MarK C. Ladendorf |

Profile

Mark C. Ladendorf has devoted his legal career to representing injured victims of automobile and motorcycle accidents, product defects, premises liability, construction/work-related accidents, medical malpractice, wrongful death, or other types of accidents causing injury to people and their families. Mark has been selected to “The Best Lawyers in America” as well as the “National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Trial Lawyers”. Mr. Ladendorf is featured in Martindale-Hubbell’s Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers under three distinct categories of practice, which include personal injury, medical malpractice, and wrongful death litigation.

Mark holds an “AV” rating as an attorney, the highest ranking an attorney can attain. Mark served as the President of the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association during the 2013/14 term and holds an emeritus position on its Board of Directors, having served since 1990. Mark is also a Life Member of the National Registry of Who’s Who, as well as being selected as one of Indiana’s Super Lawyers in Indianapolis Monthly magazine and Indiana Super Lawyers magazine, every year of its publication. He has authored and lectured extensively in the field of tort law and trial litigation, as demonstrated in his Resume. Mark has represented clients throughout the State of Indiana and the… Read More

RESUME

Mark C. Ladendorf: born Hammond, Indiana, June 17, 1955; admitted to bar, 1980, Indiana, U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit and U.S. District Court, Northern and Southern Districts of Indiana; Presented oral argument before the Indiana Supreme Court, Indiana Court of Appeals and the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Chicago, Illinois. Education: Indiana University (B.A., with distinction, 1977; J.D., Magna Cum Laude, 1980) Author: “Indiana Discovery, Pretrial & Trial Resources: Plaintiffs Perspective”, 1988, Professional Education Systems, Inc; “Indiana Uninsured & Underinsured Motorist Coverage Issues” 1989, Professional Educations Systems, Inc; “Statutory Guidelines with Regards to Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Claim”, 1989 Professional Education Systems, Inc.; “Dram Shop Liability From the Plaintiff’s Perspective”, 1990, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum Seminar; “Using Expert Witnesses In Discovery & Trial” 1991, National Business Institute, Inc. Seminar; “Plaintiff’s Perspective on Selecting and Preparing Cases for Summary Judgment”, 1992, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum Seminar; “Taking and Defending Depositions from a Plaintiff’s Perspective”, 1993, Law Seminars International; “Recent Case Law Update Regarding Interrogatories, Request For Production and Request For Admissions”, 1995, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum Seminar; “Advanced Trial Series – Setting the Stage; Pre-Trial Practice”, 1995, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum Seminar; “Issues Relating to Medical Malpractice in Indiana”, 1995, The Labor News; “Trying the Automobile Injury Case in Indiana”, 1996, National Business Institute, Inc.; “Protecting Work Product: Video Settlement Documentary” 2014, Indiana Trial Lawyers Association; Co-Author: “Final Argument in a Products Liability Lawsuit”, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum Seminar, 1982. • Lecturer, “How to Manage your Law Practice and Balance it with your Personal Life”, Applied Professionalism for Young Lawyers, Indiana Trial Lawyers Association, 2014; • Lecturer, “A new Twist on an Old Tradition”, Torts, Indiana Law Survey, The Alumni Association Of The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School Of Law, 2013 • Lecturer, “Damages in a Wrongful Death Trial,” Indiana Continuing Legal Education

Testimonials

Publishing ...

