SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER DEPARTMENT C-33

DR. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ.,

HONORABLE GEOFFREY T. GLASS, JUDGE PRESIDING REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT

Fr ien

ds of P
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT:

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

oli
JULY 1, 2010 DR. ORLY TAITZ ATTORNEY AT LAW

BELL MC ANDREWS & HILTACHK BY: BRIAN T. HILDRETH SPECIAL APPEARANCE (BY TELEPHONE)

tija

) ) PLAINTIFF, ) ) CASE NO. 30-2010 ) 00381664 VS. ) ) DAMON DUNN AND DOES 1 THROUGH 18, ) ) DEFENDANTS, ) ____________________________________)

b.c om

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA - THURSDAY, JULY 1, 2010 MORNING SESSION -O0O-

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HAD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: MS. TAITZ: TAITZ. TAITZ VERSUS DUNN. YES.

I AM THE PLAINTIFF IN THIS CASE.

MR. HILDRETH:

YOUR HONOR, THIS IS BRIAN HILDRETH.

tija

GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.

REPRESENT MR. DUNN, AND I AM SPECIALLY APPEARING TODAY. I APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO APPEAR VIA COURT CALL. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

oli

YOU ARE SPECIALLY APPEARING?

UNDERSTAND AN ANSWER -- MR. DUNN HAS FILED AN ANSWER? MR. HILDRETH: WE DID FILE AN ANSWER TO THE ELECTION

Fr ien

26

ds of P
CONTEST. THE COURT: MR. HILDRETH: OKAY. FOR -- FOR THIS ACTION. YESTERDAY, 11:23 A.M. THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME. THE COURT:

HOWEVER, JUST BASED ON WHAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR

TODAY, WE'RE A LITTLE UNCLEAR IF THIS IS A NEW ACTION OR RELATED TO THE ELECTIONS CONTEST. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE SAME CASE NUMBER. I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER REASON TO

SPECIALLY APPEAR WOULD BE THAT THERE WAS INADEQUATE NOTICE WE DIDN'T RECEIVE NOTICE UNTIL

YEAH, YESTERDAY, 11:23, WHICH IS NOT

THE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE THAT YOU FILED,

MS. TAITZ, SAYS THAT YOU SENT NOTICE ON JUNE 30 BY E-MAIL. BUT BECAUSE OF THE TIMEFRAME, WE REQUIRE NOTICE BY NINE CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
2 I AM ORLY I AND I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

O'CLOCK. E-MAIL.

SO I HAVE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHEN YOU SENT THE

MS. TAITZ:

ACTUALLY, ONLY I SENT AN E-MAIL.

MR. HILDRETH'S OFFICE THE DAY BEFORE ON TUESDAY -THE COURT: IT BY E-MAIL.

YOUR CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE SAYS YOU SENT

IF YOU DID IT IN SOME OTHER FASHION, I WOULD

TESTIMONY ABOUT THAT.

I AM NOT HERE TO GET ANY TESTIMONY. IT IS ALL IN THE

THIS IS AN EX PARTE HEARING. PAPERS.

YOU HAVE TO SWEAR UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT YOU

GAVE THEM NOTICE AND TO DO IT BY WAY OF DECLARATION. ALL IN THE RULES, THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT. EXPECT YOU TO FOLLOW THEM.

oli

tija
BUT I -- I HAVE GOT A

EXPECT THAT IN A DECLARATION FROM YOU.

ds of P
ISSUES THAT WE CAN RESOLVE. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. ME A DECLARATION. JULY 1ST. PHONE. EXPECT.

SO THAT -- THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH REGARD TO THAT.

LET'S -- LET'S HOLD OFF ON THAT TO SEE IF THERE ARE OTHER

WHAT I EXPECT IS COMPLIANCE WITH

THE RULES THAT SAY, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE NOTICE, YOU GIVE

I CALLED THEM ON JUNE 29.

I TALKED TO SO AND SO.

I TOLD THEM I WAS GOING TO BE HERE AT NINE O'CLOCK ON THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO TRY TO APPEAR BY THAT'S WHAT I

Fr ien

OR THEY SAID WHATEVER THEY SAID.

WHAT I GOT WAS THAT YOU SENT A TRUE AND CORRECT

25

COPY SOMETIME YESTERDAY BY E-MAIL. AND HE IS SAYING THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENT. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR AND I

26

b.c om
3 I CALLED I CAN'T ACCEPT YOUR THAT'S AND I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

WOULD HAVE TO AGREE. IS NOTICE. MS. TAITZ:

THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO SHOW THERE

THAT'S OKAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEYS HAVE FILED AN ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT. THE COURT: INTERRUPT YOU. BUT -- I AM SORRY.

I DON'T MEAN TO

SUFFICIENT TO MAKE THEM COME IN HERE TODAY FOR -- TO HEAR THIS MOTION. MR. HILDRETH:

YOUR HONOR, I WILL SAY ALSO THAT THIS IS

THE THIRD ATTEMPT THAT PLAINTIFF HAS MADE IN AN EX PARTE APPLICATION. THURSDAY. ONE HAPPENED ON JUNE 24, WHICH WAS LAST AND

ANOTHER HAPPENED ON THIS MONDAY, THE 28TH.

ds of P
MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: MR. HILDRETH: THE COURT: NOTICE FOR ANY OTHER ACTIONS. SAY TO MS. TAITZ -MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: SPEAKING.

