option. So I filed it in small claims since there is supposed to be relaxed standards. Long story short I was railroaded by the judge. Rushed. And couldn’t find the sheet of paper proving I’d served the defendant. He didn’t answer. Didn’t show on the day of court. And I still lost. If I had the money to pay for legal representation I would have won in court. Hands down. But because I was a pro se litigant the judge already didn’t like me.
That’s the interesting thing with my case: I beat Harvard and their high-powered attorneys twice before two federal judges. The only time I lost was when I appeared before Judge William Young, a Harvard undergraduate and Harvard law school graduate. There was a 92% chance I would have won if my case went to trial, but somehow, the case was assigned to a District Court judge who was a Harvard alumnus.
I need help
with what