Your testimonial has been successfully sent

Please fill out all fields

DETAILS

1 CommentComment on Facebook

To the Honorable Court Comes now the Defendant, an American-born citizen, invoking the full protection of the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and all applicable federal and state civil rights statutes. The Defendant respectfully moves this Court for immediate dismissal of all charges, full restitution, and the initiation of a federal inquiry into the unlawful alteration of arrest records ~ acts that constitute a direct assault on constitutional law, civil rights, and the integrity of the American justice system. I. Statement of Facts The Defendant’s arrest records were unlawfully altered, amended, or falsified on multiple occasions. Up to nine (9) separate instances ~ without judicial authorization, due process, or the Defendant’s knowledge or consent. These alterations occurred within official courthouse systems, representing a deliberate and systemic act of tampering with public records, a felony under both federal and state law. This misconduct deprived the Defendant of liberty, reputation, and due process, violating the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Neither the Defendant nor counsel was ever permitted to appear before a judge. The entire judicial process was subverted, replaced by falsified documentation and administrative deceit. These actions were not clerical errors. They were calculated violations . A coordinated effort to manipulate the record, obstruct justice, and conceal misconduct. The Defendant asserts that this pattern of falsification constitutes a constitutional crisis, undermining the rule of law and eroding public trust in the judiciary. II. Constitutional and Statutory Violations A. Fourth Amendment The unlawful alteration of arrest records constitutes an unreasonable seizure of identity and liberty. By fabricating or distorting the factual basis of prior proceedings, state actors effectively seized the Defendant’s legal identity and replaced it with a false narrative, violating the right to be secure in person and record. B. Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (Due Process and Equal Protection) The Defendant was denied procedural due process when records were altered without notice, hearing, or opportunity to contest. Equal protection was violated through selective and discriminatory treatment. These acts deprived the Defendant of the fundamental fairness guaranteed by the Constitution and created a two-tiered system of justice . One for the protected, and one for the silenced. C. Sixth Amendment The Defendant’s right to a fair trial and accurate recordkeeping was destroyed. Altered records directly affect defense strategy, credibility, and sentencing considerations. The falsification of judicial documents renders any subsequent proceedings constitutionally void. D. Civil Rights Statutes Under 42 U.S.C. §1983, any person acting under color of law who deprives another of constitutional rights is liable for damages. The Defendant reserves the right to pursue civil action against all responsible parties, including law enforcement agencies, clerks, prosecutors, and any third parties complicit in the falsification of records. Each alteration constitutes a separate and actionable violation of civil rights. III. Legal Argument for Dismissal and Restitution Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine Any evidence derived from falsified or altered records is inadmissible. The foundation of the prosecution’s case is therefore tainted and must be dismissed in its entirety. The doctrine mandates exclusion of all evidence obtained through unlawful means, ensuring that justice is not built upon corruption. Violation of Brady v. Maryland (373 U.S. 83, 1963) The suppression or alteration of exculpatory evidence constitutes prosecutorial misconduct and mandates dismissal. By concealing or distorting material facts, the prosecution deprived the Defendant of a fair opportunity to present a complete defense. Judicial Integrity and Public Trust The Court has an inherent duty to preserve the integrity of its records. Allowing prosecution to proceed on falsified documentation undermines the rule of law and erodes public confidence in the justice system. The judiciary must act decisively to correct and condemn such violations to maintain its legitimacy and moral authority. IV. Damages and Valuation of Harm The Defendant seeks restitution and damages commensurate with the magnitude of the constitutional violations and the systemic corruption exposed. The following categories of harm justify a valuation exceeding $2.5 billion USD, reflecting both compensatory and punitive damages: Loss of Liberty and Due Process ~ The unlawful deprivation of freedom and denial of judicial access. Reputational and Emotional Harm ~ Two decades of stigma, psychological trauma, and social isolation. Economic and Opportunity Loss ~ Destruction of career, income potential, and professional standing. Punitive Damages ~ To punish and deter future misconduct by state actors and institutions. Institutional Accountability ~ Damages for systemic corruption, falsification of public records, and erosion of public trust. Public Interest Damages ~ Compensation for the broader societal harm caused by the corruption of judicial integrity. This case represents not merely a personal injury, but a national constitutional breach — a precedent that, if left unpunished, endangers every citizen’s right to due process and equal protection under the law. V. Relief Sought The Defendant respectfully requests: Immediate dismissal of all charges with prejudice. Expungement of all falsified or altered records. Independent forensic audit of all arrest and court records associated with the Defendant. Referral to the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division for investigation into systemic misconduct. Award of compensatory and punitive damages totaling $2.5 billion USD, subject to adjustment upon discovery. Public acknowledgment of wrongdoing and formal correction of all judicial records. VI. Conclusion The Defendant stands as a sovereign American citizen whose rights were not merely violated but erased. The unlawful alteration of official records is not a clerical mistake. It is a constitutional crime. It is the theft of truth, the erasure of identity, and the corruption of the very system sworn to protect it. Justice demands not only dismissal but restitution, reform, and accountability. The Constitution cannot defend itself; it relies on citizens and courts of conscience to do so. This motion is not a plea for mercy . It is a demand for justice, truth, and the restoration of the rule of law. Respectfully submitted, Sign: ~ {Jeremy H. Hars} ~

MarK C. Ladendorf

Profile

Related

Testimonials

DETAILS

Press Releases

Newest Member

Matthew Trollinger

Recent Posts

Press Releases

Contact Us

Profile

Related

Address

Our Address:

Telephone:

Email:

Web:

Testimonials

DETAILS

Press Releases

Newest Member

Matthew Trollinger