Posted on 10/13/2009 10:39:05 AM PDT by GoldStandard
U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land, in Columbus, has come down hard on birther attorney Orly Taitz, fining her $20,000 for willfully abusing her right to practice law. I suspect Taitz won’t have that right much longer.
“The Court finds that counsel’s conduct was willful and not merely negligent. It demonstrates bad faith on her part. As an attorney, she is deemed to have known better. She owed a duty to follow the rules and to respect the Court. Counsel’s pattern of conduct conclusively establishes that she did not mistakenly violate a provision of law. She knowingly violated Rule 11. Her response to the Court’s show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and borders on delusional.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.ajc.com ...
Her telling the judge to “shove it” isn’t going to help her get an appeals hearing.
So, it's only OK if the ACLU and others of the Left do it!
This is the judge's retaliation for bringing a case that ALMOST brought the curtain down on 0bama’s fraud! If not for quick cancellation of orders, the standing was unimpeachable!
The fine cannot stand on appeal; it punishes those seeking legal redress!
The ramblings of Orly Taitz aren’t exactly persuasive evidence. A guy who bore a resemblance to Eric Holder being in a local coffee shop, and stock in nationwide corporations is not a conflict of interest.
Isn't that exactly what she is trying to prove??????????????????
So the judge’s “conflict of interest” is owning shares of microsoft and comcast, and this give him a “financial interest” in a suit challenging Nilbama? Pathetically weak.
The Judge ordered the 20k to be paid to the United States and then the United States will pay the 20k to the Judge’s favorite charity.
This will be definitely be overturned on appeal.
Taitz is a poor lawyer. She gave the Judge a pretext to land on her AND the fine will probably stand.
Considering they are both blue chip stocks, one would be hard pressed to find a judge that doesn’t own one or both. Heck, I own both and I bet many FReepers do as well.
I suggest you all read the Court’s order in full
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20996403/Gov-uscourts-gamd-77605-28-0
Anger that is expended on conspiracy rather than diligent research and legitimate legal action is a waste. It is in the best tradition of prestidigitation in that it misdirects. The distraction is entertaining, but utterly useless. You were never alone.
Evidence? Orly's "evidence" consists of freeped internet polls and a "Kenyan" birth certificate she got from a guy selling them on eBay.
It wasnt her cause that got her in trouble, it was her conduct. She has a mail order law degree, very little courtroom experience, continually made mistakes in her motions and she attacked the integrity of the judge. That is a sure fire recipe for disaster. She does not need to be the point person for this agenda.
But he implied very strongly in dicta that it is:
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law.....When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law.
Looks like he didn't like her conduct, but it also looks like he's using her conduct to club the case.
So what did he do on the merits? Or did he rule at all?
“The judiciary is totally corrupt ... “
From what I’ve seen. California’s federal Judge Carter is not corrupt.
No ruling on the merits yet, BUT read page 33 of the ruling. “This pattern infected the entire proceeding, not just an isolated pleading. Her initial complaint was legally frivolous.” “frivolous motion” “frivolous filings” “Rather than assert legitimate legal arguments...” “She had no facts to support her claims...” And on and on.
Uh, yeah, they can.
He made his judgment based on the facts. or lack thereof, that Orly presented. And there isn’t a snowball’s chance in h@ll that an appeal will get this overturned.
Uh, yeah, they can.
He made his judgment based on the facts. or lack thereof, that Orly presented. And there isn’t a snowball’s chance in heck that an appeal will get this overturned.
I’m with you- it must be great to be able render a verdict without having to go through that pesky trial business
Ping to dpulicate thread.
We have progressed from merely having the gargoyles in charge of the cathedral to having Dracula in charge of the blood bank.
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.