READE v GALVIN - ACT II

Post Reply
User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#1

Post by realist » Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:39 pm

I know this case has been mentioned (for some reason could only find it in the Birther Scorecard Update thread. :shock: So updating the Docket for future reference...General DocketUnited States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Court of Appeals Docket #: 12-2406 Docketed: 11/26/2012 Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights Reade, Jr. v. Galvin, et al Appeal From: District of Massachusetts, Boston Fee Status: [highlight]in forma pauperis[/highlight] Case Type Information: 1) civil 2) private 3) civil rights Originating Court Information: District: 0101-1 : 1:12-cv-11492-DJC Lead: 1:12-cv-11492-DJC Ordering Judge: Denise J. Casper, U.S. District Judge Date Filed: 08/09/2012 Date Order/Judgment: 10/30/2012 Date Order/Judgment EOD: 10/31/2012 Date NOA Filed: 11/08/2012 Date Rec'd COA: 11/26/2012 11/26/2012 CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #9) filed by pro se Appellant William Reade, Jr. No hearings below. [12-2406] (CP) 12/03/2012 DOCKETING statement filed by Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP) 12/03/2012 TRANSCRIPT report/order form filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. indicating transcripts are not necessary for this appeal. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP) 12/03/2012 BRIEFING schedule set. [highlight]Brief due 01/14/2013 for appellantWilliam Frederick Reade Jr.. Pursuant to F.R.A.P. 31(a), appellee's brief will be due 30 days following service of appellant's brief and appellant's reply brief will be due 14 days following service of appellee's brief.[/highlight] [12-2406] (CP) 12/03/2012 LETTER filed by pro se appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding his appeal. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP) 12/11/2012 NOTICE to take judicial notice filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#2

Post by realist » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:03 pm

[highlight]Reade v Galvin Appeal Docket Update[/highlight]








Case/Context





Reade v. Galvin, No. 1:12-cv-11492, 2012 WL 5385683 (D. Mass. Oct. 30, 2012) (dismissing complaint filed against Massachusetts Secretary of State for allegedly refusing to consider plaintiff’s challenge to Obama’s eligibility to be included on 2012 primary ballot; finding that Reade does not have standing to challenge eligibility in court);











APPEAL DOCKET UPDATE (First Circuit Court of Appeals)


11/26/2012 CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #9) filed by pro se Appellant William Reade, Jr. No hearings below. [12-2406] (CP)





12/03/2012 DOCKETING statement filed by Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





12/03/2012 TRANSCRIPT report/order form filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. indicating transcripts are not necessary for this appeal. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





12/03/2012 BRIEFING schedule set. [highlight]Brief due 01/14/2013 for appellant William Frederick Reade[/highlight] Jr.. Pursuant to F.R.A.P. 31(a), appellee's brief will be due 30 days following service of appellant's brief and appellant's reply brief will be due 14 days following service of appellee's brief. [12-2406] (CP)





12/03/2012 LETTER filed by pro se appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding his appeal. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





12/11/2012 NOTICE to take judicial notice filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





[highlight]12/21/2012 APPELLANT'S BRIEF filed by Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr[/highlight].. Copies 1. Certificate of service not included. Brief due 01/25/2013 for appellee Martha Coakley and William F. Galvin [12-2406] (RL)
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#3

Post by Piffle » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:25 pm

When you play for free, you get what you pay for.





This is one of those cases that was dismissed sua sponte by the district court on the way in the door because it was filed by a pro se plaintiff in forma pauperis and was found to be facially frivolous.





At least it hasn't chewed up much in the way of judicial resources so far and the First Circuit won't dally with it either.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#4

Post by realist » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:14 pm

Docket Update...01/22/2013 NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellees Martha Coakley and William F. Galvin filed by Attorney John M. Stephan. Certificate of service dated 01/22/2013. [12-2406] (JMS) 01/22/2013 LETTER regarding Response to Appeal filed by Attorney John Michael Stephan for Appellees William F. Galvin and Martha Coakley. Certificate of service dated 01/22/2013. [12-2406] (JMS) 01/23/2013 ORDER entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge. We treat appellant's letters, motions and filings, which were docketed in this court on December 3, 2012 and December 11, 2012, as supplements to his brief. [highlight]To the extent that appellant is asking for immediate relief prior to the final adjudication of this appeal, interim relief is denied. The appeal will be decided in due course.[/highlight] [12-2406] (GK)
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

chancery
Posts: 1627
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:51 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#5

Post by chancery » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:46 pm

Off Topic
01/23/2013 ORDER entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge.Since when was a circuit judge referred to (as opposed to described as) "Appellate Judge"?

A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#6

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:13 pm

Off Topic
01/23/2013 ORDER entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge.Since when was a circuit judge referred to (as opposed to described as) "Appellate Judge"?
In New Jersey, Appellate Division judges have the suffix, "J.A.D.," appended to their names. It stands for "Judge of the Appellate Division." If it appears on their docket, that must be the standard appellation.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26659
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#7

Post by bob » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:18 pm

01/23/2013 ORDER entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge.Since when was a circuit judge referred to (as opposed to described as) "Appellate Judge"?Good question. Howard is a [/break1]wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_R._Howard]circuit judge.My WAG would be that that's the default for one-judge orders.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#8

Post by realist » Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:43 am

Docket Update...





Court of Appeals Docket #: 12-2406


Docketed: 11/26/2012


Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights


Reade, Jr. v. Galvin, et al


Appeal From: District of Massachusetts, Boston


Fee Status: in forma pauperis





[highlight]01/22/2013 [link]LETTER,[/link] regarding Response to Appeal filed by Attorney John Michael Stephan for Appellees William F. Galvin and Martha Coakley. Certificate of service dated 01/22/2013. [12-2406] (JMS)[/highlight]





01/23/2013 [link]ORDER,[/link] entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge. We treat appellant's letters, motions and filings, which were docketed in this court on December 3, 2012 and December 11, 2012, as supplements to his brief. To the extent that appellant is asking for immediate relief prior to the final adjudication of this appeal, interim relief is denied. The appeal will be decided in due course. [12-2406] (GK)





01/30/2013 LETTER in response to Appellee's letter filed on January 22, 2013 filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





[highlight]01/31/2013 [link]CASE submitted,[/link]. Panel: Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge; Norman H. Stahl, Appellate Judge; Rogeriee Thompson, Appellate Judge. [12-2406] (LM)[/highlight]





02/04/2013 [link]ORDER,[/link] entered by Rogeriee Thompson, Appellate Judge: Appellant's letter docketed on January 30, 2013 is treated as a motion for appointment of counsel and is denied. [12-2406] (CP)





ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26659
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#9

Post by bob » Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:09 pm

Again with the "Appellate Judge" nomenclature. Must be a First Circuit thing. :-k
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#10

Post by realist » Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:42 pm

Docket Update...





Dismissal Affirmed





06/11/2013 [link]JUDGMENT,[/link] entered by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge; Norman H. Stahl, Appellate Judge and Rogeriee Thompson, Appellate Judge. Affirmed [12-2406] (CP)


Another. Bites. Dust.
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34769
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#11

Post by realist » Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:13 am

UPDATE...





Reade refuses to give up and continues to file :turd: just not giving up on his appeal to 1st Circuit. Check out all the entries … since the Mandate was issued!!!





I’ve only downloaded the order denying the various motions/letters/craziness…





Court of Appeals Docket #: 12-2406


Docketed: 11/26/2012


Termed: 06/11/2013





Nature of Suit: 3440 Other Civil Rights


Reade, Jr. v. Galvin, et al


Appeal From: District of Massachusetts, Boston


Fee Status: [highlight]in forma pauperis[/highlight]








[highlight]06/11/2013[/highlight]


1 pg, 9.09 KB


[highlight]JUDGMENT entered[/highlight] by Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge; Norman H. Stahl, Appellate Judge and Rogeriee Thompson, Appellate Judge. Affirmed [12-2406] (CP)





[highlight]07/03/2013[/highlight]


1 pg, 6 KB


[highlight]MANDATE issued.[/highlight] [12-2406] (CP)





07/10/2013


29 pg, 4.17 MB


[highlight]PETITION for rehearing en banc[/highlight] filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





07/17/2013


9 pg, 2.42 MB


COURTESY COPY OF LETTER sent to John Stephan, Esq. filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service dated 07/10/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





08/01/2013


3 pg, 136.68 KB


[highlight]LETTER filed by pro se Appellant[/highlight] William Frederick Reade, Jr. requesting copies. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





08/01/2013


15 pg, 1.05 MB


[highlight]LETTER filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. with attachment regarding further evidence.[/highlight] Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





08/05/2013


28 pg, 2.66 MB


PLEADING tendered: [highlight]Request for Writ of Certiorari[/highlight] filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





08/09/2013


4 pg, 159.88 KB


[highlight]LETTER filed[/highlight] by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding his appeal. Certificate of service dated 08/06/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





08/12/2013


1 pg, 10.2 KB


[highlight]LETTER sent to pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.[/highlight] regarding his recent correspondence dated August 6, 2013. [12-2406] (CP)





08/13/2013


1 pg, 10.03 KB


[highlight]LETTER sent to pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr[/highlight]. regarding receipt of his August 1, 2013 correspondence [12-2406] (CP)





08/13/2013


1 pg, 9.94 KB


[highlight]LETTER sent to pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.[/highlight]regarding receipt of his correspondence dated July 29, 2013. [12-2406] (CP)





08/16/2013


12 pg, 735.91 KB


[highlight]LETTER filed[/highlight] by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding recent correspondence. Certificate of service dated 08/12/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





09/09/2013


2 pg, 134.46 KB


[highlight]LETTER filed[/highlight] by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding his itinerary. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)





09/26/2013


44 pg, 2.42 MB


[highlight]REQUEST for en banc hearing filed[/highlight]by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service dated 09/25/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





09/26/2013


42 pg, 2.61 MB


[highlight]NOTICE of information, follow-up and reinforcement of request for en banc hearing[/highlight]filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service dated 09/25/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





09/27/2013


1 pg, 7.32 KB


[highlight]LETTER sent to pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr[/highlight] acknowledging receipt of copies of request for en banc hearing. [12-2406] (CP)





10/02/2013


18 pg, 1.94 MB


[highlight]MOTION requesting an emergency hearing AND notice of "new evidence" or in the alternative, a de novo review to correct errors and omissions[/highlight] filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. Certificate of service dated 10/01/2013. [12-2406] (CP)





10/03/2013


0 pg, 0 KB


[highlight]MOTION requesting immediate en banc hearing with supplement based on "new evidence"[/highlight]filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr.. Certificate of service dated 10/01/2013. [12-2406] CLERK'S NOTE: Docket entry is duplicative to the motion filed on October 2, 2013. [12-2406]. [12-2406] (CP)





[highlight]11/01/2013[/highlight]


1 pg, 6.86 KB


[highlight][link]ORDER,[/link] entered[/highlight] by Juan R. Torruella, Appellate Judge; Jeffrey R. Howard, Appellate Judge and Rogeriee Thompson: Since petitioner's requests for an en banc hearing and related relief were filed subsequent to the issuance of mandate in this case, they must be construed as motions to recall mandate. [highlight]Construing them as such, the motions are denied.[/highlight] [12-2406] (CP)





11/12/2013


8 pg, 2.68 MB


[highlight]LETTER filed by pro se Appellant William Frederick Reade, Jr. regarding concerns that his case has not been properly completed[/highlight]. Certificate of service was not included. [12-2406] (CP)
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
magdalen77
Posts: 5393
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm
Location: Down in the cellar

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#12

Post by magdalen77 » Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:29 pm

Is there any process for telling someone like this, "If you file anything else in this closed case, we will immediately file it in the trash can"?

