What a piece of … Well, it ain’t a legal brief, that’s for sure. These pro-se’s are getting more and more ridiculous. Expect nothing…
Noonan v Bowen (APPEAL) – Reply Brief of Appellant Barnett
No wonder she lost…
All over the place, nothing of any legal relevance.. Orly at her best and worst.
The Court of Appeal in California has issued a ruling in Orly’s appeal of Taitz v Obama. Orly, recently, presented her ‘case’ in front of the judges, and in absence of the three defendants, and predictably lost.
The justices documented the many failures in Orly’s attempts, including her failure to properly request that a court reporter be present, and her failures to present the court with the relevant rulings.
What a mess… Which reminds we why we ‘love’ our dentist friend…
Read the non-published decision here…
Dr Conspiracy has his own thoughts on these matters
Finally, her appeal was totally botched in that she provided reams of rubbish about Obama, but failed to provide copies of transcripts and lower court orders which are the fundamental paperwork that must be filed with an appeal.
Orly’s ‘train’ derails once again… No surprise here… She has consistently shown herself to be quite unable to meet the legal requirements.
Appellant’s motion for leave to file a supplemental brief and attached CD with newly discovered information is DENIED.
Orly has shown herself to be totally clueless about the legal system, and how to properly name and serve the relevant parties.
In her initial filing, Orly totally forgot to name and serve Occidental, thus forever losing the opportunity to appeal these issues. She tries desperately to introduce new evidence in an Appeal, something she claimed was impossible in the Alabama case… Hilarious how quickly she forgets her own insights when it comes to her own failings.
So now we have her attempting to introduce ‘new evidence’ which however already was available to her in 2008. She is trying to include Occidental and its lawyer, but still fails to follow the Court’s rules.
Can we predict another failure by our dentist friend Orly? While it is hilarious to observe the Cold Case Posse struggling with the Xerox workflow, observing Orly’s follies never turns old..
COACA Third Appellate District – Noonan v Bowen APPEAL – Brief of Appellant NOONAN
COACA Third Appellate District – Noonan v Bowen APPEAL – Brief of Appellant BARNETT
COACA Third Appellate District – Noonan v Bowen APPEAL – Brief of Respondents OBAMA and OfACA
Orly is still struggling with her filing and now the court has continued the case.
On the court’s own motion and for good cause, the matter previously calendared for September 26, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., is CONTINUED to the October 2013 oral argument calendar. Notice will be given of the new date and time.
Has the court noticed all the problems with the case Such as the failure to properly join appellees? What a mess
The Judge’s findings really demolish Orly’s foolish claims. The judge’s written ruling laid to rest any uncertainties.
Another fail and worse, she has made several other failures and the court may not be impressed. Let me point out that the appellate court does not know default and will rule based on the lower court’s findings. It did not need any input from the defendants as the Court will have no trouble accepting the lower court’s decision
On June 21, 2013, appellant submitted a faxed notice regarding respondents’ brief having not been filed and also included was a declaration of new facts that appellant believes will weigh in favor of granting her appeal. On June 24, 2013, appellant filed the original to the fax received on June 21, 2013. The clerk of this court is DIRECTED to reject the fax received June 21, 2013, and to strike the filing of the document filed June 24, 2013, and return forthwith both documents to appellant. The court is aware of the status of respondents’ briefs and the declaration of new facts is not part of the record on appeal
Okay, who has pranked our dentist/lawyer friend? Orly believes that since Obama et al refused to respond to her appeal, they are now in default… Poor Orly… Or course, new information cannot be raised on appeal and yet.. Hey wait, did she not lecture Zullo on this? Orly is so clueless… Soooo funny… And really, some third hand hearsay…
IN THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
Superior Court Ca5e Number
Taitz v Obama, Feinstein, Emken
NOTICE BY APPELLANT OF APPELLEES FAILURE TO FILE APPELLEES BRIEF.
NEW INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN, IMPORTANT FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF THE CASE,
In Grinols, Orly was appealing a decision to deny a motion for default. The appeals court has ruled…ffg
Grinols appeal dismissed!
Filed order (MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, RONALD M. GOULD and PAUL J. WATFORD) A review of the record and appellants’ response to the May 15, 2013 order to show cause demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the order challenged in the appeal is not final or appealable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Bird v. Reese, 875 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1989) (order) (order denying a motion for default judgment is not a final appealable order); FirsTier Mortgage Co. v. Investors Mortgage Ins. Co, 498 U.S. 269, 276 (1991) (premature appeal not cured by subsequent entry of judgment where appellant could not reasonably believe order was final or appealable). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED.  (WL)
AnitaMarie at the Fogbow announced
Doc C just posted Taitz’s Opening Brief. His summary: It’s crap.
He’s being very kind.
Appellants’ Opening Brief
I cannot believe the horrible brief. It starts off with a reference to 28 USC § 1295 Jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Remember, she is filing with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Let me explain, the US Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit
[...] is a United States court of appeals headquartered in Washington, D.C.. The court was created by Congress with passage of the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982, which merged the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate division of the United States Court of Claims, making the judges of the former courts into circuit judges.
The correct reference is of course 28 USC § 1291 Final decisions of district courts. How could a lawyer make such a fundamental error?… Well, remember, this is Orly..
CASE G 047746
IN THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
BARACK OBAMA, DIANE FEINSTEIN, ELOZABETH EMKEN
APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF
APPELLANT PRO SE