Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored (Re-opened for limited business)

On October 13, Judge Land signed an order

Counsel Orly Taitz is hereby ordered to pay $20,000.00 to the United States, through the Middle District of Georgia Clerk’s Office, within thirty days of the date of this Order as a sanction for her misconduct in violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Today is November 11 and 1 days remain for Orly to pay her sanctions

Even though she is no longer counsel representing the plaintiff, Orly has filed a ‘Notice of Appeal’. Be prepared for the Appeals Court to slap on other sanctions.

10/20/2009 29 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 21[RECAP] Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, 13 [RECAP] Order on Motion for TRO, Order on Motion to Dismiss, 14 [RECAP] Judgment, 17 [RECAP] Order, 28 [RECAP] Order on Motion for Recusal, Order on Motion for Extension of Time (Misc) by Connie Rhodes. Filing fee $ 455, Receipt No.: 113G0000000000831915. (Taitz, Orly) (Entered: 10/20/2009)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION

CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, M.D. F.S.,
Plaintiff,
v.
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, §
GARRISON COMMANDER, FORT § 4:09-cv-00106-CDL
BENNING, GEORGIA,    §
GEORGE STEUBER, DEPUTY   §
COMMANDER, FORT BENNING,  §
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED  §
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, § ATTORNEY’S
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto § NOTICE OF APPEAL
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, § OF SANCTIONS &
Defendants.    § RELATED ORDERS

(more…)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION

CONNIE RHODES,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THOMAS D. MACDONALD, Colonel,
Garrison Commander, Fort
Benning; et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 4:09-CV-106 (CDL)
O R D E R

INTRODUCTION

Commenting on the special privilege granted to lawyers and the corresponding duty imposed upon them, Justice Cardozo once observed:

Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions. [A lawyer is] received into that ancient fellowship for something more than private gain. He [becomes] an officer of the court, and, like the court itself, an instrument or agency to advance the ends of justice.

People ex rel. Karlin v. Culkin, 162 N.E. 487, 489 (N.Y. 1928) (Cardozo, J., writing as Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals before his appointment to the United States Supreme Court) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Competent and ethical lawyers “are essential to the primary governmental function of administering justice.” Goldfarb v. Va. State Bar, 421 U.S. 773, 792 (1975). For justice to be administered efficiently and justly, lawyers must understand the conditions that govern their privilege to practice law. Lawyers who do not understand those conditions are at best woefully unprepared to practice the profession and at worst a menace to it.

(more…)

Instead of the $10,000 sanctions the Judge felt compelled by Orly’s response to double the sanction and forward the order to the California Bar

10/13/2009 28 ORDER denying 24 Motion for Recusal; denying 25 Motion for Extension of Time. Ordered by Judge Clay D. Land on 10/13/2009. (lra) (Entered: 10/13/2009)

Regrettably, the conduct of counsel Orly Taitz has crossed these lines, and Ms. Taitz must be sanctioned for her misconduct. After a full review of the sanctionable conduct, counsel’s conduct leading up to that conduct, and counsel’s response to the Court’s show cause order, the Court finds that a monetary penalty of $20,000.00 shall be imposed upon counsel Orly Taitz as punishment for her misconduct, as a deterrent to prevent future misconduct, and to protect the integrity of the Court.

…

The Court further directs the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this Order to the State Bar of California, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, for whatever use it deems appropriate

Note: Seems that Orly’s certificate of good faith expects Judge Land to recuse himself from the Rhodes v McDonald case rather than his order to show cause.

ATTORNEY’S CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH

I, Orly Taitz, am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California, before the Supreme Court of the United States, and other Federal District Courts. I am in the process of seeking admission pro hac vice in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. I was the attorney for the Plaintiff in this case, Captain Connie Rhodes, and I have reviewed the law and the circumstances underlying Judge Clay D. Land’s conduct in connection with this cause. I agree that a reasonable person would be likely, if not almost certain, to conclude that Judge Clay D. Land’s rapid, in fact “lightening like”, disposition of this case was a result of preconceived, extrajudicial notions and pervasive bias based either on politics or on some other external factor having nothing to do with Captain Rhodes’s Complaint, Application(s) for Temporary Restraining Order, and Motion to Reinstate the same, because nothing in Judge Land’s orders that the Honorable Judge even read the first page of any of these documents, much less the prayer(s) for relief.

(more…)

Note: Note that since Connie Rhodes has apparently dropped Orly as her Lawyer, Orly can no further represent her as a plaintiff in the case.

PS: Orly tried the same in Florida

08/06/2009 8 MOTION for recusal of District Judge Richard A. Lazzara by Stefan Frederick Cook. (BSN) (Entered: 08/06/2009)
08/06/2009 10 ENDORSED ORDER denying 8 Motion for Recusal as frivolous and wholly without merit. Signed by Judge Richard A. Lazzara on 8/6/2009. (DMB) (Entered: 08/06/2009)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION
120 12th Street P.O. Box 124 Columbus, Georgia 31902
CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, M.D. F.S.,
Plaintiff,
v.
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD,
GARRISON COMMANDER, FORT
BENNING, GEORGIA,
GEORGE STEUBER, DEPUTY
COMMANDER, FORT BENNING,
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES,
Defendants.

