Posted on 06/15/2011 8:52:24 AM PDT by westcoastwillieg
edge,
You’ve created such a total fabrication of reality that I can’t decide whether to ignore or tear apart the very large web of misinformation that you’ve woven together with a profoundly mistaken interpretation of the law, incoherent speculation, and wishful thinking.
To put it as simply as possible: no legally binding subpoena was issued. Ms. Nagamine stated exactly that in Paragraph 2, in concise legal language. She then went on to clarify the state’s position on release of the requested document. She could have not responded at all, with no consequence.
Any state’s Deputy AG (or any experienced attorney in or out of govt) can recognize a legally binding subpoena. They know that a legally binding subpoena is issued by the court or by an attorney as an officer of the court from which the subpoena would be issued, not by a pro se litigant. There is no question about it. It is invalid on its face. It has nothing to do with anyone’s legal authority to determine its validity. I don’t know what other defect(s) exist, if any. The lack of proper issuance is one that is easily recognizable, and fatal.
In fact, if one wanted to get sticky about it, by signing the subpoena form as an attorney in that court, knowing she’s not admitted to its bar, Dr. Taitz might have stepped into an ethical quandry. That is the type activity that often keeps experienced attorneys from bringing in other attorneys pro hac vice, especially one with the track record of Dr Taitz. I don’t want to get into ad hominem attacks on her, but there comes a time to stop making excuses for endless procedural missteps. What lawyer in his/her right mind would take the chance? The local counsel could face sanctions for what the attorney admitted pro hac vice does.
I went upthread and found the motion to quash a subpoena that you linked. Note that in the Hollander case, the defendant had just been served with the Summons and Complaint, and the time to file an answer or motion had not yet passed. The defendant was in the position of having to object directly to the court because of that timing. However, in the Taitz case, an Answer and motion – and Order - had already been filed before the subpoena was issued/served, however improperly. Judge Lamberth’s Order of June 2, 2011 granting in part and denying in part the defendant’s motion left the case without even a Complaint until the redacted one was filed June 14, 2011. The govt’s motion (to dismiss) will be filed no later than July 5, 2011.
Under this freewheeling scenario, your neighbor could sue you, fill out and sign a subpoena form, and hand-deliver it to you, demanding you turn over to him copies of your bank and tax return records. Unless he signed as an officer of the court, it would mean absolutely nothing and you would not be bound to respond to it, or even acknowledge it. You could throw it in the trash. Our laws offer rights, privileges, responsibilities and protections.
The unauthorized issuer of that subpoena could then go to court to try to compel what the invalid subpoena requested, alas to no avail. Contempt, btw, only relates to a failure to obey an order of the court or a subpoena issued by the court (or an officer of the court). In a case where there is no order or the subpoena is not issued by the court (or an officer of the court) and thus not legally binding, there is no basis for contempt.
In this case, if Dr. Taitz wants to cure the defects in her subpoena, she has to request one to be issued by the Clerk in HI or bring in local counsel who may or may not issue it, absent an order from the court where the case is pending. Since this case is in DC but the subpoena would have to be issued thru the HI court, she would likely have to move first for an Order from Judge Lamberth allowing her to proceed to have the subpoena issued in HI.
I accept your concession. Now you can simply admit you were wrong.
It's not up to the recipient or even a recipient's legal counsel to make this determination on their own. If you don't think it's legal, you ignore it or you challenge it. I gave a very specific example of how that was done in the Hollander v. McCain case in a motion to quash. All the same faither objections that you and cockeyedtexan have presented were addressed in their MTQ. I'm not bothering with the rest of your post because it's rambling nonsense that falls under the category of "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with B.S."
If it makes you happy, fine. But you are wrong. And projecting.
Bwahahaha! You need to join Orly’s three-ring circus as the center act because your clown show is something to behold.
They come to a professionally uninformed conclusion on their own. When that is pointed out, they insist that the iron clad logic of their position is unassailable and denigrate anyone with actual knowledge of the subject at hand. When their iron clad logic fails to pan out, exactly as they were told, they chalk it up to corrupt courts. Then they move on to the next pointless shiny object where, once again, they will be unassailably right.
Lather, rinse, and repeat.
