Archive | Lawsuits RSS feed for this section

Strunk hit with staggering $177,000 legal sanction

By on April 3, 2013 in Lawsuits, Sanctions

I’m going to have this thing overturned and I’m not going to pay a dime.

The New York Daily News reports that the amount of legal sanctions to be imposed on persistent New York litigator Christopher-Earl : Strunk is $177,000, by far the largest birther penalty imposed to date. Strunk is also barred from suing a long list of individuals in the New York Court System.

Prior to this, the birther sanctions record was held by Orly Taitz at $20,000 and $4,000, and seconded by $10,565.23 against the Liberty Legal Foundation and a distant third by Linda Jordan at a reduced amount of $3,500.

Strunk, who lives on a modest retirement income from Social Security has, according to prior court filings, no assets of note.

Read more:

Doc foresees latest Taitz move in a dream

By on April 2, 2013 in Lawsuits, Orly Taitz

imageI mentioned briefly in a comment a couple of days ago that I had a dream, a really strange one, where I kept finding boxes of cranks and  boxes of dirt. It wasn’t obvious why I had this dream, but I think now that it was prophetic of the latest legal move of Orly Taitz in Grinols v. Electoral College.

Not long after being rebuffed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Taitz v Democrat Party of Mississippi, where she attempted to obtain a Writ of Mandamus to require the judge to declare Michael Astrue, former Commissioner of Social Security, in default for failing to respond to a defective service of the complaint, she turns around and files an appeal of Judge England’s refusal to find President Obama in default in Grinols, where the judge had explained in great detail why her service was defective in that case also.

imageThe legal form of the two appellate actions are different, one to force a judge to rule  with a writ of mandamus and the other an appeal of a ruling, but the underlying defect is the same: Orly Taitz doesn’t follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and local rules when serving plaintiffs. Repeated legal failures makes one a crank, and I think that this is what my dream meant, particularly as Orly Taitz once said on her blog [link to Taitz web site]: “I used this motion to simply pour dirt on me.”

Note: there is a hearing on a motion to dismiss in this case on the 18th of this month.

Grinols Notice of Appeal and Ex Parte Expedited Motion0001 by orlytaitz1

Court considers reconsidering and decides not to

By on March 30, 2013 in Lawsuits, Orly Taitz

Yes, the latest motion to reconsider from Orly Taitz in Grinols v. Electoral College has been denied by Judge England. Taitz tried to have the President declared in default for not appearing in the case, but she bungled the service and so he’s not (yet) a party, and so has no duty to respond. Judge England explained to her in great detail how she went wrong when he denied her motion, and taking this to heart, Taitz ignored it, and asked for reconsideration.

No dice, says the Judge. Read the order:

Continue Reading →

McInnish wants oral argument before birther judge

By on March 29, 2013 in Lawsuits

Hugh McInnish’s lawsuit against Alabama Secretary of State Chapman to require her to verify eligibility of presidential candidates was dismissed with prejudice, a dismissal affirmed by a circuit court in Montgomery.

McInnish argues now before the Alabama Supreme Court that the District Court was in error and that Chapman has an “affirmative duty” to verify eligibility. Chapman said no. McInnish argues:

It would be paradoxical beyond measure if the real and grave question of the legitimacy of the de facto President, a question which lies at the very heart of our American Constitutional Government, were left unresolved for want of the simplest of documents, a birth certificate.

This of course ignores the fact that no less than two other secretaries of state (Arizona and Kansas) asked for and received certifications of the facts of Obama’s birth from Hawaii.

The case is now before the Alabama Supreme Court and it’s newly-elected birther Chief Justice Roy Moore. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are L. Dean Johnson of Huntsville and Larry Klayman.

Read the brief:

Continue Reading →

Taitz under attack, surrounded–threats loom

By on March 26, 2013 in Lawsuits, Orly Taitz

While I’m at the dentist’s office, you can read this tale of Orly Taitz inserting herself where she is not wanted, but herself found wanting a legal theory to support her action.

Thanks to the Jack Ryan collection for this tidbit that contains some perhaps over-the-top language, which I borrowed for the headline.

Taitz’ motion is subject to attack on many fronts; between Plaintiffs and the Defendants, she is surrounded.

…

In sum, Taitz has not articulated any specific common question of law or fact, much less one compelling enough to overcome the looming threats of delay and undue prejudice.

Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge

Judicial Watch v King (SD Ind) – Order Denying Taitz Motion to Intevene by Jack Ryan

Settlement reached in Jordan v. Reed

By on March 21, 2013 in Lawsuits

Linda Jordan and the Attorney General of Washington State agreed, according to a report at Obama Release Your Records, on a settlement by which Jordan would pay  the State $3,500 for the cost of their defending a frivolous appeal filed by Jordan. The State had previously been awarded almost $13,000 in costs, but this amount had been appealed by Jordan’s attorney Richard B. Sanders.

According to ORYR, Jordan had already received donations towards her sanctions that exceed the settlement plus her attorney fees. So much for the theory that actions have consequences.

Congress rejects Grinols subpoenas

By on March 19, 2013 in Lawsuits, Orly Taitz

I’m rather proud that I learned how to spell “subpoena” and can do it repeatedly, without error and without consulting a dictionary. If I ever needed to have a subpoena issued, I would probably consult a lawyer, and if I did consult a lawyer, one lawyer in particular stands at the very top of the list of ones that I would not consult: Orly Taitz.

Except for “friendlies,” I am not aware that Orly Taitz ever actually got anything in response to a subpoena except the occasional rejection letter, such as the one she got  from the Maricopa County Attorney on behalf of Sheriff Joe Arpaio once.

I am one of the adherents of the “shiny object” theory of Orly Law, believing that Orly Taitz uses legal methods that sound impressive, that use Latin phrases, that other lawyers use and that have some tangentially similar shape to real legal methods. Certainly one of the more frequent methods employed by Taitz is the subpoena, most recently directed at members of Congress in the Grinols v. Electoral College case where the docket is becoming clogged with them. Taitz is suing the 535 members of Congress (among others) and seems to think that the US Attorney who has responded on behalf of federal defendants in the case should have individually notified each member of the suit. Taitz is demanding that a list of members she contacted answer a questionnaire about the representation.

The Office of the General Counsel of the US House of Representatives on behalf of 22 members of Congress has sent a letter to Taitz explaining to her 5 reasons why her subpoena is worthless, and why the members of Congress will not be responding.

Read the letter:

Continue Reading →

Older posts Newer posts