MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 24507
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ (Rawly NC)
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Foggy » Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:25 am

Wait, there's lipstick on the pig but no clothes on the book of pork? :confused:
If dogs run free, why not we?

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 12952
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:05 am

Foggy wrote:Wait, there's lipstick on the pig but no clothes on the book of pork? :confused:
Must be a paperback, the hardcover would have a dustcover... :)

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: FEMA Camp PI Okanogan, WA 98840

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by SueDB » Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:30 am

Foggy wrote:Wait, there's lipstick on the pig but no clothes on the book of pork? :confused:
But was the lipstick Grossly Inappropriate Larry's color???
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by rpenner » Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:19 am

GIL comes across as a chain-smoking belligerent ignoramus who has allowed Defendant's attorney to act like the only adult in the room.

Exactly the posture one wants when Defendants urge that the sanctions motion be the first item considered.

Maclilly
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:15 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Maclilly » Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:50 am

I am just appalled at this man's intentional lying. I understand the need to try and polish a turd case, but by god this man has no ethics. How has he been allowed to practice law for so long?

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8555
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Notorial Dissent » Fri Feb 26, 2016 2:55 pm

We can but hope, particularly since KKKlayman's efforts to date have all been pure bull.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Tesibria » Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:51 pm

Docket Update:
03/04/2016 -- 261 -- NOTICE Regarding Plaintiff's Pending Motion for Protective Order by HMH HOLDINGS, INC., HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT PUBLISHING COMPANY, JAMES RISEN re 255 MOTION for Protective Order (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Zycherman, Lisa) (Entered: 03/04/2016) [Notice that Istvan Burgyan deposition took place March 1, 2016]

03/07/2016 -- -- MINUTE ORDER: In light of 261 Defendants' Notice, 255 Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order is DENIED AS MOOT. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Rudolph Contreras on 03/07/2016. (lcrc3) (Entered: 03/07/2016)

03/07/2016 -- -- MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of 258 the parties' Joint Status Report and the entire sizeable record transferred from the Southern District of Florida, the Court will review and resolve the pending dispositive motions before conducting any further proceedings in this case. The Court is cognizant of Plaintiff's health issues and, if a trial is necessary in this matter, the Court sees no reason that it will not be able to schedule a trial in 2016. Signed by Judge Rudolph Contreras on 03/07/2016. (lcrc3) (Entered: 03/07/2016)
“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8645
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Kriselda Gray » Tue Mar 08, 2016 10:27 am

I've heard of mixed metaphors before, bit I think GIL ran those through a high powered food processor
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush

SCMP = SovCits/Militias/Patriots.

Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
-----
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants...

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8006
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Mikedunford » Tue Mar 08, 2016 11:08 am

Kriselda Gray wrote:I've heard of mixed metaphors before, bit I think GIL ran those through a high powered food processor
SO missing the like button.
I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14069
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Reality Check » Wed May 11, 2016 8:36 am

Are we still waiting for the new judge to rule on motions?
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8006
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Mikedunford » Wed May 11, 2016 8:49 am

Reality Check wrote:Are we still waiting for the new judge to rule on motions?
Yes, at least as of last week (which was the last time I checked the docket).
I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 5689
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Northland10 » Wed May 11, 2016 8:52 am

Reality Check wrote:Are we still waiting for the new judge to rule on motions?
Yep. No recent activity when I checked yesterday.
North-land: of the family 10
UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Tesibria » Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:38 am

(a) Should probably change title of this thread, given that it's no longer a FL case...

(b) Poor Montgomery - he's caught in a bit of a bind.

As well-documented above, he's filed affidavit under oath that he's a Florida resident.

I recently learned that Montgomery has filed a negligence/tort action in Washington state court (now claiming that his injuries, etc. were caused by defective device). Curiously, his complaint left out the paragraph stating his (and his wife's) residence. Defendants noticed this and, in their motion to dismiss, asked the court to require Montgomery to provide it. From the Motion to Dismiss:
Plaintiffs' failure to provide their state of residence is a curious oversight. Last year, in opposition to a motion to
dismiss or transfer of venue filed in a Florida federal case, Plaintiff executed an affidavit claiming to be a Florida resident. ... In granting the Defendants' motion to transfer the case to the District of Columbia under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the judge in that case acknowledged the Defendants' argument that the facts revealed during discovery demonstrated that Plaintiff was domiciled in Washington State. ...
From the Reply:
Plaintiffs' refusal to respond to a simple request for their location of residence is suspect. Plaintiffs ignore an affidavit executed by Mr. Montgomery "under penalty of perjury" in a federal case which is referenced in Penumbra's opening brief. In that affidavit, Mr. Montgomery claims to be a Florida resident and submits a voter registration form in support. Requiring Plaintiffs to state whether Mr. Montgomery is a Florida resident, or some other state, and the location of their residence is simple enough, may avoid needless discovery and motions practice, and will save time and resources for both parties and this Court. Second, Plaintiffs' domiciled state and county will inevitably become part of the public record, so it is difficult to discern the alleged burden being claimed. Finally, Penumbra cannot determine if there are jurisdictional issues, including those relating to venue under CR 82, without this information.
Well, on May 16, the Court ordered Montgomery to include his location of residence in his amended complaint.