WE DIDN'T RECEIVE NOTICE OF EITHER OF THOSE. THEY WEREN'T THE ATTORNEYS ON THE CASE.

MR. HILDRETH IS NOT BEING HONEST. HOLD ON A SECOND. MR. HILDRETH?

YES, YOUR HONOR.

I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER YOU GOT ALL RIGHT? THAT -- EITHER BUT I DO WANT TO

YOU GOT NOTICE ON THIS ONE OR YOU DIDN'T.

Fr ien

23

MY UNDERSTANDING WAS -I'M SORRY, MS. TAITZ. I WASN'T FINISHED

24 25 26

I WANTED TO TELL YOU, MS. TAITZ, THE RULES

REGARDING EX PARTE APPLICATION ARE RULE 3.1200 AND THROUGH CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

BUT FILING AN ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT IS NOT

b.c om
4 YOU'RE RIGHT.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

3.1207.

COUNSEL HAS SAID AND MR. HILDRETH HAS SAID THAT

3.-- WELL, THAT THERE HAS BEEN A PREVIOUS APPLICATION.

RULE 3.1202 SAYS IF AN EX PARTE APPLICATION HAS

BEEN REFUSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, ANY SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION OF THE SAME CHARACTER OR FOR THE SAME RELIEF, ALTHOUGH MADE UPON AN ALLEGED DIFFERENT STATE OF FACTS, MUST INCLUDE A

COURT DID IN THAT CASE.

SO I AM JUST IDENTIFYING ISSUES AT THIS POINT. AM NOT RESOLVING ANYTHING. BUT MR. HILDRETH SAID YOU'VE

tija
IT ISN'T ME.

FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS AND WHAT THE

MADE TWO OTHER APPLICATIONS -MS. TAITZ: THE COURT:

MAY I RESPOND? I'M SORRY.

ds of P
OTHER APPLICATIONS. THEM AND DISCLOSE THEM. IT IS IN THE RULES. RULES SAY. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. ALL RIGHT.

RELIEF YOU'RE ASKING HERE, YOU HAVE TO, BY RULE, IDENTIFY

SO I NEED THAT IN YOUR PAPERS AS WELL.

oli

MR. HILDRETH SAID YOU MADE TWO

IF YOU HAVE AND ASKED FOR THE SAME

NEED TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE ASKED ANOTHER COURT FOR THE SAME RELIEF, EVEN IF THE COURT SAID I AM NOT -- I DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION TO DO IT, I AM TRANSFERRING IT. IF YOU SET --

IF YOU HAVE SET ANOTHER EX PARTE MOTION TO ASK FOR THE SAME THING, YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT TO ME IN THE PAPERWORK. IT IS WHAT THE

Fr ien

MAY I RESPOND, YOUR HONOR?

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
5 I BECAUSE I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

MS. TAITZ:

MR. HILDRETH IS STATING THAT I MADE PRIOR

EX PARTE APPLICATIONS AND THEY DID NOT GET PROPER NOTICE. IN REALITY, THEY WEREN'T ATTORNEYS ON THE RECORD. SO I

COULD NOT NOTICE THEM BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ATTORNEYS ON THE RECORD.

MR. DUNN HAS NOT HIRED MR. HILDRETH UNTIL MONDAY.

THEY NEVER SENT THEIR ANSWER TO ME.

tija

AND, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY NEVER SENT ME ANY NOTICE, OR I NEVER RECEIVED IT.

WENT TO COURT ON TUESDAY JUST BECAUSE I FOUND ON THE INTERNET THEIR ANSWER, THE ANSWER WAS FILED. GOT THE ANSWER. BUT I NEVER

I WAS TOLD THAT THEIR MESSENGER APPEARED IN LAGUNA HILLS COURTROOM MONDAY AT FOUR O'CLOCK AND WERE TOLD THE CASE WAS TRANSFERRED HERE. THIS DIVISION. SO THEY FILED IT IN THIS -- IN

15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

ds of P
ANSWER FILED HERE. PHONE NUMBER. CALL ME ASAP. TUESDAY. I CALLED. THEY NEVER CALLED ME.

HOWEVER, THEY DID NOT SERVE ME, NOT BY MAIL,

NOT BY FEDERAL EXPRESS, NOT BY ANY OTHER MEANS. I CAME TO THIS DIVISION, AND I -- I SPENT THE

WHOLE DAY ON TUESDAY TRYING TO FIND THEIR ANSWER BECAUSE THEY DID NOT SERVE ME WITH THEIR ANSWER. THERE WAS NO

SO I ACTUALLY CALLED ANOTHER PLAINTIFF

WHO FILED ANOTHER LAWSUIT AGAINST MR. DUNN TO GET THEIR

Fr ien

AND I CALLED THEIR LAW FIRM AND STATED ARE YOU, BY PLEASE

24 25 26

CHANCE, REPRESENTING MR. DUNN IN THIS CASE AS WELL?

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

I TALKED TO THEIR SECRETARY ON AN E-MAIL CAME FROM THEM

b.c om
6 I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

FROM SOMEBODY BY THE NAME OF DIAZ.

I HAVE A HUNDRED THOUSAND E-MAILS IN MY BOX.

CHANCE, I OPENED THIS E-MAIL FROM SOMEBODY BY THE NAME DIAZ, AND IT HAPPENED TO BE FROM MR. HILDRETH. EVEN KNOWN THAT IT WAS FROM THEM. CONDUCT BUSINESS. THE COURT: OKAY. I WOULDN'T HAVE

THAT IS NOT THE WAY TO

OUT WHO REPRESENTS MR. DUNN.

