"It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human
    history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to
    improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice he sends
    forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million
    different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current
    that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."

            Robert F Kennedy - 1966

For the legal basis of this case see my web page on the US Supreme Court's decision in Humana v. Forsyth. The general outline of our automobile insurance case, that is in substance a matter of performance on contract is explained in the Exhibits linked to below, which are exact as opposed to truncated versions that are still published on this site as links from The Insurance Page.

   January 23, 1999
        - After three days of analyzing and writing about Humana v.
	  Forsyth decision by the US Supreme Court, which, though
          important as hell was glossed over or dimissed by the
	  media (just stupid, afraid or bought off?) I suddenly
	  realized that this was appropriate and important to us.
	  If you think 3 days is weird to figure this out see
	  my state of mind in next and rage.

	  This was my beginning of figuring out a plan to learn Federal
	  law, and formal legal reasoning.  Bringing myself up as
	  mathematician and scientist didn't hurt.  I hadn't planned
	  on being an attorney, much less my own, but it was a socially
	  acceptable outlet for disciplining rage at criminality and
	  injustice - preferable to my then rational considerations
	  of various methods of suicide.

	  The Internet was from then on my constant companion: it was
	  a source of emotional strength through communication with
	  real friends who kindly provided proofing of my legal writing;
	  it was my (only) law library.  Because of the Internet and my
	  webpages I think I've helped quite a number of people, and
	  I'm happy about that.  What is said "what goes around comes
	  around": support, help and assistence has come from where I
	  never especially expected it.  Without the Internet, the
	  logic of the US Supreme Court, my close friends and my very
	  appropriate psychotherapist from whom I heard more often than
	  not what I needed to hear rather than what I wanted to hear,
	  I would probably be dead, rather than a purposeful warrior
	  whose purpose is justice and not selfdestructive revenge.

	  To cram the complexities of Federal law in a matter of months,
	  even for a scholarly nature isn't easy - but, there being
	  at least this option, there was, and is no choice, and so the
	  study and analysis with the tips and suggestions of friends
	  who knew more law than I continued.

          The one aspect of my being that State Farm has not succeeded
          in destroying is my mind - though, when there was no recourse,
          they almost did succeed in that too.

   March 15, 1999
        - RICO Complaint received by
	  the Clerk of the Court together with Exhibits A and B against
          State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and State Farm
	  Indemnity Company of New Jersey, their agents, servants and
	  employees, in the United States District Court, Asheville in
	  the Western District of North Carolina.

   August 03, 1999
        - Lawsuit Complaint filed together
	  with Exhibits A and B against
          State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and State Farm
	  Indemnity of New Jersey, their agents, servants and employees,
	  in the United States District Court, Asheville in the Western
	  District of North Carolina.

	  The Honorable Lacey H. Thornburg,
	  assigned District Court Judge.

   August 10, 1999
        - The Complaint was dispatched
	  by Certified Mail in service upon Mr. Edward B. Rust Jr.,
	  President of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
	  and upon Mr. Terence Welsh, President of State Farm
	  Indemnity Company.  They have 23 days in which to respond.

   August 20, 1999
        - After returning from a perfectly hellish trip to Durham,
	  Duke U. Med. Center on August 18 to have Alan relieved of
	  an agonizing disc herniation (perfect surgery by our brilliant
	  neurosurgeon, Michael M. Haglund, MD, PhD) the little green
	  cards were in the mail showing service of summons and complaints
	  on August 12, 1999, both receipts having been accepted with
	  a signature that seems to read "Bill Mills".  The name was not
	  printed in accordance with receipt prescription.

	  We are both still recovering from the trip, and expect to be
	  doing that for a few more days.

	  I have noticed that State Farm's snooping robots have found
	  these pages already.  That's ok with us.  At least we have
	  nothing to hide or be ashamed of.  "Let all the evils that
	  lurk in the mud - hatch out."

	  It is interesting that all my previously indexed web pages
	  have disappeared from the altavista index.  I questioned them.
	  The response was basically "sorry - we are building a new
	  index; just resubmit the central page."  No "scooter" for
	  a week after that.  OK - altavista is practically dead anyhow.
	  Bad drives out good: Compaq quality drives out DEC quality.

	  Solid evidence of State Farms's general racketeering is appearing
	  from unexpected as well as expected places.  These are "Plaintiffs'
	  burden of proof" and will be disclosed at the appropriate time.
	  Now is not that time.
	  
   August 25, 1999
        - Proof of all service was sent to the Clerk of the Court in
          Asheville.

