|Norman L. Sirak
Attorney at Law
75 Public Square, Suite 800
Cleveland, OH 44113
Sirak Releases Appeal Brief Draft
IIAO Mr. Sirak will be sending this out next week to all of his clients, and it will be a little further along. But this draft represents a lot of work already. Appeal Draft
Sirak Class Action Suit Dismissed Feb. 1st
Judge Carr Issued His Opinion and Dismissed the Case In Its Entirety, but Sirak Will Be Back
IIAO Becki Miller broke the devastating news today through e-mail and the Parole Reform Discussion Group. Federal Judge Carr's decision represents a conflict with other recent rulings in similar suits against the APA, not the least of which are Dotson, Layne, Ankrom, and the January 12th Ohio case in Hernandez. Our hearts and prayers are with the clients, their families, the Siraks, the Millers, and all the volunteers who gave of themselves to get us this far. Something must have gone awry.
|On July 20, 2001 this class action suit was filed against the Ohio Adult Parole Authority, (Parole Board). Plaintiffs are challenging the complete process of reviewing and deciding upon granting or denying parole to an Ohio inmate convicted under Ohio's prior sentencing law. Although it was originally open to everyone under the Old Law, it now has been restricted to the clientele of Norman Sirak. To join the class, please see the official Parole Reform web site.|
|Plaintiffs, acting through counsel, move the Court for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(C) for Abuse of Discretion, Arbitrary and Capricious Decision-making, Violation of Separation of Powers, Bad Faith, Violations of the Ex Post Facto Clause and violations of the Equal Protection Clause.|
Sirak finishes filings for Summary Judgment
Progress Report January 16, 2004
Progress Report February 17, 2004
and Graphs referred to in this motion
Filings in this case
Copies may be found at the Official Parole Reform Web Site
If someone is under the new law with a prior old law number and has completed the old time requirements (time and parole), and completed the new 'flat time', but the Parole Board is trying to charge them with a parole violation based on their old number, they are eligible.
If someone is on a technical violation and being forced to do more than 12-18 months for the violation by the Parole Board, they are eligible.
Contact Mr. Sirak at the address above or by email and ask for the application. A fee of $220 is required to retain his services and become a client, and named plaintiff. This can also be done with a downpayment of $100, and $10 per month thereafter.
about Injunction Notice from Ankrom v. Hageman Case no. 01CVH02-1563
Official Parole Reform Web Site
Sirak does not work with or for the IIAO Inc., this page was added to our
web site to facilitate
a factual information presence on the Internet in support of this action.
©2003-2006 IIAO Inc.