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

To: STJPII
Well, let's see.

Orly tries to issue a subpoena as an officer of the court, but she isn't admitted to practice before the court; a subpoena from the DC Circuit is void under Rule 45 (a)(2)(C) anyway and she tries to engage in discovery before the mandatory Rule 26 (d)(1) hearing has been held.

Either she has engaged the court's process for an "improper purpose" or she is too stupid to breath.

78 posted on 08/15/2011 1:01:22 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Lucky; STJPII

The reference should have been to a Rule 26 (f) conference, by the way.


79 posted on 08/15/2011 1:14:14 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Lucky

“Orly tries to issue a subpoena as an officer of the court, but she isn’t admitted to practice before the court”

Orly is not a member of the Federal bar?

“she tries to engage in discovery before the mandatory Rule 26 (d)(1) hearing has been held”

This is why I asked if a scheduling order has been issued because that creates and exception under 26(d)(1) stating discovery may proceed “by court order.” Obviously the parties aren’t going to agree to a “stipulation” under 26 (d).

Candidly, I know NOTHING about Orly. People say she is crazy and her voice grates on them etc. Orly’s legal skills are not the issue. Full disclosure and transparency are the only issues.


81 posted on 08/15/2011 3:02:00 PM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

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