WHY THEY HAVEN'T FILED AN ANSWER. FILED AN EX PARTE MOTION.

NOW, I DON'T NEED TO HEAR ABOUT ALL OF THAT STUFF. I WILL -- I DID NOTE IN WHAT YOU JUST TOLD ME THAT YOU'RE SAYING YOU GOT A NOTE -- AN E-MAIL FROM HILDRETH, BUT YOU DIDN'T -- YOU ALMOST DIDN'T OPEN IT BECAUSE YOU GET SO MANY YET YOUR CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE SAYS

ds of P
THOUSANDS OF E-MAILS. YOU E-MAILED IT TO THEM. THE SAME RIGHT. TO ASSUME YOU OPENED IT. TO HOW YOU MADE SERVICE. YOU WERE BRINGING THE EX PARTE. 10:31 IN THE MORNING.

NOW, I ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU E-MAILED IT TO THEM, I THINK THEY GOT

THAT YOU ASSUMED THAT THEY WOULD OPEN IT.

IF THEY SEND YOU SOMETHING, THEY'RE GOING NOW, THAT MAY NOT BE TRUE.

BUT THAT IS WHY I NEED A DECLARATION FROM YOU AS YOU CALLED THEM UP. YOU TOLD THEM

Fr ien

THE EX PARTE OR WHATEVER YOU E-MAILED THE NEXT DAY.

oli

tija

MS. TAITZ, WE'RE NOT HERE TO FIGURE WE'RE NOT HERE TO FIGURE OUT WE'RE HERE BECAUSE YOU

YOU E-MAILED THE TEXT OF HE IS

25 26

SAYING HE DIDN'T GET THAT UNTIL 11:31 IN THE MORNING OR IT HAS TO BE BY NINE O'CLOCK.

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
7 BY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

I AM JUST IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES.

NOT ADDRESSED WHAT I ASKED YOU ABOUT, WHICH IS RULE 3.1202

SAYS IF YOU HAVE MADE AN APPLICATION TO SOME OTHER JUDGE FOR THE SAME RELIEF, OF THE SAME CHARACTER -- OR AN APPLICATION OF THE SAME CHARACTER, EVEN IF THIS IS ON COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FACTS, I NEED TO KNOW THAT.

THIS IS EX PARTE. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT:

THIS IS AN EMERGENCY --

I -I'M SORRY.

TALKING, I WON'T.

I WILL JUST RULE ON YOUR MOTION.

oli

tija

AND I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE COURT DID.

IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO FINISH DO YOU

WANT TO TALK, OR DO YOU WANT ME TO TALK? MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: I AM SORRY, YOUR HONOR. OKAY.

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

ds of P
IS IN THERE. IMPORTANT FOR THIS MOTION. YOU SAY "ESQ." MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: YES. THINK THEY DO.

IF YOU -- I JUST NEED TO KNOW HAVE AND IT SAYS IT

YOU MADE THE PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS OR NOT.

NOW, I WILL ALSO SAY I THINK YOU HAVE "ESQ" --

THIS IS A SIDE MATTER, NOT THAT -- MAYBE NOT -- NOT THAT BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THE BAR?

Fr ien

THE RULES REQUIRE THAT A MEMBER OF THE BAR

WHO SUBMITS PAPERS TO THE COURT PUT THEIR BAR NUMBER ON IT. THE REASON -- AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THE RULES. I DON'T KNOW BUT I

25 26

IF THEY APPLY TO ATTORNEYS REPRESENTING THEMSELVES.

BECAUSE THAT IS THE WAY THAT I WOULD REPORT

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
8 BUT YOU HAVE BECAUSE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

ANY ACTIVITIES OF A BAR MEMBER TO THE STATE BAR.

SO I AM JUST SAYING THAT I -- IF YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY, I NEED TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY. STATE BAR NUMBER IS THE WAY TO DO IT.

WITH REGARD TO PUTTING A STATE BAR NUMBER ON THERE.

BE THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO IF YOU'RE REPRESENTING YOURSELF.

THEY'RE AN ATTORNEY, THEY'RE STILL BOUND BY THE CODES OF ETHICS OF ATTORNEYS. SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THOSE RULES.

SO, MR. HILDRETH, YOU'RE SAYING WE GOT TO DO THIS TOMORROW, OR ARE YOU WILLING TO GO AHEAD TODAY? MR. HILDRETH: WE CAN GO FORWARD, YOUR HONOR. WE'RE

PREPARED TO DISCUSS THE MERITS. THE COURT:

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

ds of P
ELSE TOGETHER. ON YOUR COMPLAINT. PROCEDURE NUMBER 44.

ONE OF THE PROBLEMS, MS. TAITZ, WITH THE

NOTICE OF MOTION IS IT SAYS -- YOUR NOTICE OF MOTION SAYS THERE IS GOING TO BE AN EX PARTE HEARING, AND THEN YOU GIVE ME THE MOTION AND THE POINTS AND AUTHORITIES AND EVERYTHING

SO I AM NOT QUITE SURE.

