See other Neocon Nuttery Articles
Title: Georgia Judge Fines 'Birther' Lawyer Orly Taitz $20,000
Source:
Politics Daily
URL Source: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/1 ... ther-lawyer-orly-taitz-20-000/
Published: Oct 13, 2009
Author: Politics Daily
Post Date: 2009-10-13 12:22:29 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 2171
Comments: 40
Orly Taitz, the California lawyer known for her vocal and litigious leadership in the "birther" movement, has been slapped with a $20,000 fine by a District Court in Georgia for "wasting the Defendants' time" in a case one of her clients brought against the U.S. Army. The court ruled that Taitz violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which stipulates that attorneys will not sign onto cases that are clearly brought with dishonest or frivolous motives. The case, in which Army Capt. Connie Rhodes sought a restraining order for her pending deployment to Iraq on grounds that President Obama is not a valid commander in chief, was part of Taitz's nationwide legal campaign to prove that Obama was not born in the United States. The court's decision, excerpted by the Washington Independent, says the suit was brought in "bad faith," and calls Taitz's legal conduct "willful and not merely negligent." "Counsel's frivolous and sanctionable conduct wasted the Defendants' time and valuable judicial resources that could have been devoted to legitimate cases pending with the Court," the judge wrote in the decision. The Rhodes case was dismissed on Sept. 16. with an opinion that hinted at the court's displeasure with Taitz. It took a strange turn just days after that ruling, when Rhodes claimed she had never given Taitz permission to request a stay in her name, and said she was filing a complaint against Taitz with the California bar.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
That needs to be contested and fought vigorously. It's fine to disagree. The law should never penalize somebody for bringing forth a suit that they feel is justified. This punishment smacks of overt political censorship of opinions contrary to the sitting administration.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Judge got a point, don't he?
The western world’s first parliament, called the Althing, was established in Iceland. It has convened every year without exception since 911 AD.
Courts aren't the place to bring your opinions. You're supposed to have facts and be able to back them up. On that, Orly fails miserably every time she opens her mouth.
You don't fine somebody for bringing a case to trial. She thought she had the facts, whether she did or didn't. Or are you in favor of government punishing anybody who brings up a case against sitting powers? Christ, what the hell is with partisanship that it makes people blind?
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
That isn't what she got fined for. I suggest you spend some time reading the Scribd documents about this case before going off on a tangent. Or perhaps your partisanship has made you blind to the antics of the most incompetent lawyer I've ever seen.
An incompetent lawyer does not justify punishing a plaintiff with a fine. The judge could have just let it go and went on with life. I can see that you approve of punishing unpopular politics. Figures.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
The plaintiff is not being fined. The plaintiff fired Taitz after watching her antics in court. Taitz is the one being fined, and rightly so.
some just can't get there if another doesn't hold their hand and lead them.
You're right, I should have said lawyer, the plaintiff had nothing to do with it.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
I was mistaken and admitted as much. Banner day for the internet at large, somebody admitting that he was in error. I'm glad to have been a part of it.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Judge Land is a Bush appointee. You might want to read his opinion and legal reasoning.
So if a guy who is on drugs and drunk walks into your yard and trips over your kid's toy Tonka truck and breaks his neck and sues you for $1000000.00 and he feels that is a justified case?? Would you still feel the same? Massive tort cases are brought forth by lawyers who feel their cases are justified. One reason why you buy a new ladder and you cannot see what color it is because of the 75 safety decals plastered over it.
The judge is free to toss the case out. Which he should. Prohibitive fining is little more than retribution.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
No, it's a prohibitive measure aimed at others who would emulate Dr. Lawyer Indian Chief types like Oily Taint by wasting the court's time. Hopefully she's not as bad a dentist as she is a lawyer. People could get hurt. Actions have consequences. The cost for her stupidity (this time) is $20000.
Right, retribution.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
How cute. Or maybe you don't understand my point of view. It happens sometimes.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Of course it is. It's clearly an abuse of power. But it's ok as long as 0bama is being shielded...
Or maybe you don't understand my point of view. It happens sometimes. US_GRANT always plays it "cute." She understands you, but is merely very protective of her messiah.
Well, you know how it goes. Some animals are more equal than other animals.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Your point of view seems to imply that any suit should be heard and if the judge decides it is without merit, he merely tells the party bringing the suit "no, it has no merit, go on your way...", no harm, no foul. What if the party in question, in this case, "Dr" Taitz, doesn't get a clue and keeps doing the same thing over and over? She should be able to tie everyone's time up countering her silly claims? There are a finite number of courts. Doing things your way, a few kooks could bring the entire judicial system of the country to a screeching halt, again, without penalty. Extending your logic, "prohibitive" fines for speeding or running stop signs are "retribution" for you exercising your freedom to break traffic laws, right?
Maybe the judicial system shouldn't be trying so many things due to so many damned laws on the books that have no place there, so that they'd have time to hear from everybody that pays their salary, even the kooks, first. Second, asking for evidence of eligibility is not unreasonable. I don't have a dog in the birther race one way or the other, but I do know that asking a party to prove something is not unreasonable. This is all silliness. I suspect the judge could have fined this person a million dollars and you'd be defending it.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Prohibitive? You bet! If you fine me twenty thousand dollars for jaywalking or running a stop sign, you're doing nothing but throwing around your governmental weight to "make an example" of me, which is wrong.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Who gives a flying fuck what you Traitors think or say ??? You're perfectly content to have a Kenyan Marxist NCWO Puppet finish off what's left. Fuck you.
