MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT: Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit NOTE: Having the lawsuit not up 4 debate

torchbearer said:
I was thinking of a teaching moment, not a threat.
you asked:


as if, you didn't know what such behavior would look like.
i offered to show you.
most people pay for their education. i was giving you a grant.
Click to expand...

Thanks but I have been trolled by professional trolls plenty. I think I have a grasp on the art of trolling.
 
RonRules said:
It's 5 PM, no notice from Gilbert about a filing.
Click to expand...

tick-tick-head290x288trans.gif
 
This is the latest from Pacer:

08/08/2012 36 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants Republican National Committee amending First Amended Complaint, 12 ; filed by plaintiffs (rla) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/09/2012 37 Second EX PARTE APPLICATION to Expedite THE CASE CONSISTENT WITH 42 USC 1971(e) filed by PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/09/2012 38 OF SERVICE filed by PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen, re Second EX PARTE APPLICATION to Expedite THE CASE CONSISTENT WITH 42 USC 1971(e) 37 served on 08-09-2012. (Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/10/2012 39 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 8/6/2012 Item 11, Vol. I. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: DEBBIE GALE, phone number 714-558-8141 or EMAIL: [email protected]. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 8/31/2012. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/10/2012. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/8/2012. (Gale, Debbie) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/10/2012 40 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 8/6/2012 Item 11, Vol. I re Transcript 39 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(Gale, Debbie) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/10/2012 41 TRANSCRIPT ORDER for date of proceedings 08/06/2012 to 08/06/2012 as to PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen Court Reporter Jane Sutton Rule. Court will contact Richard C. Gilbert at [email protected] with any questions regarding this order. Transcript portion requested: Opening Statement by Plaintiff on 08/06/2012. Opening Statement by Defendant on 08/06/2012. Closing Argument by Plaintiff on 08/06/2012. Closing Argument by Defendant on 08/06/2012. Opinion of the Court on 08/06/2012. Other: 08/06/2012. Category: Daily. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the court reporter/recorder. (Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/13/2012 42 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 08/06/2012. Court Reporter: Jane Sutton Rule, phone number (714)558-7755, [email protected]. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 9/3/2012. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/13/2012. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/11/2012. (Sutton, Jane) (Entered: 08/13/2012)

08/20/2012 43 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THISCOURT SHOULD NOT CONSTRUE PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF APPEAL AS A DESIRE TO STAND UPON THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. Thus, this Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to SHOW CAUSE why this Court should not construe Plaintiffs notice of appeal as a desire to stand upon the First Amended Complaint and treat the August 7, 2012, Order as a final judgment divesting this Court of jurisdiction. See Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that plaintiff who filed an Election to Stand Upon the Sufficiency of AmendedComplaint Pleadings made a reasonable choice to expedite the rest of the case and test her belief that the... claim was adequately pled). Plaintiffs shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause by 9 a.m. on August 21, 2012. If Plaintiffs fail to file a Response or file a Response that fails to clearly indicate whether they are appealing or not, this Court will strike Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint and issue a final judgment dismissing Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint with prejudice and for the reasons stated in the Courts August 7, 2012, Order. (twdb) (Entered: 08/20/2012)

The last item has me curious. That appeals business before a judgement (which puzzled me) pissed off the judge. He's got to show up tomorrow morning at 9:00 AM.
 
Last edited:
PatriotOne said:
Herr Sailingaway is deleting Gilberts non-cheerleader's posts now and banning those who don't support him. Who are you calling a troll Torch?
Click to expand...

Note the revised op taken from the forum guidelines section. The fact of having the lawsuit is not up for debate, and is out of the control of the forum. This thread is to see if it can be influenced or helped in a positive way. You may make an opposing thread, in hot topics or vent to just blow off steam, but note the comments about that in the first post above.
 
