Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

GIL: Klayman

User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#501

Post by northland10 »

And in the primary Klayman vs everybody on the Board of Professional Responsibility, the judge entered this order:
ORDER

In accordance with the oral rulings issued by the Court at the motions hearing held on June 29, 2022, it is hereby

ORDERED that, pending a final ruling by the Court on the pending motions in this case, the plaintiff is precluded from filing any additional lawsuits based upon the previous and pending D.C. Bar proceedings against him. It is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall forthwith mail a copy of this Order to the plaintiff’s address on record.

SO ORDERED this 29th day of June, 2022.
Of course, he has already filed a notice of appeal which will go over so well.

He also asked for clarification
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 2.84.0.pdf

The defendants submitted a "NOTICE of Submission in Response to Questions Raised by the Court During Telephonic Hearing of June 29, 2022." In it, they confirmed the currently outstanding investigations by the Board against Klayman and they are the same ones that he listed in the Palm County Court filing, including the newest one over his actions suing every judge in the DC Court of Appeals. The Santilli and Montgomery cases are apparently still pending.

They also explained that their rules allow them to tattle to other jurisdictions for censures of an attorney (or greater consequences such as suspension). I'm pretty sure that he did not explain he was breaking the rules of jurisdictions by not self tattling.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 7.31.0.pdf

Larry will file a response once he receives the transcripts of the hearing in order to be consistent in his lies.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 2.86.0.pdf

He likes to whine about due process even though there is a whole process for the DC Board. He just does not like the results.
101010 :towel:
User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:56 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#502

Post by scirreeve »

He is doing sportsball stuff now. Whatever.
https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americ ... iv-dpworld
User avatar
realist
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:25 am

Re: GIL: Klayman

#503

Post by realist »

scirreeve wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 1:29 am He is doing sportsball stuff now. Whatever.
https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americ ... iv-dpworld
He may even have a point re the PGA Tour but I can’t imagine how he has standing to Sue.
Image
Image X 4
Image X 32
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#504

Post by northland10 »

He has a filing number but it looks like it is not entered on the docket as a case yet. Oddly, the press release he has on that EINPresswire has a different civil filing number than the one from his Freedom Watch site (filing number not case number). One is 152278 (which is actually too small for a civil filing number) and the other is 152286168. Even ignoring it is a longer number, the sequence would be higher 152286 vs 152278. The Pressiwire release is 5 July even though he announced this a couple of weeks ago. Did he create a new filing? Was the first one rejected? Did he accidentally include a filing number for a new case in Palm Beach County against the evil folks of the DC Board of Professional Responsibility?
101010 :towel:
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5387
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: GIL: Klayman

#505

Post by bob »

realist wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 9:42 am
scirreeve wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 1:29 am He is doing sportsball stuff now. Whatever.
https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americ ... iv-dpworld
He may even have a point re the PGA Tour but I can’t imagine how he has standing to Sue.
He claims he bought tickets to a golf tourney! :roll:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
realist
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:25 am

Re: GIL: Klayman

#506

Post by realist »

bob wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 11:08 am
realist wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 9:42 am
scirreeve wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 1:29 am He is doing sportsball stuff now. Whatever.
https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americ ... iv-dpworld
He may even have a point re the PGA Tour but I can’t imagine how he has standing to Sue.
He claims he bought tickets to a golf tourney! :roll:
:brickwallsmall: :brickwallsmall: :brickwallsmall:
Image
Image X 4
Image X 32
User avatar
Dr. Ken
Posts: 2450
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: GIL: Klayman

#507

Post by Dr. Ken »

ImageImagePhilly Boondoggle
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#508

Post by northland10 »

Shocked I tells ya.. Shocked I am.
101010 :towel:
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5387
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: GIL: Klayman

#509

Post by bob »

That Law & Order article:
In a phone interview, Klayman criticized the summary order as a “poorly reasoned” decision by “Clinton and Obama appointees that they stated should not be used as precedent.” Rulings issued by summary order do not have precedential effect.
:doh:

Literally the first line of the order:
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT.
:brickwallsmall:
Klayman wrote:“I mean, frankly it’s a disgrace — and you can quote me on that,” added Klayman, who vowed to pursue an appeal before a full en banc panel of the Second Circuit.
Klayman gotta.

Bonus:

:lol:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#510

Post by northland10 »

I thought Roy told GIL that he's just not that into him but was stuck with having to use him on the oral argument. Is GIL still planning the strategy or is he just doing his normal bluster? If Roy is basically done with GIL, then I doubt we will see the rehearing petition.

While an attorney representing himself has a fool for a client, he is still better off than having GIL. I have not read deeply but it appears the 2 Alabama cases for Roy are proceeding in a much more normal (read boring) manner since he dumbed Klayman.
101010 :towel:
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#511

Post by northland10 »

northland10 wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 9:14 pm ...In it, they confirmed the currently outstanding investigations by the Board against Klayman and they are the same ones that he listed in the Palm County Court filing, including the newest one over his actions suing every judge in the DC Court of Appeals. The Santilli and Montgomery cases are apparently still pending.
He won't self-tattle to a bar/attorney discipline board, but he shows he has no problem tossing his dirty laundry out for all to see. We suspected there were other pending cases and had seen one bill of particulars, but had he not made an issue about it in his Palm Country court filing, or complained at the hearing, nobody would have known. He did even bother to ask that stuff be filed under seal.

He did the same thing in his divorce. His need for revenge overrides any little voice saying, "don't say that out loud".
101010 :towel:
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#512

Post by northland10 »

Was wandering around and came across. Klayman v. Freedom Watch, Inc. I thought that odd (especially being from 2007-08) so I had to check it out. Some other org had formed called Freedom Watch and he sued. As you might expect, he lost.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .147.0.pdf
101010 :towel:
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#513

Post by northland10 »

In the never-ending attempt to get rid of the Klayman v Judicial Watch Judge, he filed this on 22 June.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .648.0.pdf

He gets all threaty about how she is being sued in Klayman v Rao (which is waiting to be killed by the DC circuit visiting judges) and he will be filing or filing more in a judicial complaint against her. I would have thought that there is some DC Bar rule against behavior like this. Maybe the DC Board can add it to their investigation into him suing all of the DC Court of Appeals judges (i.e. threatening judges to get the ruling you want or judge shopping via lawsuit against judges).

Of course, Judge Kotar-Kotelly responds with the middle finger extended which has to be really sore by now.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .649.0.pdf

She points out that the DC Circuit said she was right in not recusing herself and that she performed admirably (granted, he sued them for that). She also mentions that SCOTUS denied the writ petition.

Of course, he will say that he filed a Petition for Rehearing but it is DOA. Anything to try and delay the $2m collection. The rehearing petition says distributed so I assume it will be dumped in the summer, as is normal for rehearing petitions submitted during the recess.
101010 :towel:
W. Kevin Vicklund
Posts: 2134
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#514

Post by W. Kevin Vicklund »

northland10 wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:37 pm Was wandering around and came across. Klayman v. Freedom Watch, Inc. I thought that odd (especially being from 2007-08) so I had to check it out. Some other org had formed called Freedom Watch and he sued. As you might expect, he lost.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .147.0.pdf
This might be the origin of his constant attempts to shoehorn Lanham Act claims in cases that the Lanham Act clearly doesn't apply.

(de minimus: Freedom's Watch, Inc.)
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5598
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: GIL: Klayman

#515

Post by northland10 »

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 12:03 pm
northland10 wrote: Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:37 pm Was wandering around and came across. Klayman v. Freedom Watch, Inc. I thought that odd (especially being from 2007-08) so I had to check it out. Some other org had formed called Freedom Watch and he sued. As you might expect, he lost.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .147.0.pdf
This might be the origin of his constant attempts to shoehorn Lanham Act claims in cases that the Lanham Act clearly doesn't apply.

(de minimus: Freedom's Watch, Inc.)
I must have been tired as I did not even notice it was possessive which actually weakens his argument more.

Given that the defendants were power brokers and money folks from the GOP, I suspect this case was as much about getting even for being kicked to the curb on his election run and the Judicial Watch supporters not following him after he was out.
101010 :towel:
W. Kevin Vicklund
Posts: 2134
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#516

Post by W. Kevin Vicklund »

The judge snarked a bit in the final footnote:
8 Klayman argues that Defendants intentionally copied Freedom Watch from him and switched it to Freedom’s Watch to mask the obvious copying, causing confusion among the relevant public. But the Court has already found the term Freedom Watch to be descriptive words in the public domain. Thus, any confusion created by Defendants’ use of the term is “irrelevant unless the mark is protectable in the first instance.” Gift of Learning, 392 F.3d at 801.
User avatar
KickahaOta
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:17 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#517

Post by KickahaOta »

Klayman update!

In Klayman v. Porter et al in the Southern District of Florida, Klayman responds to his foes' motion to dismiss.

He doesn't seem happy.

Image
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5589
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: GIL: Klayman

#518

Post by Luke »

Thank you, KickahaOta! This is a really fun read, he lays out and whines about all the cases against him.

Should we send this Dennis Montgomery part over to Sharon Rondeau to get a comment from Mike Zullo? :lol: 8-)

Klayman Dennis.JPG
Klayman Dennis.JPG (145.86 KiB) Viewed 794 times

Klayman Dennis 2.JPG
Klayman Dennis 2.JPG (34.5 KiB) Viewed 794 times
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
Ben-Prime
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:29 pm
Location: Worldwide Availability
Occupation: Managing People Who Manage Machines
Verified: ✅MamaSaysI'mBonaFide

Re: GIL: Klayman

#519

Post by Ben-Prime »

KickahaOta wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:24 pm Klayman update!

In Klayman v. Porter et al in the Southern District of Florida, Klayman responds to his foes' motion to dismiss.

He doesn't seem happy.

Image
If only I could find an adverb and adjective combination that would cover calling your opponent "nothing more than political tools" as a statement of *fact*. Someone help me out here?
But the sunshine aye shall light the sky,
As round and round we run;
And the truth shall ever come uppermost,
And justice shall be done.

- Charles Mackay, "Eternal Justice"
User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:19 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#520

Post by Sam the Centipede »

Ben-Prime wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 4:26 am If only I could find an adverb and adjective combination that would cover calling your opponent "nothing more than political tools" as a statement of *fact*. Someone help me out here?
Larrily Klaymanesque?
User avatar
keith
Posts: 3706
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:23 pm
Location: The Swamp in Victorian Oz
Occupation: Retired Computer Systems Analyst Project Manager Super Coder
Verified: ✅lunatic

Re: GIL: Klayman

#521

Post by keith »

Self-destructively masochistic?
Has everybody heard about the bird?
W. Kevin Vicklund
Posts: 2134
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#522

Post by W. Kevin Vicklund »

Grossly inappropriate?
User avatar
Ben-Prime
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:29 pm
Location: Worldwide Availability
Occupation: Managing People Who Manage Machines
Verified: ✅MamaSaysI'mBonaFide

Re: GIL: Klayman

#523

Post by Ben-Prime »

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 9:19 am Grossly inappropriate?
Whoa. Perfect. Let's use that.
But the sunshine aye shall light the sky,
As round and round we run;
And the truth shall ever come uppermost,
And justice shall be done.

- Charles Mackay, "Eternal Justice"
jemcanada2
Posts: 952
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:12 am

Re: GIL: Klayman

#524

Post by jemcanada2 »

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 9:19 am Grossly inappropriate?
:winner: :winner:
W. Kevin Vicklund
Posts: 2134
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm

Re: GIL: Klayman

#525

Post by W. Kevin Vicklund »

Ben-Prime wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 9:38 am
W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 9:19 am Grossly inappropriate?
Whoa. Perfect. Let's use that.
:thankyou:
Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”