First you shoo away the fly ($20,000). If it keeps buzzing around, you find something sufficiently large so as to remove the annoyance for good ($1000000). Go to a courtroom sometime and observe. They're backlogged six ways from Sunday, and guess what? Everyone there thinks they're right and have been wronged in some way. As a party to a custody hearing, I was recently waiting my turn at the docket to file a motion, behind a guy who was dragged in in irons for raping his ex- wife, thus impregnating her. He was serving prison time for that crime, and had filed suit in family court for custody of the child. Pray tell, how should that matter have been adjudicated? Did the convict have standing or had his case merit? To his credit, the judge stopped just short of saying "are you f*cking kidding me?", but not much short of it.
We pay their salary, we should be able to have our day in court without fearing that a judge is going to plunk a fine on us because he considers us...well in your words...some kind of insect.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
When you step into that particular arena, some days you're the christian, some days the lion.
We won't agree on this. I fine you $50,000, to be paid in small unmarked bills and dimes. Pony up.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Given that the reason she took the bar (she didn't go to a real law school) was to defend herself against malpractice law suits, I doubt very much she is any good at dentistry either.
You're perfectly content to have a Kenyan Marxist NCWO Puppet finish off what's left. Fuck you. Well thought out argument. Have you thought about becoming Sarah's political director?
She was clearly warned not to try it again after the Rhodes defeat or she'd be sanctioned. Rhodes fired her and she still filed an appeal under Rhodes' name after that. Her appeal alleged the judge was corrupt, an Obama crony, that AG Holder was seen at a nearby coffee shop, etc. All crazy crap. This was supposed to force the judge to recuse himself and she could then get another shot at it with the same case (except she would have had to find another client). She asked for it. She worked for it. Land gave her what he said he would if she tried it again.
what's the point of arguing with you dipshits ???? since when have you ever minded the truth ????? Fuck You
pat yourself on the back.
Humor Break - left click to enlarge
thx wud You know I love you like a Canadian allie and step brother...LOL series, all love and peace for you here.
Have you been arguing? I thought you were just swearing at me.
Exactly, I don't waste good conversation and critical thought with self- loathing morans that wipe their ass with the Constitution and piss on every drop of blood, every family and their treasure that was spent in forming a solid but imperfect Republic. You're a sick sack of shit Deconstructionist and you probably can't even help it. Fuck YOU for leading sheep to slaughter...whether they deserve it or not. You're a waste of carbon; the best part of you ran down your mother's leg.
has been slapped with a $20,000 fine by a District Court in Georgia for "wasting the Defendants' time"
#2. To: Brian S (#0)
The court's decision, excerpted by the Washington Independent, says the suit was brought in "bad faith,"
#3. To: SonOfLiberty (#1)
This punishment smacks of overt political censorship of opinions contrary to the sitting administration.
#4. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#3)
#5. To: SonOfLiberty (#4)
You don't fine somebody for bringing a case to trial. She thought she had the facts, whether she did or didn't.
#6. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#5)
#7. To: SonOfLiberty (#6)
An incompetent lawyer does not justify punishing a plaintiff with a fine.
#8. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#7)
The best gun to have, is the gun you have, when you need a gun.
#9. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#7)
#10. To: IRTorqued (#8)
#11. To: SonOfLiberty (#1)
This punishment smacks of overt political censorship of opinions contrary to the sitting administration.
#12. To: SonOfLiberty (#1)
It's fine to disagree. The law should never penalize somebody for bringing forth a suit that they feel is justified.
#13. To: belmontconservative (#12)
#14. To: SonOfLiberty (#13)
(Edited)
Prohibitive fining is little more than retribution.
#15. To: Samuel Gray (#14)
#16. To: SonOfLiberty (#15)
#17. To: Samuel Gray (#16)
#18. To: SonOfLiberty (#13)
Prohibitive fining is little more than retribution.
#19. To: SonOfLiberty (#17)
How cute.
#20. To: Liberator (#19)
#21. To: SonOfLiberty (#17)
#22. To: Samuel Gray (#21)
#23. To: Samuel Gray (#21)
Extending your logic, "prohibitive" fines for speeding or running stop signs are "retribution" for you exercising your freedom to break traffic laws, right?
#24. To: IDon'tThinkSo, b s (#3)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#25. To: SonOfLiberty (#22)
I suspect the judge could have fined this person a million dollars and you'd be defending it.
#26. To: Samuel Gray (#25)
#27. To: SonOfLiberty (#26)
#28. To: Samuel Gray (#27)
#29. To: Samuel Gray (#21)
#30. To: Samuel Gray (#25)
#31. To: Samuel Gray (#27)
#32. To: Samuel Gray (#14)
Hopefully she's not as bad a dentist as she is a lawyer. People could get hurt.
#33. To: Rotara (#24)
Who gives a flying fuck what you Traitors think or say ???
#34. To: SonOfLiberty (#13)
Prohibitive fining is little more than retribution.
#35. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#33)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#36. To: SonOfLiberty (#10)
The best gun to have, is the gun you have, when you need a gun.
#37. To: Rotara, IDon'tThinkSo (#35)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#38. To: wudidiz (#37)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#39. To: Rotara (#35)
what's the point of arguing with you dipshits ????
#40. To: IDon'tThinkSo (#39)
(Edited)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
