There is a tiny docket entry with huge significance in the Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi case, dated January 8:
Set Hearings: Telephone Conference set for 1/22/2014 10:00 AM before District Judge Henry T. Wingate (TRS)
Woo Hoo! I am being told that the purpose of this hearing is for Judge Wingate to issue rulings on the outstanding motions in the case, following up his order from last July:
TEXT ONLY ORDER: The court did not speak to Mr. Begley, nor seek to learn the case authority offered. Defense may submit this additional authority by the end of the day (5 p.m.) on Friday, July 19, 2013. Should plaintiffs wish to respond, they may do so by the end of the day (5 p.m.) on Tuesday, July 23, 2013. The parties are not to submit narratives nor lengthy explanations regarding any submissions; the court seeks only the case cites, and a one or two sentence explanation of the parties purpose in submitting the authority. Submissions may be made by email to the chambers email address. The court anticipates issuing written opinions on the outstanding motions before the court within several days after the submission of any additional authority. Signed by District Judge Henry T. Wingate on 7/18/2013 (tn) (Entered: 07/18/2013)
The lawsuit has grown since its original filing in Mississippi state court, through the addition of a Civil RICO action. While I talk about Orly Taitz as the Plaintiff, there are four others: Brian Fedorka, Leah Lax (who claims she never consented to be a party), Tom MacLeran and Laurie Roth. On the defense side we have four groups of defendants: the Mississippi Secretary of State represented by the state attorney general, the Mississippi Democratic Party joined by Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi represented by Sam Begley and Scott Tepper, the Hawaii defendants Loretta Fuddy and Alvin Onaka represented by Mississippi attorney Walter Dukes, and the federal defendant Michael Astrue who has not appeared due to lack of service.
Here is a summary of the major motions in the case:
| ECF | Party | Motion | Status |
| 8 | MS Secretary of State | Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings | |
| 11 | Taitz | Dismiss and sanction for removal | |
| 15 | MS Democrats | Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings | |
| 20 | Taitz | Motion to remand to state court | |
| 40 | Taitz | Motion to expedite | |
| 57 | Hawaii Defendants | Motion to Dismiss | |
| 76 | Lax | Motion to remove Lax from the suit | |
| 85, 87 | Taitz | Motion for default judgment against Astrue | Denied |
| 93 | Taitz | Motion to Reconsider default judgment | Denied |
A hearing was held on September 24, 2012 on the motions: 8, 11, 15, 20, and 40. Another telephone conference was held on November 15 on motions 15 and 57. Since those hearings, defendant Loretta Fuddy died.
So next Wednesday, January 22, at 10 AM (CST) is the big news for next week. Of course the case is not over as, no doubt, new motions will be filed.
Read more:
I’m keeping my expectations low on this. Obviously, the judge will have no good news for Taitz and her alleged coplaintiffs, but I won’t count on anything else coming out of it.
Keeping your expectations low for this meeting seems wise, but the fun starts when the judge gets around to dismissing the case. Tepper and Begley offered to let Orly off the hook here for $25K—I don’t think it is unreasonable to assume that they will be asking for significantly higher sanctions from the judge.
Most judges seemed to have given Orly the “she can’t help it, she’s crazy” treatment (just like you don’t give somebody the chair who’s obviously insane). I’m not holding my breath for any judge to award sanctions in the five to six figures anytime soon (especially since Orly seems to have abandoned her MO of filing zillions of lawsuits every month).
I’m not expecting the judge to award sanctions sua sponte, I think it is pretty obvious that Tepper and Begley will ask for sanctions (probably 6 figure sanctions) and, given the utter frivolity and incompetence of Orly’s filings, I think it is likely that the judge will award them. This is a situation we haven’t seen before (a lawyer familiar with the birthers as defense counsel), so we shouldn’t try to extrapolate the results from what has happened in the past. To me, the best data point we have is the offer to settle for $25K. Unless that was a bluff (which seems highly unlikely as we all know that Orly would never take such a deal), that amount must be a fraction of the sanctions that they believe they are likely to get. I have no idea how quickly this will play out, but I’m very confident that it wont have a happy ending for Orly.
Alas with Mad Ole Orly, when it comes to actual actions that will materially impact it, it still remains….any….day….now….alas.
I will however be very happy to eat crow if such a frabulous event should come to fruition……
As will I if our “any. day. now.” proves no more realistic than any of the birthers’, but I’m betting on this case to go the distance. We’ll see what happens one way or the other after Judge Wingate eventually dismisses Orly’s REEK-O action.
At the very least she’ll have to hire a lawyer.
I hear Larry Klayman is looking for work. 🙂
Birther lawyers don’t work together, nobody will risk having to share the fame if they found that “one honest judge”. After all, their secret dream is not just to “oust the usurper” but to be elected President after that*, or at least have their picture in the history books. Sharing that space is not an option.
_____
* Even Orly would probably be fine to change the Constitution to allow her to become Prez. Do as I say, don’t do as I do. 😉
Are con-calls typical for this type of event instead of meeting in court? Can Orly still appeal the sanction if given? Is Orly better in person or on con-call since I heard she smells?
Don’t know if he has a gun. But I know that KKKLayman (Leisurure Suit Larry is much too kind for this child molester) does not have the money to travel. That’s what he has told the court in another case himself.
I am working of a summary of the status of this case and what is on the table to date.
As I recall, Judge Wingate carefully explained the ramifications of Orly multiplying the litigation and what USC 1927 sanctions meant. Orly claimed that they could not do it because she was not acting as an attorney in this case and these sanctions only applied to attorneys.
I have no doubt that he will grant any defense motions for reasonable attorney fees. I would also hope that the attorney that represented the two defendants from the State of Hawaii would also ask for attorney fees on behalf of his client.
I’ve met her. She doesn’t smell. She seems almost normal.
Dunno, Doc, but this might help you along a little bit. http://www.scribd.com/doc/197984294/Taitz-et-al-v-MS-Dem-Party-et-al-1-9-14
In a way, she’s a typical armchair warrior. She screeches about treason and hanging people on her blog but doesn’t dare say anything like that to a judge’s face.
Yes, that’s the primary document (the court electronic version) I’m primarily working from.
This article has been updated. My understanding is that the purpose of the hearing next Wednesday is for Judge Wingate to issue his orders on the outstanding motions.
Hasn’t she accused judges of being part of the conspriacy in some of her filings? It’s not literally “to their faces”, but that’s a distinction without much of a difference.
I was referring to her behaviour “in person” which seems to be less outrageous than her “behind the keyboard” personality, at least towards authorities (she doesn’t hold back with journalists, though).