Representing yourself in court is rarely a good idea. Spend a day in traffic court if you want numerous demonstrations. Some of those folks are incompetent to the point of amusement, but once in a while, someone comes along who is simply epic, for lack of a better word.
One of those people is Paul Hupp. Mr. Hupp is a man of passion and conviction. He’s also quite the amateur litigant. I say “amateur” because he failed to procure admission to the California bar, then attempted to get said denial overturned in court.
Feeling that his money was thus wasted on law school, he attempted to get his obligations to student loans discharged. Failing in this, he tried to sue over the matter. The result? More failure.
See a pattern to this man’s life yet? It gets better.
He filed a petition to the 9th Circuit to appeal his case, not just in front of a panel, but en banc. This is where it gets fun. Witness what happens [pdf] when that combination of enthusiasm and general ineptitude all comes together:
This proceeding involves several issues of great importance, including several Constitutional issues that are of first impression nationwide. Issues so important that the Unites States of America intervened into the case to defend them.
Second, let Plaintiff make this very clear hear and now at the beginning of this petition-this Court is now on notice that public will no longer tolerate violations of the Constitution, by the Congress or the judges/judiciary that think they can rig the system, violating basic constitutional rights and engage in these acts with impunity.
The typos and grammatical errors are verbatim. It gets better.
Plaintiff has news for these slime ball, piece of ____, ass clown judges (Bowie, Canby, Thomas and Fletcher-this means you) that think they are going to rig the system and railroad the poor and innocent (…) that simply is not going to happen in this case. You ___ suckers are now on notice.
The facts of this case are going to come out, one way or the other. Remember that bitches.
(…) Plaintiff wants the three (3) little bitches who are referring to themselves as judges on this case to be on notice that allowing criminal and civil fraud to take place (…) is going to result in civil unrest. And that civil unrest is going to start out on the doorsteps of dirty judges.
Needless to say, the 9th Circuit rejected his main argument [pdf] regarding financial hardship and ruled that “Hupp’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.”
Perhaps when Uwe Boll chooses to remake Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Mr. Hupp will find fame in a revised version of Jefferson Smith.