Frank Deville, et ux. v. Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, et al.
iaSSEsSsSHSSSt
iS thaUegal?^ ^ there should be liberal ability to amend (Roland v.
Christian, 69 Cal. 2d 108, 112) . ■ ,not what we believe it to be. Truth is what the law says is truth.
Its not about our truth or the defendants truth or the judges trut ut e
truth of the law. Any unlawful activity in any business activity that is
forbidden by law. (saunders v. Superior court 27 CAL. App 4 »csz,
838 The case set here now is indeed unique, a the highest state court has
rendered a decision of an important federal question of federal law has not
been but should be, settled by this court 28 U.S.C. 451.There is indeed a
conflict of law that do exist. The petitioners constitutional due process
rights have been violated, he has been denied the right to be heard an
have a fair hearing.Truth is
What is the liberal ability to amend a complaint?