   August 27, 1999
        - The "State Farms" have done something that I consider rather
          strange: they have engaged a large (not so strange) and
          very reputable (that's strange) law firm:
          Smith, Helms, Mulliss & Moore (SHMM)
          to represent them.  Meaning that while I expect SHMM to put
          up a good fight for their clients, I don't expect to be
          kicked with dirty tricks.  Mr. Bradley R. Kutrow is apparently
          handling the case.

          A motion was made to the court, copies of which we received
          today, to extend the time to respond to the complaint by
          20 days, essentially because (SHMM) claims not to have had time
          to gather the information necessary to answer the complaint.
          This being a complex litigation, there is no surpise in this.
          I emailed Mr. Kutrow upon being served with the motion, that
          we would not oppose the extension and that we would make that
          clear more formally to the court, for which I received a "thank
          you" by email.  The answer to the complaint is now due by
          and including September 22, 1999.

   August 31, 1999
          Motion sent to the court (more as coutesy than anything else)
          denying any opposition for the Motion to extend the time for
          response to the complaint.

   September 8, 1999
          It has come to my attention that new of this case has been
          distributed by "CRASH Network's weekly fax", and that the
          complaint has been linked to by Autobodyonline.
          To both I give thanks for making this case an object of public
          scrutiny, and giving further evidence of just what insurers are
          doing to us all.  This is not just "our fight for survival",
          but I hope a contribution, one way or another, to the survival
          of many, many individuals and many businesses whose work, and
          work product is being destroyed by State Farm.

   September 23, 1999
          Defendants' response in the inevitable Motion to Dismiss, or
	  in the Alternative to Stay was received, along with a
	  Memorandum in Support of Motion.
	  An essential outline of the points raised is available.

	  We have 14 days within which to respond.

          Unfortunately, medical necessities have intervened which cause us to
	  make a motion to the court for an extension of 30 days within which
          to respond.  It's a simple document that won't be reproduced here.
	  There is no particular reason to suppose that it will not be granted.

	  Stay tuned for the very different ammended complaint with memorandum
	  addressing the points of Defendants' Memorandum in support of Motion
	  to Dismiss.

   October 1, 1999
          I emailed Mr. Kutrow yesterday concerning a 30 day extension, and
	  he graciously consented indicating that I could communicate this
	  to the Court.  So over the weekend I'll construct a pro forma
	  motion for extension and get it mailed this Monday.

   December 3, 1999
	  No, this is not a dead page, in case anyone was wondering.  We
          had to file motion for a more substantial extension of time, up
          to February 5, 2000, which was granted, but also granted was a
          Response by defendants that at that time our Amended Complaint
          would be also be due.  An Order was so issued by the Court.  To
          comply with the order, we are both going to have to forego
          necessary surgery and hope that no real disaster results.  In
          Alan's case the surgery is to fix a ruptured disc at L1-L2. 
          The work is more than considerable, so there won't be much more
          appearing here until a few days after the due date, so we get to
          recuperate from undue labors.

   February 4, 2000
	  There is a lot to catch up on here.  First, the amount of
	  evidentiary material obtained during December and and on into
	  January was so enormous that Alan did not, and could not have
	  the required surgery at L1-L2.  The court Order required us to
	  to respond to the Defendants' SFI and SFM's motion to dismiss
	  and/or submit our proposed amended complaint, together with a
	  motion to the court to ammend the complaint.  The amount of
	  evidentiary material was so great that we have not yet been
	  able to go through all of it.  Nevertheless, an Order from a
	  Federal Court is an Order.  So, we have submitted to the Court,
	  as of the morning of by express mail, so as to arrive on the
	  morning of the February 8, Monday:

                 1. Motion with suggested Order, and
                    a Memorandum in Support of that Motion;

                 2. Response to Defendants'
                    Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative to Stay,
	            and Defendants' Memorandum in Support of that Motion.

                 3. A Proposed Amended Complaint
                    with Exhibits A-H, and 6 Memorandum Attachments.
		    As much of the Exhibits, Attachments and their own
		    exhibits as possible are provided as links from the
	            amended complaint.

          Stats:
          That's a total of over 1100 pages, the complaint proper being
          262 pages with 142 causes of action that includes 15 counts of
          RICO.  For copying and binding of four copies for the Court it
          was as a round number $800.00, and to ship by express mail cost
          $180.00.  A single copy of everything packed weighed in at 18 lbs.

          We did get through a major portion of the evidentiary material,
          actually managing with the help of a few friends (thank you very
          much) to chronologize and file it with cross references.  The
          suspicions we had became quite clear in fact: the IME physicians
          pulled on Alan were "physicians of the night", and SFI's attorneys
          were in on the scam as well.

