Main Menu

Tag Archives | service

Lamb Loses Lawsuit

Thomas A. Lamb believes that citizens have a right to see the personal records of candidates for President, including their college and medical records. He filed suit against Obama and Romney in Alaska Superior Court to get them. (Romney was eventually dropped as a defendant.)

The Superior Court ruled against Lamb for 4 reasons:

  1. Failure to prefect service
  2. Lack of standing
  3. Lack of subject matter jurisdiction
  4. Failure to state a claim for relief

Lamb lost on appeal and on March 12, the Alaska Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal on items 2-4, not addressing service.

Read the decision.

Doc foresees latest Taitz move in a dream

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

How to serve the President with a lawsuit in his personal capacity in California federal court

I hope that my fellow Obots will not cast me out for lifting the veil of secrecy on the closely-guarded incantation of how to serve the President in his personal capacity. There has been an attempt to keep these dangerous weapons out of the hands of birthers like Orly Taitz and so, up until now, this information has only been available to the initiated in a classified federal court document, cryptically named “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” which is only available on a limited-access computer network called “The Internet.” It is not discussed publicly, but only whispered in the halls of certain elite institutions called “law schools.”

I am not a lawyer myself, but the information which I am about to disclose comes from one, who graduated from the University of the Pacific’s McGeorge School of Law and was in private practice as an attorney in California for 13 years. The following material pays special attention to the rules in force for federal district courts in California, where Orly Taitz is struggling mightily to achieve service on the President, but so far without success.

I am linking to the document, where the secret of serving the President of the United States in his personal capacity is detailed on Page 2, Line 14 through Page 3, Line 7. May God have mercy on my soul.

Taking legal advice from the Secret Service

There seems to be a fundamental disagreement in philosophy between birther attorney Orly Taitz and federal judge Morris C. England, Jr. regarding how to serve the President of the United States with a complaint in a lawsuit. Judge England seems to be stubbornly insisting that Taitz follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and lacks the flexibility to consider alternative legal authority, such as a remark by a Secret Service agent.

Taitz previously moved for an expedited default judgment against Obama because he failed to respond within the required time to the original complaint (ignoring the fact that she had nullified that complaint by filing an amended complaint). Judge England denied that motion because the Court Record shows no proper service of the President, nor service of anyone with the amended complaint.

Taitz, true to form, won’t take no for an answer, and asks for reconsideration [link to PDF at Taitz web site], arguing that her service of the President in his personal capacity was proper because the Secret Service said so. Taitz’ process server recounts [link to PDF at Taitz web site] that when he showed up at the White House:

I was told by the Secret Service detail at the entrance that Mr. Obama refuses to accept service of process at his residence and I need to serve him through the Department of Justice/U.S. Attorneys’ Office.

I doubt that the Secret Service detail knew in what capacity the process server was attempting to serve the President. Most suits against Obama are in his official capacity, and the advice from the Secret Service would be correct in that case.

A real lawyer wouldn’t be so stupid as to rely on what some Secret Service agent said for legal advice. A real lawyer would read the law.

Read the original order denying default judgment:

Continue Reading →

Is Orly Taitz smarter than a 5th grader?

imageThere are two schools of thought on that ques­tion.

Taitz has been filing lawsuits against President Obama for a little over 4 years now. I observed back in June of 2009 that Orly Taitz had mis­represented when an attempt was made to serve President Obama in the case of Keyes v. Obama. In this case, Orly relied on an inept volunteer who served a male mail clerk somewhere, and claimed that Obama was served in his personal capacity on January 20 (Inauguration Day) when in fact when the actual affidavit was filed, the date was February 10. In fact, I made several comments on the blog that year that the clock was ticking and that her case would be dismissed for missing the deadline to serve the complaint. And in fact, she did miss the deadline, but Judge Carter allowed more time and personally ordered Taitz and the US Attorney to work out the service then and there.

A 5th grader, even though not a law school graduate, should be smart enough to learn from a mistake. Apparently not in the case of Taitz. Once again, in the case of  Grinols v. Electoral College, she tried to serve President Obama in his personal capacity, and when he didn’t respond, she moved for a default judgment. But in fact, it was the same story as in Keyes repeated 4 years later. Taitz told the Court in a January 3 hearing that President Obama had been served in his personal capacity, when in fact service was attempted the following day, and that service again was through the US Government, and not in Obama’s personal capacity. Her motion for default was, of course, dismissed along with another tutorial on the rules of service. Until a plaintiff is served, the Court has no jurisdiction.

I will not belabor the point with other examples of Taitz’ repeated legal errors.

So we are left with two alternative theories:

  1. Orly Taitz is not smarter than a 5th grader, and that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are hopelessly beyond her grasp, even when meticulously explained to her in simple terms by a judge.
  2. Orly Taitz makes mistakes in her legal process in order that her cases be dismissed for technical reasons, to avoid her losing on the merits. By filing cases and never losing1, she can maintain the fiction on her web site that she is fighting Obama, when in fact she has no case.

1Technically, Taitz did lose one case on the merits, Farrar v. Obama in Georgia. On appeal before the Superior Court in Georgia, Obama attorney Michael Jablonski argued that service had not been effected on President Obama in that case either.

Taitz: Grinols emergency appellate filing

So what else is new? Orly’s trying to get the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to demand that Judge England do something or other in the case of Grinols v. Electoral College. It’s an emergency because Obama, well, Obama is PRESIDENTING! What Taitz is asking the Court of Appeals to do is order the Trial Court to declare Obama in default in the Grinols case, even though she clearly never served him with the complaint in the capacity in which she is suing him. She also wants the US Attorney investigated for his courtesy appearance for President Obama.

Oh, did I mention that she copied the International Criminal Bar and the UN Commission for Civil Rights Defenders1? What do you get if you do a Google image search for "united nations Commission for Civil Rights Defenders"?


The brief is 162 pages long with attachments such as the Zullo affidavit, Irey stuff, a screen print of an article by Jerome Corsi, Census forms, FOIA dumps—in fact just about every imaginable thing EXCEPT a proof of service showing that Obama had been served in his personal capacity and is in default. What a maroon!

OK, correction. Sometimes the crazy gets too strong to report it. Taitz is not suing Obama in his personal capacity; she is suing him as a candidate. On what planet is Barack Obama a candidate?

Continue Reading →