MOTION TO RECUSE THE HONORABLE CLAY D. LAND PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§144 and 455(a)

The undersigned Orly Taitz, former counsel to Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes files this Motion to Recuse pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§144 and 455(a), in support of both theories of recusal. First, there is some circumstantial evidence that Judge Clay D. Land may have had extrajudicial and ex-parte contacts with Honorable Judge Clay D. Land’s public disclosures concerning his investments, it also appears to the undersigned that Judge Land may be disqualified because hethe Obama administration, in particular from Attorney General Eric Holder (See Affidavit, Exhibit A). Second, a preliminary review of the results of the has equity ownership of certain securities (e.g. Microsoft and Comcast) which are aligned both politically and economically with a key Defendant in this case, namely the de facto President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, in such a direct and personal way that it could be said that this Judge has a financial stake in the outcome of the former Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes’ original case-in-chief.

(more…)

When legal arguments fail, what else is one to do? Orly explains

Would vast investments of Judge Land suffer, if Obama is removed from office?

His reports filed for the years 2003-7 list investments in many of the largest companies backing Barack Obama, such as Microsoft and Comcast.

In his 2004 report he also lists and investment with Time Warner, Inc..

…

It is difficult to understand how, with so many varied investments, Judge Land has managed to avoid conflicts of interest in the numerous cases he has heard. Moreover, seeing that many of these companies would be impacted if the laws signed by Barack Hussein Obama’s were declared null and void, on account of his lack of eligibility for office, it also seems reasonable to ask why Judge Land did not recuse himself in the case Rhodes vs. Mac Donald.

Is Orly going to ask Judge Land to retroactively remove himself from the case?

09/28/2009 21 ORDER granting 20 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney with conditions (see order for explanation). Attorney Orly Taitz terminated. Ordered by Judge Clay D. Land on 09/28/2009 (esl) (Entered: 09/28/2009)

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff (Doc. 20). Plaintiff apparently does not object to such withdrawal. (See Doc. 18.) Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted with the following conditions. Counsel remains subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for purposes of the Court’s show cause sanctions order and related proceedings, and Plaintiff remains subject to the jurisdiction of this Court for purposes of the Court’s previous order casting the court costs upon Plaintiff.

The Court further notes that this order shall not be construed to authorize Plaintiff’s counsel to breach any attorney-client privilege that may exist due to counsel’s representation of Plaintiff. Moreover, the Court notifies counsel that in issuing its show cause sanctions order, the Court did not rely upon the letter sent by Plaintiff purporting to discharge counsel (Doc. 18), nor does the Court intend to rely upon that document in future proceedings regarding sanctions against Plaintiff’s counsel. Whether Plaintiff expressly authorized counsel to file the motion for reconsideration is irrelevant to the Court’s determination of whether the filing was legally frivolous.

IT IS SO ORDERED, this 28th day of September, 2009.

All it takes is a /s/, Orly’s a ‘quick learner’. But since she is dropping her client, where is her ‘proof of service’ (see update) to Connie Rhodes?

09/28/2009 Notice of Error in Filing (related document: 19 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Connie Rhodes ). DOCUMENT IS NOT SIGNED AND MUST BE RE-FILED ONCE EXECUTED WITH AN “S/signature”. (esl) (Entered: 09/28/2009)

09/28/2009 20 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Connie Rhodes filed by Orly Taitz.(Taitz, Orly) (Entered: 09/28/2009)

Update: Seems I predicted well

09/28/2009 TEXT ONLY Notice of Error in Filing (related document: 20 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Connie Rhodes ). SIGNED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE IS MISSING FROM DOCUMENT. PLEASE E-FILE AN EXECUTED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND LINK IT BACK TO DOCUMENT 20. Failure to include service on Plaintiff will result in another Notice of Error in Filing. (esl) (Entered: 09/28/2009)

Note: And still not signed. Hilarious…

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMUS DIVISION
120 12th Street  P.O. Box 124  Columbus, Georgia 31902

CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, M.D. F.S.,
Plaintiff,
v.
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD,
GARRISON COMMANDER, FORT
BENNING, GEORGIA,
GEORGE STEUBER, DEPUTY
COMMANDER, FORT BENNING,
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES,
Defendants.

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

The undersigned attorney comes before this Court to respectfully ask for leave to withdraw as counsel for the Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes.  The immediate need for this withdrawal is the filing of two documents of September 18, 2009, one by the Court, Document 17, and one apparently by Plaintiff Connie Rhodes, which together have the effect of creating a serious conflict of interest between Plaintiff and her counsel.  In order to defend herself, the undersigned
counsel will have to contest and potentially appeal any sanctions order in her own name alone, separately from the Plaintiff, by offering and divulging what would normally constitute inadmissible and privileged attorney-client communications, and take a position contrary to her client’s most recently stated position in this litigation.

(more…)

As if Orly has not enough trouble, her client has abandoned her and announces that she will be filing a complaint with the California Bar…

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION (pdf)

CONNIE RHODES,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THOMAS D. MACDONALD, Colonel, Garrison Commander, Fort Benning; et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 4:09-CV-106 (CDL)

O R D E R

“It was deja vu all over again.” [1]  In her most recent tirade, Plaintiff’s counsel seeks  reconsideration of the Court’s order dismissing this action.  Instead 2 of seriously addressing the substance of the Court’s order, counsel repeats her political diatribe against the President, complains that she did not have time to address dismissal of the action (although she sought expedited consideration), accuses the undersigned of treason, and maintains that “the United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and . . . subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously protested.”  (Pl.’s Emergency Req. for Stay of Deployment 2.)

(more…)