          We really had no choice but to include them all as Defendants
          in the amemded complaint so that the schemes of fraud, extortion,
          robbery and racketeering became clear.

          That we did manage to write the full body of the complaint with
          its ancillary documents, is nothing short of a miracle, since
          toward the end, we were both sure our minds were going.  How it
          did get done eludes me since it seemed to me that I could not
          remember anything for more than a few seconds, and could do
          nothing but sit, padded and semirecumbent with a computer
          keyboard in my lap, and have books read to me.

          Selftorture to end another's murder of you is a novel idea that
          could only happen in the modern days of alleged "insurance", and
          true governmental corruption.

   February 7, 2000
          The Response to SF's Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative
	  to Stay, and our Motion to Amend the Complaint, with Memorandum
	  in Support, as above, were served, by mail, on SF's attorneys.

   February 13, 2000
	  The agony and stress of writing all that had to be written has not
	  yet worn off.  We have read through the entire complaint in
	  semisanity, and found numerous errors and omissions which we
	  are now trying to correct.  We are closing in on the corrections
	  required by a third reading, hoping that this one will be
	  tolerably close to "perfect".

   February 15, 2000
          This seems to be the day of the tolerably perfect complaint,
	  after 6 complete proof sessions.  This is the "proposed"
	  Amended Complaint as presented above that was presented to the Court.

   February 23, 2000
           The date all the new material was put up on webpages.  That
	   which has been submitted to th Court is now know to be in the
	   hands of the Defendants who have been added, which is to say
	   that they already have prior notice and detailed information
	   of being sued.  There is no reason not to post what we have
	   written and submitted to the Court.

   February 25, 2000
           Defendants SFM and SFI through their attorneys filed a motion
	   for a 30 day extension within which to respond to our motion
	   to amend the complaint, or the amended complaint itself.
           Plaintiffs have already agreed to any reasonable extension
           in their motion to extend, and do not oppose this.  The date
	   the of response is March 20, 2000, which should be, if nothing
	   else, interesting.

   March 8, 2000
	   For some reason, SFI has through its attorneys Melli in NJ,
	   have now decided that settling the UIM suit, for the policy
	   limits would be a good idea.  We will believe that when the
	   money is in our attorneys' trust accounts.  That coverage should
	   have been paid 4 years ago when the tortfeasor's insurance
	   company, threw in the policy.  Now, it will merely pay debts
	   and pay for repairs and replacements of some property that was
	   unable to be maintained.

   April 11, 2000
           Magistrate Judge files his Memorandum & Recommendation
	   that we be dismissed with prejudice.

           This document is given by JPEG images of each page.  I had
           hoped to avoid this, but other methods proved to be entirely
           too much work.  At least the defendants cannot complain of
           errors in any transcriptions in key in.

   April 21, 2000
           Motion(s) no longer referred: [26-1] Motion to Amend, [9-1]
           Complaint, [17-1] Motion to Dismiss, [17-2] Motion to Stay.

   April 27, 2000
           We filed our OBJECTIONS to the Magistrate's Memorandum &
           Recommendation.

   April 27, 2000
           Motion for an Emergency Continuance referred to Judge Thornburg.
           This is selfexplanatory.

   April 28, 2000
           The case file was sent to Judge Thornburg's office.

   May 03, 2000
           Alan's surgery #3

   May 10, 2000
           State Farm and State Farm Indemnity just had to file a
           Memorandum in Response to our OBJECTIONS of April 27.

           This document is also given by JPEG images of each page.

   May 18, 2000
           Defendants' Memorandum of May 10, was simply so outrageous
           that we had to file a Memorandum in Response to it.
           
   August 10, 2000
           I have finally gotten the filings up from April 10 to May 18.
           After paying off debts, engaging in a small amount of charity,
           and playing catch up with items lost, deteriorated (new
           underpants were a good idea) and figuring out what could be
           both afforded and make our lives easier and healthier, the
           money from the UIM settlement is exhausted.  Boy, that didn't
           take long!  I had no idea that spending money with such care
           takes so much time and effort.  Another lesson learned along
           the way is that it is *very* expensive to be destitute.

           We still wait for Judge Thornburg's decision(s).  I must
           admit that the absence of pressures on the legal front have
           been a welcome breather.

   August 13, 2000
           The docket file from the PACER system can be used to
           for references to the docket numbers.  This is a Postscript
           file.

           We have discovered that the massaged JPEG files of some of
           the documents are pretty sad.  They will soon be replaced
           with much more readable images.