WELL, YOUR PRAYER FOR RELIEF IS YOU WANT AN EXPEDITED TRIAL YOUR BASIS FOR THAT IS CODE OF CIVIL

Fr ien

YOU ALSO WANT TO PRESERVE THE STATUS QUO TO STAY

THE REGISTRATION OF VOTES BY THE COUNTY REGISTRAR PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE TRIAL, THAT IS, SO THEY DON'T REGISTER THE VOTES, AND ALSO ISSUE A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, NOT EVEN A CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

26

oli

tija

BUT IF -- IF SOMEBODY IS REPRESENTING THEMSELF AND

AS I UNDERSTAND IT --

b.c om
9 AND A LOOK AT THE RULES IT MAY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

DIRECTING THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS -- I ASSUME THAT'S THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY IN

YOUR PAPERS -- NOT TO CERTIFY THE VOTES IN THE ELECTION -IN THE PRIMARY ELECTION FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE. HAVE I GOT THAT RIGHT? MS. TAITZ:

IN PLURAL, MEANING ALL OF THE REGISTRARS. THE COURT: MS. TAITZ:

ALL OF THE REGISTRARS FOR ALL THE COUNTIES? I HAVE TO BECAUSE THIS IS AN ELECTION FOR

SECRETARY OF STATE AS -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR HONOR HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE ACTUAL COMPLAINT AND ALL THE EXHIBITS. BUT THIS IS A COMPLAINT FOR FRAUD COMMITTED BY

ds of P
THE COURT: I AM SORRY. YOU HAVE TO ANSWER MY QUESTION. YOU WANT CORRECTLY? MS. TAITZ: YES. TO ORANGE COUNTY REGISTRAR.

MR. DUNN IN HIS VOTER REGISTRATION AND NOMINATION -I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT. BUT

NOT ONLY ORANGE COUNTY REGISTRAR.

THE REGISTRARS BECAUSE I NEED TO SEND A COPY TO EVERY REGISTRAR, ALL OF THEM, NOW FINALIZING REGISTRATION AND CERTIFICATION OF VOTES IN THIS PRIMARY ELECTION. AND THEY NEED TO BE APPRISED OF THE FACT THAT AND BASED ON A

Fr ien

THERE IS AN ISSUE, A PENDING ISSUE.

PRECEDENT CASE OF MC KINNEY V. CITY OF SAN DIEGO WHERE A CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

THE ONLY -- THE ONLY ISSUE IS IT IS I MEAN, I CAN SEND FIRST

tija

WELL, MOSTLY I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN REGISTRARS AND I WILL --

HAVE I STATED WHAT RELIEF

BUT IT NEEDS -- I HAVE WRITTEN

b.c om
10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

SIMILAR STAY WAS ISSUED BY THE COURT OF APPEALS RIGHT HERE IN SANTA ANA IN A SIMILAR CASE OF ELECTIONS FRAUD, I AM

ASKING FOR A STAY OF CERTIFICATION OF VOTES FOR MR. DUNN AND STAY AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE MATTER AT TRIAL. THE COURT: CASE -MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: YES. ALL RIGHT.

OTHER THAN THE MC KINNEY

-- WHAT -- LET ME BACK UP A SECOND.

tija

NOT -- YOU DON'T INDICATE ANYWHERE THAT ANYBODY WON THE ELECTION. SO YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE AT THE PROCESS WHERE THE BUT BEFORE WE

ELECTION -- THE VOTES HAVE ALL BEEN CAST.

KNOW THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION, BEFORE THEY'RE OFFICIAL, YOU WANT ME TO STOP IT? MS. TAITZ:

ds of P
CERTIFICATION. THE COURT: IF THE CERTIFICATION IS YOU WIN? MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: NO. DO WE KNOW THAT? MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: HE HAS GOT MORE VOTES.

TO STAY THE CERTIFICATION, YES.

WELL, WHAT IF YOU WIN THE ELECTION?

oli

WELL, AS OF NOW, MR. DUNN HAS MORE VOTES. REGISTRAR HASN'T CERTIFIED THEM. HOW

Fr ien

I AM GOING BY THE SEMI-OFFICIAL RESULTS

POSTED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEBRA BOWEN. THAT IS NOT IN YOUR PAPERS, THAT YOU THINK I -- THE CLOSEST I SAW WAS IN YOUR

24 25 26

COMPLAINT, YOU GOT 440,000 VOTES. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
11 YOU'RE WHAT

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

MS. TAITZ: VOTES. THE COURT: DON'T KNOW.

WELL, NOW IT IS ABOUT A HALF A MILLION

OKAY.

WELL, THAT HAS CHANGED, THEN.

I DON'T KNOW.

WHAT IF THE REGISTRARS -- WHAT

IF, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY SAY YOU WIN? MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: NO, THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

I HOLD UP THE CERTIFICATION OR NOT? MS. TAITZ:

BECAUSE THE VOTES -- EVEN THOUGH MR. DUNN

GOT MORE VOTES, THOSE VOTES WERE OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF FRAUD -THE COURT:

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

Fr ien

ds of P
COUNT. TO AN OFFICE. GENERAL ELECTION. AN OFFICE. OFFICE. CERTIFICATION GO THROUGH? MS. TAITZ: I AM THE OPPONENT OF MR. DUNN. THE BALLOT AS A CANDIDATE.

LAWSUIT TO -- IN EITHER CASE, I HAVE TO SAY THE VOTES DIDN'T SO WHETHER THE -- BECAUSE HE IS NOT ACTUALLY ELECTED ALL HE IS ENTITLED TO DO IS RUN IN THE

SO I AM NOT -- IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF HIM GETTING IT IS HIM HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO RUN FOR AN

AND I AM NOT SURE WHAT CHANGES IF I LET THE

IF I MAY EXPLAIN, I AM THE CONTENDER OF -IF THE ELECTION IS

CERTIFIED, THEN I WILL BE PREVENTED FROM PUTTING MY NAME ON I CANNOT PUT MY STATEMENT. I

CANNOT PUT MY -- MY NAME WILL NOT BE ON THE BALLOT. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE TO YOUR

tija

WELL, THEN, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF

BUT I DON'T THINK YOU

b.c om
12 I AND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

THEREFORE, VOTERS -THE COURT: MS. TAITZ: I AM SORRY.

