This has to be a new record for you.
Stimulus money went for faster PCs in Rahm's office.
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 10/08/2009 2:40:40 PM PDT by Elderberry
Orly's request of Relief from Stay of Discovery was denied
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
Orly misunderstood routine clerical housekeeping as meaning Judge Carter had denied the Motion to Dismiss. She then filed a motion to lift the Judge’s stay on discovery. He simply denied that motion, which would never have been filed by competent counsel.
Judge Carter still has to rule on the Motion to Dismiss. I suspect he will grant it.
The plaintiffs can ask the court as many times as they want to remove the stay for discovery. No skin off anyone's teeth. The judge most likely will not remove his stay until he decides on the defense's 'motion to dismiss' - if it is dismissed.
It’s just a dumb thing. The Motion to Dismiss has yet to be ruled on.
This has to be a new record for you.
Stimulus money went for faster PCs in Rahm's office.
Yawn.
Here goes: Orly Taitz, attorney for Captain Barret (and other plaintiffs, IIRC), filed a motion the other day to ask the judge to allow discovery to proceed. The discovery was stayed (english: postponed) pending the Judge’s decision of 0’s motion to dismiss the case outright, without any further discovery. It seems the Judge did not want the parties to spend a lot of time and money if the case may get dismissed anyway.
In case you don’t know, discovery is the pretrial process where each side gets to make various types of requests to get information about the case. It can be in the form of written questions (interrogatories), examination of witnesses (depositions), document requests and variations of these procedures to non-parties who may possess information. The point of the exercise to obtain as much information as you can to help you win or defend the case at trial and even to enable you to make motions to dismiss or to expand the case, based on the information developed through discovery, before the trial.
And you may see the trolls here say Orly is embarrassing herself.
You don’t get ‘embarrassed’ for asking (by the plaintiffs) the court to move the ball forward by asking for discovery to be granted.
That got my attention. Who's motion to dismiss what? Please excuse my ignorance with regards to all of this, but what does this statement mean?
It seems to me that Discovery is the whole case. Discovery would obviously request to see the Birth Certificate.
The BC will show one of two possible things: Obama is a natural-born citizen or he isn’t.
I don’t know how the judge can stay Discovery if he really intends for the case to proceed.
Exactly. There was no down side to asking.
This is a case whose outcome will likely be determined when and if the appropriate discovery is ever allowed and obtained.
The lawyers representing Obama have moved to dismiss the case. That’s what the majority of Monday’s hearing dealt with. Judge Carter has not ruled on that motion. Life is never totally predicatble, but reading bewteen the lines, I suspect he will grant the motion to dismiss.
I read the other responses to your question, and you can disregard all of them.
What actually happened was that Orly filed a motion to go forward with discovery after the judge ordered that discovery be stopped pending his ruling on the motion to dismiss. It is no surprise the motion was denied, but that doesn’t mean it was wrong to file it.
If the discovery had been allowed, the plaintiffs could have pursued motions to produce genuine documents and the like. Now, it’s just wait and do nothing til the motion to dismiss is ruled on. Like some others, I think dismissal is likely.
Oooh, thank you. That was completely understandable!
Who knows what the Taitz clown may have screwed up this time.
TANKS,Lu...
You asked a troll, but I’ll answer. On or about the 25th of August, the Government asked the court to dismiss the case. The plaintiffs responded to the governments ‘motion to dismiss’ arguing for their case to continue. This went on with court filings throughout September until the October 5th Hearing. The Hearing went on for most of the morning, but no decision was made by the court to dismiss the Defense’s motion or grant it. It has been put off until the judge can gather, digest, and make a decision on the case. The Plaintiffs in the mean time, requested again for discovery, which the judge has denied. The judge will most likely not remove his stay for discovery until he makes a decision about the government’s ‘motion to dismiss’ ...by dismissing it and letting the case go forward.
Or she is putting her legal skills on display so that she will receive the next appointment to the SCOTUS.
Your one tune posts are nothing but old and tiring.
Okay. I’ve been raked over the coals here previously for my cynicism as to whether any of this legal exercise will bear good fruit. (I sincerely hope that it does.) Having said that, I ask this in good faith and with no desire to ruffle anyone’s feathers: Do you trust that, if what you say re: the likelihood of dismissal comes to pass, the result will be on the up-and-up? In other words, do you as many others here believe that this judge, being a Marine, will be fair and honest regardless of his decision?
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.