   September 3, 2000
	   A little paranoia had be researching on the net my own
	   webpages as indexed by search engines.  A search on Altavista
	   on either "http://graham.main.nc.us/~bhammel" or the email
	   address constructed therefrom produced exactly 7 hits, only
	   one of which was actually mine!  I have almost 600 pages on
	   my website - might we say Altavista sucks?  "Alltheweb", on the
	   other hand produces over 360 hits, and if you will notice,
	   every one of my web pages has its URL at the bottom, with
	   its last date of modification.  I was even invited by Altavista
	   to go on a buying spree in order to buy many

		"http://graham.main.nc.us/~bhammel"

	   and to search experts on this subject - Perverted companies
	   with serach engines that have reached the nadir of AI.

	   I'm not quite finished.  My "hit logs" indicate hits all over
	   my site by

	   crawler0-complaints-to-admin.webresearch.pa-x.dec.com:
	   204.123.28.10

	   We can all guess rather accurately at what is going on here,
	   without very much effort.  Guess who would have me silenced
	   in the most effective way.  Fortunately, State Farm can't buy
	   *all* search engines.  If anybody wants to eaise hell with
	   Altavista, be my guest.

	   Please do not use Altavista, but use either Googlr, or
	   Alltheweb as your search engines of choice.  Altavista
	   has become nothing more than a fraud and a farce.

   September 21, 2000
	   The district court (Judge Thornburg) files its decision to
	   "adopt" the magistrate's recommendations and dismiss the
	   case with prejudice in a Judgment, Memorandum and Order.

   October 18, 2000
	   Notice of Appeal is filed and served.  This is of no particular
	   legal interest and so I'm not puting it up on the webpages.

   November 7, 2000
	   Motion for Extention is filed and served.  This is of no particular
	   legal interest and so I'm not puting it up on the webpages.

   December 4, 2000
	  Appeals Brief is filed and served.
	  The Fourth Circuit requires "informal briefs" when the appellant
	  presents Pro Se; these amount to filling out a form.  However,
	  supplementary briefs may also be submitted, and this is our
	  supplementary brief.

   December 15, 2000
	  Defendants State Farns Reply Brief is filed and served.
	  This was just a hodepodge of prior pleadings, parrotting of
	  of the District Court, which is half parrotting the defendants.
	  No issue of our biref was addressed; no new issues were raised,
	  and so we declined to respond to this.

   February 9, 2001
	  I finally summoned the energy to put up the essential pleadings
	  from September 21, 2000 to December 15, 2000.  We will see,
	  eventually, what comes from the Court of Appeals.  I won't
	  even guess.

   March 30, 2001
	  We received the ruling of the 4th Cir. Court of Appeals.  I'm
	  glad I didn't try to guess.  It was a one paragraph unpublished
	  statement that reduces to, "we find nothing reversible" and is
	  written Per Curiam, is unsigned, but said to have been before
	  Judges Wilkins, Luttig and Michael.

	  We have 14 days within which to petition for a rehearing en banc.
	  Perhaps not needless to say, that is exactly what we intend to
	  use the time for.

	  Only the Campbell case, which we have cited, comes close to
	  exposing what State Farm does and what it is.  Getting the truth
	  out in the open, in court, is rather apparently something that
	  even the *federal* courts will not allow.  We're not dead yet.

   April 10, 2001
	  Our Petition for a Rehearing was timely submitted.
	  I do not expect this actually to be heard any more than previous
	  pleading were heard.  It seems to be well know that the Fourth
	  Circuit is one of the most corrupt of all the federal circuits,
	  and indeed that all the federal courts of appeals, and most of
	  the federal circuits are corrupt.  Since my email also gives
	  considerablew weight to the idea that all the State courts are
	  similarly corrupt, just where does this joke of a judiciary leave
	  us all?  With some organizations that can be just as corrupt as
	  the courts.  See

		A Matter of Justice Coalition

	 and others who are for real:

		Justice For America, Inc.

		Jail for Judges: A Plan for Judicial Accountability

		The Committee to Expose Incompetent Attoneys and Judges

   August ??, 2001

	Our Petition to the US Supremely Corrupt Court for writ of certiorari
	was submitted, and after about six months was refused, by form
	letter from the clerk of the court, in accordance with the court's
	policy of abusive tyranny.

	With judges such as we have, who can have even one ounce of respect
	for them or the law?  In case you hadn't noticed this follows the
	picture of Nazi Germany, most especially with our new Nazi president
	elected for us by our illustirous Supreme Court, elected mind you,
	together with his "New Wold Order".  He was at Yale, just like his
	daddy, who is also a NWO perverter of Constitution, and, also just
	like his daddy a member of

		The Order of Skull and Bones

	I thought you ought to know.  You don't seriously think either
	daddy or son have enough brains to think the NWO up by themselves,
	do you?  Do the words "dangerous morons" or "criminally insane"
	come to mind?

