In simple terms, a vexatious litigant is someone who files lots of meritless lawsuits, or files lots of meritless motions in a suit. The courts may impose sanctions on vexatious litigants and their counsel. Vexatious litigants may be required to post bond, pay costs and may be prohibited from filing lawsuits without permission from a senior judge.
Certainly most people would say my simple definition fits Orly Taitz; however, “vexatious litigant” is also a term defined by statute in California, the state where Orly Taitz lives and is licensed to practice law. The definition appears in the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 391-391.8.
I want to focus on one provision of the Code and review it in terms of what Orly Taitz has done:
391. As used in this title, the following terms have the following meanings:
(a) "Litigation" means any civil action or proceeding, commenced, maintained or pending in any state or federal court.
(b) "Vexatious litigant" means a person who does any of the following:
(1) In the immediately preceding seven-year period has commenced, prosecuted, or maintained in propria persona at least five litigations other than in a small claims court that have been (i) finally determined adversely to the person or (ii) unjustifiably permitted to remain pending at least two years without having been brought to trial or hearing.
One important point is that the litigant must be representing themself (propria persona). An example of a case where Orly Taitz was not representing herself was Lightfoot v. Bowen; another was Barnett v. Obama. However, in recent times Orly Taitz has dispensed with other plaintiffs, or included them only as an afterthought or in attempt to gain standing. In the following actions, Taitz was a plaintiff and represented herself1. I have omitted ballot challenges presented to an elections board in the list, and any case that is ongoing or in which there is an appeal pending.
|1||Judd v. Obama||C. D. Cal. (Federal)||Dismissed|
|2||Taitz v. Obama||D.D.C. (Federal)||Dismissed|
|3||Taitz v. Ruemmler||D.D.C. (Federal)||Dismissed|
|4||Taitz v. Astrue||D. Hawaii (Federal)||Dismissed|
|5||Taitz v. Fuddy||Hawaii State||Dismissed|
|6||Taitz v. Gardner||NH Supreme Court||Denied|
|7||Taitz v. Nishimura||HI Supreme Court||Denied|
|8||Taitz v. Sebelius||C. D. Cal. (Federal)||Dismissed|
|9||Taitz v. Obama||CA State Court||Denied|
|10||Taitz v. Dunn||CA State Court||Judgment against|
I am qualified as an expert in mathematics, and my scientific report using recognized methodology is that the list preceding contains 10 entries, and that 10 is greater than 5. I’m not a lawyer, but it certainly seems to me that Orly Taitz fits the statutory definition of a vexatious litigant.
1There are other state lawsuits where Taitz was a plaintiff, for example a contract dispute for which I don’t have the results. There may be other cases of which I am not aware. Thanks to the Birther Scorecard for most of the case information used.