Fraud upon the court

Fraud upon the court


Editor's note: This post should be of special interest to those parties who have cases in the Probate Court of Cook County where fraud is an art form.  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster,  ProbateSharks.com


In the United States, when an officer of the court*** is found to have fraudulently presented facts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task, the act, known as "fraud upon the court", is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation.

Officers of the court include: Lawyers, Judges, Referees, and those appointed; Guardian Ad Litem, Parenting Time Expeditors, Mediators, Rule 114 Neutrals, Evaluators, Administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.

"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication". Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23

In Bullock v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."
 
 
***The generic term officer of the court (not to be confused with court officers) applies to all those who, in some degree in function of their professional or similar qualifications, have a legal part—and hence legal and deontological obligations—in the complex functioning of the judicial system as a whole, in order to forge justice out of the application of the law and the simultaneous pursuit of the legitimate interests of all parties and the general good of society.


They can be divided into the following functional groups; in most case various synonyms and parallels exist as well as a variety of operational variations, depending on the jurisdiction and the changes in relevant legislation:

Contents
1 Court proper

2 Investigation and expertise

3 Services to the parties

4 Sources and references

Court proper

Foremost those who make the decisions that determine the course of justice and its outcome:

judges, magistrates and arbitrators

prosecutors

attorneys for each party - the Supreme Court of the United States held in Ex parte Garland, 71 U. S. 333 (1866) that "Attorneys and counselors are not officers of the United States; they are officers of the court, admitted as such by its order upon evidence of their possessing sufficient legal learning and fair private character."

Investigation and expertise

These are, like the accidental witness, though not in chief of accidental access to relevant information but through their skills, experience and equipment, used to provide information to the actual decision makers above

coroners, medical examiners, and other medical experts

other judicial experts in various fields, such as state certified appraisers, certified public accountants and other professionally licensed or certified persons retained by the parties to give expert advice, the testimony and exhibits of which is admitted by the Court.

amicus curiae is a vague term for other persons consulted by the cour
marshal, sheriff, constable
bail bondsmen

Services to the parties

Bail bondsmen, who may however undertake action to capture an absconding client

Interpreters/translators are generally considered officers of the court. They render their services to the parties in the interests of the court proceedings. There are interpreters who may be employed on a permanent basis by courts to act as interpreters when called upon, e.g. International Court of Justice and the European Court of Justice. In some jurisdictions interpreters may also be deemed as officers of the court pro tempore. Court interpreters and translators have an absolute ethical duty to tell judges the truth and avoid evasion.

Court Appointed Special Advocates in some jurisdictions are considered officers of the court.

Process servers carry out service of process. In some jurisdictions they are appointed by a court and are considered appointed officers of the court.