Main Menu

Dr. Conspiracy sued

It was quite a shock to open the obamaconspiracy mailbag just now to find this disturbing statement:

This is to notify you that you have been sued.

I’ve been sued in the US District Court in Minnesota by Susan Herbert. You can read the complaint (case number 0:2011cv01869) here.

You should not sit there smugly and say: “Poor Dr. Conspiracy. I hope it turns out all right for him.” You shouldn’t be smug because you have been sued too! She has pretty much sued the whole bleepin’ world. It was just me and a few others that got the email.

I am not overly concerned at this point, because the likelihood of Ms. Herbert effecting service of the complaint on all 7 billion of us is somewhat remote. However, if I am served, I will immediately file a motion to have me dismissed from the case because Herbert lacks standing: she cannot show a causal link between anything I have done and her alleged grievance, despite Herbert’s statement:

All you can do is confess as we know your intent so it’s your motive that we want as that’s your currency. The burden is on you

28 Responses to Dr. Conspiracy sued

  1. avatar
    Majority Will July 26, 2011 at 9:58 pm #

    That almost makes Orly seem rational by comparison.

  2. avatar
    richCares July 26, 2011 at 10:39 pm #

    talking about suits, Larry Klayman, the one WND is using to sue Esquire, has filed suit against Rachel Maddow, a really stupid suit, it seems Larry has not lost his touch.

  3. avatar
    AnotherBird July 26, 2011 at 10:40 pm #

    Funny she even sued North Korea. I saw Canada first and had to chuckle. This will end in without a peep.

  4. avatar
    Sean July 26, 2011 at 11:05 pm #

    This reminds me of an article I read about a crazy woman that was legally forbidden from filing any lawsuit because of the hundreds she’s already filed. The briefs she filed were so incoherent, the court couldn’t make hide nor hair of them. Once she sued someone for a “zillion” dollars, and another brief she made reference to Manny, Moe and Jack whom she said were her sons.

  5. avatar
    Whatever4 July 26, 2011 at 11:11 pm #

    I read a number of random pages, and I must say she certainly knows how to spell-check and format. That makes her far more talented than the average birther.

  6. avatar
    Sef July 26, 2011 at 11:19 pm #

    Not only did she sue the whole bleepin’ world, but the plaintiffs are included in the defendant class, Just how does that work???

  7. avatar
    GeorgetownJD July 26, 2011 at 11:39 pm #

    She must be related to Alex J Rynkiewicz. I recognize the writing style.

  8. avatar
    J. Potter July 26, 2011 at 11:47 pm #

    Couldn’t make it past the vikings reference. Good grief!

  9. avatar
    misha July 27, 2011 at 1:48 am #

    Please sue me. I need the publicity.

  10. avatar
    Lupin July 27, 2011 at 4:05 am #

    My God, she makes Orly look positively sane!!!

    I found her photo on the internet:

    http://bakersdaughterwrites.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/simpsons_cat_lady.jpg

  11. avatar
    Lupin July 27, 2011 at 4:10 am #

    And speaking on behalf of France here is our response:

    I don’t want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

  12. avatar
    Keith July 27, 2011 at 4:22 am #

    I wonder. Can I sue her for the time I spent reading 20 or 30 random sentences?

  13. avatar
    Northland10 July 27, 2011 at 6:07 am #

    I could not get far enough to figure out if she is still President by default due to the fact she is a woman or something. I believe that was the general idea of her last case against Obama, et al. that the Supreme Court chose to ignore.

  14. avatar
    Sef July 27, 2011 at 10:18 am #

    Lupin:
    And speaking on behalf of France here is our response:

    I don’t want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

    Mmmmhhh! Elderberries!

  15. avatar
    Sef July 27, 2011 at 10:45 am #

    Did a real attorney file this??? Can’t (s)he be sanctioned?

    Doc, just how did you receive your notice? Snail mail or email? Was the envelope sent to “Occupant”. She’s going to have to spend over $136M just for service in the US. Funnneee!

  16. avatar
    Thrifty July 27, 2011 at 11:05 am #

    Crap. I’ve been sued. I was going to contact my lawyer, but he says he can’t represent me because he’s also being sued.

    Does anyone else have the Weird Al Yankovic song “I’ll Sue Ya!” playing in their head now?

  17. avatar
    Joey July 27, 2011 at 11:53 am #

    Is this the Herbert of “Herbert v Obama?” That’s one of the appeals that made it all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.