:popcorn:


For info on recent updates to the Sectec Astronomy Timeline see here (summary of recent changes)) or here (Feb 19-forward portion of timeline).
“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
bob
Posts: 21990
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by bob » Thu Jun 02, 2016 3:13 am

Who represents Montgomery in the Washington suit?
Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

chancery
Posts: 1576
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by chancery » Thu Jun 02, 2016 3:17 am

It's unlikely that Washington still requires verified complaints, but would be lovely if it did. There is wiggle room in allegations outside the context of the original case.

This is no longer relevant to any issue in the Risen case, is it?

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Tesibria » Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:59 am

chancery wrote:It's unlikely that Washington still requires verified complaints, but would be lovely if it did. There is wiggle room in allegations outside the context of the original case.

This is no longer relevant to any issue in the Risen case, is it?
Well, I think that if he contends in the Washington case that he's a Washington resident, that will be relevant in the Risen case - where he has maintained under oath that he is a Florida resident. Although the case was transferred to DC, Montgomery has claimed to be a Florida citizen and/or resident since the Complaint and has heavily relied on Florida la, in the Complaint; in his Opposition to Motion to Dismiss; and in his Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment.
“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (FL Defamation Suit)

Post by Tesibria » Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:22 am

bob wrote:Who represents Montgomery in the Washington suit?
Richard Friedman
Peter J. Mullenix
Friedman Rubin
Seattle, WA
--and--
Robert K. Dawson
DawsonBrown
Seattle, WA
“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 13899
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Suranis » Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:23 am

Aha! But Obama said "Lipstick on a pig" once! So, since the court are all unthinking Obamabots they must find for Lord Klayman of the appropriate touch!!!!
"I think its pretty troubling when a backyard decoration comes out swinging harder against Nazis than the President of the United States." - Stephen Colbert

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31118
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by mimi » Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:01 am

For any IANAL's who are curious about that new lawsuit Montgomery filed in Washington state, here's an article at Seattle Times:

Lawsuit claims medical device caused brain damage after Bellevue surgery
Originally published March 26, 2016 at 1:32 pm Updated March 28, 2016 at 8:24 am

A software designer says the Penumbra Coil 400, used to treat aneurysms, malfunctioned during surgery at Overlake Hospital in Bellevue and caused him to suffer brain damage.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-new ... in-damage/


Is there some reason he doesn't just claim to be a Florida resident in this case?

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8006
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:14 am

mimi wrote:Is there some reason he doesn't just claim to be a Florida resident in this case?
His lawyer in this case (who isn't GIL) may have an aversion to alleging a domicile that has very little factual support - both for Rule 11 reasons and because it would create an entirely unnecessary litigation issue.
I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14069
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Reality Check » Thu Jun 02, 2016 9:13 am

It's the Montgomery/GIL quantum mechanical theory of residency. Just when you thought he lives here he lives there. ;)
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8555
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:41 am

Wouldn't it just be simpler to say that Montgomery lied, that would then be all inclusive I should think. :rotflmao:
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 40879
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:54 am

Easy peasy. Montgomery has just decided to become a resident of the state of Washington, again. And he'll stay there until he's needed to be a resident of somewhere else. (Usually a state where one of his lawyers is permitted to craptice law.)

User avatar
magdalen77
Posts: 5384
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm
Location: Down in the cellar

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by magdalen77 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:47 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:Easy peasy. Montgomery has just decided to become a resident of the state of Washington, again. And he'll stay there until he's needed to be a resident of somewhere else. (Usually a state where one of his lawyers is permitted to craptice law.)
He's Schrodinger's client. :towel:

(Mags sits and waits for Slarti to explain how wrong she is).

User avatar
bob
Posts: 21990
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: MONTGOMERY v RISEN (Defamation Suit)

Post by bob » Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:56 am

Mikedunford wrote:
mimi wrote:Is there some reason he doesn't just claim to be a Florida resident in this case?
His lawyer in this case (who isn't GIL) may have an aversion to alleging a domicile that has very little factual support - both for Rule 11 reasons and because it would create an entirely unnecessary litigation issue.
Conversely, Montgomery may be reluctant to say he wasn't a Florida resident because it creates a litigation (read: sanctions) issue in Risen.

But I'm guessing the Risen defendants will be happy to see the suit end, and won't go after Klayman and Montgomery for their egregious practices.
Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Other Fringe Groups & Individuals”