Oscar Stilley in the news

[Demosthenes]

Attorney defends alleged suspended license
By Jamie Satterfield (Contact)
Tuesday, June 10, 2008

An Arkansas attorney facing disbarment proceedings in his home state is trying to convince a federal magistrate judge in Knoxville to let him represent a Blount County couple accused of tax evasion.

"I've got a number of licenses to practice," Oscar Stilley, an anti-tax attorney from Fort Smith, Ark., insisted Monday when pressed by U.S. District Magistrate Judge Clifford Shirley about his claim of being an attorney in "good standing."

"Your law license has been suspended," Shirley responded.

"It's just about over," Stilley responded.

Not quite, according to court records in a number of states, including Arkansas, Hawaii and Michigan.

Not only has Stilley's law license been suspended at least twice since 2001, the attorney has been sanctioned financially, jailed for contempt and is now the subject of disbarment by the Arkansas Supreme Court.

He's been accused of lying about, at worst and, withholding, at best, his suspension from a federal judge in Hawaii and was booted out of federal court there as a result. Federal prosecutors in Hawaii allege he is under criminal probe in Oklahoma, although they did not reveal in court records the nature of that investigation.

He also has been barred from practicing law in Arizona after failing to disclose his suspension to judges there, court records show.

Stilley downplayed his career woes at Monday's hearing, however, insisting he was appealing the disbarment proceedings, was nearly finished serving his six-month suspension and had a certificate of good standing from a federal court in Illinois.

"I felt confident I could tell my clients I could legally represent them," Stilley said of Blount County couple Brett Edward Dirr and Renee Dirr.

The Dirrs were indicted earlier this year on tax evasion charges. Federal prosecutors Charles Atchley and Frank Dale contend in court records that the couple bought a kit on tax evasion popular with IRS-hating tax protesters. They have insisted on representing themselves, relying on the legal playbook in the kit which promotes arguments such as claiming not to be a citizen of the planet, much less the United States.

But Stilley adds a new twist in what was already shaping up to be a colorful courtroom battle.

At Monday's hearing, he repeatedly referred to himself in the third person and sidestepped Shirley's probing into whether he had a license to practice law other than the Arkansas one that is under suspension.

"I've got a license," he insisted. "You want to see it? I'd have to go get it."

"Where is it from?" Shirley asked.

"The 6th Circuit," Stilley answered.

The 6th Circuit refers to the federal court region encompassing Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals does not issue law licenses.

"Who has to license you?" Shirley asked after directing Stilley to read a rule on the issue.

Stilley initially refused to offer a direct answer but finally read the section which stated an attorney must be licensed "by the highest court of" his or her state before being admitted to practice in a federal court.

"Question," Stilley said at one point. "Is the fact that my license is not in my possession, was taken by (the Arkansas Supreme Court), does that mean I am not entitled to practice law? If some of these other courts want to suspend Oscar Stilley, they can do that."

Atchley noted that Stilley at least twice at Monday's hearing admitted giving the Dirrs legal advice.

"It does not appear Mr. Stilley has a (valid) law license," Atchley said.

Shirley set a Thursday hearing at which he is demanding Stilley produce proof of a valid license to practice law.

"You tell me you have a license to practice in 10 other states," Shirley said. "I'm going to require you to show me."

"I can do that," Stilley answered.

[webhick]

"You tell me you have a license to practice in 10 other states," Shirley said. "I'm going to require you to show me."

"I can do that," Stilley answered.

Yeah, right after he goes home and learns Photoshop.

[jg]

According to the newspaper article at http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/apr/2 ... -playbook/ the Dirrs are using the Reliance Defense Package tax-fraud scheme.

[Famspear]

From the article above:

They have insisted on representing themselves, relying on the legal playbook in the kit which promotes arguments such as claiming not to be a citizen of the planet, much less the United States [. . . ]

--bolding added.

I know there should be a good joke floating around there somewhere; it just hasn't come to me.

[Famspear]

More from the article, regarding Stilley:

He's been accused of lying about, at worst and, withholding, at best, his suspension from a federal judge in Hawaii and was booted out of federal court there as a result. Federal prosecutors in Hawaii allege he is under criminal probe in Oklahoma, although they did not reveal in court records the nature of that investigation [ . . .]

If Stilley isn't more careful, he's gonna get his little oscar caught in tight, uncomfortable place. Yeeeeouch!

[LPC]

Here's the docket from the Arkansas disbarment proceeding now pending:

Case Number 08-73 filed at this court on 01/16/2008
Case Category: Original Action

Case Caption:
STARK LIGON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
V
OSCAR STILLEY, ARK. BAR NO. 91096

Stark Ligon, Executive Director (ACTIVE) Petitioner's counsel:
Stark Ligon - LEAD

Oscar Stilley, Ark. Bar No. 91096 (ACTIVE) Respondent's counsel:
Oscar Stilley - LEAD

Trial Court: ORIGINAL ACTION
ORIGINAL ACTION
Trial Court Number:
Trial Judge: Judge's Name not available in part table

------- EVENT LISTING --------
04/17/2008 Record Lodged/Hearing Dec. 14, 2007
Number of Volumes 1
Number of Sets 0
Transcript Cost 0.00
Hearing excerpts taken December 14, 2008.

