WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

Circumspect
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:47 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#26

Post by Circumspect » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:46 pm

Tom Ballantyne, the Arizona birther moron, wrote yesterday that her "[link]husband is somehow closely tied to Obama,http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-in ... n-florida/[/link]". :shock: What's the opposite of accuracy in media?A (_?_)
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5669
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#27

Post by Maybenaut » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:24 pm

What's the opposite of accuracy in media?Fox? WND?
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28717
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#28

Post by Foggy » Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:05 am

Tom Ballantyne, the Arizona birther moron, wrote yesterday that her "[link]husband is somehow closely tied to Obama,http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-in ... n-florida/[/link]". :shock:


What's the opposite of accuracy in media?A (_?_)

Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Yabbut, Circumspect ... here's the bottom line: Jill Nagamine is lucky if all they can say is that her "husband is somehow closely tied to Obama" because he represented the President's half-sister.





Heck, when I was practicing criminal defense, I represented hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of convicted criminals all by myself.





I'm somehow closely tied to ALL of 'em. My wife, too also, I reckon. :oops: ?(





I think I'd rather be like Tadeo Nagamine, and be closely tied to the President of the United States of America.
Any time my questions are all fully answered, I know I'm asking the wrong questions. - Bernard Samson

User avatar
GreatGrey
Posts: 9786
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 6:06 am
Location: Living in the Anthropocene

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#29

Post by GreatGrey » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:50 am

What's the opposite of accuracy in media?Fox? WND?Yea, that's pretty obvious, but my choice would be...
I am not "someone upthread".
Trump needs to be smashed into some kind of inedible orange pâté.

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 16010
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#30

Post by ZekeB » Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:50 am

Tom Ballantyne, the Arizona birther moron, wrote yesterday that her "[link]husband is somehow closely tied to Obama,http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-in ... n-florida/[/link]". :shock: What's the opposite of accuracy in media?A (_?_)
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
So when I see toilet paper under someone's nose, it isn't a shaving cut after all? Hmmmm...
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

brommbaer
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:51 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#31

Post by brommbaer » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:51 am

:sick:

Circumspect
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:47 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#32

Post by Circumspect » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:54 pm

Yabbut, Circumspect ... here's the bottom line: Jill Nagamine is lucky if all they can say is that her "husband is somehow closely tied to Obama" because he represented the President's half-sister.





Heck, when I was practicing criminal defense, I represented hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of convicted criminals all by myself.





I'm somehow closely tied to ALL of 'em. My wife, too also, I reckon. :oops: ?(





I think I'd rather be like Tadeo Nagamine, and be closely tied to the President of the United States of America. I wasn't thinking so much about her husband's close ties to the President, I was thinking how assinine (that was an intended misspelling) these people are to predict that the Hawaii attorney would "twist the law" if the birthers presented her with an order from a court of competent jurisdiction.





[tab=30]"Instead, even if a judge were to order this, Jill Nagamine, the Hawaii Deputy Attorney General whose husband is somehow closely tied to Obama, would twist the law – as she already has on numerous occasions – to protest that showing the birth certificate (a “bonafide” copy of which he has supposedly posted on his official White House website for all the world to see) would violate HI state law. Even though the very statute that she has quoted ad infinitum (HRS 338-18: b-9) specifically allows that a “court of competent jurisdiction” can order examination of such a document."





None of them has been clever enough to get such an order so they really ought not accuse the attorney of something that hasn't even taken place.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 10444
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#33

Post by Mikedunford » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:52 pm

I finally had a chance to read through the briefs - I'd been waiting until I had time to really sit down and look at them, since it's a case in the state where I plan on taking the bar, and I wanted to really read them carefully. A few observations:1: The State's reply brief is clear, concise, to the point, and clearly shows that Ms. Nagamine has a great deal of experience in this sort of thing. 2: Mr. Wolf's legal arguments are clearly stated and easy to follow. 3: Mr. Wolf's legal arguments are probably the best that I've seen from any of the birther attorney, with the possible exception of Mark Hatfield. 4: Mr. Wolf's legal arguments are fractally wrong and legally frivolous.
"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27044
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#34

Post by bob » Fri Dec 21, 2012 4:11 pm

5: Mr. Wolf did not write this. (There's a ghostwriter, and Wolf signed it.)
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 11952
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#35

Post by Plutodog » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:15 pm

5: Mr. Wolf did not write this. (There's a ghostwriter, and Wolf signed it.)Yeah, but too, also, a real lawyer didn't write or sign any of Orly's poo either. [-(
The only good Bundy is an Al Bundy.

