Motion For Richard A. Posner To Be Designated As "Advisory Counsel" in CA 4 Case No.: 17-1955.

Appeal: 17-1955 Doc: 6-1 Filed: 10/18/2017 Pg: 1 of 1 Total Pages:(1 of 18)
William C. Bond
Pro Se Litigation
P.O. Box 4823
Baltimore, Maryland 21211
443.970.2887
proselitigator@aol.com
October 17, 2017
Mark Zanchelli via: Email to 4cca-filing@ca4.uscourts.gov

Chief Deputy Clerk
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1100 East Main Street, Suite 501
Richmond, Virginia 23219
RE: Case No.: 17-1955
Dear Mark:
Enclosed, please find one (1) electronic copy each of petitioners filings this day.
1. MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A. POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS ADVISORY

COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER WILLIAM C. BOND.
2. Motion Exhibit no.: 1: AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. POSNER.
3. Motion Exhibit no.: 1: COVER PAGE.
4. Because the scanned signed affidavit is off-center, I am also enclosing the unsigned version of
it in Word format for your and/or the courts convenience.
I very much wish to thank you again for allowing me the courtesy of email service for this filing.
I hope this email finds you well.
Very truly yours,
/s/
William C. Bond
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
for the
FOURTH CIRCUIT
In re: William C. Bond No.: 17-1955
*
*
* * * * * * * * *
MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A. POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS

ADVISORY COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER WILLIAM C.
BOND
Comes now petitioner pro se, William C. Bond, under FRAP 2, FRAP 21(b) and
Local Rule 21(b), Local Rule 34(b), FRAP 46 and Local Rule 46(a)(b)(d) & (f),
and FRAP 47(b), and if not other rules, and states:
1. Richard A. Posner, Esquire, retired from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th
Circuit on September 2, 2017, after more than 35 years of judicial service to the
United States of America.1
2. The reason Mr. Posner gave for his retirement was his concern over the plight
and circumstances of pro se litigants.2
3. Mr. Posners retirement drew much attention.
4. Many news stories were written about Mr. Posners retirement, with one
reporting the following statement:
I feel equipped to make a difference, Posner told the

ABA Journal, adding that he would be glad to help out,
whether as serving as a lawyer for pro ses or providing
1
Mr. Posner first served the United States as a law clerk to Supreme Court
of the United States Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. and then as an attorney advisor
to then Federal Trade Commission Chairman Philip Elman. Following that, for the
next three (3) years, 1965-1968, Mr. Posner was an Assistant to the Solicitor
General of the United States, primarily under U.S. Solicitor General Thurgood
Marshall. In 1968, he left that office to join the faculty of Stanford Law School. In
1969, he left Stanford to join the faculty of the University of Chicago Law School,
where he has remained through today, concurrent with his just ended U.S. circuit
judgeship.
2
Please see this New York Times story: An Exit Interview With Richard
Posner, Judicial Provocateur, by Adam Liptak, dated September 11, 2017:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/judge-richard-posner-
retirement.html?_r=1
2
advice to them, or finding lawyers for them. 3 (Emphasis

