Standing. The ‘vetting, texting’ judge gave this case standing, and dismissed for other reasons. IIRC, none of the other cases had ‘standing.’ That sets this apart.
Standing. The ‘vetting, texting’ judge gave this case standing, and dismissed for other reasons. IIRC, none of the other cases had ‘standing.’ That sets this apart.
Obama’s attorneys moved to summarily dismiss the lawsuit for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”
Judge Robertson granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of failure to state a claim. There was no opportunity to address standing.
The US Court of Appeals For the District Of Columbia then upheld the District Court judge’s dismissal:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed March 5, 2009, and March 24, 2009, be affirmed. The district court correctly dismissed the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Hollister v. Soetoro, 601 F. Supp. 2d 179 (D.D.C. 2009).
Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that counsel had violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(2) and in imposing a reprimand as the
sanction for his part in preparing, filing, and prosecuting a legally frivolous complaint.
Hollister v. Soetoro, 258 F.R.D. 1 (D.D.C. 2009). Appellants have provided no reasonable basis for questioning the impartiality of the district court judge. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28745277/HOLLISTER-v-SOETORO-PER-CURIAM-JUDGMENT-filed-Lower-Court-Affirmed-Transport-Room