{"id":86371,"date":"2025-08-06T11:12:55","date_gmt":"2025-08-06T11:12:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/?p=86371"},"modified":"2025-08-06T11:12:55","modified_gmt":"2025-08-06T11:12:55","slug":"fraud-on-the-court-exposed-federal-judge-vacates-complaint-to-block-default-judgment-in-ada-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/?p=86371","title":{"rendered":"Fraud on the Court Exposed: Federal Judge Vacates Complaint to Block Default Judgment in ADA Case"},"content":{"rendered":"

Fraud on the Court Exposed: Federal Judge Vacates Complaint to Block Default Judgment in ADA\u00a0Case<\/strong><\/p>\n

Veguita, NM \u2013 August\u00a02025<\/p>\n

In a stunning turn of events, pro se civil rights plaintiff Joseph Lathus has uncovered what appears to be a calculated act of fraud on the court by U.S. District Judge Dominic W. Lanza in the case Lathus v. Round Valley Justice Court, Case No. 3:24-cv-08233. At stake? Constitutional rights, ADA protections, and over $2.6 million in damages from defaulting county defendants who failed to answer the\u00a0lawsuit.<\/p>\n

\ud83d\udca3 The Deception: Court Vacates the Only Served Complaint Without Motion
After properly filing and serving his original complaint in December 2024\u2014and after defendants failed to respond within the FRCP 12 deadline\u2014Mr. Lathus was entitled to a Clerk\u2019s Entry of Default under Rule\u00a055(a).<\/p>\n

Instead, Judge Lanza, newly assigned to the case, sua sponte vacated the operative complaint (Doc. 1), claiming that a later Second Amended Complaint (SAC) had overtaken it.<\/p>\n

But here\u2019s the\u00a0catch:<\/p>\n

The SAC was never served, never issued a summons, and was never responded to by any defendant.<\/p>\n

Under well-established law, an amended complaint only supersedes the original when properly served.\u00a0See:<\/p>\n

\ud83d\udd39 Gilles v. Davis, 427 F.3d 197 (3d Cir. 2005):<\/em> Unserved amended complaints do not supersede operative pleadings.<\/p>\n

\ud83d\udd39 Radtke v. Everett, 682 F. Supp. 2d 1096 (E.D. Wash. 2010<\/em>): Failure to respond to a served complaint warrants\u00a0default.<\/p>\n

This vacatur had no motion, no jurisdictional foundation, and no legal authority\u2014and its sole effect was to obstruct the Clerk from entering default judgment.<\/p>\n

\ud83e\udde0 What Is \u201cFraud on the Court\u201d?
According to Alexander v. Robertson, 882 F.2d 421 (9th Cir.\u00a01989):<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cFraud on the court is a grave wrong that corrupts the judicial machinery itself<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

In this case, the fraud occurred\u00a0when:<\/p>\n

A judge removed a valid, served complaint without cause or\u00a0motion;<\/p>\n

A major law firm\u2014Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, representing the county\u2014benefited from that obstruction;<\/p>\n

The entry of default, which would have handed Mr. Lathus a significant victory, was sabotaged.<\/p>\n

\ud83e\udde9 Connecting the Dots: A Pattern of Retaliation?
Joseph Lathus, a disabled cancer survivor, father of five, and independent legal warrior, alleges that this act was no accident.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey saw me as disabled, assumed I wouldn\u2019t fight back, and tried to bury my case quietly,\u201d says Lathus. \u201cBut I caught them in the act, and now I\u2019m documenting it for the world to\u00a0see<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lathus has filed multiple motions, including:<\/p>\n

\u25cf A Motion to Strike the unlawful\u00a0vacatur;<\/p>\n

\u25cf A Rule 11 Sanctions Motion against counsel for misrepresentation;<\/p>\n

\u25cf And now, a forthcoming Rule 60(d)(3) Motion for fraud on the\u00a0court.<\/p>\n

\u2696\ufe0f Why It Matters<\/strong>
The implications are massive\u2014not just for Lathus, but for pro se litigants nationwide.<\/p>\n

This case may serve as precedent to:<\/p>\n

Hold judges accountable for exceeding their authority;<\/p>\n

Expose collusion between courts and politically connected defense\u00a0firms;<\/p>\n

Defend the procedural rights of disabled and disenfranchised plaintiffs.<\/p>\n

\u201cFraud on the court isn\u2019t a paperwork error. It\u2019s an attack on justice itself,\u201d<\/em> says\u00a0Lathus.<\/p>\n

\ud83e\uddfe What Comes Next?
If Lathus prevails on his Rule 60(d)(3) motion, the Court will be forced\u00a0to:<\/p>\n

Reinstate the original complaint as controlling;<\/p>\n

Grant the long-overdue Clerk\u2019s Entry of\u00a0Default;<\/p>\n

Reopen the damages phase for his unrebutted constitutional and ADA\u00a0claims.<\/p>\n

And perhaps most importantly:<\/p>\n

Refer the matter for judicial discipline or bar sanctions against those who orchestrated the\u00a0fraud.<\/p>\n

\ud83d\udce3 Follow the Fight
Lathus has vowed to publish every motion, every proof, and every obstruction as public\u00a0record.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis isn\u2019t just my fight,\u201d he says. \u201cIt\u2019s every disabled, poor, or independent citizen\u2019s fight to be heard in court. And I won\u2019t stop until justice is\u00a0done.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\ud83d\udccc Stay updated:
Twitter: @JosephLathus
Docket: Lathus v. Round Valley Justice Court, CV-24-08233, U.S. District Court \u2013\u00a0Arizona<\/p>\n

Fraud on the Court Exposed: Federal Judge Vacates Complaint to Block Default Judgment in ADA Case<\/a> was originally published in Coinmonks<\/a> on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Fraud on the Court Exposed: Federal Judge Vacates Complaint to Block Default Judgment in ADA\u00a0Case Veguita, NM \u2013 August\u00a02025 In a stunning turn of events, pro se civil rights plaintiff Joseph Lathus has uncovered what appears to be a calculated act of fraud on the court by U.S. District Judge Dominic W. Lanza in the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86371","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-interesting"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86371"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=86371"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86371\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=86371"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=86371"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mycryptomania.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=86371"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}