Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Hollister v Soetoro (re Berg)
scribd ^ | 2/25/2009 | rxsid

Posted on 02/25/2009 4:55:05 PM PST by rxsid

New Court Order in Hollister v. Soetoro

Filed & Entered: 02/25/2009 Docket Text Order to Show Cause

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12825890/Order-to-Show-Cause

That doesn't look good on Berg (the case).


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; colb; hollister; lawsuit; obama; soetoro
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-210 next last

1 posted on 02/25/2009 4:55:06 PM PST by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Is this Berg’s case or Orly’s?
Either way, the judge doesn’t sound pleased with the plaintiffs.


2 posted on 02/25/2009 4:57:08 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

This is a very strange order, apparently occasioned by very strange conduct on the part of the Plaintiff.

One does not F with federal judges.


3 posted on 02/25/2009 5:01:29 PM PST by MindBender26 (The Hellfire Missile is one of the wonderful ways God shows us he loves American Soldiers & Marines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BP2; LucyT; STARWISE; FreeManN

p


4 posted on 02/25/2009 5:01:44 PM PST by hoosiermama (Berg is a liberal democrat. Keyes is a conservative. Obama is bringing us together already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

If somebody would explain this to my country a** , I would sure appreciate it ,,

no speaka lawyereze


5 posted on 02/25/2009 5:01:49 PM PST by Eagle50AE (Pray for our Armed Forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle50AE
The attorney's pursing this have apparently given up or were to busy to respond and had a paralegal file a response. They have until 5pm tomorrow to respond or the case will be dismissed.
6 posted on 02/25/2009 5:16:11 PM PST by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

more here

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=3890


7 posted on 02/25/2009 5:20:07 PM PST by luv2ndamend (May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. — Samue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama; montanajoe; Calpernia; Fred Nerks; null and void; pissant; george76; PhilDragoo; ...
Thanks, hoosiermama.

According to montanajoe this means: The attorney's pursing this have apparently given up or were to busy to respond and had a paralegal file a response. They have until 5pm tomorrow to respond or the case will be dismissed.

8 posted on 02/25/2009 5:24:18 PM PST by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Good grief. We can’t afford to mess around! Someone’s head should roll.


9 posted on 02/25/2009 5:24:34 PM PST by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend
From your link:

"While FreeRepublic.com is reporting that this Declaration — authored by Lisa Liberi, Philip Berg’s assistant and paralegal — was entered on February 17, 2009, the actual Declaration (Scribd) admits to being filed on February 13, 2008.

The Declaration is a short five pager and definitely worth the read, as it stipulates that Ms. Liberi is being encumbered by a Clerk of the Court."

10 posted on 02/25/2009 5:31:27 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

What happened was the Clerk and her supervisor forced Lisa L. to file a Motion which was not needed. They obviously played good cop; bad cop. Finally, she filed this Motion only to have the case denied by the judge for filing the Motion.

What a crock. That is so backhanded. All Lisa is doing is documenting what happened and she did a damn good job. In other words, this case was set up to be dismissed by the judge.


11 posted on 02/25/2009 5:36:36 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Clinton appointee?


12 posted on 02/25/2009 5:39:22 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“The Declaration is a short five pager and definitely worth the read, as it stipulates that Ms. Liberi is being encumbered by a Clerk of the Court.””

Read below:


Case 1:08-cv-02254-JR

Document 13-2

Filed 02/13/2009

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA : : Plaintiff : vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:08-cv-02254 JR : BARRY SOETORO, a/k/a Barack : Hussein Obama, in his capacity as : a natural person; in his capacity as : de facto President in posse; and in his : capacity as de jure President in posse : and : JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his capacity : as a natural person; in his capacity as : de jure Acting President in posse; in his : capacity as de jure President in posse; : and in his capacity as de jure Vice: President in posse; : and : NATURAL and UN-NATURAL : DOES 1-100 INCLUSIVE, : : Defendants : DECLARATION OF LISA LIBERI GREGORY S. HOLLISTER,

I, Lisa Liberi, being over the age of eighteen (18) and not a party to the within action prepared this Declaration of Lisa Liberi regarding certain events regarding this litigation. If called to do so, I could and would competently testify under oath as follows: 1. I am employed by the Law Offices of Philip J. Berg as Assistant to and Paralegal

for Philip J. Berg, Esquire. Our business address is located at 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite #12, Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531. 2. On December 31, 2008, I caused the Complaint for our Client, Gregory S.

Hollister, to be filed in the within action.

I:\Obama\Hollister Liberi Declaration 02 13 09.doc

1

Case 1:08-cv-02254-JR

Document 13-2

Filed 02/13/2009

Page 2 of 5

3.

