Skip to comments.Hollister v Soetoro Updates
Posted on 10/20/2009 1:53:28 PM PDT by rxsid
HOLLISTER v. SOETORO (et al)
APPELLE BRIEF (09/04/2009)
UNOPPOSED ENTRY OF APPEARANCE (09/22/2009)
EMERGENCY MOTION (w. Declaration of L. Liberi) (09/22/2009)
APPELLANT REPLY BRIEF (09/22/2009)
EMERGENCY MOTION (09/28/2009)
PER CURIAM ORDER (10/20/2009)
CLERK'S ORDER (10/20/2009)
K? Thanks for telling us what we are seeing.
Gotta go make some money.
Gregory S. Hollister,Appellantv.Barry Soetoro, in his capacity as a naturalperson; de facto President in posse; and as dejure President in posse, also known as BarackObam a, et al.,Appellees———————————————Consolidated with 09-5161
O R D E ROn September 23, 2009, appellant Hemenway filed a motion for judicial notice. Anyresponse was due by October 8, 2009. To date, no response has been received from theappellees. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it isORDERED, on the courts own motion, that appellees show cause by October 30,2009, why the motion for judicial notice should not be considered and decided without aresponse. The response to the order to show cause may not exceed 20 pages.FOR THE COURT:Mark J. Langer, Clerk
Come back at the end of the month.
"What this means is that Larry Joyce who is the Lead Attorney for Col Hollister and always has been has asked the court to remove for his client what was filed by John Heminway who was the sponsoring Attorney for Larry Joyce and Phil Berg. This information that John Heminway filed was in no way filed with Larry Joyce knowing that John Heminway was filing what he did. In fact Larry Joyce filed his own Brief in behalf of Col Hollister. Larry Joyce was recently addmitted to practice law in the DC Circuit court so Larry no longer needs a sponsoring attorney. Pro Hac Vicei is the term for a sponsoring attorney.by "Admin" on October 19, 2009, 02:25:48 pm
Larry's Brief makes a much stronger argument than that of John Heminway. John can use whatever he wants to try and have his sanctioned order although pointed out that the judge cannot sanction Heminway, the threat of the sanction can be remove from the court record and that is what Heminway is trying to do."
b.t.w. that forum is a "temp" forum since the obamacrimes forum has been "down" for weeks now.
Bump. Read for later.
Hopefully, someone will explain all this.
"Attachment 1: This is a copy of the statute of Hawaii, circa 1982 which specifically empowers the officials of that state to grant a birth document to a child born outside the state in the preceding year. The statute was the same in the year in which the defendant Soetoro a/k/a Obama was born."
"Attachment 2: Here we present the statutes of Hawaii concerning freedom of information in the situation where a state official, in this case Dr. Fukima, has made a statement. The statutes empower a citizen to have access to the support for the statement. In this instance Dr. Fukima, who is a doctor and not a lawyer or constitutional authority, stated that the defendant Soetoro a/k/a Obama was a natural born citizen, thus seemingly overruling the United States Supreme Court, or purporting to. The New Jersey attorney Leo C. Donofrio, who has initiated litigation about Obamas eligibility, through a reader of his blog and web site, after Hawaii officials refused to disclose the information as required by Hawaii law, is preparing a freedom of information suit. It will be filed before this case is finally fully decided and we will call to the Courts attention the actual documents in the case as they appear in the court in Hawaii."
"Attachment 3: This is the statement under penalty of perjury of Lucas Smith supporting a document filed in the related case of Barnett v. Obama, case no. SACV09-00082-DOC (Aux) Judge Carter."
"Attachment 5: Here we present documents from the official proceedings of the Democratic National Committee during the proceeding of certifying to the state electoral college officials the defendant Soetoro a/k/a Obama as official nominee, the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, presiding as a party official but still bound by her duty of honest services. She apparently either herself or through someone under her supervision, altered the document to eliminate the specific certification of constitutional eligibility, raising the presumption of irregularity. "
"Attachment 6. Here we present excerpts from the proceedings of the United States Senate during the electoral proceedings along with the statutory excerpts showing the requirements and it is clear that the Honorable Vice President Richard Cheney, sitting as President of the Senate, failed to issue the required call for objections, raising the question of whether or not the process was in fact completed or if objections should now officially be called for."
This is Berg’s case? I know Phil Berg and Mario Apuzzo are getting the slow treatment.
This quote makes no sense, and I can’t access the linked site. I would venture a guess the ‘admin’ is not a lawyer.
I believe that “Admin” is involved, in some way, with Attorney Berg (at least, connected with his assistant(s) and the previous forum)...but not certain about that.
Yes, kinda. Larry Joyce is the lead attorney on the Hollister case.
ok, so I am somewhat lost here. If these are the attachments the attorney Larry Joyce filed an ‘emergency motion’ to remove on behalf of Hollister, why ?? It seems Heminway did the right thing by putting them in the record.
I never heard of Larry. ???
Berg and Hemenway filed appeal briefs (appealing from the district court's dismissl of their lawsuit) which were longer than the rules allow. The Court of Appeals refused to take them; the appeal process now has to start over and they have to file shorter briefs. The defendants will then respond to those new briefs and the plaintiffs will have to file new reply briefs.
In the meantime, Hemenway filed a motion for the court to consider additional evidence (including Orly Taitz's alleged Kenyan birth certificate). Berg said he didn't want that additional evidence considered and that it should be considered to have been filed only by Hemenway. The defendants (Obama and Biden) didn't respond to the motion to consider additional evidence, but the Court gave them further time to respond.
Well, when did this Larry Joyce become “Lead Attorney” ? “Admin” says he is and always was “Lead Attorney,” but if Joyce was only recently admitted into the court bar, and wasn’t representing Hollister in the District Court, how does that fit?
I thought in the lower court the judge called both Berg and Joyce “agents provacateurs” and santioned Heminway only because they weren’t admitted to his court and Heminway was? This whole entry by “admin” sounds like someone else involved in some of these cases.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.