Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
7Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Taitz Fined $20,000

Taitz Fined $20,000

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,391 |Likes:
Published by tpmdocs

More info:

Published by: tpmdocs on Oct 13, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/30/2013

pdf

text

original

 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIACOLUMBUS DIVISIONCONNIE RHODES,Plaintiff,vs.THOMAS D. MACDONALD, Colonel,Garrison Commander, FortBenning;
et al.
,Defendants.******CASE NO. 4:09-CV-106 (CDL)O R D E RINTRODUCTIONCommenting on the special privilege granted to lawyers and thecorresponding duty imposed upon them, Justice Cardozo once observed:Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened withconditions. [A lawyer is] received into that ancientfellowship for something more than private gain. He[becomes] an officer of the court, and, like the courtitself, an instrument or agency to advance the ends ofjustice.
People ex rel. Karlin v. Culkin,
162 N.E. 487, 489 (N.Y. 1928)(Cardozo, J., writing as Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appealsbefore his appointment to the United States Supreme Court) (internalquotation marks omitted). Competent and ethical lawyers “areessential to the primary governmental function of administeringjustice.”
Goldfarb v. Va. State Bar 
, 421 U.S. 773, 792 (1975). Forjustice to be administered efficiently and justly, lawyers mustunderstand the conditions that govern their privilege to practice law.Lawyers who do not understand those conditions are at best woefullyunprepared to practice the profession and at worst a menace to it.
 
2When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonablebasis for believing that they are supported by existing law or amodification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses herprivilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as aplatform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legalcause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law.When a lawyer personally attacks opposing parties and disrespects theintegrity of the judiciary, that lawyer abuses her privilege topractice law. When a lawyer recklessly accuses a judge of violatingthe Judicial Code of Conduct with no supporting evidence beyond herdissatisfaction with the judge’s rulings, that lawyer abuses herprivilege to practice law. When a lawyer abuses her privilege topractice law, that lawyer ceases to advance her cause or the ends ofjustice.It is irrefutable that a lawyer owes her client zealous advocacy,but her zeal must be constrained within the bounds placed upon her asan officer of the Court and under the Court’s rules.
See e.g., PolkCounty v. Dodson
, 454 U.S. 312, 323 (1981) (though a lawyer “has aduty to advance all colorable claims and defenses . . . [i]t is theobligation of any lawyer . . . not to clog the courts with frivolousmotions or appeals”). Specifically, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure expressly sets forth the outer boundaries ofacceptable attorney conduct. That rule prohibits a lawyer fromasserting claims or legal positions that are not well-founded underexisting law or through the modification, extension, or expansion of
 
1
The Court does not take this action lightly, and in fact, cannotrecall having previously imposed monetary sanctions upon an attorney
suasponte.
3existing law. Rule 11 also prohibits an attorney from using thecourts for a purpose unrelated to the resolution of a legitimate legalcause of action.
Cf., e.g., Donaldson v. Clark
, 819 F.2d 1551, 1558-59 (11th Cir. 1987) (en banc) (noting that members of the bar have a“special administrative responsibility in the judicial process” andthat monetary sanctions may be imposed for “an unjustified failure tocarry out” this special responsibility (internal quotation marksomitted)).Regrettably, the conduct of counsel Orly Taitz has crossed theselines, and Ms. Taitz must be sanctioned for her misconduct. After afull review of the sanctionable conduct, counsel’s conduct leading upto that conduct, and counsel’s response to the Court’s show causeorder, the Court finds that a monetary penalty of $20,000.00 shall beimposed upon counsel Orly Taitz as punishment for her misconduct, asa deterrent to prevent future misconduct, and to protect the integrityof the Court. Payment shall be made to the United States, through theMiddle District of Georgia Clerk’s Office, within thirty days oftoday’s Order. If counsel fails to pay the sanction due, the U.S.Attorney will be authorized to commence collection proceedings.
1

Activity (7)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
Patrick J. Colliano added this note
The court could not rule on Obama's eligibility, even if it wanted to.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Jerome Corsi liked this
Jerome Corsi liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->