On or about January 2, 2009 at approximately 10:00 a.m. Eastern time, I received

a call from John Hemenway, Esquire, local counsel and sponsors of Philip J. Berg, Esquire and Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire to be entered in this Court to practice pro hac vice in the within matter. 4. Mr. Hemenway informed me he had received a call from Maureen Higgins, a

Clerk at the United States District Court, District of Columbia. Mr. Hemenway stated Ms. Higgins refused to file Plaintiff’s Complaint without a Motion for Leave to File an Interpleader Action. 5. Mr. Hemenway stated he went down to the Court and asked who the Judge was in

this matter; however, the Clerk refused to tell him. Mr. Hemenway stated he wanted to appear before the Judge regarding the issues with the Court’s Clerk. 6. I immediately contacted Maureen Higgins via telephone to discuss the issue

regarding the Motion she was requesting. Ms. Higgins informed me that we had to file a Motion for Leave to file our Interpleader Complaint by noon, as it was year end close, or she would not file Petitioner’s Complaint. I explained to Ms. Higgins that this was not normal protocol. Ms. Higgins first stated it was a local rule. Ms. Higgins then retracted this statement claiming it was in her Interpleader Manual that she was required to follow. 7. I explained to Ms. Higgins that it was normal protocol to file a Motion for Leave

to Deposit Funds with the Court in an Interpleader Action, however, not to file a Motion seeking Leave of the Court to file a Complaint for Interpleader. Ms. Higgins again stated she would not file Plaintiff’s Complaint without said Motion. 8. I hung up with Ms. Higgins and immediately contacted David Scott, Ms. Higgins

Supervisor. Mr. Scott placed my call on speaker and called Ms. Higgins into his Office. I

I:\Obama\Hollister Liberi Declaration 02 13 09.doc

2

Case 1:08-cv-02254-JR

Document 13-2

Filed 02/13/2009

Page 3 of 5

informed Mr. Scott and Ms. Higgins I pulled the law books pertaining to the Interpleader Action as well as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules for the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. Nowhere was I able to locate such a requirement as dictated by Ms. Higgins. 9. Ms. Higgins became frustrated and began speaking very loudly. I continued

reading exactly what the law stated pursuant to the Interpleader Actions. Ms. Higgins finally stated if we did not file an original Motion for Leave to File an Interpleader Action, our Client’s Complaint would be rejected and she would mail it back to us. This of course was doing nothing more than prejudicing our client. 10. Mr. Scott stated we should file the Motion even though we did not agree and

email it to him. Mr. Scott stated the reason they needed it by noon was due to the fact of year-end close. Mr. Scott stated if Ms. Higgins attempted to reject Plaintiff’s Complaint again, he would personally go before the Judge. 11. Although in disagreement, to preserve the rights of our Client, I prepared a

Motion for Leave to file an Interpleader Action. I submitted the Motion to all counsel who reluctantly agreed to have it filed. 12. At the time of the filing of Plaintiff’s Complaint a Motion to Shorten time

for Defendants to Answer was filed as well as a Motion to enter Philip J. Berg, Esquire and Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire to Appear Pro Hac Vice. 13. On or about February 4, 2009, this Honorable Court entered an order deeming the

Motion for Leave to file Plaintiff’s Interpleader Action frivolous and therefore denied it. At the same this Honorable Court held Mr. Berg’s and Mr. Joyce’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in abeyance until the Court has had the opportunity in open Court to examine their

I:\Obama\Hollister Liberi Declaration 02 13 09.doc

3

Case 1:08-cv-02254-JR

Document 13-2

Filed 02/13/2009

Page 4 of 5

credentials, their competence, their good faith, and the factual and legal bases of the Complaint they have signed. 14. I immediately contacted David Scott back regarding this Order. Mr. Scott

remembered the events involving his Clerk, Maureen Higgins and the Motion in question. Mr. Scott apologized and stated he was discussing this issue with his Supervisors. Mr. Scott pulled the Order of this Court and took it to his Supervisors so they would discuss this issue with Ms. Higgins. I told Mr. Scott I hoped he would inform the Court as to the actions that forced the filing of the Motion for Leave to File an Interpleader Action.

