Posted on 09/28/2009 10:15:01 AM PDT by vikk
Attorney Orly Taitz, a national figure in the “birther” movement and lawyer for an Army captain who sought to stop her deployment to Iraq on arguments that President Barack Obama can’t legitimately hold office, has filed a motion to withdraw as the captain’s lawyer.
Taitz, who represents Capt. Connie Rhodes, filed her latest motion Saturday. It cites two court documents as reasons for withdrawing from the case — a Sept. 18 order from U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land threatening $10,000 in sanctions against Taitz and a letter purportedly signed by Connie Rhodes, which asks for Taitz to be removed as her attorney.
“In order to defend herself, the undersigned counsel will have to contest and potentially appeal any sanctions order in her own name alone, separately from the plaintiff, by offering and divulging what would normally constitute inadmissible and privileged attorney-client communications,” Taitz states. “The undersigned attorney will also offer evidence and call witnesses whose testimony will be adverse to her (former) client’s most recently stated position in this case.”
It appears, however, that Taitz didn’t sign her motion. Court records filed Monday state that the motion must be filed again because Taitz didn’t sign it.
?? LOL No case? How many states proved his citizenshp?
Enough times that one begins to think that either a) it's not an accident; or b) her maiden name is LaRouche.
If a plant, more likely an ACORNite.
Because there is no case. When the birthers come up with proof that Obama was born elsewhere, then they’ll have a case. You don’t go to court with suspicion.
She has repeatedly committed these clerical errors in her legal filings. She is just completely incompetent as an attorney. I am sure it cam be blamed on her dubious law degree and her unfamiliarity with the technicalities of the American legal system. Sad, but maddening.
We shouldn’t have to go to court to know this information. It should be PUBLIC record. Period. It should be revealed before the primary, so ALL can confirm.
The ‘signing’ is not exactly as it appears. Today’s pleadings are filed electronically and so is the signature. One needs a pin number to file and needs to be adept at using the court’s system to performing the filing. You may be a great lawyer but electronically challenged when it comes to these ministerial tasks. I’m not trying to make up excuses for not getting it right since a lawyer should know how to do it, but anyone who has worked with computers and electronic submissions knows what I am talking about. Some people are simiply more computer literate than others. In addition, most lawyers have staff to do such things, but you won’t find high priced lawyers running after the kind of litigation Orly takes on because there is no rich client willing to pay the fee. On the other hand, look what Obama’s personal lawyers are charging for their services. They can afford to have an army of electronic wizards and proof readers supporting their efforts. In addition, doesn’t it make you feel all warm and fuzzy to know that there are three high priced government lawyers opposing her in the Keyes case who have a limitless staff of bureaucrats getting paid with our taxpayer dollars to defend Obama for free.
Right in there with those acorn employees on video tape? Comical! I’m just speechless, what else can we say or do? My opinion, make everthing TRANSPARENT before the next primary, that’s for sure. :-P
Don’t know why all you people are so critical.
If you know anything about court, it is that it exists in a parallel universe. You cannot apply real world common sense to court. Nothing makes sense in court and Orly is the only individual who has gotten this far. Non of the critics here can hold a candle to her.
Secondly, there is nothing on her site to this effect so we do not know what the official story is until she addresses it.
You guys send out the white flag before any fight has even started.
And that is why we must adopt a "Loser Pays" policy.
Not the point. The point is you don't go to court because you *suspect* something.
I agree, if there is a suspicion of a crime, cops are called. But, there is a difference between suspicion and failure to prove eligibility. I’d like to know what he used to get his drivers license in ahem cough cough chicago.
They're back.
.
Please. She might dig out one of my tooth fillings instead of the tartar.
Maybe she should be seized by the guys in white coats.
The Rats have to be laughing at how gullible people can be (and there’s plenty of gullibility to spread around).
Monday, Sep. 28, 2009
Attorney Orly Taitz removed as lawyer for Capt. Connie Rhodes, still on the hook for possible sanctions
- ariquelmy@ledger-enquirer.comIn response to a motion filed today by “birther” attorney Orly Taitz, U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land has removed her from representing an Army captain who sought to stop her deployment to Iraq by arguing President Barack Obama can’t legitimately hold office.
Land’s order states that Taitz, who represented Capt. Connie Rhodes, is still responsible for showing why he shouldn’t sanction her $10,000 for filing a “frivolous” suit and that Rhodes remains responsible for paying the defendants’ court costs.
Taitz filed her motion to be removed as Rhodes’ attorney Saturday in the Columbus Division of U.S. District Court. It cites two court documents as reasons for withdrawing from the case — a Sept. 18 order from U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land threatening sanctions against Taitz and a letter purportedly signed by Connie Rhodes, which asks for Taitz to be removed as her attorney.
“In order to defend herself, the undersigned counsel will have to contest and potentially appeal any sanctions order in her own name alone, separately from the plaintiff, by offering and divulging what would normally constitute inadmissible and privileged attorney-client communications,” Taitz states. “The undersigned attorney will also offer evidence and call witnesses whose testimony will be adverse to her (former) client’s most recently stated position in this case.”
It appears, however, that Taitz didn’t sign her motion. Court records filed Monday state that the motion must be filed again because Taitz didn’t sign it.
It was again filed with the court, though the second filing lacked a certificate of service, which states who received the filing and how they received it.
Land’s order came before Taitz filed another amended motion.
There is been no legal failure to prove eligibility. The constitution doesn’t require production of a birth certificate. There is nothing on which to base a legal case. Until there is, you shouldn’t expect any birther lawsuit to accomplish anything.
Folks need to quit yelling “TROLL” every time they’re challenged. Whether implicit or explicit. It’s tiresome.138 posted on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 11:21:56 AM by Admin Moderator
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.