  18. avatar
    G July 27, 2011 at 1:31 pm #

    Well, crazy Susan Herbert included her 2 minor sons as “signed plaintiffs” on this piece of loopy dreck too. Skip to page 301 of the complaint and you get her list of “signed plaintiffs” and her creative explanations for how most of them signed. Her kids are #15, which of course, she just signed for herself, since they are minors and she is their parent. Right above that at #14 is well known Birther & fantasy grand jury nut, Carl Swensson, who sounds like he is one of the mentally ill people who were delusional enough to actually seek Susan Herbert out on this and *did* actually add themselves to this case. LOL! Few others are actual signatures. Mainly her and some Brian Dobry and a few other nuts strewn throughout. Not sure if this Susan Clemons she lists as part of her Council for the Class is even aware that Herbert claims she is representing them. I highly doubt it. The funniest is seeing her explanation that Al Franken and Charlie Rangel are part of her plaintiff class…

    Yeah, she should get mad Orly to represent all of them…sounds like a perfect match of crazy incompetence, if you ask me.

    Sean: This reminds me of an article I read about a crazy woman that was legally forbidden from filing any lawsuit because of the hundreds she’s already filed. The briefs she filed were so incoherent, the court couldn’t make hide nor hair of them. Once she sued someone for a “zillion” dollars, and another brief she made reference to Manny, Moe and Jack whom she said were her sons.

  19. avatar
    Sef July 27, 2011 at 1:59 pm #

    She actually believes that when someone gives her their business card it mans they have signed on to her suit??? Un f ing real!!!

  20. avatar
    G July 27, 2011 at 2:11 pm #

    Yeah…LOL! But some of her other reasons listed there were even weaker and crazier than that. Like what she said about the Hopi (actually all Native Americans according to her suit) or that simple unrelated conversation statements by certain people were their real signature or some crazy nonsense like that. It is just an astounding level of delusions built upon delusions…

    Sef: She actually believes that when someone gives her their business card it mans they have signed on to her suit??? Un f ing real!!!

  21. avatar
    PaulG July 27, 2011 at 3:39 pm #

    It has a shout out to Rocky & Bullwinkle, so it’s not all bad.

  22. avatar
    G July 27, 2011 at 3:45 pm #

    LOL! Yeah, I noticed that too….

    PaulG: It has a shout out to Rocky & Bullwinkle, so it’s not all bad.

  23. avatar
    Critical Thinker July 27, 2011 at 4:18 pm #

    Wow. She has kids. Very, very tragic.

    G:
    Well, crazy Susan Herbert included her 2 minor sons…

  24. avatar
    Jules July 27, 2011 at 6:11 pm #

    Lupin: And speaking on behalf of France here is our response:

    I don’t want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

    I’ll respond on behalf of Great Britain as if this were a matter before the courts of England and Wales. I refer to Rule 3.4(2)(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules and paragraph.4(2) of Practice Direction 3A. The claim in question is incoherent and completely nonsensical such that it presents no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim. Accordingly, I submit that the claim should be struck out forthwith. I request an order that the Claimant pay the Defendant’s costs of bringing this application, sumarily assessed at 100.

    I will let those more familiar with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure deal with the equivalent rules in the US that will actually result in the matter being dismissed.

  25. avatar
    Jules July 27, 2011 at 6:15 pm #

    I amend the above so that I correctly refer to paragraph 1.4(2) of Practice Direction 3A.

  26. avatar
    Keith July 28, 2011 at 12:32 am #

    Jules: Accordingly, I submit that the claim should be struck out forthwith. I request an order that the Claimant pay the Defendant’s costs of bringing this application, sumarily assessed at 100.

    Just curious. Is that 100 pounds per defendent? Because she seems to be suing everybody in the world and that means there are more than 62,262,000 defendentsin the UK. So we are talking about the neighborhood of 125 Million pounds? That’s about $204 million in USD

  27. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny July 28, 2011 at 9:50 am #

    Well, since she is not suing Poland, Germany or Belgium, I am off the hook, I suppose.

    Why is she suing Norway? Dit Glenn B(reiv)eck put her up to that?

  28. avatar
    Jules July 30, 2011 at 7:17 am #

    Keith: Just curious. Is that 100 pounds per defendent? Because she seems to be suing everybody in the world and that means there are more than 62,262,000 defendentsin the UK. So we are talking about the neighborhood of 125 Million pounds? That’s about $204 million in USD

    As there was only one application for striking out made on behalf of the UK, I was seeking only one payment of 100, to be paid to HM Treasury (which could really use the cash).

    In any event, the court would have the power to strike out such a claim if it were filed in the UK even if the particulars of claim were not an incoherent rant. The claimant would have some difficulty effecting service on 62,262,000 people and so would probably be unable to request a default judgment. (As a first class stamp costs 46p, the cost of serving the entire UK population would be 28,640,520. I would like to thank Ms Herbert if she intends to give the Royal Mail some much-needed revenue.) In the absence of a defence or valid application for default judgment, the court would likely end up striking out the proceedings.

    My understanding is that the US tends to be stricter than England & Wales about the method for service of a claim and so Ms Herbert will likely find herself unable to effect service on most of her defendants unless she is willing to spend billions (or even trillions) on private process servers.

    Of course, all this discussion is really quite silly because a claim seeking to sue all of humanity is clearly not legitimate and will not require a defence in practice.