LEVERAGE THE LAW
Constitution-Based Procedural Integrity Through Public DocumentationLATEST DEVELOPMENTS
08/24/2025
Defendant Judges in Default in Civil Rights Case UPDATE
In response, Federal District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina
(SELECT ONLY ONE)
News
07/07/2025
Lawsuit Filed Under § 42 U.S.C. 1985 (Conspiracy to Deprive Rights) and § 42 U.S.C. 1986 (Failure to Act)
Defendants
(Alleged initiators of coordinated actions)
Dana Devane-Webster
(Defendant)
Steve Palme
(Def. & Def. Webster’s Atty.)
Pia Law
(Defendant)
Stephanie Jenkins
(Def. & Def. Law’s Atty.)
Referenced Institutional Actors
(Alleged neutral actors within systemic framework)
Rhonda Young
(Judge)
Heather Forshey
(PC)
Renee Jordan
(Judge)
Kathy Lucas
(PC)
Previously Posted:
Judge Brian Ratledge, Judge Julie Bell, Judge Damion McCullers, Judge Jennifer Bedford
6/26/2025
This is the way accountability ends—
Not with a bang, but with a Rule 6(b)(3)*
6/19/2025
THE CIRCUIT… OF SILENCE (?)
Read “Will the Fourth Circuit Finally Address Williams?”
5/27/2025
YOU KNOW THE OLD SAYING…
If a civil right is violated in the Fourth Circuit, will it make a sound? 
5/15/2025
Former Lead Judge Ratledge Leaving Family Court
___________________________________
Most Judges Follow the Rule of Law vs. The Question of Judges Like Brian Ratledge
Gone, but not forgotten
Activity
08/22/2025
62-Year-Old Parent’s Health Collapse: Documented Laryngitis Diagnosis While Preparing for Six Court Issues in a Single Day — Attorney and Federal Defendant Stephanie T. Jenkins Forces Custody Hearing in His Absence
READ ENTIRE FEDERAL JUDICIAL NOTICE
(Click or tap to see and download full size cartoon)</div
07/08/2025
4 Wake County NC Family Court Judges in Default in Civil Rights Lawsuit
(Individual Capacity)
On July 8, 2025, we filed for an Entry of Default Judgment against
These Wake County North Carolina Defendant Judges
About Us
Leverage the Law is a public documentation project focused on systemic legal misalignment and civil rights protection in U.S. courts.
We provide free, open-source access to procedural history, constitutional analysis, and legal architecture for individuals seeking to understand and navigate systemic failure in state and federal courts.
Disclaimer
We are not attorneys and do not provide legal advice or representation. For assistance with a legal matter, please consult a licensed attorney.
No part of this platform is intended to substitute for professional legal services. All litigation referenced on this site is self-represented or conducted through proper legal channels. Communications through this site do not create an attorney–client relationship and are not treated as legal engagement.
Information & Resources
FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS CASE #1 TIMELINE
Below is a Timeline of the Important Milestones.
For access to full case filings visit the PACER MONITOR site for this case.
Michael Scott Davis, Stetson Mansfield Webster
Plaintiffs
v
Brian Ratledge, Julie Bell, Jennifer Bedford, Damion McCullers
In their Official and Individual Capacities as District Court Judges
CASE 5:24-CV-440-FL
Co-Plaintiffs File Complaints and Memorandum
Co-Plaintiffs File Amended Complaints and Memorandum
Opposing attorney in Plaintiff Webster’s case, Steve Palmé, files a motion to continue a hearing scheduled for August 29, 2024 brought by Plaintiff Webster, effectively filing a motion to keep judge named in federal lawsuit presiding over opposing party’s case.
Read the Motion
On Aug 28, 2024 Judge Margaret Eagles signed an unfilled order granting permission to continue a calendared hearing for Plaintiff Webster in front of Judge Julie Bell.
The order was signed Aug 28, 2024, 5 days before a new court date of Jan 16, 2025 had been set and filed on Sept 3rd.
This order was signed without a hearing, despite the objections of Plaintiff Webster.
Read Plaintiff Webster’s Motion to Recuse and Judge’s Order
Opposition to Motion and Motion to Recuse |
Judge Eagles Signed Order
On September 9, 2024, more than a month after Plaintiffs initiated their lawsuit, Plaintiff Davis filed a motion to recuse Judge Brian Ratledge due to the judge’s failure to take action on his own regarding an upcoming hearing scheduled for October 30, 2024. Judge Ratledge’s refusal to recuse, along with Judge Julie Bell’s refusal to do the same, formed the basis of the supplemental complaint Plaintiffs filed on September 19, 2024.
Read Plaintiff Davis’s Motion to Recuse
Plaintiff Davis’s Motion to Recuse
After more than a month after Plaintiffs filed a Federal Civil Rights lawsuit against four Wake County Family Court Judges—including Judge Brian Ratledge and Judge Julie Bell—now, due to their failure to recuse themselves and take appropriate action, Plaintiffs Davis and Webster have submitted a Motion for Leave and a Supplemental Complaint. These new violations have increased the total counts from 15 to 17.
Read Plaintiffs Motion for Leave, Supplemental Complaint and Memorandum of Law
Motion for Leave | Supplemental Complaint | Supplemental Memorandum of Law
October 11, 2024 Raleigh, North Carolina—Plaintiffs Davis and Webster filed an emergency motion in federal court to address the continuing lack of recusal and calling for a declaration that the their civil rights are being violated.
See filing: 2024-10-11 Urgent Motion Filed in Federal Court
October 15, 2024 Raleigh North Carolina—A Federal District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina has issued an order that all parties must submit all documents regarding their position by October 21, 2024. The judge acted of her own accord, signalling deep dissatisfaction with the way Defendants have been responding and acting.
See More Details Here | Download Order Here
See Complete Timeline Through 26-12-2024
We’ll be filling in the details shortly, but for a timeline of events see below.
Click or Tap to View
Important Tips to Help Your Situation…
- Address mental health needs. It’s important to spot and accept mental health problems when dealing with legal issues.Pay attention to mental wellness. Knowing and acknowledging mental health concerns is crucial in legal matters.
- Look for significance beyond the courtroom. Diving into hobbies or tasks that aren’t tied to your lawsuit can give you a sense of equilibrium and a fresh viewpoint.Search for purpose beyond legal fights. Getting involved in hobbies or projects not linked
- Unwind and find joy. It’s important to chill out and enjoy things, even when you’re dealing with tough legal stuff.
- Try out spiritual or other kinds of help. You might look into different spiritual activities or find new ways to get through tough times.Look into spiritual
- Acknowledge systemic issues. Be aware that the system can often be resistant to constitutional rights and redress, and may harbor corruption.
- Understand how standing up to others can affect them. Even when things look tough, fighting with heart can really hit your rivals’ money and reputation.
- Understand that the legal system isn’t close to perfect. Know that just because you’re legally correct, it doesn’t guarantee a win. Sometimes the law is twisted or people cheat.
- Acknowledge the legal system’s flaws and prejudices. Recognize that being legally correct does not guarantee success. Laws can be bent, and dishonesty might influence outcomes.
Learn about the common urge to misuse power. Know that power abuse happens often and we must always be watchful to prevent it. - Understand the wider impact of legal conflicts. See how single legal fights fit into a bigger picture of widespread problems and possible changes.
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
—Thomas Jefferson
Source: https://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/TSJN.html
