Grinols Petition for a writ of Mandamus 9th circuit
Posted on | February 28, 2013 | 14 Comments
Grinols petition for a writ of mandamus for default judgment and stay of other proceedings
13-70744 James Grinols, et al v. USDC-SAC “Petition For Writ Docketed”
|
11:09 AM (36 minutes ago)
 |
|
||
|
||||
***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.
The following transaction was entered on 02/28/2013 at 11:08:49 AM PST and filed on 02/27/2013
| Case Name: | James Grinols, et al v. USDC-SAC |
| Case Number: | 13-70744 |
| Document(s): | Document(s) |
Docket Text: FILED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS. DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. NOTIFIED REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST OF FILING. [8530853] (HC)
Notice will be electronically mailed to:
Mr. Edward Alan Olsen, Assistant U.S. Attorney Doctor Orly Taitz, Counsel USDC, Sacramento George Michael Waters
The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document Description: Docketing Letter Original Filename: /opt/ACECF/live/forms/hollyc_
- Mr. Edward Alan Olsen, Assistant U.S. Attorney
- Doctor Orly Taitz, Counsel
- USDC, Sacramento
- George Michael Waters
Document Description: Petition + Exhibits Original Filename: GrinolsMandamus.pdf Electronic Document Stamp: [STAMP acecfStamp_ID=1106763461 [Date=02/27/2013] [FileNumber=8530853-0] [
| General Docket United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| In re: JAMES GRINOLS; ROBERT ODDEN; EDWARD NOONAN; KEITH JUDD; THOMAS GREGORY MACLERAN, —————————— JAMES GRINOLS; ROBERT ODDEN; EDWARD NOONAN; KEITH JUDD; THOMAS GREGORY MACLERAN, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO, Respondent, ELECTORAL COLLEGE; PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE; GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA; SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA; U.S. CONGRESS; BARRACK OBAMA, Real Parties in Interest. |
Comments
14 Responses to “Grinols Petition for a writ of Mandamus 9th circuit”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
February 28th, 2013 @ 1:36 pm
16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it…..
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Jon Roland:
Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a “law”, and should not be called a “law”, even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.
All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one’s life.
Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.
February 28th, 2013 @ 3:42 pm
In layman’s terms, please tell me you’ve made progress holding them accountable for this treason.
February 28th, 2013 @ 3:45 pm
Never understood, that if a militia is required, according to the Second Amendment, to defend a free state, and the right of the citizens that compose such a militia to bear arms, shall not be infringed, that the leftist that want to disarm those same citizens, could claim that the militia have no rights to have access to semi-automatic or even automatic assault rifles.
What type of weapons are they allow to have muskets ?
February 28th, 2013 @ 4:17 pm
Doug – The cases must, of necessity, proceed within currently recogized and accepted theory and practice. During my lifetime, I’ve witnessed far too many “constitutionalists” just like Jon Roland offering “legal advice” that has sent trusting people straight to prison. Oh, I know, “But, you don’t understand, this guy is different, he really knows what he’s talking about! He knows more than the lawyers and judges, they don’t even understand the law!” – Folks always believe such claims prior to discovering that, in practice, some “brilliant self-taught constitutional scholar” is not quite as wise as advertised. Doctor Taitz knows what she’s doing. Support her and her outstanding efforts.
February 28th, 2013 @ 5:37 pm
I must admit, I have a difficult time understanding where we are in this process. Writs of Mandamus and the like are all a foreign language to me, and a clear explanation on this site, in addition to the document itself, would be greatly appreciated.
PLEASE – Dr. Tiatz; For those of us who are without the educational background to know what these documents and actions are, and what they actually do, I respectfully request you add some explanatory commentary to your site for us.
God bless you for your efforts to bring this Usurper-in-Chief to justice.
If you don’t do this, who will? And if you can’t get this done NOW, when would it ever get done?
February 28th, 2013 @ 6:34 pm
BREAKING: United States Supreme Court Rules 4th Amendment Null And Void!: https://youtu.be/7poSnj-VhB8 via @youtube
February 28th, 2013 @ 6:38 pm
Why would anyone ask anyone else to do something for them when they can do for themselves?
USE THE DAMNED WEB TO LEARN ABOUT A WRITE OF MANDAMUS!
February 28th, 2013 @ 6:38 pm
Why would anyone ask anyone else to do something for them when they can do for themselves?
USE THE DAMNED WEB TO LEARN ABOUT A WRITE OF MANDAMUS!
February 28th, 2013 @ 8:07 pm
Roger,
Writ of mandamus in legal terms is “righting the wrong”. There were people here that were “wronged” by this crook in chief and they’ll only trying to “right” the situation but with a corrupt system Dr. Taitz has an up hill battle and I personally wish her luck
February 28th, 2013 @ 8:31 pm
URGENT) THEY’RE COMING FOR THE KIDS: Obama Lawyers Trying to Take Away …: https://youtu.be/EpZ2dRuASj8 via @youtube
February 28th, 2013 @ 8:32 pm
Is Barack Obama the Messiah? https://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/?spref=tw
February 28th, 2013 @ 11:29 pm
I couldn’t agree more with Roger Gangitano’s comment. PLEASE include some explanatory information with these posts. We know you’re crazy-busy, but since nobody else reports on this stuff, we (non-lawyers) need a little guidance!
March 1st, 2013 @ 2:01 am
Francisco: their alinsky attitude is at work. And they just want to fulfill the evil and don’t care about the right and wrong of it! They have incredibly PERVERTED MINDS!!! Which means that they are possessed! They can’t think straight!
March 1st, 2013 @ 8:02 am
Mission Impossible
In hearing Rush Limbaugh the other day, saying he is ashamed of his compatriots’ attitude, I tend to agree, we might be too far gone to the left to save the republic. Too many takers and subversives already outnumber the producers and patriots. God helps us if this were the case.