If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

SAYS THAT IT WAS A DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT PERMISSION TO FILE A NEW AMENDED COMPLAINT

Legal Analysis by John Charlton

No judge in America has so completely and quickly eviscerated his own reputation with one case, as has Judge David O. Carter, of the Federal Court in Santa Ana, California, in the case Barnett vs. Obama.

(Dec. 16, 2009) — On Sunday the nation saw one of the most noble gestures ever, when Dr. Orly Taitz filed a Motion for Clarification in the case of Barnett vs. Obama, seeking to know from Judge David O. Carter if his ruling of Oct. 29th, was to be considered an end of the case or merely a dismissal of the First Amended Complaint.

Considering that Federal Rules of Civil Procedure indicate that the statement, “dismissed with prejudice,” closes a case in such a way as to prevent the filing of a new action or the filing of an amended complaint to continue the case with a modified claim, Dr. Taitz’s filing gave the court the benefit of the doubt, and considered all the injustice and dishonesty already shown by Judge Carter as something that, in view of greater issues, could be overlooked for the present.

But no such honor was to be found sitting at Judge Carter’s desk of tyranny.

His in-chamber order, issued today was as brief as it was laughably mendacious:

PROCEEDING (IN CHAMBERS): CLARIFYING ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS OF
OCTOBER 29, 2009

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Clarification regarding whether the October 29, 2009 Order was a dismissal with or without prejudice.

The Court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint on October 29, 2009 was a dismissal without leave to amend and with prejudice.

The Clerk shall serve this minute order on all parties to the action.

Mendacious, because no matter what Carter thinks his authority is, his authority and power are not capable of changing the past and adding words or significance, wherein no words or signification existed.

History herself recalls, that Judge Carter’s ruling of Oct. 29th clearly did not contain the words “dismissed with prejudice” nor any statement that the dismissal was “without leave to amend.”

Carter has, thus, closed the case and found himself guilty of the most grave breach of judicial ethics:  lying to plaintiffs and their counsel in July in promising them a hearing on merits, as a trick to avoid having to render a default judgment against Obama for not responding to the service of court papers; hiring as a clerk a lawyer who is politically tied to the defendants; including false and unsubstantiated claims in his ruling of Oct. 29th with a purpose of defaming and libeling Dr. Orly Taitz; and finally, with great mendacity, claiming his order of Oct. 29th was something it never was in law.

Not the least of his crimes was his trashing of the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs in his Oct. 29th ruling.

The Post & Email need not proclaim Judge Carter a criminal or traitor to the Republic, he has done so with his own hand, blackening his soul thereby, with a far darker hue than the robes he wears.

But he does deserve to be called a “scoundrel,” because that is what he is.

For more information on the issues raised in this article, click on the tags at the bottom of this report.

Join the Conversation

10 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. [In response to the question, “Can Orly appeal?”:]

    So long as she files her notice within 30 days of the Court’s penultimate order denying her Motion for Reconsideration (it should have been entitled a Rule 59(e) Motion, but Orly dispensed with her law clerk’s services on November 4, 2009….. But Orly will still be able to appeal if she wants to and is able to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. There are a few decent judges on that circuit, which tends to buck the national trends by backing the rights of the people under the constitution. IF Orly wants to do it right, there is a chance…. But I was not optimistic about her motion for clarification at all….she cited NO legal authority therein…. and such a motion does not toll the time for appeals….

  2. Maybe we should be fighting the standing concept. Although that probably would be just as hard. We are no longer allowed to make sure the document WE THE PEOPLE created is being followed.

    http://www.constitution.org/duepr/standing/winter_standing.htm

    ——————-
    Mr. Charlton replies: Bliz, I could not agree more. Lawyers and judges, in general, have too much complacency regarding recent precedents which are clearly inappropriate when applied to all cases and controversies.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/06/how-the-standing-doctrine-has-opened-the-door-to-usurpation/

      1. Just as Obama uses threats and coersion to influence the judiciary, so might Dr. Taitz. Dr. Taitz has gained many influencial persons on her,”facebook” page. Also, their are the members of the ’09 Continetial Congress or the American Grand Jury. If, Carter could be brought up on charges of breach of ethics with the backing of presentments, throw in a few Senators and Congressional Representatives, petitions, amincus curues, etc. A judicial review board or a ethics review committee might alter the course of Carter’s mishandling of the default lawsuit. If she should only just appeal the lawsuit would be buried and forgotten for years. Any other legal action would be more expediant to the plaintiffs. Not only just Carter, but all of the lawsuits could benefit from a favorable decision, when the rulings are over-turned. Such review boards, committee’s and organizations due excist, its time they see justice upheld. Look at Obama’s poll ratings he’s not the hot potato, anymore. As if he ever really was!!!! A concerted effort would bowl the yo-yo’s right over, no matter their affliations. “Might is Right”.

  3. yo: You’re right. I say to every single would-be and overt patriot out there, use as many creative non-violent surreptitious underhanded sneaky infiltrative methods as you can possibly think of. Write articles, become a citizen journalist, publish videos, get on radio talk shows, call government personnel incessantly, let them know the thorn in their side will only get worse and will never, ever go away. Better yet, run for every single local office from the school board on up that you can imagine, box out the commies who’ve been taking these spots for decades. It’s an imperative!

  4. He is much much more than a scoundrel.
    I will never ever forgive you Judge Carter for what you’ve done to all of us and this country.

    You make me sick.

  5. ” lying to plaintiffs and their counsel in July in promising them a hearing on merits, as a trick to avoid having to render a default judgment against Obama for not responding to the service of court papers”

    That part especially got my attention. Are these the people we’re hoping will help us uphold the constitution?

    Back to hoping that the hackers will come through for us, because relying on these people to follow the law, whether it’s orly’s attempts to get the bc or leo’s attempt to initiate a quo warranto, doesn’t seem to be a high probability trade.