added.)
5. Reportedly, as recounted in the above-cited news story, many public groups and
individuals, numbering in the 100's, attempted to solicit Mr. Posners help.
6. Therefore, this petitioner is humbled and honored to have gained Mr. Posners
help.
7. On October 4, 2017, by email and FedEx, Mr. Posner wrote to U.S. Fourth
Circuit Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory, with copies to the parties, a letter on behalf
of petitioner, voicing his opinion about petitioners pending mandamus action and
concerns about the underlying litigation.
8. Since that letter, Mr. Posner and this petitioner have continued their
correspondence, and Mr. Posner has expressed to petitioner his willingness to enter
3
Please see this ABA Journal news story: Posner says he is open to
litigating on behalf of pro se litigants, defends book, by Debra Cassens Weiss,
dated September 26, 2017:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/posner_says_he_is_open_to_litigating_on
_behalf_of_pro_se_litigants_defends
3
this mandamus action to help petitioner in any and/ or all ways possible.
9. Toward that end, Mr. Posner, a member in good standing of the New York State
Bar with an unblemished record & also as a retired U.S. judge with more than 35
years of appellate court service,4 has asked the clerk of this court to waive him in
as member of this courts bar so that he can participate in this case.
10. On information and belief, Mr. Posner made his request via telephone to U.S.
Fourth Circuit Chief Deputy Clerk Mark Zanchelli on Monday, October 16, 2017,
and his request was not granted. This motion follows and attempts to both clarify
the specific request and to gain the courts designation of Mr. Posner as advisory
counsel in this case.
11. FRAP 46 and Local Rule 46 cover attorney admissions. Local Rule 46(a)(b)(d)
&(f) must be read together when analyzing this motion.
12. Local Rule 34(b) covers the courts informal briefing schedule and the
4
In addition, Mr. Posner also has extensive experience over decades, sitting
by designation in district courts, as a trial judge in civil, criminal, and motions
actions.
4
subject of appointment of counsel to pro se litigants.
13. FRAP 2 and FRAP 47(b) cover the courts suspension of its rules for good
cause and states that A court of appeals may regulate practice in a particular case
in any manner consistent with federal law, these rules, and local rules of the
circuit.
14. This mandamus action is factually loaded.
15. Petitioner knows the facts of this matter very well. 5
16. Petitioner also well-knows that he needs the advice and opinions of an expert
litigator, in real time.
17. Mr. Posner has affirmed that he is willing and able to help and assist petitioner
pro se in this litigation, in all ways, including the drafting of filings and preparing
5
While petitioner believes that the legal arguments regarding this mandamus
action are relatively straightforward, the underlying facts as recounted in the
Second Amended Complaint filings are extensive. See, 16-cv-02723-DAF (D.
Md.) At docket nos.: 26 & 28.
5
petitioner for pro se oral argument. Further, Mr. Posner affirms that he will sign, as
advisory counsel, all future filings of petitioner in this mandamus action.6
18. In sum, petitioner requests that the court allow him to remain pro se with Local
Rule 34(b) informal briefing privileges, but with Mr. Posner to be listed upon the
docket as advisory counsel, with all the commitments as listed above.
19. Petitioner believes that the courts rules allow the court to modify Local Rule
46(d) to include, for this case, advisory counsel. Further, Petitioner believes he
has showed good cause under FRAP 2; and, also, that it is clearly in the interest
of justice and a clear matter of great public import because of the pro se aspects
that the court modify the rules in this case under FRAP 47(b).
20. Finally, petitioner wishes to advise the court that promptly upon Mr. Posners
designation and/or admission by the court to represent petitioner as advisory
counsel an appropriate motion for substantive relief would then be filed.
6
Please see: Exhibit no.: 1, Affidavit of Richard A. Posner.
6
21. Petitioner contacted opposing counsel under Local Rule 27(a) and was
informed that the government will not consent in advance and that they will review
the filing before determining how to respond.
WHEREFORE, for the aforementioned reasons, petitioner prays the court grants
the requested relief expeditiously.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
_________________________
WILLIAM C. BOND
Pro Se
P.O. Box 4823
Baltimore, Maryland 21211
(443) 970-2887
proselitigator@aol.com
CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 17th day of October 2017, copies of

Petitioners MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A. POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO
APPEAR AS ADVISORY COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER
WILLIAM C. BOND were served by Email to: ALLEN F. LOUCKS, AUSA,
U.S. Attorneys Office, District of Maryland, 36 S. Charles Street, 4th Floor,
Baltimore, Maryland 21201, allen.loucks@usdoj.gov; and to: MATTHEW P.
PHELPS, AUSA, U.S. Attorneys Office, District of Maryland, 36 S. Charles
Street, 4th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, matthew.phelps@usdoj.gov; and by
7
Email to: MARK ZANCHELLI, Chief Deputy Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit, 1100 East Main Street, Suite 501, Richmond, Virginia 23219,
4cca-filing@ca4.uscourts.gov.
/s/
_________________________
WILLIAM C. BOND
8
EXHIBIT 1
AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. POSNER
1. My name is Richard A. Posner. I am competent to testify in this case, and as I
have extensive knowledge of the case.
2. My affidavit is in support of the MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A.
POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS ADVISORY COUNSEL ON BEHALF
OF PETITIONER WILLIAM C. BOND in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit case number 17-1955.
3. I have been a member in good standing of the New York State Bar since 1963.
4. I recently retired after more than 35 years as an Article III judge of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, including a seven-year term as the
courts chief judge.
5. I was employed as a full law professor by the University of Chicago Law School
from 1970 to my appointment to the court in 1981; since then I have taught part
time at the law school.

