Posted on 04/10/2013 2:39:17 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
DOCKET UPDATE: 4/08/2013
Florida Supreme Court Docket
Case Docket Case Number: SC13-560 - Active
MICHAEL VOELTZ vs. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
Petitioner's notice, filed in this Court on March 12, 2013, has been treated as a petition for writ of mandamus seeking reinstatement of the proceedings in the district court of appeal below. Petitioner is allowed to and including April 29, 2013, in which to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, addressing why the proceedings in the district court of appeal should not have been dismissed. The failure to file a proper petition with this Court within the time provided could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of this case. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410. Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it may not be subject to reinstatement.
(Excerpt) Read more at jweb.flcourts.org ...
He must have hired Orly Taitz as his co-counsel.
Did the court state what the deficiency was?
The court could be playing games. (Paper not white enough, margin on right too narrow, wrong font)
Has Klayman EVER won a case?
I don’t know Triple. This is the case where the lower court Judge stated that the fact the government says Obama is qualified to be president is more than enough for him.
“This court notes that President Obama lives in the White House. He flies on Air Force One. He has appeared before Congress, delivered State of the Union addresses and meets with congressional leaders on a regular basis. He has appointed countless ambassadors to represent the interests of the United States throughout the world,” Carroll wrote.
“As this matter has come before the court at this time of the year it seems only appropriate to paraphrase the ruling rendered by the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper from New York in open court in the classic holiday film ‘Miracle on 34th St.’ ‘Since the United States Government declares this man to be president, this court will not dispute it. Case dismissed.’”
It was the second time in eligibility cases that a judge appeared to have abandoned legal fundamentals and simply ruled for Obama on no particular basis.
No he did not hire Taitz.
“Then the court unilaterally characterized it as a Petition for Mandamus.”
Why do you think they did that?
Presumably the Florida Supreme Court will issue a mandamus ordering the district court of appeal perform their legal duty, which they failed to do with their “Miracle on 34th Street” ruling.
I am not a Florida lawyer, but this is what an appellate court will typically do if someone files a notice of appeal from a nonappealable order-- tell him you can't appeal this, but you can try a writ of mandamus.
Larry Klayman is Either HAPLESS, or a DEMOCRAT!! Pick one.
Is that the same judge who said the fact that the post office, a branch of the federal government, said Kris Kringle is the one and true Santa Clause is more than enough for him?
No, wait a minute...
-PJ
-PJ
“I am curious as to why Larry Klayman, a licensed Florida attorney didn’t file a proper petition for ‘Writ of Mandamus’ the first time.”
Sometimes a lawyer “throws long” to try to gain a particular advantage, but the court doesn’t buy it. Then the lawyer has to run a different, less preferred play.
At least the case is still alive and since the court took it upon itself to characterize the filing as a request for a writ of mandamus, the court is affirming standing, it would seem, if Klayman can prove up his claims.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandamus
“In the American legal system it must be a judicially enforceable and legally protected right before one suffering a grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when he is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something and abstains from doing it.”
“This is the case where the lower court Judge stated that the fact the government says Obama is qualified to be president is more than enough for him.”
I think you have the wrong case. There have been three Voeltz v. Obama cases.
Voeltz I was before Judge Lewis - it was dismissed and appealed. 2012-CA-00467
Voeltz II was before Judge Cooper - it was dismissed but not appealed. 2012-CA-02063
Voeltz III was before Judge Carroll - I’m not sure if it was appealed. 2012-CA3857
In the case before the Florida Supreme Court, Judge Lewis wrote,
“I have reviewed and considered the legal authority submitted by the Plaintiff and the Defendant on this issue and conclude as a matter of law that this allegation [Obama’s father not being a US citizen], if true, would not make the candidate ineligible for the office.”
He also cites Hollander v. McCain, Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana and Wong Kim Ark
And disregards that the Ankeny decision admits that the Wong Kim Ark decision never makes such a conclusion.
Still psychotic and unable to read, eh edge?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
Sorry, but namecalling and illiteracy is your badge to wear. Posting a link that you can't support with a cogent argument is a losing tactic for you.
Posting a link that shows you are wrong may irritate you, but it is only a losing prospect with those equally psychotic.
maybe it’s too late at night, but it’s not yet April 29, 2013?
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.