I declare under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 13th day of February, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

s/ Lisa Liberi ______________________________ LISA LIBERI

I:\Obama\Hollister Liberi Declaration 02 13 09.doc

4

Case 1:08-cv-02254-JR

Document 13-2

Filed 02/13/2009

Page 5 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

: : Plaintiff, : vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:08-cv-02254 JR : BARRY SOETORO, et al : : Defendants. :

GREGORY S. HOLLISTER,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Lisa Liberi, hereby certify that the Declaration of Lisa Liberi was served via electronic filing this 13th day of February 2009 upon the following: Robert F. Bauer, Esquire PERKINS COIE 607 Fourteenth Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005-2003 Telephone: (202) 628-6600 Facsimile: (202) 434-1690 RBauer@perkinscoie.com

s/ Lisa Liberi ______________________________ LISA LIBERI

I:\Obama\Hollister Liberi Declaration 02 13 09.doc

5


13 posted on 02/25/2009 5:42:00 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Thanks for your explanation. But wouldn’t Berg have known about this?


14 posted on 02/25/2009 5:42:22 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; ExTexasRedhead

Don’t know; but it was a really rotten thing to do. You can thank Barry Soetoro for that. No wonder all of these cases are being dismissed. They are trying to make people believe they are being dismissed for legitimate reasons when it appears they are forcing the plaintiffs to obey their own rules; so they will have cause to dismiss them.


15 posted on 02/25/2009 5:43:19 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Bookmark.


16 posted on 02/25/2009 5:45:59 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: azishot

Possibly, but there probably wasn’t anything he could do about it but go along or have the case dismissed. It happens. Sometimes it’s like a ping pong match.


17 posted on 02/25/2009 5:51:03 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Those of us that got flamed for our comments about the plaintiff’s case and its chances seem to be getting vindicated.


18 posted on 02/25/2009 5:52:23 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

This is exactly what Leo encountered in NJ courts and at SCOTUS with the clerks. Runaround, conflicting demands, nonsense

Some of the people here are already taking the judge’s side. The judiciary no longer cares about We The People or the Constitution anymore.

Can Berg then take this case to SCOTUS if it is dismissed?

Orly needs more active military in the thousands so the court system can tell our military that they do not have standing.


19 posted on 02/25/2009 5:53:00 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Ha ha. Not funny.


20 posted on 02/25/2009 5:53:07 PM PST by Polarik ("A forgery created to prove a claim repudiates that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

No. It is more like the Judiciary does not want to uphold the Constitution.


21 posted on 02/25/2009 5:55:03 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

Thank you !


22 posted on 02/25/2009 5:56:32 PM PST by Eagle50AE (Pray for our Armed Forces.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

I doubt if people read what Lisa filed or they wouldn’t be siding with the judge. She is documenting which is exactly what she should do what happened.

I have no idea what is going to happen; but people should really take this seriously. This is a real look into how sometimes the legal world works.


23 posted on 02/25/2009 5:57:37 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Why would the judge say that evidently Berg “has not been admitted to practice in this court?”

Legalese is a foreign language to me. I’m still hoping and praying that something happens real soon.


24 posted on 02/25/2009 5:58:57 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

I don’t know about the rest of what you asked. But it’s definately worth reading what she wrote. And I stress she is documenting what happened.


25 posted on 02/25/2009 6:01:29 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

I am not sure it really has to do with the Constitution; it’s more likely legal tricks.


26 posted on 02/25/2009 6:03:05 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

It is pretty obvious that the Judiciary/court system/Judges are going to do nothing about the usurper. My hope is Berg can appeal this to SCOTUS. I am sure the SCOTUS clerks and Danny Bickle will try to sabotage that filing.


27 posted on 02/25/2009 6:03:27 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: freekitty; All

From http://www.therightsideoflife.com/

Instead of the opposition plaintiff was ordered to file by 2/13/09 (or defendants’ motion to dismiss would be granted as conceded, see [#10]), what plaintiff filed was (a) the affidavit of a paralegal (who works in the office of a Pennsylvania lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in this Court), complaining about her treatment by an employee of the Clerk’s Office, and (b) many blank pages, decorated only by what appear to be botanical drawings and the illegible photocopy of an Hawaiian certificate of live birth. (a) The affidavit was apparently intended as a response to my earlier observation that plaintiff’s motion to file interpleader was frivolous, see [#2], [#10], the argument being, “Maureen Higgins made me do it.” What was frivolous about the motion, however, was not the fact that it was filed, but the suggestion that “duties” could be filed in the registry of this court. (b) The blank pages were either somebody’s idea of a joke (in which case I don’t get it) or a mistake. If the latter, plaintiffs have until 5:00 pm EST on 2/26/09 to correct it, by re-filing their points and authorities in opposition to the pending motion to dismiss (in the .pdf format required by the Court’s CM/EDF system), or otherwise to show cause why that motion should not now be granted as conceded. It is SO ORDERED.

JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge


28 posted on 02/25/2009 6:04:42 PM PST by luv2ndamend (May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. — Samue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: azishot

I don’t know. Maybe he is not licensed in that state. I don’t know. I would hardly think he would file something in a court in a state he is not licensed to practice in. Your guess is as good as mine.


29 posted on 02/25/2009 6:05:00 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

This is exactly what Leo encountered in NJ courts and at SCOTUS with the clerks. Runaround, conflicting demands, nonsense

***I remember that and thought at the time that some kind of games were being played but no one knew the rules.


30 posted on 02/25/2009 6:05:51 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

The law is a tough business, and the courts do not accept nonsense. It is a take-no-prisoners game and the attorneys who venture into Federal court had better be willing and able to play by the rules. They are paramount, and they are all written down for everyone to see.

Too bad that the quality of legal practice leaves much to be desired here, but that is the real problem. Don’t blame it on the courts. They are charged with ruling on what is presented according to the law and the rules. They cannot and will not fashion a remedy for the plaintiff who cannot ask for the right thing in the right way.


31 posted on 02/25/2009 6:08:01 PM PST by esquirette (If we do not know our own worldview, we will accept theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend

I didn’t read everything. Did the judge cite actual documentation that says the attorney can not practice law in that court or state? All Lisa did was state what actually happened. It’s like an affidavit in a way. Sometime there are blank pages but they should be numbered in bates(numbering system for documentation of legal cases) form if this is a case.

Whooee, all I can say this judge is playing hardball. Not a good thing.


32 posted on 02/25/2009 6:10:52 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: esquirette

Yeah we know all about the court and laws in this country where someone who by the day appears to have been born in Kenya can be POTUS and wreck the country. The Judiciary will protect him because they are as corrupt as the Dems because they are the Dems.


33 posted on 02/25/2009 6:11:17 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; LucyT

Robert Bauer, the President's personal lawyer...

BAUER BIO

Washington, D.C. PHONE: 202.434.1602 FAX: 202.434.1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

...Bob is General Counsel to Obama for America and General Counsel to the Democratic National Committee, and he has been counsel for many years to the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees. He has also served as co-counsel to the New Hampshire State Senate in the trial of Chief Justice David A. Brock (2000); general counsel to the Bill Bradley for President Committee (1999-2000); and counsel to the Democratic Leader in the trial of President William Jefferson Clinton (1999)...

34 posted on 02/25/2009 6:11:57 PM PST by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Thanks...glad to hear you say, “your guess is as good as mine.”

Wish I could understand why the judge would say that he couldn’t practice in this court and then turn around and say “Oh by the way, you have until the 26th to show cause.”


35 posted on 02/25/2009 6:13:03 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: esquirette

Are you an attorney? The thing that bothers me is why would this case be filed if the attorney is not eligible to practice in that court?

Yes, law is a tough business.


36 posted on 02/25/2009 6:13:05 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

I thought he could too. I am going to do more searching.


37 posted on 02/25/2009 6:16:10 PM PST by luv2ndamend (May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. — Samue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

I just don’t know.


38 posted on 02/25/2009 6:16:39 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

I too would like to know if a higher court would hear a case over court procedures. Fed courts are tough, but I’ve never hear of them acting like this. If there is an appeal over miscommuncation by court personnel, or whatever...I’m not sure that can be done. It is the attorney who is completely responsible for all documents filed with the court. Paralegals are supervised by attys, she was acting on attys behalf. If the atty messes up, he’s to be responsible. If the judge had committed an error, then there would be a cause for appeal of some type. Clerks are not suppose to give advice, but they can reject documents.


39 posted on 02/25/2009 6:17:42 PM PST by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend

This judge is a corrupt sitting judge using manufactured plausible deniability to avoid allowing anything in his court which would question his chosen president. The clerky types are being used and lovin’ it!


40 posted on 02/25/2009 6:19:30 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

Leo Donofrio got the same treatment in NJ courts and in SCOTUS. The judiciary is obviously doing everything it can to protect the Kenyan.


41 posted on 02/25/2009 6:20:24 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

Not even close, but your effort is duly noted.


42 posted on 02/25/2009 6:20:30 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

I agree. But they should be on real grounds according to the law. If a Motion of this type wasn’t required; why require it?


