POWELL v OBAMA - ACT II (APPEAL) FCSC - ACT III (SCOGA)

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

As I pointed out in the (now) Swensson v Obama thread, as it stand now Swensson and Powell have filed their appeals separately, and as of this time have been assigned to two separate judges and neither are assigned to the same judge as Orly.

For now I will make a placeholder for the Powell case here. If they are consolidated, in whatever combination, I'll make thread adjustments at that time.

Quote:

In the SUPERIOR COURT
Fulton County, Georgia
Case No. 2012CV211528

KEVIN RICHARD POWELL VS. BARACK OBAMA

Filed on 02/15/2012
Case Type: JUDICIAL REVIEW
Judge: Christopher S. Brasher
Current Status: Filed

Defendant
Defendant Attorneys
Obama, Barack

Plaintiff
Plaintiff Attorneys
Powell, Kevin Richard Hatfield, John Mark
201 Albany Avenue
Waycross, GA 31501

Events and Orders of the Court
02/15/2012 CASE INITIATION FORM
02/15/2012 PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Also. Too. According to the Uniform Rules...

Quote:

4. Related Civil Cases
(aa) When practical, all actions involving substantially the same parties, subject
matter, or the same factual issues, whether pending simultaneously or not, shall be
assigned to the same Judge. Whenever such action is refiled or derivative or
companion action is filed or refiled, such action shall be assigned to the Judge to whom
the original action was or is assigned. Generally, such actions will be assigned to the
Judge to whom the action with the lower case number is or was assigned.

(bb) Counsel shall, at the time of filing any civil action, inform the Clerk of the
fact that the case filed is related to any action under the definition contained in
paragraph (aa) above

Loren · **Joined:** Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:20 pm **Posts:** 3898

Powell v Obama, Petition for Judicial Review

Litlebritdifrnt2 · **Posted:** Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:56 am

Wow. Other than the whole "respondent" thingy it is actually a proper Petition for Judicial Review. I am slightly impressed.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:57 am

Thanks for getting those pleadings for us linking to ORYR's documents.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Also at Jack's...

Powell v Obama - Petition for Judicial Review

majorbabs · **Posted:** Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:02 am

realist wrote:

Also at Jack's...

Powell v Obama - Petition for Judicial Review

Thanks for getting the pleadings. I sent a contribute to Fogbow to help pay for costs. I hope others do the same.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Powell v Obama - Letter to Judge Malihi

Powell v Obama - Letter to SoS Kemp

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Re: Swensson/Powell/Welden/Farrar - Defendant's Request to Consolidate Cases

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9390

realist wrote:

Re: Swensson/Powell/Welden/Farrar - Defendant's Request to Consolidate Cases

And that is how it's done. I'm glad to see Jablonski's resumed involvement in the case, though I fully expected to see his return.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Powell v Obama - Motion for Expedited Review or Alternatively for Stay...

SueDB · **Posted:** Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:00 am

majorbabs wrote:

realist wrote:

Also at Jack's...

Powell v Obama - Petition for Judicial Review

Thanks for getting the pleadings. I sent a contribute to Fogbow to help pay for costs. I hope others do the same.

Offtopic :

There is a month to month plan $5.00 on up that you can sign up for at Fogbow. It lets Foggy kinda sorta predict how much money he has to operate with and what kind of shortfall needs to be advertised.

Prior Planning leads to Perfect Performance.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

Kinda reading the tea leaves here but it appears that Hatfield filed the same motion in Powell that he did in Swensson, which makes sense, of course.

Quote:

Events and Orders of the Court
02/22/2012 MOTION
02/15/2012 CASE INITIATION FORM
02/15/2012 PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

UPDATE:

Powell v Obama - Order Transferring Case

mimi · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:18 pm

Kevin Powell has been researching. He's sure throwing a lot of stuff into his scribd account.

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in before you can view hidden messages

http://www.scribd.com/PixelPatriot

I thought the appeal was just on what was already presented.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

It is, mimi.

SueDB · **Posted:** Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:02 am

realist wrote:

It is, mimi.

Powell sounds like he doesn't have a clue...Hatfield isn't any better.

He can have a the ebidence he can gather. It wastes his time and money - two things I like to see in birthers.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

I've been out all day, but the Order of Dismissal in the four cases is at Jack's.

Farrar, Welden, Powell, Swensson - Order Dismissing

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23573

SCOGA...

Powell v Obama - Application for Discretionary Appeal

Powell v Obama - Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal
Scribd is unavailable at this time... documents as soon as possible.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:49 pm

It's the usual crap, plus 4 other generally procedural issues which in California would be the death knell for a discretionary appeal (that is, the Supreme Court wouldn't touch it since it doesn't cleanly present a substantive issue). Minor v. Happersett is, of course, the crown jewel of the petitioner's case. Ankeny is dissed and, mirabile dictu, Wong Kim Ark appears not to be mentioned at all.