THEREFORE, VOTERS WILL WHAT?

WILL BE PREVENTED FROM VOTING IN GENERAL

ELECTION FOR A QUALIFIED CANDIDATE, WHICH WOULD BE ME. THE COURT: OKAY.

IF I GRANT YOUR RELIEF AND SAY TO

ALL THE REGISTRARS IN ALL THE COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA -- AND,

EVERY REGISTRAR EVERYWHERE. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: I WILL --

HOLD ON A SECOND.

THE REGISTRARS DO NOT COUNT THE VOTES IN THIS -- DO NOT CERTIFY THE VOTES IN THIS ELECTION, HOW WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO GO INTO THE GENERAL ELECTION? WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? THERE

ds of P
WOULD BE NO CANDIDATE, PERIOD. ELECTION IS SUSPENDED. CANDIDATE. NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE BALLOT. MS. TAITZ: BE ON THE BALLOT.

THERE IS NO WINNER FOR THE ELECTION.

oli

DECIDE -- UNTIL WE DECIDE WHETHER THE ELECTION -- WHETHER THE ELECTION -- THE VOTING SHOULD BE ANNULLED OR NOT. SO

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

YOUR BASIS FOR SAYING YOU WANT TO HOLD UP THE REGISTRATION IS SO THAT THE VOTERS KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE A BUT THAT WOULD NOT BE THE RELIEF. THE RELIEF IS

Fr ien

BY DEFAULT, AS YOU CAN UNDERSTAND, I WILL BUT INDEFINITELY, SOMEBODY WHO IS A

LIFE-LONG DEMOCRAT AND WHO GOT ON THE PRIMARY BALLOT BY FRAUD WILL NOT BE ON THAT BALLOT. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

tija

BY THE WAY, YOU WOULD HAVE TO TELL ME.

IF I WERE TO SAY TO ALL

BECAUSE THERE IS NO -- THE

b.c om
13 I CAN'T JUST SAY AND UNTIL WE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

THE COURT:

I AM SORRY.

MC KINNEY DOESN'T SAY THAT.

NEITHER DOES THE -MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: ACTUALLY --

THE LAW WITH REGARD TO THIS IS CLEAR.

IS WRONG IF I WERE TO SAY MR. DUNN -- THE VOTES FOR MR. DUNN DON'T COUNT. ELECTION. MR. HILDRETH: THE COURT: I DON'T GIVE THE ELECTION TO YOU. IT IS A NEW

YOUR HONOR, MAY I SAY SOMETHING HERE? HOLD ON A SECOND.

NO.

MR. HILDRETH: MS. TAITZ:

OKAY.

ACTUALLY, THE PRECEDING CASES OF GILMORE V.

JORDAN AND POWER V. JORDAN -- AND THOSE ARE THE CASES THAT I QUOTED -- SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THE COURT -- THE DISTRICT COURT WAS CORRECT IN INSTRUCTING THE REGISTRARS -- IN THAT CASE, IT WAS SAN FRANCISCO AND SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY -- NOT TO CERTIFY THE VOTES. MR. GILMORE. AND THAT WAS FOR MR. POWER AND

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

ds of P
THAT'S THE OPPOSITE. THE COURT: THAT'S 1934. CASE. IT IS A 2006 CASE. HAVE TO REMEMBER. CONNECTION WITH MC KINNEY. LATER.

CERTIFY THE VOTES BECAUSE FRAUD WAS COMMITTED.

oli

EXACTLY CASE ON POINT, AND THAT'S WHAT I AM ASKING. AND THAT RELIES ON AN OLDER

Fr ien

WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT -- AND YOU DIDN'T CITE IT. WELL, IT IS LATER THAN THAT. I WOULD

YOU DIDN'T CITE IT, BUT I FOUND IT IN I'LL HAVE TO FIND IT FOR YOU

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

tija

EXACTLY THEY WERE TOLD DON'T THAT IS

b.c om
14 IT

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

MS. TAITZ: THE COURT:

YOUR HONOR -HOLD ON A SECOND.

IT WAS THIS DISTRICT WHO

SAID YOU DON'T GIVE THE VOTE -- YOU DON'T GIVE THE ELECTION TO THE RUNNERS UP. WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE VOTING.

OF THE VOTING BEING CERTIFIED, HOLDING UP THE CERTIFICATION DOES NOT GIVE THE ELECTION TO THE RUNNER-UP. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: MS. TAITZ: MAY I RESPOND? YEAH.

YOUR HONOR, I AM NOT -- I DID NOT ASK IN MY I DID

PRAYER OF RELIEF FOR YOU TO CERTIFY ME AS A WINNER. NOT ASK YOU FOR THAT.

PRECEDENCE OF MC KINNEY WHERE RIGHT HERE ACROSS THE STREET, FOURTH -THE COURT:

ds of P
CASE. THAT. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: THAT? MS. TAITZ: GENERAL ELECTION.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT DID IT.

