Skip to comments.Donofrio & Pidgeon file Motion for Reconsideration i Chrysler Case
Posted on 12/28/2009 7:38:26 AM PST by circumbendibus
Last night Attorney Leo Donofrio filed an Omnibus Motion to Reconsider in the case RE: in Chrysler LLC et al., in the name of Attorney Stephen Pidgeon and himself, and on behalf of more than 20 Chrysler Dealerships, seeking to recover monetary compensation for the loss of their franchises and contractual rights with Chrysler.
The case involves the disputed bankruptcy proceedings of Chrysler automotive corporation, known formally as Chrysler LLC. The many cases regarding the dissolution and sale of Chrysler are being heard before the Honorable Robert J. Gonzalez, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Federal Court, Southern District of New York.
Following the sale of Chrysler LLC to Fiat, the new corporation took the name Chrysler Group LLC, and the former is know know as Old Carco LLC, or Old Chrysler.
While the issue of Obamas illegitimacy as President makes the dissolution and reorganization of the corporation by Obama and at his behest, one of the glaring crimes of his regime; the creditors in the case are not questioning his eligibility, but rather the nature of the corporate dissolution and reorganization.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
This story was an exclusive to the Post & Email. MSM has not picked up on this yet.
I would rather see the secured debtholders in court against Obama and Chrysler.
Unfortunately, they were forced (nearly at gunpoint) to sign their rights away.
The MSM will never pick up on this, the legal fight for a Writ of Quo Warranto in the DC Federal Court, nor the cases proceeding in Hawaii to force the Hawaiian DOH to follow Hawaiian law, and release the documentation surrounding BHO's birth.
In fact, I haven't even seen a trace in the WSJ, where the Chrysler deal belongs!
The rights taken from them Soviet or Islamo Kenyan Marxist style. I give Leo and Pidgeon a lot of credit. The masses of fools care more about the football playoffs and bowl games. Idiots. TV gives the left their power.
Cavuto broke this story on Fox News in early December. After quo warranto is filed in DC this week or next, I expect there to be some follow up reporting at least.
The Democrats just change the law when they are in power to suit them. The press just goes along with it. Makes me sick. This usurper must be removed and charged with treason along with the rest of the DNC.
Wouldn’t it be great; if they could get Obama and Co while they were in Hawaii?
Yes. One can dream anyway.
In reading Beck's "Common Sense," you'll notice he skips blithely over Article II,after mentioning every other office's qualifications. Levin, the "great constitutional scholar" also has a faulty copy of the document. Very darn weird.
By now the Eligibility Issue has been so interwined with the "Birther Conspiracy," that no right wing talker apparently has the guts to set their audience straight. If they mention it at at all, Right or Left, it's only to ridicule the "Birthers."
"Yabut, he was born in Hawaii." End of story.
In his last show before Christmas, Rush hinted how Obama (like Tiger Woods) could crumble quickly (once certain information comes out). Maybe it’s just my wishful thinking but I think Obama will be unmasked in 2010 before elections take place.
“Before turning to our legal analysis of the elements necessary to establish fraud on the Court under FRCP Rule 60(d)(3), we should state that Movants do not allege Judge Gonzalez intentionally perpetrated a fraud on the Court. Regardless, we respectfully submit that the assertion wielded by Judge Gonzalez in Footnote 21 is fraudulent on its face and as such it exhibits a reckless disregard for the truth which is enough under controlling precedent to establish fraud on the court under Rule 60(d)(3).”
Wow! Professional gambler D’Onofrio is accusing the judge of committing a “fraud on the court” via “reckless disregard of the truth”.
Normally, as Taitz has found, it is not advisable to both insult and enrage the judge that you are asking to make a ruling a your motion. D’Onofrio is too smart for that, so I suspect that he may have deliberately put the judge in a conflict of interest position where the judge will need to recuse himself.
Judges must avoid even the appearance of conflict of interst, and if the judge rules against D’Onofrio’s client he could be seen as protecting his self-interest in his reputation. If he rules for D’Onofrio’s client, he will be admitting to having perpetrated a fraud on his own court!
I expect (not a lawyer) that the judge might feel compelled to recuse himself for this reason and that is what D’Onofrio intended. A new judge, not under the excruciating time pressure of the first judge and able to weigh with more time D’Onofrio’s arguments, might rule for D’Onofrio’s plaintiffs. I would be interested in how a lawyer thinks the judge will respond.
No surprise, but I wouldn’t be too hopeful if I were you. You said it yourself—this kind of stuff doesn’t go over well. If one want to be a professional gambler, one should try it in Vegas, not the courts.
Outside of TV, it’s very hard for a lawyer to compel a judge to recuse himself based on your interpretation of his ruling. It’s almost always foolish to try.
"Jes a-tryin' ta hep you-all out, Judge."
The Lord’s perfect timing..........
Leo is not accusing the judge of _intentional_ fraud, but with what amounts to fraud. The judge himself acted with such “reckless disregard for the truth” that it amounted to the judge committing a fraud on his own court! The judge's reckless disregard was to characterize in a footnote testimony of a witness as having the exact opposite meaning of what the witness intended, which Leo says is clear from the record.
Before turning to our legal analysis of the elements necessary to establish fraud on the Court under FRCP Rule 60(d)(3), we should state that Movants do not allege Judge Gonzalez intentionally perpetrated a fraud on the Court. Regardless, we respectfully submit that the assertion wielded by Judge Gonzalez in Footnote 21 is fraudulent on its face and as such it exhibits a reckless disregard for the truth which is enough under controlling precedent to establish fraud on the court under Rule 60(d)(3).
"Ahem ...,. your honor may have been misled .... b-b-by this witness' incoherent remarks ... we pray the court reconsider the actual import of the witness' remarks ... in this here motion, which we in no way wish to be construed as critical of your honor's previous opinions ... coulda happened to anybody. "
Judge Gonzalez was born in Brooklyn, New York in 1947. Judge Gonzalez received an undergraduate degree in accounting from Fordham University in 1969 and a masters degree in education from Brooklyn College in 1974. He received a J.D. from Fordham University School of Law in 1982. He also received an L.L.M. in taxation from New York University School of Law in 1990. Judge Gonzalez was an attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service and earned the Chief Counsel's Special Achievement Award for three consecutive years. Thereafter, he practiced with the firms of Pollner, Mezan, Stolzberg, Berger & Glass, P.C. and Gaston & Snow in New York City. Judge Gonzalez was appointed Assistant United States Trustee in the Southern District of New York in 1991. He was appointed United States Trustee for Region 2 (Second Circuit) in 1993 and served in that position until his appointment to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in 1995.
To my jaundiced old eye it appears that Gonzalez is probably not a total AAA* dummy and at least knows the ropes. However, Gonzalez is a complete government man. At least Donofrio is not attacking him publicly as a certain Russian Dentist of my acquaintance would have done by now.
A Federally Protected species: The Affirmative Action Anus.
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.