04/14/2008 Per Curiam Order
Action = GRNTPERCUR on 04/14/08
Motion for appointment of Special Judge. Motion granted.
See per curiam this date.

04/14/2008 Letter Orders - Supreme Court
Submitted to the court on - 03/20/08
Petitioner's Attorney - Stark Ligon
Honorable John Lineberger appointed as special judge.

04/03/2008 Letter Orders - Supreme Court
Submitted to the court on - 03/20/08
Respondent's Attorney - Oscar Stilley

03/05/2008 Motion for Recusal - Oscar Stilley, Ark. Bar
Submitted to the court on - 03/20/08
Action = DENIED on 04/03/08
Respondent's Attorney - Oscar Stilley
Respondent's motion for recusal with conditional demand for
hearing is denied.

03/03/2008 Motion for Appointment of Special Judge - Sta
Submitted to the court on - 03/20/08
Action = GRNTPERCUR on 04/14/08
Petitioner's Attorney - Stark Ligon
Motion for appointment of Special Judge. Motion granted.
See per curiam this date.

03/03/2008 Response to Petition for Disbarment - Oscar S
Respondent's Attorney - Oscar Stilley
Response to petition for disbarment.

01/28/2008 Letter from Attorney
Attorney - Oscar Stilley
Letter in case file. Response is due March 3, 2008. Signed
by both attorneys.

01/16/2008 Petition for Disbarment - Stark Ligon, Execut
Action = awaiting action
Petitioner's Attorney - Stark Ligon
Petition for disbarment.

[Famspear]

More from the article:

Not only has Stilley's law license been suspended at least twice since 2001, the attorney has been sanctioned financially, jailed for contempt and is now the subject of disbarment by the Arkansas Supreme Court.

OK, OK, but look on the bright side; this shows he's pretty good at multi-tasking, right?

[LPC]

The following is the text of the order SUSPENDING Stilley from the practice of law while the disbarment proceeding is pending.

From what I've seen, continuing to practice law while suspended is a slam-dunk for disbarment.

FILED
DEC 27 2007
LESLIE W. STEEN
CLERK

BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
PANEL B
IN RE: OSCAR AMOS STlLLEY
Arkansas Bar ID #91096
CPC Docket No. 2006-067

ORDER OF INTERIM SUSPENSION

Respondent OSCAR AMOS STILLEY, Arkansas Bar ID #91096, an attorney practicing
law primarily in Fort Smith, Arkansas, is the subject of a Findings and Order recently filed in this case after a public hearing on December 14, 2007, in which he was unanimously found to have violated Model Rules 3.1,3.3(a)(l), 3.4(c) (eleven counts), and 8.4(d) (ten counts).

The Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct (Committee), by its Panel
B, pursuant to the mandate of Section 16.A(1), Procedures of the Arkansas Supreme Court
Regulating Professional Conduct of Attorneys at Law (the 'Procedures'') (Rev. 2002), voted to
initiate disbarment proceedings against Respondent and further unanimously voted that an interim suspension of Respondent's privilege to practice law under the authority of his Arkansas law license be imposed pursuant to Sections 17.E(1) and 17.E(3)(a) of the Procedures.

It is therefore ORDERED that Respondent OSCAR AMOS STILLEY, be, and he hereby is, SUSPENDED from the practice of law within this jurisdiction immediately upon the filing of this
Order with the Clerk of the Arkansas Supreme Court, and continuing during the pendency of
disbarment proceedings to be filed against him.

ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT COMMITTEE
ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT - PANEL B
Date: Dec. 27, 2007
By: Henry Hodges, Panel B Chair

[LPC]

And, according to this nugget, Stilley was also suspended for 6 months in another matter, and that the 6 months did not begin to run until 2/28/2008.

OSCAR A. STILLEY, Bar No. 91096, of Fort Smith, Arkansas, had his Arkansas law license suspended for six (6) months, effective February 25, 2008, in Case No. CPC 2002-077. This sanction was affirmed on appeal by the Arkansas Supreme Court in No. 06-972, by the Opinion issued June 21, 2007, and available on-line. The Mandate in No. 06-972 was issued on February 25, 2008, as a result of the action of the United States Supreme Court in No. 07-779 on February 19, 2008, denying Mr. Stilley’s petition for a writ of certiorari.

The opinion of the Arkansas Supreme Court, affirming the suspension, is here.

[Nikki]

Relevant excerpts from the Arkansas Bar Model Rules:

RULE 3.1. MERITORIOUS CLAIMS AND CONTENTIONS.
A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein,
unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established.