	So welcome to the Nazi States of Amerika - how do you like it?

	There was a time, even in this country, when the penalty for
	treason was death.  Now, what do you call a treasonous recidivist
	who legally decides on his own guilt or immunity from punishment?

	Your Honor!

	I only wish this were a joke, but unfortunately, the judiciary of
	the US - pick your court - is nothing but a joke, and an evil one
	at that.

	Anyone who would read through the pleadings of this case can see,
	as plain as day, the filth and treasonous corruption of both
	"judges", Magistrate Max O. Cogburn Jr. and District
	Court "Judge" Lacey H. Thornburg for the US District Court, Western
	District of North Caolina.  They are both in clear and obvious contempt
	of our Constitution, and should both be locked away for life.

	So far, Judges Wilkins, Luttig and Michael, of the Fourth Circuit
	Court of Appeals are not very far behind.

	Do we wonder why the legally sloppy pleadings of the Defendants
	in this case?  Not anymore!  Can you spell "collusion"?  Can you
	say "judicial racketeering"?

	We are not at all alone in being subjected to the abuses of this
	corporate-judicial pigsty.  It becomes even more interesting when
	you figure out just who has to be in further complicity for such
	slime to inhabit the judiciary.  We do have two other branches of
	government, in case you may have forgotten.  Checks and Balances?

	Jefferson himslef was extremely worried about the Supreme Court
	arrogating unto itself powers that it did not have, and that
	process has continued unabated to now.  The judiciary has, top to
	bottom, in effect, made itself immune to charges of the very
	criminal and and treasonous behavior in which it is engaged.

	We are no longer a "nation of law"; we are a nation of judicial
	tyranny, the slaves of which are living under a constitutionally
	void government of occupation.  When shall we simply ignore it?

	                GUIDE TO (STATE - NC) JUDICIAL IMPEACHMENT

		THE CASE FOR JUDICIAL IMPEACHMENT, by Robert Muchnik

	REFLECTIONS ON JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE by, Honorable Jefferson Sessions
	A Senator from Alabama speaks.  It is woefully short of being
	scholarly, but makes well the rather tame point that our sense
	of judicial independence is not compromised by judicial responsibility
	and that on the federal level, the Congress does indeed have the
	power and right to regulate all courts below the Supreme Court.
	What it does not take into account is that the absence of judical
	responsibility over generations has given the judiciary the moral
	and legal idea that it is above the law.  I hear 'Sly' Stallone
	shouting, "I Am the law!". At least "Judge Dred" was a moral, if
	fictional character.  Better we should understand that putting on
	a black uniform is not a bad indicator of appropriate suspicions.
	A modified dictum: any uncontrolled and unmetered power will be,
	without question, abused to its maximum possible limit.  Any proper
	governmental system must recognize the essential evil of any
	system of government, and provide a swift and powerful remedy for
	the exercise of that evil.

	To a very large extent our judiciary is a "criminal class" that
	at this point needs much more than curtailment.  These lawless,
	selfserving scum (my politesse bag is empty) have put so many
	lives in hell, and even murdered them, that our revenge against
	them should be swift, definitive and memorable for eons.

	While I'm at it, what do you think your judiciary is made up of?
	Lawyers!  Of course, we have a few honest judges left and a few
	honest lawyers left, but personally, I would never trust one of
	either again.  No lawyer will call to task a judge who rules on
	your particular case.  He does have other cases - we are talking
	about plaintiffs' attoneyes here, civil defendants' attorneys are
	mostly 'a priori' scum who work for insurance companies, State Farm
	goes without saying, as we could wish it might, and would gladly
	murder mother and grandmother for two cents.  Your attorney,
	however, is automatically screwed by the corrupt judiciary, which
	has already been bought by State Farm, other insurance companies,
	and other large multinational corporations.

	To keep being a lawyer, you have to lick judicial boot, no matter
	how dirty.  Can anyone wonder why there are so many really nasty
	lawyer jokes?  Those jokes were mostly invented by people who were
	on the receiving end of what passes for justice in this hellhole
	of a hypocritical nation.

	Would I like all this *not* to be true?  You can bet your boots on
	that.  We live in a fascist state; learn your manners as its
	slave or kick the bastards' heads in.  They aren't very amenable
	to argumentation, and isn't that a surprise?  That's all folks.