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28717
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#36

Post by Foggy » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:26 pm

1: The State's reply brief is clear, concise, to the point, and clearly shows that Ms. Nagamine has a great deal of experience in this sort of thing.Hell of a writer, she is.
Any time my questions are all fully answered, I know I'm asking the wrong questions. - Bernard Samson

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34883
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#37

Post by realist » Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Docket Update...





2013-01-14 - Wolf v Fuddy - [link]APPELLANT WILLIAM WOLF’S REPLY TO STATE OF HAWAI’I’S ANSWERING BRIEF,[/link]





Mr. Wolf apparently believes Ms. Nagamine's brief needs some cleansing. Yeah... cleansing.


REALLY!!! And takes some serious issue with her advocacy. :P





A. Cleansing The Answering Brief


The Answering Brief (“AB”) submitted by the Attorney General (“AG”) contains


objectionable advocacy that does nothing to facilitate fair and orderly consideration and resolution of the real issues in this case. The brief is permeated with aspersions, red herrings, and straw men. Even worse are the AG’s misleading and unfounded contentions of law.Unfounded or misleading contentions of law, however, must always be out of bounds. Sadly, the AG’s brief crossed that line several times. By far the most egregious is the AG’s unconditional contention that where a statutorily created right serves a public policy purpose, the person protected by the statute cannot waive the right. [AB, 10-13] Obviously, that unconditional contention is absolutely essential to the AG’s claim that Obama could never waive the protection afforded him by Section 338-18, Hawaii Revised Statutes (“HRS”). Appellant exposes and demolishes that claim, infra. [highlight]Minimal legal research reveals that the AG is absolutely wrong about the applicable law.[/highlight] How the AG’s advocacy could be so wrong in misstating the applicable law should trouble the Court.





Although less troubling and egregious, the AG also crossed the line when advocating that


Appellant raised a new issue on appeal, and therefore that issue should not be considered because not preserved in the action below. [AB, 14] This is startling, given that Appellant’s case never got 2 past the pleading stage. [highlight]When a contention of law is the newly raised issue on appeal, why is there a problem?[/highlight] ](*,)It's an "interesting" read. And still far better than any of Orly's... mostly. :lol:
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44875
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#38

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:58 pm

Translation: Jill Nagamine's brief destroyed all my arguments. Please ignore it 'cuz I want to win.

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

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#39

Post by Piffle » Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:33 pm

Wolf is a small, nasty snot-slinger. If you're going to attempt to leverage such a pompous, sarcastic tone, you need to earn the right. Moreover, you better be right about what you're writing about.Another day, another birther, another fail. It's just too bad that these morons are incapable of recognizing when they've embarrassed themselves so thoroughly.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15756
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#40

Post by Reality Check » Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:46 pm

This is Wolf's work alone, correct? The older attorney from Hawaii did not stay on for the appeal as I recall.
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44875
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#41

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:50 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if Orly Taitz's boyfriend, cuckolder Charles E. Linck/Lincoln, III, wrote this trash.

AnitaMaria
Posts: 4360
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#42

Post by AnitaMaria » Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:55 pm

He sure didn't start strong, did he? The first 4 paragraphs are just complaining about being called a birther. :roll:

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27044
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#43

Post by bob » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:11 pm

For someone who claims to be not a birther, he sure talks a lot about Obama's birth certificate. :-kThis is Wolf's work alone, correct? The older attorney from Hawaii did not stay on for the appeal as I recall.Correct (-ish). I don't think this is Wolf's work at all; I suspect the out-of-state lawyer that Wolf originally retained ghostwrote this.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15756
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#44

Post by Reality Check » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

Correct (-ish). I don't think this is Wolf's work at all; I suspect the out-of-state lawyer that Wolf originally retained ghostwrote this.So you don't think it was a lone Wolf? :dontwanttolook:
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

tjh
Posts: 2939
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#45

Post by tjh » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:34 pm

So you don't think it was a lone Wolf? :dontwanttolook:It was a where-wolf. ;;)

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#46

Post by SueDB » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:39 pm

So you don't think it was a lone Wolf? :dontwanttolook:It was a where-wolf. ;;)There Wolf!
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#47

Post by SueDB » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:41 pm

[BBvideo 425,350:2w4h7zr0][/BBvideo]
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14219
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#48

Post by Dolly » Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:46 pm

\ :D / Warren Zevon-Werewolves of London \ :D /
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#49

Post by SueDB » Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:08 pm

My Main Man Lon Chaney Jr. as Larry Talbot[BBvideo 425,350:5dn1zmdt][/BBvideo]
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5669
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

WOLF v FUDDY (HI Intermediate Court of Appeals)

#50

Post by Maybenaut » Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:21 pm

So you don't think it was a lone Wolf? :dontwanttolook:It was a where-wolf. ;;)A-Woooooo
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

Post Reply

Return to “Eligibility Lawsuits”