Main Menu

Docket Project

Dr. Conspiracy

Dr. Conspiracy

Just thinking here about starting a case tracking project here. Following is my tentative list of data items to track:

  • Case Name (e.g. Keyes et al. v. Obama et al.)
  • List of Plaintiffs
  • List of Defendants
  • Court/Judge
  • Summary of Complaint or main issue
  • Does it related to Obama’s eligibility to be president?
  • Is it from a federal prisoner?
  • Has the court labeled any part of the case or motions “frivolous”?
  • What is the Status of the case?
  • What is the next action and date?
  • Link to documents
  • Link to news coverage

I’m thinking about the best way to format this. A table couldn’t be made wide enough. Should I use the blog or something else? A blog could have one page per case in a standard layout and then one “index page” which might be a quick status: case name, status, link to main page.

Just thinking out loud here.

[The Docket Project is now available through a link at the top of the blog labeled “Docket“]

25 Responses to Docket Project

  1. avatar
    Obot 1024 February 17, 2009 at 1:05 pm #

    Orly Taitz has taken to publishing critic’s email addresses and personal information.

    She published what is supposedly JD Georgetown’s office information & phone number.

    That was after publishing personal info on Yes to Democracy’s site registrant.

  2. avatar
    Expelliarmus February 17, 2009 at 1:41 pm #

    I think that is an overly ambitious and unnecessary project. I’d suggest that you limit the tracking to cases that raise some sort of political issue. If you want to have a reference list to sort out the cases brought by federal prisoners, mental patients, or if stuff comes up later where Obama is named as a formality only in his official capacity — then I’d suggest separate headings or topics to just list those cases, but don’t waste time with tracking them.

  3. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 17, 2009 at 1:47 pm #

    That makes sense.

  4. avatar
    Kelly February 17, 2009 at 5:41 pm #

    I am a paralegal in a personal injury lawfirm. I track cases in memo style and keep them in alphabetical order. This allows me to go to that directory and know exactly what is going on.

  5. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 17, 2009 at 8:56 pm #

    The Docket Project is now launched. Look for a Docket Tab up top to appear soon. Slowly but surely.

  6. avatar
    richCares February 18, 2009 at 1:12 am #

    claim is made that summons was issued in Kercher case against Obama, his proof is same as Berg, how can that garbge get a summons issued, anybody know?

  7. avatar
    Expelliarmus February 18, 2009 at 1:40 am #

    Getting a summons issued is automatic along with the filing of the complaint. It is usually done concurrently with filing.

  8. avatar
    Expelliarmus February 18, 2009 at 2:58 am #

    It would be helpful to also include a link to the Motion to Dismiss in Hollister v. Soetero – see: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/9-1.pdf

    Obviously I found it, but it took some digging around the site for me to do so — since the whole point of the docket project is to make an easy reference point, I’m thinking that the motion is really needed in order to make whatever sense of the opposition that is possible to be made.

  9. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 18, 2009 at 7:43 am #

    Added, thanks.

  10. avatar
    Bob February 18, 2009 at 6:49 pm #

    First off, thanks for undertaking this. Less work for me to satify my curiousity about this issue.

    I think the Right Side of Life actually has done a decent job at this:

    http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?page_id=1518

    So I would steal from them: Have one landing page that lists the case’s name and status (“Filed on [date], Motion to Dismiss filed on [date], etc.), and then link each case to a separate page, for you fill in the relevant data fields.

  11. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 18, 2009 at 8:28 pm #

    So I’m thinking now that I don’t have to be encyclopedic about the cases. I’ll just say whether it’s active or not, and link to what documents I have.

  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 18, 2009 at 9:24 pm #

    I tell you what prompted me to do the Docket. It’s the case Essek v. Obama. I had a particular interest in the case because of focused demand — to see the birth certificate. I could find nothing on the status of the case, and the Right Side just linked to links that linked back to the same place they started. I go nowhere. I also wanted better ways to refer people to the case filings. So, here we are, Essek and all.

    I went over to the Right Side and told them Essek had been dismissed.

