Can someone translate?
I believe a pro hac vice order is simply allowing an out of state lawyer to appear in the court in question.
You don’t have to, but it would be helpful if you would provide a summary of just what this really means please?
Wow!
Does that judge have it in for them or what?!? What games are going on?!?!
Objection to the Filing of Defendants’ Reply Memorandum
"Plaintiff Gregory S. Hollister objects to the filing of Defendants’ “REPLY MEMORANDUM OF PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA and VICE PRESIDENT JOSEPH BIDEN IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS”. First of all, this honorable Court gave Plaintiff Hollister only two [2] days to respond to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, a motion which in fact had already been mooted by Plaintiff’s filing of his First Amended Complaint. By contrast, Defendants’ filed this Memorandum at issue here thirteen [13] days after Plaintiff Hollister’s Brief and Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss was filed, when this Honorable Court had not even set any schedule for such a filing at all." [snip]
Good thing they had ESP to know they had been ordered!
Although Plaintiff’s counsel has not been issued an ECF log-in or password, which would have emailed Counsel upon the filing of a document through the ECF system (due to Plaintiff’s counsels’ motions for admission pro hac vice not yet being granted), Counsel learned of the Order in time to properly comply with the Order of this Court.And what the heck was going on here?!!?
The Order to Show Cause stated, “Instead of the opposition plaintiff was ordered to file by 2/13/09 (or defendants' motion to dismiss would be granted as conceded, see [#10], what plaintiff filed was (a) the affidavit of a paralegal (who works in the office of a Pennsylvania lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in this Court), complaining about her treatment by an employee of the Clerk's Office, and (b) many blank pages, decorated only by what appear to be botanical drawings and the illegible photocopy of an Hawaiian certificate of live birth. (a) The affidavit was apparently intended as a response to my earlier observation that plaintiff's motion to file interpleader was frivolous, see [#2], [#10], the argument being, "Maureen Higgins made me do it." What was frivolous about the motion, however, was not the fact that it was filed, but the suggestion that (a) "duties" could be filed in the registry of this court. (b) The blank pages were either somebody's idea of a joke (in which case I don't get it) or a mistake. If the latter, plaintiffs have until 5:00 pm EST on 2/26/09 to correct it, by re-filing their points and authorities in opposition to the pending motion to dismiss (in the .pdf format required by the Court's CM/EDF system), or otherwise to show cause why that motion should not now be granted as conceded. It is SO ORDERED.”Is someone in the Court playing games? Did they actually send this?
ping
Isn't this wonderful, the law and the lawyers, I mean? The question is one that an off-the-boat Pakistani cab driver could understand, and these people turn it into gobbledygook that less than 0.005% of the population can understand. It should be illegal to write laws and/or issue opinions with that include any word that does not appear in the Declaration or in the Constitution and amendments.
ML/NJ
p