MD – Taitz v Colvin – Rejected – Orly needs to file a motion for leave

[Update: The Judge corrected the record and ordered the document to be filed. It’s time for a ruling which by all likelihood will be a dismissal. There is just nothing there.]

Orly has filed a document which, under the rules of the Court, cannot be filed without leave of court. Judge Hollander is tightening down on the rules. I can already predict her next move.

3 thoughts on “MD – Taitz v Colvin – Rejected – Orly needs to file a motion for leave

  1. I’m certainly not one to defend Orly, but I believe a courteous call to the clerk would cure this. I believe it is a pleading that should be allowed, based on how the Court has allowed other pleadings to be filed. Not saying the pleading is worth anything, but I believe it should be (in this case) proper to file it. The clerk is likely confused due to the “dual” motions filed earlier by Taitz and defense response filed “dual” and so I believe Orly is entitled to this reply.

  2. It was the judge who signed the order. We shall see. Orly’s piece deserves to be filed as it is so outrageous. Poor Orly has lost all touch with reality and common sense it seems to me.

Comments are closed.