Because I’ve always believed FR is a site for the civil exchange of ideas and information among conservatives and did not want to present erroneous information, before posting what you claim is “BS.” I ran my #343 reply to you by an attorney with whom I work, who:
a) Has practiced successfully in the USDC-DC for 40+ years
b) Has practiced successfully in the USCA-DC for 40+ years
c) Has practiced successfully in the SCOTUS for 30 years
d) Has submitted ‘amicus’ brief in successful cases in the SCOTUS
e) Has been granted certiorari as lead counsel in a politically charged case – per curium
f) Has provided extensive support in an eligibility/ NBC case to its counsel of record
g) Has not been sanctioned for any procedural matters in all those years
h) Might just have a clue what he is talking about in confirming what I posted
It’s a helluva day when you have me agreeing with Buckeye and tired_old, but now we have it. Job well done!
Sure it is. What do you think legal counsel does other than give legal counsel? Saying that legal counsel can't make a determination about the validity of a subpoena is as ridiculous as suggesting that a physician can't make a determination about the medical necessity of an operation.
If you don't think it's legal, you ignore it or you challenge it.
Nagamine first told Orly that she was going to ignore the invalid subpoena. Then she told Orly how she would challenge it if it were valid. Time is money for attorneys. As Deputy AG, Nagamine doesn't want to waste time with Orly's foolishness. So she told Orly what to expect if Orly can later properly serve the subpoena. By writing to Orly, Nagamine was likely attempting to save herself time later.
I gave a very specific example of how that was done in the Hollander v. McCain case in a motion to quash.
Attorneys don't practice exactly the same way anymore than physicians do. But as EDINVA told you, there were different circumstances in Hollander v. McCain.
Sorry, but posting a phantom resume doesn’t mean anything.
Sorry, but this is a ridiculous analogy. A physician, unlike legal counsel, doesn't rely on a third party (a judge) who actually has the overriding authority to render a decision or make a binding determination. Legal counsel in this example is much more analogous to a physician's assistant or nurse.
Nagamine first told Orly that she was going to ignore the invalid subpoena. Then she told Orly how she would challenge it if it were valid. Time is money for attorneys. As Deputy AG, Nagamine doesn't want to waste time with Orly's foolishness. So she told Orly what to expect if Orly can later properly serve the subpoena. By writing to Orly, Nagamine was likely attempting to save herself time later.
Nagamine didn't tell Orly how she would challenge anything. She responded with an objection per rule 45. If Nagamine was worried about "wasting time," she wouldn't bother with the objection. She could have just as easily filed the objection solely over how the subpoenas were issued without bothering with the privilege claim.
Attorneys don't practice exactly the same way anymore than physicians do. But as EDINVA told you, there were different circumstances in Hollander v. McCain.
Nobody argued that the circumstances are the same, just that the objections raised by faithers, but not raised by Nagamine, are similar. Nagamine, unlike faithers, was at least smart enough to know that it wouldn't enough to blow smoke about how the subpoenas were served.
If all Orly is trying to do with the subpoena is to see what he posted online is what is in the actual record, I can't see why she is going through the subpoena route. Under 338-18, she can get all the info she needs without a subpoena. Specifically :
(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings
She can submit a list of 23 questions that they only have to answer with a yes or no. For example
1. In field 1, does the name Barack Hussein Obama II appear
23. Is there an entry in field 23 ?
She would get all the info she is seeking except tha tit just isn't a certified copy of the original.
Now, of course, it all depends on Hawaii obeying their own laws. We have seen their track record in this respect.
I’ve been asking this question, but haven’t gotten an answer yet....
WHY can’t we file a Class Action Lawsuit against the Hawaii Dept. of Health??? I’m sure there are millions that would sign up! Many less significant Class Action suits have been filed. Guess I need to consult with a lawyer but thought someone else would have thought of this by now.
It's just a mechanism to aggregate claims when no individual party has sufficient economic incentive to bring suit on his own. It's not a magic bullet. If, as the courts have indicated to date for the birther suits, the individual claims are assessed as devoid of legal validity, bundling them up has no more legal validity. A million times zero is still zero.
Thank you very much for that answer! I had no idea what the “details” of a class action was so that explains why it wouldn’t work. :(
Oh well, so much for that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.