  13. avatar
    Bob February 19, 2009 at 3:50 pm #

    I was praising the Ride Side for its attractiveness in layout, not the quality of its content. Their landing page isn’t cluttered with too much information, but has links to specifics if you want to see it.

  14. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 19, 2009 at 5:16 pm #

    I understand, and it is very attractive and functional layout. The Freeper List is plug ugly, but more complete. The Freeper list contains prisoners suing to get out of jail mixed in with eligibility cases. This makes the list appear longer than it should.

  15. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 17, 2009 at 6:50 am #

    Ankeny v Daniels – Dismissed

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 26, 2009 at 6:51 am #

    I updated the format again, adding a new column for the date of the next expected activity. Federal Prisoner and official conduct suits unrelated to Obama conspiracy theories have been deleted.

    A couple of dismissals have been added today, including Morrow v Barak Humane Obama.

    Looks like all that is cooking is Berg’s appeal before 3rd circuit, Berg’s super secret sealed suit in DC, Keyes v. Obama in California and Kerchner v. Obama in New Jersey.

  17. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 26, 2009 at 8:03 am #

    Well, there’s the garbage load of stuff that Orly delivered to the Chief Justice. Last we heard, the Court’s security people were “analyzing” it all.

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2009 at 3:36 pm #

    I note that Craig v. United States has been decided in favor of the United States. Craig claims his civil right were violated and he suffered great distress because Congress has not passed any legislation defining “natural born citizen”. Craig also wanted to certify a class action suit on behalf of every American. Craig himself wanted $.02 per American in damages.

    Craig is appealing.

    One other addition to the docket. I have the complaint link to the sealed case The Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations of Missouri et al v. Obama et al. The complaint is a white supremacist rant from an incarcerated mental patient. If you’re offended by extreme racist language, then this will no doubt offend you.

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 4, 2009 at 2:38 pm #

    I have some updates for the docket. I don’t see entries in the court system that I would expect to see in Kerchner v. Obama, but my best guess is that the defendants have moved to postpone response until June 21, and that the court will grant it.

    In Schneller v. Cortes, writ of certiorari is scheduled for conference June 18 at the Supreme Court. “Many are called, but few are chosen.”

    I don’t see Strunk’s response (due June 1) and if really not files, Strunk’s case is in danger of being dismissed.

  20. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 9:34 am #

    John McCain (one of the defendants in Hamblin v. Obama) filed a motion to dismiss and a motion in opposition to the motion to dismiss was filed June 15.

  21. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 27, 2009 at 11:43 am #

    A few updates to the docket:

    Craig v. Obama has been appealed to the Supreme Court (conference Sept. 29) although I can’t see that he’s lost his appeal in circuit court yet.

    Hollister v Soetor (Phil Berg / Hemenway) is on appeal and their response is due August 5.

    I added the latest document, the Government response, in Kerchner v. Obama.

    I also added a case (already dismissed), Dawson v. Obama, somehow overlooked before.

  22. avatar
    Expelliarmus June 27, 2009 at 2:32 pm #

    Thanks — I noticed the Dawson case cited in the Kerchner pleading…. I thought “WTF? I didn’t see that mentioned on Doc Conspiracy’s site…..”

  23. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 27, 2009 at 4:47 pm #

    Dawson is a federal prisoner. The court in Dawson said:

    The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2).

  24. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 22, 2009 at 7:47 pm #

    A few changes to the Docket project:

    I have changed the coloring scheme. When a case is appealed, I turn it pink while the appeal itself is green so long as it is active. The upshot of this is that you see more green to more accurately reflect cases where something is active.

    I added a color to the legend for the conspiracy wining. While no case has yet won, I thought I might as well pick out a color.

    I added the Patriot’s Heart Network case to the Docket, although I’m not sure it makes sense to call this petition a lawsuit. Nevertheless it is on a court web site and I might as well have a place to track it.

    The case Keyes v. Obama has been renamed to Barnett v. Obama to reflect recent court documents. As far as I know, Alan Keyes is still a party to the lawsuit.