NOW, LET ME TELL YOU THIS, DR. TAITZ.

oli

ALL I ASKED IS FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE

THE VOTERS NEED TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE THE PROPER PARTY.

tija

RELIEF THAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING YOU JUST TOLD ME WILL NOT DO

MAY I CORRECT MYSELF, YOUR HONOR?

VOTERS NEED TO KNOW THAT MR. DUNN WAS NOT A PROPER PARTY, THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH HIS -- WITH HIS CERTIFICATION. WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE VOTERS NEED TO KNOW

Fr ien

BECAUSE THE VOTERS WILL BE VOTING IN I MEAN, IF THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, THEN

ANYBODY CAN COMMIT ANY FRAUD AND NOTHING WILL BE DONE. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
15 THE ISSUE I UNDERSTAND THE YOU TOLD ME THIS THE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

THE COURT:

NO.

NO.

NO.

YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.

HERE ON AN EMERGENCY, NOT TO GET IT CERTIFIED. QUESTION IS, WHY IS THERE AN EMERGENCY?

THE ELECTION CAN STILL BE ANNULLED BASED UPON FRAUD. WHAT THE CASES YOU CITED TOLD ME.

WHY DO I HAVE TO STOP THE CERTIFICATION?

THEY'RE COMMITTED -- WHETHER THEY'RE OBTAINED WITH FRAUD OR NOT, ARE X, Y AND Z, WHATEVER THEY ARE. AND PRESUMABLY

YOU'RE WILLING TO ADMIT THAT YOU HAVE LESS OF THE VOTES THAN HE DOES. BUT THAT'S NOT CLEAR. OKAY.

THEY CERTIFY IT.

OF ACTION TO ANNUL IT. THAT YOU HAVE NOW.

Fr ien

ds of P
INFECTED. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT: UNDERMINES THE CERTIFICATION. SET ASIDE THE ELECTION; CORRECT? VOTES -- IT WAS INFECTED.

YOUR CAUSE OF ACTION IS TO ANNUL THE

VOTES, NOT THAT THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS IS SOMEWHAT SO WHAT I AM SAYING IS WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT

MAKE IN THE LONG TERM OR EVEN IN THE NEAR SHORT TERM WHETHER THE VOTES ARE CERTIFIED BY THE REGISTRARS OR NOT? I AM SAYING THAT THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS

IS DEFINITELY INFECTED BECAUSE IT IS DEFINITELY UNDERMINED. IF SOMEBODY CAN GET ON THE BALLOT BY FRAUD AND BE CERTIFIED, THAT UNDERMINES THE WHOLE PROCESS OF CERTIFICATION. DR. TAITZ, YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO ME. IT

oli
THE VOTES?

YOU HAVE THE SAME CAUSE OF ACTION

WE SHOULDN'T COUNT WHAT THEY

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

tija

THE CERTIFICATION TELLS US THAT THE NUMBER OF VOTES, WHETHER

YOU STILL HAVE YOUR CAUSE

BUT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS ALL THE

b.c om
16 WE'RE WHAT MY IF IT IS CERTIFIED, THAT'S BECAUSE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

VOTED FOR ON JUNE 9.

WE SHOULDN'T COUNT THAT BECAUSE THEY -- HE WAS OUT BUYING VOTES. HE WAS GETTING ALL OF HIS FRIENDS FROM NEW RIGHT?

JERSEY TO COME VOTE, WHATEVER. RIGHT?

YOU WANT A NEW ELECTION; RIGHT? NO.

MS. TAITZ:

I NEVER ASKED FOR A NEW ELECTION.

AND I AM NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO GRANT ANY FINAL RELIEF. I AM ASKING IS JUST A TEMPORARY RELIEF OF STAYING CERTIFICATION. SCHEDULED.

tija

THERE WOULD NOT BE A NEED FOR A NEW ELECTION.

AND MAYBE WE CAN SEE WHEN TRIAL CAN BE

IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SCHEDULED SOON ENOUGH, MAYBE WE CAN FIND SOME KIND OF RESOLUTION. AND I

ds of P
LET'S FIND A SOLUTION. SUGGEST? THE COURT: MR. HILDRETH: YES, SIR.

THAT'S WHY MY FIRST PRAYER OF RELIEF WAS EXPEDITED TRIAL. HAVE ALREADY FILED AN ISSUE MEMORANDUM FOR TRIAL.

oli

WE CAN START FROM THERE AND FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YOUR HONOR. CLEARLY, YOU WOULDN'T WANT SOMEBODY

COMMITTING FRAUD AND CERTIFIED AS A WINNER OF THE ELECTION. SO I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE HERE. WHAT DO YOU

Fr ien

NO, MS. TAITZ, WE'RE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE.

MR. HILDRETH, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND? THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I

GUESS, FIRST, THE POINT TO MAKE IS THAT THE ELECTIONS CODE PROVIDES FOR THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SOMEBODY IS UNHAPPY OR CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
17 THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM; YOUR HONOR, ALL AND MAYBE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

FEELS THAT THE PERSON WHO WAS ELECTED DID NOT DESERVE TO BE ELECTED OR SOMEHOW INSTITUTED FRAUD INTO THE PROCESS.

AND BASICALLY WHAT THE ELECTIONS CODE STIPULATES

IS THAT THE CERTIFICATION GOES FORWARD, BUT THAT IF THE -IF THE FRAUD OR WHATEVER IT IS IS PROVEN, THAT A NEW CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION IS ISSUED.