43 posted on 02/25/2009 6:20:39 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
1:08-cv-02254-JR
HOLLISTER v. SOETORO et al
James Robertson, presiding
Date filed: 12/31/2008
Date of last filing: 02/25/2009

U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:08-cv-02254-JR


HOLLISTER v. SOETORO et al
Assigned to: Judge James Robertson
Cause: 28:1335 Interpleader Action

Date Filed: 12/31/2008
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff
GREGORY S. HOLLISTER represented by John David Hemenway
HEMENWAY & ASSOCIATES
4816 Rodman Street, NW
Washington , DC 20016
(202) 244-4819
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
BARRY SOETORO
in his capacity as a natural person; de facto President in posse; and as de jure President in posse
also known as
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
represented by Robert Felix Bauer
PERKINS COIE, LLP
607 14th Street, NW
Suite 800
Washington , DC 20005-2011
(202) 628-6600
Fax: (202) 654-9104
Email: rbauer@perkinscoie.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
Defendant
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.
in his capacity as a natural person; as de jure Acting President in posse; as de jure President in posse; as the jure Vice-President in posse
represented by Robert Felix Bauer
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
DOES
1-100 Inclusive, Natural and Un-Natural

Date Filed # Docket Text
12/31/2008 1  COMPLAINT against BARRY SOETORO, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR, DOES ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616017337) filed by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(tg, ) Modified to re-upload the complaint on 1/5/2009 (tg, ). (Entered: 01/05/2009)
12/31/2008 2  MOTION to File Interpleader and Deposit Funds with the Court by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
12/31/2008 3  MOTION Requesting an Order Shortening Time for Defendants to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
12/31/2008   Summons (2) Issued as to BARRY SOETORO, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR. (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
12/31/2008 4  MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Philip J. Berg, :Firm- Law Offices of Philip J. Berg, :Address- 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12, Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531. Phone No. - (610) 825-3134. Fax No. - (610) 834-7659 by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
12/31/2008 5  MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Lawrence J. Joyce, :Firm- Lawrence J. Joyce, Attorney at Law, :Address- 1517 N. Wilmot Road, Suite 215, Tucson, Arizona 85712. Phone No. - (520) 584-0236. by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
01/14/2009 6  RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR served on 1/6/2009, answer due 1/26/2009 (nmw, ) (Entered: 01/14/2009)
01/14/2009 7  RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. BARRY SOETORO served on 1/6/2009, answer due 1/26/2009 (nmw, ) (Entered: 01/14/2009)
01/26/2009 8  NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Felix Bauer on behalf of BARRY SOETORO, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR (Bauer, Robert) (Entered: 01/26/2009)
01/26/2009 9  MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden by BARRY SOETORO, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order Dismissing)(Bauer, Robert) (Entered: 01/26/2009)
02/04/2009 10  ORDER denying plaintiff's motion to file interpleader and deposit funds with the court 2 ; denying as moot plaintiff's motion to shorten time for defendants to respond to complaint 3 ; and holding in abeyance plaintiff's motions for leave to appear pro hac vice 4 and 5 . Signed by Judge James Robertson on February 4, 2009. (MT) (Entered: 02/04/2009)
02/09/2009 11  FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against BARRY SOETORO, JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR, DOES filed by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER.(nmw, ) (Entered: 02/11/2009)
02/11/2009 12  ORDER that defendants need not respond to the amended complaint and that plaintiff's response to the motion to dismiss is due 2/13/09. Signed by Judge James Robertson on February 11, 2009. (MT) (Entered: 02/11/2009)
02/13/2009 13  Memorandum in opposition to re 9 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden filed by GREGORY S. HOLLISTER. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration)(nmw, ) (Entered: 02/17/2009)
02/25/2009 14  ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge James Robertson on February 25, 2009. (MT) (Entered: 02/25/2009)

When I spoke with Hollister in mid-January, he indicated to me if it didn't get picked up by Inauguration Day, he felt the case might be too "non-standard" in that venue. It's an interesting twist using the Interpleader IMO, but the USDCDC is a pain in the butt to deal with, uncooperative in many regards. Hopefully they will get this fixed quick...

44 posted on 02/25/2009 6:20:56 PM PST by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Is this one of those “power corrupts and absolute power absolutely corrupts” moments?


45 posted on 02/25/2009 6:22:02 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

The problem here since we are not privy to what is actually going on; it’s hard to tell except they are playing hardball.


46 posted on 02/25/2009 6:22:19 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Can the case be appealed to SCOTUS? This is just O’s gang in full court press. His goons control the clerks at SCOTUS as well as the clerks there cheered him when he visited.


47 posted on 02/25/2009 6:22:19 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

bookmark.


48 posted on 02/25/2009 6:25:50 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: azishot

It is a raw arrogance moment. The Constitutional contract has been abrogated, so the judges do what is right in their own minds, kind of like the last paragraph in the book of Kings, OT.


49 posted on 02/25/2009 6:26:08 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

The order says what the order says. Doesn’t leave much room for interpretation.


50 posted on 02/25/2009 6:26:11 PM PST by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-210 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson