You are on page 1of 5

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW Document 611 Filed 03/22/13 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:15799

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 27 28

vs. ORLY TAITZ, et al,

TH

FO GB O

LISA LIBERI, et al,

: : Plaintiffs, : : : : : : : Defendants. : : : : :

Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG (AJW) [Honorable Andrew J. Guilford] PLAINTIFFS FURTHER BRIEFING (SUR-REPLY) TO THIS COURTS JANUARY 23, 2013 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ISSUED UPON ORLY TAITZ Location: Courtroom 10D

On January 23, 2013, this Court Ordered Orly Taitz to Show Cause as to

Ordered against her in the matter Orly Taitz v. Barack Obama, et al, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2012-00582135.

February 4, 2013, ECF Docket Entry [ECF] 592 and provided the Court with the partial documents pertaining to the Sanctions issued against Orly Taitz by Judge Charles Margines in the above referenced case.
1

FR

IE

Plaintiffs Responded to the Courts Order to Show Cause [OSC] on

ND

Why She Should Not be Sanctioned for Lying to the Court regarding Sanctions

OF

I.

INTRODUCTION:

.C O

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

Philip J. Berg, Esquire (PA I.D. 9867) E-mail: philjberg@gmail.com LAW OFFICES OF PHILIP J. BERG 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Telephone: (610) 825-3134 Fax: (610) 834-7659 Attorney in Pro Se and for Plaintiffs

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW Document 611 Filed 03/22/13 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:15800

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 27 28

Orly Taitz Responded to this Courts OSC on February 4, 2013, ECF 593 claiming the $4,000 in Sanctions that were imposed on her in the Orange County case, Orly Taitz v. Barack Obama, et al, Orange County Superior Court Case No.

Based on this, Plaintiffs sought Leave to further Brief the Issue, which was

II.

ARGUMENT:

Based on First City Properties, Inc. v. MacAdam (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 507 at 515, sanctions imposed along with an order to quash an improper subpoena under California C.C.P. 1987.2 are not discovery sanctions. In First City the Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Four held:

First City argues that section 1987.2 is in reality a discovery statute and that specific written findings are not required for an award of discovery sanctions. While we recognize that specific written findings are not required for issuance of sanctions in routine discovery disputes (Mattco Forge, Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co. (1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 1429 [273 Cal.Rptr. 262]), we cannot agree that treatment of sanctions pursuant to section 1987.2 falls within the same purview as issuance of discovery sanctions. [First City Properties, Inc. v. MacAdam (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 507, 515] Attorney Taitz has also pointed out in her papers, ECF 593 at page 3, that

she has Appealed the Order imposing sanctions against her to the Court of

FR

IE

ND

OF

TH

FO GB O

Granted by this Court on March 15, 2013, ECF 610 at page 2, 2.

.C O

were Discovery Sanctions. That claim is untrue.

30-2012-00582135, were not reportable to the State Bar or this Court because they

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW Document 611 Filed 03/22/13 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:15801

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 27 28

Appeals. Since Taitz would be expected to research the law before filing the appeal (to insure that she had good grounds to do so), certainly she must be aware of the First City case, which is apparently the only reported California case dealing

Attorney Taitz lied to this Court and then failed to bring relevant case law to

Dated: March 22, 2013

FR

IE

ND

OF

TH

FO GB O

this Court's attention. For this she should be Sanctioned. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Philip J. Berg Philip J. Berg, Esquire

.C O

III.

CONCLUSION:

M
3

with whether Section 1987.2 sanctions are discovery sanctions.

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW Document 611-1 Filed 03/22/13 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:15802

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 27 28

LISA LIBERI, et al, vs. ORLY TAITZ, et al,

I, Philip J. Berg, Esquire, hereby certify a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs

was served through the ECF filing system this 22nd day of March 2013 upon the

FR

IE

ND

following:

Orly Taitz 29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Suite 100 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 Email: orly.taitz@gmail.com and Email: dr_taitz@yahoo.com Served via the ECF Filing System Attorney for Defendant Defend our Freedoms Foundation, Inc.

OF

further Briefing (Sur-Reply) to the Courts Order to Show Cause issued upon Orly Taitz

TH

: : : Plaintiffs, : : : : : : Defendants. : :

FO GB O

CIVIL ACTION NUMBER: 8:11-cv-00485-AG (AJW) PLAINTIFFS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

.C O

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

Philip J. Berg, Esquire (PA I.D. 9867) E-mail: philjberg@gmail.com LAW OFFICES OF PHILIP J. BERG 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Telephone: (610) 825-3134 Fax: (610) 834-7659 Attorney in pro se and for Plaintiffs

Liberi, et al Plaintiffs Cert of Svc re Plaintiffs further Briefing (Sur-Reply)

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW Document 611-1 Filed 03/22/13 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:15803

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 27 28

FR

IE

ND

OF

TH

FO GB O

Marc Steven Colen, Esq. Law Offices of Marc Steven Colen 5737 Kanan Road, Ste. 347 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 Email: mcolen@colenlaw.com Served via the ECF Filing System Attorney for Defendants: Todd Sankey; and The Sankey Firm, Inc.

/s/ Philip J. Berg Philip J. Berg, Esquire

.C O

Kim Schumann, Esquire Jeffrey P. Cunningham, Esquire SCHUMANN, RALLO & ROSENBERG, LLP 3100 Bristol Street, Suite 400 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Served via the ECF Filing System Attorney for Defendants Orly Taitz; Orly Taitz, Inc.; and Law Offices of Orly Taitz

Liberi, et al Plaintiffs Cert of Svc re Plaintiffs further Briefing (Sur-Reply)