SO THE CERTIFICATION IN

BUT IF MS. TAITZ IS SOMEHOW ABLE TO PROVE UP HER CLAIMS, THAT A NEW CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION WOULD BE ISSUED TO THE, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, WINNER OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION. SO THAT IS UNDER THE ELECTIONS CODE. AND

THAT, MS. TAITZ DOESN'T MEET THE STANDARD FOR A TRO. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO REPARABLE HARM TODAY AS WE ALL SIT HERE. AND, YOU KNOW, SHE DOES HAVE A LEGAL

Fr ien

ds of P
ELECTIONS CODE. "ELECTION CONTESTS." ELECTION CONTEST. VOTES. COUNTY HERE TODAY.

REMEDY THAT IS ADEQUATE TO HER, WHICH IS PROVIDED UNDER THE IT IS DIVISION 16 WHICH IS ENTITLED

AND THIRD, I GUESS SHE HASN'T SHOWN A REASONABLE

PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS OF HER UNDERLYING SO BASED ON THOSE THREE REASONS AND BASED

ON WHAT IS PROVIDED IN THE ELECTIONS CODE, I THINK THAT THE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER TODAY SHOULD BE DENIED. AND, IN ADDITION, I WILL SAY THAT SHE IS ASKING --

IT APPEARS THAT SHE IS ASKING MR. DUNN TO STOP TALLYING THE SO WE DON'T HAVE THE REGISTRARS OF VOTERS FROM EACH AND WE DON'T HAVE THE SECRETARY OF STATE

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

THIS CASE CAN ABSOLUTELY GO FORWARD.

AND I THINK BASED ON

b.c om
18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

REPRESENTATIVES HERE TODAY.

SO I AM NOT -- I AM NOT SURE

WHAT MR.-- THE RELIEF AGAINST MR. DUNN WOULD BE. THE ONLY PARTY NAMED. THE COURT: RIGHT.

WHAT ABOUT MC KINNEY?

IS BEING WORKED ON. ME.

SO I DON'T HAVE THE CASE IN FRONT OF

BUT HER PAPERS, MS. TAITZ'S PAPERS -- DR. TAITZ SAYS

ELECTIONS RESULTS. THAT CASE? MR. HILDRETH: YESTERDAY.

IS THAT THE RELIEF THAT WAS GRANTED IN

WELL, I -- I QUICKLY LOOKED AT MC KINNEY

AND REALLY ONCE I SAW THAT, THE FACTS WERE AND

ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'RE FACING HERE TODAY.

THAT IS THEY WERE ALLOWING A CANDIDATE TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT THAT MAYBE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT, A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE, THAT MAYBE AFFECTED THE OUTCOME OF THE GENERAL ELECTION.

ds of P
THE COURT: RIGHT.

SO IT WASN'T NECESSARILY ONE PERSON BRINGING AN

ELECTION CONTEST AGAINST ANOTHER PERSON, MEANING ONE CANDIDATE AGAINST ANOTHER CANDIDATE. THAT IS WHY MC KINNEY

IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE AND DIFFERENT FROM THE GARDEN-VARIETY ELECTION CONTEST CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE ELECTIONS CODE. I DO KNOW THAT THAT IS WHAT THE

Fr ien

22 23 24 25

ISSUE WAS -- I KNOW, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE MC KINNEY CASE AND THE CASES THAT CITE IT TALK ABOUT THE EFFECT OF THE

26

CERTIFICATION OR THE EFFECT OF FRAUD ON THE ELECTION. CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

THAT THE COURT OF APPEALS STAYED THE CERTIFICATION OF THE

b.c om
19 BUT WE ARE MY COMPUTER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

BUT I DON'T RECALL IT BEING A STAYING OF THE

CERTIFICATION ELECTION RESULTS OR WHY IT WAS, IN FACT, A STAY OF THE CERTIFICATION. DIFFERENT THAN THAT. MS. TAITZ: THE COURT:

I THINK MC KINNEY DID SOMETHING OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

MIGHT I RESPOND, YOUR HONOR? HOLD ON A SECOND.

ALL RIGHT.

MR. HILDRETH SAID? MS. TAITZ: ABSOLUTELY.

MISREPRESENTING THE LAW.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG.

MATTER OF FACT, AS YOU STATED, YOUR HONOR, ABSOLUTELY CORRECTLY, IF THE LAW WOULD HAVE BEEN AS MR. HILDRETH WANTS IT TO BE, THEN THE -- RIGHT HERE, THE COURT OF APPEALS IN SANTA ANA WOULD NOT HAVE STAYED CERTIFICATION OF ELECTION. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED IN MC KINNEY. THEY

17 18 19 20 21 22

ds of P
ISSUED A STAY. RIGHT HERE DID. THE COURT: I AM SORRY. IS AN EMERGENCY MATTER. ARGUE IT. I'VE GOT ENOUGH. LET ME SAY THIS: DOES NOT CHANGE THE ISSUE.

AND IF -- WE CAN COME TO A DECISION THAT

WILL BE ABSOLUTELY OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE COURT OF APPEALS

oli

tija

YOUR ARGUMENT, MS. TAITZ.

DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO WHAT

MR. HILDRETH IS JUST SIMPLY AND AS A

I AM GOING TO STOP YOU.

YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO CONTINUE TO I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE.

Fr ien

THE CERTIFICATION OF THE WINNERS IF, IN FACT, YOUR COMPLAINT IS THE

23 24 25 26

CORRECT, THEN THE RELIEF IS TO ANNUL THE ELECTION.

