2008-12-19 Broe v Reed – SOS Response to amended petition and motion to dismiss

NO. 82473-8
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
JAMES E. BROE, KENNETH R. SEAL, ROBERT BAKER, MARK SUSSMAN, STAN WALTER, BILL WISE, ANDY STEVENS, ED CRAWFORD, JASON LAGEN, LOUISE WORKMAN, JOCELYN MURCELLI, MIKE MURCELLI, and KEVIN MCDOWELL, American Citizens, Washington Residents and Registered Voters in the State of Washington,
Petitioners,
v.
SAMUAL S. REED, Secretary of State for the State of Washington,
Respondent.

SECRETARY OF STATE’S RESPONSE TO AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND MOTION TO DISMISS

Orly Taitz – Demand to Robert McKenna AG State of Washington

Orly Update

Fascinating that Orly believes that an Attorney General of the State of Washington can hold a Grand Jury hearing against a sitting President. Fascinating… Especially since it was Robert McKenna who filed the motion to dismiss in the case Broe v Reed

Mr. Robert McKenna
Attorney General, Washington
Office of The Attorney General
1125 Washington St, SE
PO Box 40100
Olympia, WA 98504-0100

03.16.09.

Open Letter

Sent by certified mail, return receipt, restricted delivery to Robert McKenna only

Dear Honorable Attorney General McKenna,

01-08-2009 WA Supreme Ct. dismisses Broe v Reed

The Washington Supreme Court today dismissed a lawsuit alleging Secretary of State Sam Reed had failed to confirm that President-elect Barack Obama was eligible to run for president.

Source: TriCityHerald.com

Supreme Court No. 82473-8

This matter came before the Court on its January 8, 2009, En Bane Conference and the Court having unanimously determined that the following order should be entered:

Now, therefore, it is hereby ORDERED:

The Secretary of State’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Petition for Writ of Mandamus as moot is granted. Petitioner’s Amended Motion for Expedited Discovery and for Authority to Issue Subpoena is denied.

Source: WA Supreme Court ruling

Broe v Reed – No Appeal to Supreme Court

Stephen Pidgeon Attorney at Law and (sole) contributor at DecaLogos wrote:

Here is an update concerning Broe v Reed.

The plaintiffs have elected not to make an appeal to the US Supreme Court, but are considering other strategies.

We have pursued our investigation, and have incurred over $30,000 in billing doing so. A complete dossier will be available as soon as we complete the remaining legs of our investigation.

Source: Stephen Pidgeon at Plains Radio forum