6. I have decided to dedicate my post-judicial career to helping pro se litigants.
7. It is my desire to help the petitioner in this mandamus action, whose name is
William C. Bond.
8. I infer from the extensive factual history of his litigation and the multitude of
documents that hes filed in the litigation over many years that Mr. Bond has
remained continuously, energetically, and determinedly involved in the litigation.
9. I also find him to be very capable in many ways, very diligent, very focused, a
very good writer of legal documents, and I have benefited from his work ethic as I
have not yet had an opportunity to fully assemble my own litigation staff and
documentation.
10. It is my intention to help Mr. Bond with his future filings, including by guiding
his filings, providing case law, suggesting arguments, directing tactics and
strategy, and preparing Mr. Bond for oral argument, should the court order it.
11. I am also prepared to present oral argument on Mr. Bonds behalf should the
2
court wish me to.
12. Mr. Bond and I agree that he should remain pro se with the privilege of
informal briefing and filing and that my role will be limited to advisory counsel.
13. We also agree that each of us will sign all filings presented to the court on his
behalf.
14. Mr. Bond, in the earlier mentioned motion, has asked this court to designate me
as his advisory counsel under Local Rule 46(d) and FRAP 2, to waive any fee to
the court to become a member of the Fourth Circuits bar for this case, and also to
waive the bar applications requirement that a current member of the Fourth
Circuit bar attest to my good character. I do not intend to practice law in the Fourth
Circuit in any case other than the present one.
15. I am immediately prepared to provide the court, via Chief Deputy Clerk Mark
Zanchelli, a bar application as directed by the court in its forthcoming order on Mr.
Bonds motion, and any other forms the court orders submitted.
3
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, I declare under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 16th day of October 2017.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
_________________________
RICHARD A. POSNER
1222 East 56th Street
Chicago, Illinois 60537
(773) 955-1351
rposner62@gmail.com
4

Motion For Richard A. Posner To Be Designated As "Advisory Counsel" in CA 4 Case No.: 17-1955.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Motion For Richard A. Posner To Be Designated As "Advisory Counsel" in CA 4 Case No.: 17-1955.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appeal: 17-1955 Doc: 6-1 Filed: 10/18/2017 Pg: 1 of 1 Total Pages:(1 of 18)

October 17, 2017

Mark Zanchelli via: Email to 4cca-filing@ca4.uscourts.gov

RE: Case No.: 17-1955

1. MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A. POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS ADVISORY

2. Motion Exhibit no.: 1: AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. POSNER.

3. Motion Exhibit no.: 1: COVER PAGE.

I hope this email finds you well.

Very truly yours,

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

In re: William C. Bond No.: 17-1955

MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A. POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS

and FRAP 47(b), and if not other rules, and states:

United States of America.1

and circumstances of pro se litigants.2

3. Mr. Posners retirement drew much attention.

reporting the following statement:

I feel equipped to make a difference, Posner told the

advice to them, or finding lawyers for them. 3 (Emphasis

individuals, numbering in the 100's, attempted to solicit Mr. Posners help.

concerns about the underlying litigation.

as member of this courts bar so that he can participate in this case.

counsel in this case.

&(f) must be read together when analyzing this motion.

subject of appointment of counsel to pro se litigants.

14. This mandamus action is factually loaded.

15. Petitioner knows the facts of this matter very well. 5

litigator, in real time.

advisory counsel, all future filings of petitioner in this mandamus action.6

docket as advisory counsel, with all the commitments as listed above.

designation and/or admission by the court to represent petitioner as advisory

counsel an appropriate motion for substantive relief would then be filed.

the filing before determining how to respond.

the requested relief expeditiously.

CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 17th day of October 2017, copies of

AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD A. POSNER

1. My name is Richard A. Posner. I am competent to testify in this case, and as I

have extensive knowledge of the case.

2. My affidavit is in support of the MOTION TO ALLOW RICHARD A.

POSNER, ESQUIRE, TO APPEAR AS ADVISORY COUNSEL ON BEHALF

OF PETITIONER WILLIAM C. BOND in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth

Circuit case number 17-1955.

courts chief judge.

time at the law school.

6. I have decided to dedicate my post-judicial career to helping pro se litigants.

7. It is my desire to help the petitioner in this mandamus action, whose name is

remained continuously, energetically, and determinedly involved in the litigation.

court wish me to.

Circuit in any case other than the present one.

You might also like