Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
In 2012-06-12 - TAITZ - Eyewitness Report of Hearing by a Legal Lohengrin

In 2012-06-12 - TAITZ - Eyewitness Report of Hearing by a Legal Lohengrin

|Views: 37|Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Jack Ryan on Jun 13, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


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





REPORT OF THE HEARING HELD JUNE 12, 2012IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MARION COUNTY INDIANATaitz, et al. v Indiana Board of Elections, et al.by
A Legal Lohengrin
» Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:30 pmI arrived and sat down at 1:19. Before entering the courtroom, I went into the judge'soffice and asked her assistant whether it would be permissible to take notes on my laptopor whether sticking to pen and paper would be more appropriate. She suggested it wouldbe on the safer side not to use the laptop, and I agreed. She thanked me for asking.Whatever the rules are, I find it is generally better to go with the judge's preferences, soam not even sure as to the actual rule, if any.Orly and her clients were already in the room. Orly was having people mess with theaudiovisual equipment, including setting up a display easel, presumably for Orly'senlarged exhibits. None of this equipment was ever used in the hearing.None of Orly's witnesses were present. In fact, they were never permitted to testify. Theonly witness present was Charlie White, ex-Secretary of State, whose legal travails havebeen previously discussed. He was accompanied by counsel. Neither made a formalappearance. The rest of the crew were present: Karl Swihart, Edward Kesler, and Frank Weyl. Additionally, Bob Kern was present, who is the person in the audience who had anoutburst during the Indiana Election Commission, and who is since a part of the case.Orly wore the same "black lawyer suit" as always. Her hair looked like a rat's nest, asalways. Before the hearing, she was wearing glasses, but abandoned them during thehearing.Also present were attorneys Kate Shelby and Jefferson Garn, for the State, as well as oneor two support personnel who sat in the audience. Shelby appeared to be first chair, butGarn would also make arguments directly to the court. Unlike some judges, Judge Reiddid not insist on being addressed only by one attorney.I think Orly made me pretty early on, as she turned around to glare at me, where I wassitting directly behind her entourage. I managed not to stick my tongue out at her out of respect for the dignity of the court, not her.About on time at 1:30, the judge's assistant entered from the office and announced "Allrise." The judge entered and bade everyone sit. She is an unassuming woman with akindly demeanor, and was scrupulously polite during the hearing, despite beingrepeatedly startled by baffling outbursts of idiocy.The court then went to appearances, and unsurprisingly, Orly managed to screw up evenentering an appearance. She announced herself as plaintiff pro se, and then tried to go off 
on a tangent, but was politely and firmly directed that this was just entering appearancesand argument could wait. I won't note every time she did this, but she was continuallyattempting to start a sentence during other people's comments and arguments, but was soregally ignored that she never got any of this off the ground.The court then took appearances from the other pro se plaintiffs.In preliminary matters, the court announced the hearing concerned the 3/23 petition fordeclaratory and injunctive relief and three defendant motions of 4/16, the objection toTaitz's appearance, the IEC's motion to dismiss, and the motion for sanctions, as well asOrly's motion for stay under the AOPA. Judge Reid explained that any motions receivedafter her order setting the hearing were not on the table today and would be addressed at afuture hearing. Considering the outcome, that seems unlikely, but with Orly, we can besure she'll do something else in this case.Orly started with an absurd argument that she never received a written order setting theseother matters for hearing, and that it was a violation of her due process rights to moveforward on anything other than her own injunction hearing. Judge Reid pointed out againthat Orly was pro se and not representing anyone else, and that therefore, the otherpetitioners would have to address the matter individually. They could not represent eachother nor could Orly represent them. This was how the rest of the hearing was conducted,although to some extent, it was a charade, as by the end of the hearing, Judge Reid wasmerely asking whether any of the petitioners had anything to add.Notably, and this only becomes amusing later, Orly also complained of receiving anunsigned proposed order from the AG's office. She also uttered another incoherent bunchof words with "unintelligible" somewhere in it, an example of irony if I have ever seenone.This is why the petitioners each individually made essentially the same argument, thatamounted to little more than a ditto of Orly's nonsense.Attorney Shelby at this point raised the issue that in fact, the order served on Orly and allparties was explicit that "all pending motions" were the topic of today's hearing. AttorneyShelby also mentioned that Orly had filed a motion for sanctions against at least Garn. Ihave not confirmed whether Shelby was also the subject of this motion and didn't hearthis bit clearly. In any event, the date was 6/15, after the date the hearing was set. JudgeReid confirms that none of these late-filed motions are the subject of today's hearing.Judge Reid then moves on to some preliminary "housekeeping" matters. The first of theseconcerns a voluminous stack of papers. It was at a distance from me, so I could notpersonally ascertain its size, but the judge later explicitly stated it was an inch and a half high. I will take her at her word. She stated that this stack of papers consisted of duplicative filings by Orly that the court already had, by Orly and her petitioners. Sternly,she stated that the court does not have the "space or luxury" to accommodate endlesscopies of the same thing. She cited the local rules, stated that attorneys and pro se parties
have the obligation to know the local rules, and to follow them. She then conveys Orly'spile of garbage back to her.I will note that while the judge explicitly directed her admonitions to both sides, whilenoting that petitioners were the primary malefactors, the only parties handed back piles of worthless paper were Orly and her "plaintiffs."The next matter also concerned a pile of Orly's poopies. Judge Reid was even less happywith this irregularly-shaped pile of whatever held together with rubber bands. In fact, shestates that these documents, received from Orly and the parties, has been labeled"Mystery," as it is neither exhibits nor evidence, and in fact, the court has no idea what itis. Judge Reid issues another stern admonition that discovery is not to be filed with thecourt except pursuant to trial rules, reminding everyone again that attorneys and pro selitigants alike are required to follow the court rules. She then hands Orly back her secondpile of garbage.Judge Reid then moves on to another matter. She is (rightly) irritated that parties havebeen submitting motions without proposed orders attached. Even more, parties have beensubmitting papers, against the rules, not only without proposed orders but without pre-addressed envelopes with correct postage applied. Again, Judge Reid directs heradmonition to both sides, but again, it is only Orly who appears to have failed utterly toobey the local rules. In fact, one of Orly's screeches, as noted earlier, was complainingabout having received a proposed order from the AG's office.Judge Reid elaborates on this rule, noting that it is over 25 years old, again noting thatpro se plaintiffs as well as attorneys are obligated to follow the rules. She notes that noneof the filings of Orly or her FMs has complied with this rule. "That will stop." Shecontinues, stating that noncompliant filings will not be accepted.Judge Reid's next housekeeping matter is the receipt of duplicative pleadings, basicallyby Orly and her FMs. She notes that FMs have walked in to her office and deliveredpapers, and that then, the next day, the same papers show up by FedEx or other means.She explains that this results in clerks having to perform unnecessary work, and that inprocessing the paperwork, they create docket entries that are basically meaningless andconfusing, and that this practice must end. Similarly "extraneous" documents are useless.Again, the judge renews her demand that these parties adhere to the rules. Needless tosay, this is the cry of a judge who has been flooded with endless piles of garbage frompaper terrorists.Orly attempts to go into a screech about disappearing subpoenas and similar Orly wordsalad. This is shut down nearly immediately. Judge Reid's facial expression is that of aperson who just bit into a ripe persimmon.She demands, at some time, that Orly, as well as her supposedly fellow pro se plaintiffs,admit they agree to comply by the local rules and that their noncompliant filings will not

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
silverbull8 liked this
Jack Ryan liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

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