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
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
NY 2012-04-11 Strunk v NYBOE Et Al Decision and Order

NY 2012-04-11 Strunk v NYBOE Et Al Decision and Order

Ratings: (0)|Views: 65,253 |Likes:
Published by Doctor Conspiracy
Decision and order in the case of Christopher Earl Strunk v. New York Board of Elections and many others.
Decision and order in the case of Christopher Earl Strunk v. New York Board of Elections and many others.

More info:

Published by: Doctor Conspiracy on May 04, 2012
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

09/20/2013

pdf

text

original

 
PRESENT:
oM.~".S~C\(J.S.C
HON. ARTHUR
SCHA~(,
Justice.CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNI(,
in esse
Plaintiff,-against-
NEW
YORI( STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS;JAMES
A.
W ALSH/Co-Chair, DOUGLAS A.I(ELLNERICo-Chair, EVELYN
J.
AQUILAICOlnlnissioner, GREGORY
P.
PETERSONI
COlnlnissioner, Deputy Director TODD D.VALENTINE, Deputy Director STANLY ZALEN;ANDREW CUOMO, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN,THOMAS
P.
DINAPOLI, RUTH NOEMI COLON,in their Official and individual capacity, Fr. JOSEPH
A.
O'HARE,
SJ.;
Fr. JOSEPH
P.
PARKES,
S.l;
FREDERICK A.
O.
SCHWARZ, JR.; PETER
G.
PETERSEN; ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI;MARI( BRZEZINSKI; JOSEPH
R.
BIDEN, JR.;SOEBARKAH (a.k.a Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. BarackHussein Obatna, a.k.a Steve Dunhatn); NANCYPELOSI; DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE OFTHE STATE OF
NEW
YORK; STATE COMMITTEE
OF
THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF
NEW
-1-
At an lAS Term, Part
27
ofthe Suprelne Court
of
theState
of
New York, held
in
and for the County
of
Kings, at the Courthouse,at Civic Center, Brooklyn,New York, on the
11
th day
of
April 2012
DECISION
&
ORDER
Index No.
6500/11
 
YORK STATE;
ROGER
CALERO; THE SOCIALISTWORI(ERS PARTY; IAN
1.
BRZEZINSKI; JOHNSIDNEY MCCAIN III; JOHN A. BOEHNER; THE
NEW
YORK STATE REPUBLICAN STATECOMMITTEE; THE
NEW
YORK STATECOMMITTEE OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY;STATE COMMITTEE OF THE CONSERVATIVEPARTY
OF
NEW YORI( STATE; PENNY
S.
PRITZKER; GEORGE SOROS;
OBAMA FORAMERICA; OBAMA
VICTORY
FUND;
MCCAIN
VICTORY 2008;
MCCAIN-PALIN
VICTORY 2008;
JOHN AND JANE DOES; and XYZ ENTITIES.Defendants.The following papers nUlnbered 1 to
25
read on this motion:Notice
of
Motion and Notice
of
Cross-Motion andand Affidavits (Affinnations )
__________
Opposing Affidavits (Affinnations)
________
Reply Affidavits (Affinnations)
_________
Papers NUlnbered:
1 -
13
14
-
21
22 -
25
If
the cOlnplaint in this action was a Inovie script, it would be entitled
TheManchurian Candidate Meets The
Da
Vinci Code. Pro
se
plaintiff CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK brings this action against nUlnerous defendants, including PresidentBARACK OBAMA, Vice President JOSEPH BIDEN, Senator JOHN MCCAIN, Speaker
of
the House
of
Representatives JOHN BOEHNER, fonner House
of
RepresentativesSpeaker NANCY PELOSI, Governor ANDREW CUOMO, Attorney General ERIC
-2-
 
SCHNEIDERMAN, COInptroller THOMAS DI NAPOLI, the
NEW
YORK STATEBOARD OF ELECTIONS, billionaires PETER PETERSEN, PENNY PRITZKER,GEORGE SOROS and six
New
York State political parties. Thirteen Inotions arepending before the Court.Plaintiff STRUNK's cOinplaint
is
a rmnbling, forty-five page variation on "birther"cases, containing 150 prolix paragraphs, in
at
tiInes a stremn
of
consciousness. Plaintiffscentral allegation
is
that defendants President OBAMA and Senator McCAIN, despite notbeing "natural born" citizens
of
the United States according to
plaintiffs
interpretation
of
Article II, Section
1,
Clause 5
of
the
U.
S.
Constitution, engaged with the assistance
of
other defendants in an extensive conspiracy, on behalf
of
the ROlnan Catholic Church todefraud the Ainerican people and usurp control
of
the Presidency in 2008. Most
of
plaintiff
STRUNK's
cOinplaint is a lengthy, vitriolic, baseless diatribe against defendants,but Inost especially against the Vatican, the Roman Catholic Church, and particularly theSociety
of
Jesus (the Jesuit Order).Plaintiff STRUNK alleges seven causes
of
action: breach
of
state constitutionalfiduciary duty by the
NEW
YORI( STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS and public officerdefendants; denial
of
equal protection for voter expectation
of
a correct ballot; denial
of
substantive due process for voter expectation
of
a correct ballot; interference with theright to a republican fonn
of
governinent by the two Jesuit defendants and defendantF.A.O. SCHWARZ, JR., who were all melnbers
of
the
New
York City Cmnpaign Finance
-3-

Activity (1)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

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