RonRules said:
This is the latest from Pacer:

08/08/2012 36 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants Republican National Committee amending First Amended Complaint, 12 ; filed by plaintiffs (rla) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/09/2012 37 Second EX PARTE APPLICATION to Expedite THE CASE CONSISTENT WITH 42 USC 1971(e) filed by PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/09/2012 38 OF SERVICE filed by PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen, re Second EX PARTE APPLICATION to Expedite THE CASE CONSISTENT WITH 42 USC 1971(e) 37 served on 08-09-2012. (Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/09/2012)

08/10/2012 39 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 8/6/2012 Item 11, Vol. I. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: DEBBIE GALE, phone number 714-558-8141 or EMAIL: [email protected]. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 8/31/2012. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/10/2012. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/8/2012. (Gale, Debbie) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/10/2012 40 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 8/6/2012 Item 11, Vol. I re Transcript 39 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY.(Gale, Debbie) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/10/2012 41 TRANSCRIPT ORDER for date of proceedings 08/06/2012 to 08/06/2012 as to PLAINTIFF Alaska Delegate Barbara Andersen Court Reporter Jane Sutton Rule. Court will contact Richard C. Gilbert at [email protected] with any questions regarding this order. Transcript portion requested: Opening Statement by Plaintiff on 08/06/2012. Opening Statement by Defendant on 08/06/2012. Closing Argument by Plaintiff on 08/06/2012. Closing Argument by Defendant on 08/06/2012. Opinion of the Court on 08/06/2012. Other: 08/06/2012. Category: Daily. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the court reporter/recorder. (Gilbert, Richard) (Entered: 08/10/2012)

08/13/2012 42 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 08/06/2012. Court Reporter: Jane Sutton Rule, phone number (714)558-7755, [email protected]. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 9/3/2012. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/13/2012. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/11/2012. (Sutton, Jane) (Entered: 08/13/2012)

08/20/2012 43 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THISCOURT SHOULD NOT CONSTRUE PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF APPEAL AS A DESIRE TO STAND UPON THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. Thus, this Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to SHOW CAUSE why this Court should not construe Plaintiffs notice of appeal as a desire to stand upon the First Amended Complaint and treat the August 7, 2012, Order as a final judgment divesting this Court of jurisdiction. See Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that plaintiff who filed an Election to Stand Upon the Sufficiency of AmendedComplaint Pleadings made a reasonable choice to expedite the rest of the case and test her belief that the... claim was adequately pled). Plaintiffs shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause by 9 a.m. on August 21, 2012. If Plaintiffs fail to file a Response or file a Response that fails to clearly indicate whether they are appealing or not, this Court will strike Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint and issue a final judgment dismissing Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint with prejudice and for the reasons stated in the Courts August 7, 2012, Order. (twdb) (Entered: 08/20/2012)

The last item has me curious.
Click to expand...

it was with leave to amend so seems to me the cause is to keep this part alive as well. I wasn't thrilled to see the appeal. I wonder if the other side knew this was coming, since they didn't file a motion to dismiss.
 
Here is what has happened on the Court docket on the Pacer System:

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS COURT SHOULD NOT CONSTRUE PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF APPEAL AS A DESIRE TO STAND UPON THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. Thus, this Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to SHOW CAUSE why this Court should not construe Plaintiffs notice of appeal as a desire to stand upon the First Amended Complaint and treat the August 7, 2012, Order as a final judgment divesting this Court of jurisdiction. See Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that plaintiff who filed an Election to Stand Upon the Sufficiency of AmendedComplaint Pleadings made a reasonable choice to expedite the rest of the case and test her belief that the... claim was adequately pled). Plaintiffs shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause by 9 a.m. on August 21, 2012. If Plaintiffs fail to file a Response or file a Response that fails to clearly indicate whether they are appealing or not, this Court will strike Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint and issue a final judgment dismissing Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint with prejudice and for the reasons stated in the Courts August 7, 2012, Order. (twdb) (Entered: 08/20/2012)

An order to show cause is a last chance before the court takes action. Essentially, the Judge believes Gilbert's pleading was non-responsive and is preparing to strike the case. If so, it will be up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. But, they will be looking at the version that the trial court previously struck (because the new version has not been accepted by the trial court). Appeals are tough and usually take a few months. A faster process is sometimes possible but is difficult because it is at the Court's discretion.

FYI: There is no deadline to file a motion to dismiss by today. Those must be filed before filing a responsive answer which is 30 days after a complaint (or amended complaint ) is filed -- unless the court specifies otherwise. Also, in federal court, one can file until midnight and still be timely.


P.S. I know some are suspicious of me and my motives. But, nothing I have ever posted has been inaccurate or misleading.
 
Last edited:
it has indeed been misleading. I don't know if it has been inaccurate.

The judge doesn't appear to be saying that it is non responsive but that he may view the appeal of the part of the judgment as divesting the lower court of jurisdiction by appealing a final judgment. It could only have been final as to parts the court said it was final to though, not as to parts the court said could be restated.

What I don't like is the dismissal 'with prejudice', which is why we wanted to insert our fraud facts if poss as responsive to their expected motion to strike.