RULE 3.3. CANDOR TOWARD THE TRIBUNAL.
(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal;


RULE 3.4. FAIRNESS TO OPPOSING PARTY AND COUNSEL.
A lawyer shall not:
…
(c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open
refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists;


RULE 8.4. MISCONDUCT.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
…
(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;

I've been a baaaaaad boy!

[grixit]

Trying to play word games with the judge-- yeah that'll work. Btw: what happens if his non terran clients get deported?

[Dezcad]

After reading these posts about Oscar, this came to mind.

My attorney has a first name, its O-S-C-A-R
My attorney has a second name, its S-T-I-LL-E-Y

Oh I love to hear him talk in court
And if you ask me why, I'll say

Cause Oscar Stilley has a way with B-A-L-O-N-E-Y

[Cpt Banjo]

I've been a baaaaaad boy!

Stolen from Lou Costello.

[wserra]

From what I've seen, continuing to practice law while suspended is a slam-dunk for disbarment.

The moron is certainly trying his best. As I posted in the High Profile TPs forum almost a year ago, it seems as though Oscar "PRA" Stilley is having an increasingly hard time securing pro hac vice admissions for TPs around the country.

There has been some recent discussion in the MLM forum over the recent tax evasion conviction of a senior distributor for ripoff "wellness" MLM Mannatech, Raymond Gebauer of Bellevue, WA. An examination of the docket showed that Gebauer attempted to retain Stilley to represent him, but Stilley's PHV application was denied by the clerk of the court. Stilley appealed the clerk's denial to the District Judge. The rules don't provide for any such appeal, but Judge Lasnik ruled on it anyway, perhaps to make a point - while listing Stilley's misdeeds in the opinion.

We can hope.

[wserra]

The Dirrs' arraignment (pro se) is a hoot and a half. It's also 2.4M, so be advised.

Sooner or later, some poor magistrate-judge assigned to arraign morons like these is going to lose it: "You're idiots. I enter a plea of not guilty for you. Get out of my courtroom."

[LPC]

There has been some recent discussion in the MLM forum over the recent tax evasion conviction of a senior distributor for ripoff "wellness" MLM Mannatech, Raymond Gebauer of Bellevue, WA. An examination of the docket showed that Gebauer attempted to retain Stilley to represent him, but Stilley's PHV application was denied by the clerk of the court. Stilley appealed the clerk's denial to the District Judge. The rules don't provide for any such appeal, but Judge Lasnik ruled on it anyway, perhaps to make a point - while listing Stilley's misdeeds in the opinion.

I have a copy of a similar opinion, denying his admission to the WD of Michigan (Case No. 1:04-mc-00009-RHB; 01/28/2004), if anyone is keeping a scrapbook.

[LPC]

The Dirrs' arraignment (pro se) is a hoot and a half.

Yes, it's funny. And sad.

And the patience of the magistrate is unbelievable. Much of the dialog is obviously his very patient and very gentle attempt to demonstrate to them why they should get a lawyer.

There are several references to the defendants reading their arguments from a "book" or "notebook." Anyone know which book?

[LPC]

Stilley's application for admission pro hac vice in the Dirr case only lists one bar admission: To the federal district court in the central district of Illinois. That was the Lawrence case.

I couldn't find a copy of his application to that court to see what bar he claimed to be admitted to in order to get admitted to the central district of Illinois, but it looks like Stilley has been running a kind of "slash and burn" pyramid scheme with his bar admissions, using one of the few courts in which he as good standing in order to get admitted to other courts. But he may be running out of courts if he could only cite one to the Dirr court.

One PHV application he filed in 2007 in the ND of Illinois is interesting. In the space for listing the courts to which he has been admitted and is in good standing, he writes "see attached," but there is no attachment on the docket. On the second page, there are a series of yes/no questions, which he answered as follows:

Has the appilicant ever been:
censured, suspended. disbarred, or otherwise disciplined by any court? Yes
or is the applicant currently the subject of an investigation of the applicant's professional conduct? Yes
transferred to inactive status, voluntarily withdrawn, or resigned from the bar of any court? No
denied admission to the bar of any court? Yes
held in contempt of court? Yes

And the judge approved the application!

(A "brief description" explaining the four "yes" answers should have been attached to the application, but it wasn't part of the docket.)

[ASITStands]

There are several references to the defendants reading their arguments from a "book" or "notebook." Anyone know which book?

It appeared to me this was the "Reliance Defense" method employed by the Dirrs.

I wondered about the source of that work. Did not Benson produce a 'Reliance Defense Package' and Judge Rizzo a 'Reliance Defense Program?' Which one is being employed here?

[Demosthenes]

From a footnote in one of the gov's motions:

10 Benson’s book, which is the centerpiece of the “Reliance Defense Package,” has been thoroughly discredited along with its nonsensical arguments regarding the validity of the
Sixteenth Amendment. See Miller v. United States, 868 F.2d 236, 240-41 (7th Cir. 1989);
United States v. Sitka, 845 F.2d 43, 46 (2d Cir. 1988); Gonsalves v. United States, 2006 WL
358240 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 15, 2006);