Why Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq., or her plaintiff David Farrar, for that matter, would even dream she would be granted pro hac vice status in any judicial court in Georgia, having already been sanctioned $20,000 in a Federal court in Georgia after she had abused pro hac vice, is a mystery for the ages.
From the Order issued on February 15 by Chief Judge Cynthia D. Wright in the Fulton County Superior Court, Atlanta Judicial Circuit; courtesy of Jack Ryan Scribd:
The majority of the required information set forth above was not included in the Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Ms. Taitz as required by Uniform Superior Court Rule 4.4(E)(1). Moreover, the Motion included no Verification affirming that the applicant read the application, was knowledgeable as to its contents, and that said contents were true.
On February 7, Butterfly Bilderberg at The Fogbow predicted Taitz would not be granted pro hac vice in Georgia:
Won’t happen. Georgia changed its rules in 2009 to tighten Uniform Superior Court Rule 4.4, which sets forth the requirements for PHV. The amendment requires a pro hac applicant to send a copy of his/her motion to appear to the Office of the General Counsel of the State Bar of Georgia. The Office of General Counsel may file an objection to the motion or seek the court’s imposition of conditions on the PHV admission. If the application has been previously granted, the Office of General Counsel may file a motion asking the court to withdraw the PHV admission.
Further, during the pendency of the application AND during the PHV admission, the out-of-state attorney submits to the authority of the court AND the Office of General Counsel for all conduct relating “in any way” to the proceeding in which the attorney appears. This authority includes the authority to discipline the PHV attorney “in the same manner as an in-state lawyer.”
The application for PHV admission requires disclosure of whether the attorney has been formally sanctioned “by any court in a written order for disobedience to its rules or orders.” The application must identify: the name and contact information of the court issuing such sanction; the date of the sanction; the caption of the proceedings; the substance of the court’s ruling; and it must attach a copy of the written order.
Judge Wright listed the requirements Taitz did not fulfill, as she does not follow any rules, ever:
Notice, while Taitz’s Application captioned Barack Obama as the sole Defendant, Judge Wright properly added Secretary of State Brian Kemp and copied his office. In the Appeal itself, Taitz captioned “Barack Obama, Secretary of State.” That’s right, Secretary of State. (That’s a step up from the other day when she told Newt Gingrich the President wasn’t qualified to “pick tomatoes or clean bathrooms.”) She then wasted no time in disrespecting Chief Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi. Nothing very new, though, since this is common behavior for Orly Taitz.
According to Dean Haskins, posting at Orly’s World Facebook
Dean Haskins
I am told that David Farrar has sent out multiple emails asking if anyone knows of a Georgia attorney who would be willing to file a pro hac vice motion for the dentist. Can any of you possibly help him out? LOL!
If true, it indicates Georgia lawyers weren’t jumping to associate with the Birther Queen, anyhow. Who can blame them? And, if you were a judge and had the choice, would you have this miserable, rule-breaking bitch practice law in your courtroom?
See also:
Welden v. Obama Appeal Filed in Georgia
Farrar v. Obama, etc.: Final Decision–DENIED
Criminal Investigations For All!
Georgia Ballot Challenge Ruling
Who Is Residing In The White House?
Boots On The Ground In Georgia
Orly Taitz, Ass Backwards As Always
Georgia Ballot Challenge Official Transcripts
Has Orly Taitz Committed Perjury?
Farrar v. Obama: Motion for Letters Rogatory–DENIED
Editorial: ‘Birther’ nonsense makes state look idiotic — again
Atlanta GA: Fogbow Court Observers’ Report
Fogbowers Make The News In Atlanta
An Eloquent Plea Out Of Georgia
‘Birther’ lawyer doesn’t expect to see Obama
While The President Is Across The Country On Thursday
Farrar v. Obama: Subpoena-Palooza
Farrar v. Obama: Motion To Quash Subpoenas
Poor, Poor Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.
Taitz v. Fuddy: Reconsideration–DENIED
Taitz v. Fuddy Video–This Hearing Was A Lulu
Riding The Taitz Train To Failure
Ankeny v. Gov. of Indiana Appeal Transfer: DENIED
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.