However, I need to look at that case.
 
Last edited:
Note the revised op taken from the forum guidelines section. The fact of having the lawsuit is not up for debate, and is out of the control of the forum. This thread is to see if it can be influenced or helped in a positive way. You may make an opposing thread, in hot topics or vent to just blow off steam, but note the comments about that in the first post above.
Click to expand...

When those annoying little brats were not posting, actual discussion were taking place, I e-mailed the thread to loads of Law Faculties, but none of them seem to have given a shit, and if anyone did bother sticking their nose in, then all they will see is Lawdida hijacking this. What is being done for this thread is 2 objectives , one is helping the case and the other is to document for historical purposes.

Lawdida you MADE YOU POINT VERY FUCKING CLEAR!!!!! you do not support the case. WE ALL GET IT.

I personally think this has legs and after TAMPA if things don't work out with Gilbert we'll chipin for another lawyer (hopefully foreigners will FINALLY BE ABLE TO GIVE SOME FREAKING MONEY TO SOMETHING LOL, NOT THAT i HAVE MUCH but it would be cool to sacrifice some beers for Ron Paul). I also thought of a Liberty Lawyers type association. YAL has proven very successful and it would be so awesome to have a Liberty Lawyers Association. If this gets off the ground then poeple will be very wary of fcking with us. This association can deal with all constitutional matters and political type matters.
 
As most of us non-lawyers intuitively thought:

"Because Plaintiffs filed both an amended complaint and a notice of appeal, this
Court can not discern whether Plaintiffs wish to: (1) treat the August 7, 2012, Order as a
final judgment divesting this Court of jurisdiction; or (2) continue to litigate in this Court.
The one thing that is certain is that Plaintiffs can not do both. Plaintiffs “cannot pursue
an appeal from the Court’s order and simultaneously treat this matter as ongoing by filing
[a] second amended complaint.” Ingram v. Warden, CIV.A. 10-4151 NLH, 2011 WL
318300, *1 (D.N.J. Jan. 24, 2011). Plaintiffs “cannot ‘hedge [their] bets’ by hoping that
either continuing proceedings before this Court or . . . before the Court of Appeals [will]
yield a favorable result; rather, [Plaintiffs are] obligated to make an exclusive election.”
Id."
 
RonRules said:
As most of us non-lawyers intuitively thought:

"Because Plaintiffs filed both an amended complaint and a notice of appeal, this
Court can not discern whether Plaintiffs wish to: (1) treat the August 7, 2012, Order as a
final judgment divesting this Court of jurisdiction; or (2) continue to litigate in this Court.
The one thing that is certain is that Plaintiffs can not do both. Plaintiffs “cannot pursue
an appeal from the Court’s order and simultaneously treat this matter as ongoing by filing
[a] second amended complaint.” Ingram v. Warden, CIV.A. 10-4151 NLH, 2011 WL
318300, *1 (D.N.J. Jan. 24, 2011). Plaintiffs “cannot ‘hedge [their] bets’ by hoping that
either continuing proceedings before this Court or . . . before the Court of Appeals [will]
yield a favorable result; rather, [Plaintiffs are] obligated to make an exclusive election.”
Id."
Click to expand...


this strategy does not appear to be filled with win.
 
sailingaway said:
Note the revised op taken from the forum guidelines section. The fact of having the lawsuit is not up for debate, and is out of the control of the forum. This thread is to see if it can be influenced or helped in a positive way. You may make an opposing thread, in hot topics or vent to just blow off steam, but note the comments about that in the first post above.
Click to expand...

Did you put that there? And yeah...I got something to say about that because it does not support your hijacking this thread and making it your own at all.

But we can discuss that after the latest Gilbert idiocy has been dissected :rolleyes:.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ronpaulhawaii
Ron Paul BBQ team looking to expand event size
Replies
6
Views
150
ronpaulhawaii
ronpaulhawaii
Occam's Banana
The lessons of Ron Paul
Replies
12
Views
397
acptulsa
acptulsa
PAF
The 9/11 Attacks Exposed Major Government Failure, But Americans Learned the Wrong Lessons
Replies
0
Views
69
PAF
PAF
PAF
Pentagon Demands Journalists Sign Pledge Not To Gather Certain Information
Replies
2
Views
224
PAF
PAF
Occam's Banana
NY - judge strikes down the "vampire rule" [FPC lawsuit]
Replies
0
Views
418
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top