Does the fruit company already hold trademarks on iLawyer and iAttorney

Didn't we have a judge recently sign an order while stamping denied on every page?

Do you thing the judge stamped "denied" on every page?

I really want to know what this decision says and will pay for all costs involved (including a nice lunch for 2 - take a freind and have a good time) to get the truth of this decision.

Umm...I live in Oregon. Got that covered?

Orly posted a barely legible Order on her web site. As expected, Judge Reid crossed out some crap. I was surprised, though, that Orly's proposed order went overboard only slightly. I was expecting some real insanity in the proposed Order, but she was remarkably restrained in her dishonesty.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/ ... oceed-.pdf

Can't read it any better, but if you wish to avoid a Taitz pdf...

2012-08-17 - IN - ORDER Denying Rule 60 Motion and Granting Leave to File SAC

Very hard to read...wow...
From what I could gather, this is going to take more of something Orly doesn't have - TIME

The election isn't very far away. Orly had better snap it up and move her ass if she is going to get this to court in time.

I kinda like this part:



After Orly re-files (and manages to somehow properly serve) the amended complaint, Motion to Dismiss coming in ... 23 ... 22 ... 21 ...

They scribd as jpg images. so I guess you could make it darker.

edit: deleted the images cuz better ones are below.

What's being ordered in the last paragraph (that runs from the bottom of page 2 to the top of page 3)? There appears to be language that's been left out.

Judge Reid has certainly done a great job. She and Taitz appear to be getting along swimmingly. I'm sure Taitz will reward Judge Reid soon. And Judge Reid deserves everything that Taitz now sends her way.

I enhanced the images to be readable. Jack Ryan should have it shortly.

This looks like a very lazy judge to me.

Was there a hearing on this order at which Defendants were present, or did Judge Reid simply scratch out some parts and sign it?

Did the Defendants ever receive a copy of this draft?

The first page says Indiana Deputy AG Jefferson Garn and assistant Kate Shelby were present. I do not know the answer tot he second one.

Agreed. But it's not unusual to see orders with strikeouts, additions, interlineations, etc.

No, no hearing, and it would be rare to have one. It's not unusual for opposing counsel to approve or disapprove an order, however. In this case, dunno if they did or not. I'm guessing not.

We don't know if they received the Proposed Order or not. They've certainly received the final.

It doesn't much matter. The final order appears to reflect what the judge decided at the hearing... Rule 60 denied and leave to file SAC on the three issues.

Victory lap my ass.

Had the original dismissal been appealed by a competently represented appellant, Judge Reid would have found herself in a tenuous position (based on Loh's report of the proceedings) because (it could be argued) she dismissed for failure to follow rules, or something of that ilk. To say the least, Her Honor's legal reasoning was very fuzzy.

The current order corrects the record by dismissing the ballot appeal portion for lack of jurisdiction and failure to provide the agency record. Whether Orly understands this is beside the point: The agency appeal portion is now dead-parrot dead and will survive even a well-argued appeal.

So what did Orly gain? She gets to amend her other causes of action once again -- something she's incapable of doing such that they could possibly survive adjudication of a motion to dismiss by a competent judge.

Not surprisingly, there is nothing about this order that can fairly be characterized as "allowing the other claims to proceed." (That phrase customarily applies when a suit survives an adjudicated motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment.)

While Orly makes much noise over the observation that her other claims have not yet been heard on the merits, it is equally true that defendants' motions to dismiss have not yet been heard on the merits.

FWIW, if I were representing defendants, I'd be pissed about that.

Um, did anyone else notice the name of the file as published on Lena's site?



MS-signed-order-granting-leave-of-court-to-proceed

MS?

I thought the abbreviation for Indiana was IN.

.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=246328

...waaaaaait for it:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=246332

Taitz is so disorganized she didn't even give her servants a phone number.

I am a practicing attorney and I must say that Judge Reid's ruling and the subsequent Order is, well, crazy. This case started out as an agency appeal. The Court ruled that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claim. Fine. Normally, that ends the case. There is nothing to amend and certainly not anything to amend to state a tort claim separate from the agency appeal. They either do things differently in Indiana or Orly has found a kindred spirit, dog help our souls.

[Can someone remind me who the defendants are suppose to be. As an agency appeal, the defendant would the agency and possibly, since this is an elections matter, the SOS. Is Orly going to allege fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence against them? Who else has Orly named and has anybody else been served and shown up?]

The Indiana AG's office foolishly made an unnecessary concession in one of its oppositions, and Taitz read it broadly. Judge Reid, apparently no great legal mind, and keeper of a number of rubber stamps she feels compelled to use, allowed Taitz to resuscitate a claim that was never properly pleaded nor before the court.

As I've said before, Judge Reid now deserves everything Taitz defecates her way.

And lest we forget, this long brown skidmark on the State of Indiana's back side was excreted by an unauthorized "legal practitioner" who had no business filing an Illinois Indiana election challenge in the first place. Consistent with her own charade, she's an out-of-state witness-plaintiff, fer chrissakes -- with no other personal basis for standing.

If Orly is not, in fact, engaging in UPL by continuing to represent her in-state "clients", then WTF is she still doing here?

Oh sure, Judge Reid told Orly at the first hearing that she could not argue on behalf of the other plaintiffs, but where's her ruling on the defense's motion to strike her appearance?

Think about it. Taking Orly's interest as separate from the other plaintiffs, we have a resident of California getting leave of court to file a second amended complaint against the Indiana Elections Commission and Secretary of State for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud. Without the aid of hallucinogenic drugs, how could this possibly make sense?

Malihi was out of his league but, for my money, Rubberstamp Reid's rulings in this case take the cake.

Perhaps Judge Reid actually thinks Taitz is certifiably insane, and is simply treating her with her own brand of pro-per kid gloves, with a smidgen of kindly "mentoring".

It's the only way the alleged quote "It looks like you know what you're doing" makes sense.

Kind of, "okay, we'll go through these motions that you've invented, and follow them to some sort of logical conclusion, because to try to steer you onto another course or cut you off entirely is likely to result in true unpleasantness, possibly involving the hurling of actual, not metaphorical, feces, which we would like to avoid at all costs."