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#13

Post by Piffle » Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:33 pm

Clearly, Mr. Reade is a man of letters. ](*,)

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26659
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#14

Post by bob » Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:33 pm

Is there any process for telling someone like this, "If you file anything else in this closed case, we will immediately file it in the trash can"?The judge can direct the clerk to not file further filings. It happens.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31128
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#15

Post by mimi » Wed Jan 08, 2014 2:23 pm

I don't even remember that guy.But I googled.Here he is on 'Patriot Action Network'[/break1]net/profile/WilliamFReadeJr]http://patriotaction.net/profile/WilliamFReadeJrOne of his filings is posted here:I am not just talking I am acting. I am in Federal Court going after the truth. I have the facts, and this contains some of the most pertinent. I am including Judges and all others who are lying. WILLIAM F. READE, Jr. LTC USAR (Ret) Margaret Carter, Clerk of Court September 25, 2013U.S. Court of Appeals for the First CircuitJohn Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse1 Courthouse Way, Suite 2500Boston, MA 02210 Re: Reade v. Galvin, et al., No. 12-2406 Re: REQUEST for EN BANC HEARING STATEMENT OF THE CASE The First Federal District Court; Appeals Court; and Senior Judge Lynch of the First District in Boston have by abuse of their judicial discretion denied me my rights under Article VI (duties of officials by their oath) (supremacy clause), the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, [i. e.: the traditional standard of appellate review for evidence-related questions arising during trial is the abuse of discretion standard. Most judicial determinations are made based on evidence introduced at legal proceedings (but not by the Judge). Evidence may consist of oral testimony, written testimony,], (see #3; #4 below). By condoning, supporting, and approving acts of perjury; improper interpretation of Statutes and failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Evidence, by the District Judge, they are complicit. (see 18 USC § 1622 - Subornation of perjury) (Rule 801; Rule 802. The Rule against Hearsay). They are conspirators in perjury, and by their failure to completely review and evaluate all of the evidence provided in my appeal, they have also “Abused Judicial Discretion”. “The backbone of American Law is that one (1) false statement advanced under oath is perjury, and if the person who receives this false information does not strike it down then the "two" form a conspiracy.” This "evident" conspiracy will grow even larger on appeal when (5) five more Judges and Appeals Court clerks "witness" the false move "on the record" causing the conspiracy to grow larger and make it even more "evident".Exhibit Cremainder:[/break1]net/forum/topics/allen-west-and-all-others-with-a-mouth-read-this?xg_source=activity]http://patriotaction.net/forum/topics/a ... e=activityA bunch of others are prolly posted there. Same old, same old.Sorry, Bill. As birfers go, you're a bore. facebook:[/break1]facebook.com/bill.reade.75]https://www.facebook.com/bill.reade.75

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#16

Post by Piffle » Wed Jan 08, 2014 4:55 pm

Sorry, Bill. As birfers go, you're a bore. :yeah: A retired lieutenant colonel who's so impoverished that he had to file in forma pauperis.





While reaching the 20-year retirement rank of LTC is hardly a great achievement (it's pretty much par for the course -- no better, no worse), it still scares me that folks this illiterate and stupid ever become field grade officers.

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 15615
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

READE v GALVIN - ACT II

#17

Post by ZekeB » Wed Jan 08, 2014 4:56 pm

Sorry, Bill. As birfers go, you're a bore. :yeah: A retired lieutenant colonel who's so impoverished that he had to file in forma pauperis.





While reaching the 20-year retirement rank of LTC is hardly a great achievement (it's pretty much par for the course -- no better, no worse), it still scares me that folks this stupid ever become field grade officers.Fixed
Ano, jsou opravdové. - Stormy Daniels

Nech mě domluvit! - Orly Taitz

Post Reply

Return to “Eligibility Lawsuits”