RELIEF IS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, NOT TO MAKE YOU THE WINNER. BUT EVEN IF IT WERE TO MAKE YOU THE WINNER OF THE CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

b.c om
20 I'VE HEARD THIS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

ELECTION, IT WOULD BE -- IT CAN STILL BE DONE EVEN AFTER THE CERTIFICATION.

IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU BROUGHT THIS -- WELL,

IF YOU'RE ENTITLED TO BRING THIS LAWSUIT AFTER THE ELECTION, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO BRING IT AFTER THE CERTIFICATION AS WELL. THE CERTIFICATION DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN TERMS OF THE FRAUD OR THE LAWSUIT. BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT CLAIMING

CLAIMING IS -- WELL, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE CLAIMING IS MR. DUNN SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ON THE BALLOT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

BUT YOU'RE CLAIMING FRAUD IN THE ELECTION ANYWAY. THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES AROUND THAT. BUT NONE OF THEM

HAVE TO DO WITH WHETHER THE VOTES CAST ARE THE VOTES -- ARE FOR THE CANDIDATE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO CERTIFY. AND IT

ds of P
THE ELECTION.

WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW THAT AND NOT ASSUME -- AT LEAST FOR PURPOSES OF THIS MOTION, NOT ASSUME THAT MR. DUNN HAS WON

IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE KNEW HE DID WIN IT.

BECAUSE IF HE DIDN'T WIN IT, YOUR CASE CAN STILL GO FORWARD. BUT IT IS ONLY WITH REGARD TO DAMAGES, THAT YOU SPENT $40,000 PURSUING SOMETHING WHO WASN'T ELIGIBLE. OF THE CLAIMS YOU HAVE IN THE LAWSUIT. BUT TO SET IT ASIDE AND SAY HE IS NOT ELIGIBLE THAT IS ONE

Fr ien

AND, THEREFORE, HE IS NOT -- AND, THEREFORE, YOU SHOULD BE THE CANDIDATE, THAT CAN BE HANDLED AFTER CERTIFICATION. SO

I UNDERSTAND -- I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION THAT MC KINNEY CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

ANY FRAUD IN THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS.

b.c om
21 WHAT YOU'RE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

STAYED CERTIFICATION.

WHETHER THAT IS TRUE OR NOT, I DON'T

SEE THAT THAT IS A NECESSARY COMPONENT FOR YOU TO PURSUE YOUR CLAIM, A NECESSARY ISSUE. ALSO, I HAVE TO SAY THIS:

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

44 TALKS ABOUT APPEALS TO THE APPELLATE COURT AND TO THE SUPREME COURT. THEY'RE ENTITLED TO GIVE A PREFERENCE.

NO -- CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 44 DOESN'T PROVIDE FOR PRIORITY OF HANDLING OF ELECTION COMPLAINTS IN THE SUPERIOR COURT.

THERE MAY BE OTHER SECTIONS. THEM. I COULDN'T FIND THEM.

IS FOR THE APPELLATE COURTS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL -- AND THE SUPREME COURT. TO ME. AND I AM NOT -- THOSE RULES DON'T APPLY THANK GOODNESS.

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

ds of P
I AM NOT THERE. OVER THEM. HIM TO CERTIFY IT, I GUESS. COUNTY REGISTRARS. AGREE. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER.

SO -- AND FURTHER, I DO HAVE A PROBLEM ORDERING

SOMEBODY NOT TO DO SOMETHING IF I DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION YOUR LAWSUIT IS AGAINST MR. DUNN. I CAN ORDER

ISSUE THE ORDER YOU WANT, TO STAY THE REGISTRATION BY THE

Fr ien

I THINK IF I SEND AN ORDER TO THE COUNTY OF

REGISTRARS SAYING DO NOT DO THAT, THEY WILL SAY WHO ARE YOU AND WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO TELL ME WHAT NOT TO DO. I AM NOT SURE I HAVE ANY JURISDICTION FOR THE AND I

25 26

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT I HAVE TO GIVE A PREFERENCE.

YOUR CITATION, THOUGH, TO 44

BUT I AM NOT SURE THAT I CAN

b.c om
22 BUT THERE IS I TRIED TO FIND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU WANT ME TO RESTRAIN THE COUNTY FROM DOING SOMETHING, THE REGISTRARS OF 50 COUNTIES FROM DOING SOMETHING. DO THAT.

I NEED JURISDICTION OVER THEM BEFORE I CAN

SO IN LIGHT OF THAT, I AM GOING TO DENY YOUR IF YOU -- THERE ARE OTHER

EX PARTE APPLICATION.

ALTERNATIVES, BUT I AM DENYING THE EX PARTE APPLICATION THAT

MR. HILDRETH, WOULD YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THAT. MS. TAITZ: MAY I RESPOND, YOUR HONOR? YOUR HONOR, MAY

I RESPOND TO THIS? THE COURT: NO.

MR. HILDRETH:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED.)

Fr ien

ds of P
CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli
I'VE RULED.

tija

YOU SET FOR HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

b.c om
23

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

I, CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR NO. 6189, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT, CONSISTING OF PAGES 2 THROUGH 23 IS A FULL, TRUE, AND CORRECT TRANSCRIPTION OF MY SHORTHAND NOTES THEREOF, AND A FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT STATEMENT OF THE PROCEEDINGS HAD IN SAID CAUSE.

DATED AT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA, THIS 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2010.

Fr ien

ds of P

CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189, RPR, CRR

oli

tija

______________________________ CHRISTINE L. BELASCO, CSR 6189 OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

b.c om

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful