Posted on 02/14/2009 1:22:44 AM PST by SvenMagnussen
Keyes v. Bowen, Obama, Biden, et. al.
MICHAEL J. STRUMWASSER FREDRIC D. WOOCHER AlMEE DUDOVITZ STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP 10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2000 Los Angeles, California 90024
Attorneys for Respondents President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and 55 California Electors
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH OF PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN, AND 55 CALIFORNIA ELECTORS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR AN ORDER THAT THE DEPOSITION OF THE CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS OF OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE NOT BE TAKEN
ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on March 13, 2009, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard by the Honorable Michael P. Kenny in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Sacramento, Respondents President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and 55 California Electors, by their attorneys, will and hereby do move for an order quashing the subpoena by Petitioners Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes, Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr., and Markham Robinson ("Petitioners") directed to third-party Occidental College demanding unrestricted access to President Barack Obama's "academic and housing records." In the alternative, Respondent moving parties seek an order from this Court that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not be taken. This Motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1987.1,2025.410, and 2025.420 on the ground that the subpoena and the associated notice to the consumer were improperly served, and on the ground that the subpoena is vague and overbroad, and seeks information that is neither relevant to this lawsuit nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This Motion is based on this notice, the concurrently filed supporting memorandum and declaration of Frederic D. Woocher, all pleadings and papers on file in this action, and upon such other matters as may be presented to the Court at the time of the hearing.
bookmarking/pinging - Yikes
pong
There can’t be any doubt that BO is spending heavily to avoid the merits of the claims against him. he also appears to be using any technicality he can think up to avoid discovery of his records.
I wonder why?
There can’t be any doubt that BO is spending heavily to avoid the merits of the claims against him. he also appears to be using any technicality he can think up to avoid discovery of his records.
I wonder why?
There can’t be any doubt that BO is spending heavily to avoid the merits of the claims against him. he also appears to be using any technicality he can think up to avoid discovery of his records.
I wonder why?
ANY time you find something ONLINE, be sure to make a copy of that page, either to your computer or to hard-copy.
It’s amazing how online items can so easily disappear. Not just on BHObama/Soetoro, but also other people of interest.
Money Laudering?
Was this the wife of Craig Robinson, who was an officer in Loop Enterprises and involved in the Pay for play in Philadelphia/Mayor Street, and who paid Senator Burris $5,000/m for his services?
BO's BIL who worked with his BO's "best friend", Jim Reynolds? Naw, they're all too innocent to do anything like that.../sarc
BTW you'll see a pattern of banking, real estate, and medical building/boards involved in this thread:
Yeah, right ... good luck!
Thank you.
Free Republic was having a fundraiser recently. You should contact Admin about contributing.
I haven’t had a chance to read any of the pleadings in this case, but I’m curious as to what any freeper lawyers think. On the surface, it seems to me that this may be the first of these cases that is being litigated like a normal lawsuit; ie. they’re making an effort to conduct real discovery instead of just jumping right to asking a court to “make Obama prove he’s legit.”
MM
Obama is determined to end speculation as to his eligibility by any means other than showing documentation most Americans show to get a driver’s license, enroll a child in school, etc.
Eventually there will be a showdown in SCOTUS & Bo will sose.
Does Dr. Edwin Viera have a WebSite? Where is he licensed to Practice Law?
Can you give me a citation for any case that he has argued?
The only case that I found listing Edwin Viera as an attorney was in Northern Virginia and Edwin Viera LOST!
Edwin Viera is not listed as an attorney on any SCOTUS reported cases.
Does Dr. Edwin Viera have a WebSite? Where is he licensed to Practice Law?
Can you give me a citation for any case that he has argued?
The only case that I found listing Edwin Viera as an attorney was in Northern Virginia and Edwin Viera LOST!
Edwin Viera is not listed as an attorney on any SCOTUS reported cases.
In order for me to hold other specific jobs on certain projects I had to agree to being finger-printed, photographed, and background checked...including talking to my neighbors.
Other jobs and employers required access to my college records. Such as a transcript to prove the validity of my Degree.
This man, who holds the office of the President, has yet to meet even the lowest form of employment requirements. A simple I-9. He holds a job, not much unlike some of my previous positions, requires further documentation.
We the people are the employer who has selected this man. It is now up to him to meet the core requirements of the job he has been elected to hold. If I had not provided the information or documentation at some point along the line, I would be denied access to some projects and been suspended and/or potentially fired for failure to comply. In the case of 0bama his ongoing failure to comply with the law, most specifically assuring the employer, us, he is eligible for office is grounds for ...impeachment.
Are you back to serial spamming again? Like last week?
Let’s see - two weeks ago you liked Berg, last week you spammed like mad that you hated Berg and this week you like him again.
Last week you liked Orly and this week you do not like Orly. Seek some help and stop spamming.
Exactly. This is exactly what the framers feared.
I think Keyes has standing (Scalia said someone running for office would) and damages/harm to Keyes. Standing and harm are the two biggies judges have used to ignore these legitimate cases.
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.