Second Florida Obama Ballot Challenge Hearing on July 10
Posted by By GeorgeM at 20 June, at 03 : 35 AM Print
Plaintiff Jerry Collette
Another Case, and Another Florida Ballot Challenge Hearing Scheduled
The attention of news reporters is drawn to the Florida Ballot Challenge case heard in Tallahassee on June 18. Sam Sewell, Project Manager for the Florida Ballot Challenge is very busy responding to inquiries about the case that is being reported by local, state and national media. Sewell is also reminding all interested parties that the Florida Ballot Challenge does not have all of their eggs in one basket. “Our strategy from the beginning was to have multiple cases in multiple jurisdictions using multiple legal tactics. We can provide legal fees for citizen activists in every county in Florida for what it costs to hire one attorney. Florida has other cases pending”
Also on June 18th, the response to dismiss on one of those cases was filed. So, on July 10, 2012, at 3:30 pm, Florida Circuit Court Judge Stanley Mills will conduct a hearing on motions to dismiss on behalf of the defendants, Barack Obama and the State Executive Committee of the Florida Democratic Party. The hearing will be held at the West Pasco Judicial Center, in New Port Richey, FL.
 |
| Judge Stanley Mills |
The plaintiff in this case is Jerry Collette, a paralegal and the creator of the “Do It Yourself Ballot Challenge Kit.” Collette’s creation can be used by citizens who want to start actions against candidates not eligible to be on the Florida ballot. The organization’s goal is to have several cases filed in the various Florida Judicial Districts. The Pasco County suit is a different from the Mike Voeltz case in Tallahassee, and brought to the court under a different legal theory. Voeltz brought his case under the election code, whereas Collette has filed his case as a common law tort action. Collette is handling his case himself. Jerry Collette commented on his involvement in the case “As a paralegal, I follow legal cases in the same way other people follow celebrities or sports. I have been following the eligibility issue since it was first raised in 2008, but did not get involved. In February 2012, when an administrative hearing was scheduled on the subject in Georgia, I was very excited that it was finally going to be litigated. When I saw how the administrative judge did a sideshow, rather than allowing the plaintiffs to really get the evidence from Hawaii, I decided to see how I could help. I looked into various possible strategies, and came up with a tort approach.”
 |
| Mike Voeltz, Sam Sewell, Jerry Collette Florida Ballot Challenge Press Conference |
Judge Mills, in a previous election related case, ordered documentation produced. Collette is hoping the judge will take a similar approach in this case, and order Obama to provide Collette access to inspection of the original government and hospital birth records, which Obama claims exist in Hawaii. Collette is asking court to keep Obama’s name off the Florida ballot if the court does not find him eligible.
The defendants claim that the Florida Democratic Party can nominate whomever it wants, then put its candidate onto the Florida ballot, and the state cannot interfere. Collette says that the Democrats are free to nominate whoever they want, even Humpty Dumpty. However, if they want to put their candidate on the state funded ballot, Florida has the right to first make sure that the candidate is eligible.
The defendants are also claiming that Collette cannot bring this type of claim in a Florida court. Collette responded by citing Article 1, Section 21, of the Florida Constitution, which says that Florida courts are open to “every person” to resolve “any injury.” Collette humorously said, “I swear that I am in the class of ‘every person’ and that the injuries I am asking the court to remedy are within the category of ‘any injury’.”
The case is Collette v. Obama, case number: 512012CA 2041WS.
Links:
Obama’s motion to dismiss
Do It Yourself Ballot Challenge Kit
Committee’s motion to dismiss
Florida Ballot Challenge
Collette’s opposition to dismissal
ConstitutionalElections.org
The complaint
ConstitutionActionFund.org
Collette’s website
Obama State Ballot Challenge
FULL PRESS RELEASE HERE: http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2012/06/obama-florida-ballot-challenge-makes.html
Contact:
or 727 457 0300
or 239 591 456
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
See Florida News
need your help NOW!
Support the Florida and Other Ballot Challenges!
Constitution Action Fund
What is the Article II Legal Defense Fund? Find out.
Only a natural born Citizen can legally be President of the USA. ”Obama” is not either.
Subscribe free to ObamaBallotChallenge.com. Please forward. We’re also on Facebook
Wouldn’t it be something if this Paralegal Jerry Collete actually got his day in court ? And then brought down this fraud obama and his illegal administration . Oh the wonders of a free society ! And a Constitutional Republic .
Charles, 11 months ago
Looks like he’s getting it on July 10.
GeorgeM, 11 months ago
Too bad Jerry’s complaint does not state a claim under “election” law, so he could possibly survive the motions. Instead, he chose to pursue a heretofore unrecognized claim for some nebulous “civil right” (that no court has ever acknowledged) and a tort claim for negligence (but he cannot identify a legally recognized “duty” that forms the predicate).
So this case is getting tossed on the 10th.
Real Lawyer, 11 months ago
Jerry has achieved at least some minor fame via out of the box thinking in legal arguments,
GeorgeM, 11 months ago
Out of the box thinking is exactly what gets dismissed for failure to state a claim. A few nights ago Jerry Collette admited on a radio program that no court has recognized the causes of action he asserts. Trial courts do not rule on creative claims, they stick to traditionally recognized claims.
Collette failed to respond to the defendants’ arguments in their motion. That means he conceded that their argument, especially about indispensable parties, is a correct statement of the law. Collette’s response failed to cite any case law. He is sunk.
Jonathan, 11 months ago
Johnathan, I don’t know what you’re talking about. I specifically addressed every argument they made.
Their argument on indispensable parties was the weakest of all. In my first draft, I didn’t cite any authority because simple logic pointed out the absurdity of their argument. Just for good measure, I found a case citation to back up my point and added it in, but I still don’t even think it was necessary. Their position on that point makes no sense.
Also, for good measure, I have a small supplemental brief that I’ll be filing next week. It reinforces my positions. Stay tuned.
P.S. I don’t always have time to read, much less reply to, all blog posts and comments. Nonetheless, I thank you for your interest in this important matter.
Jerry Collette, 11 months ago
Since it is, by statute, the SOS’s duty to place names on the ballot, you failed to address the statute that makes the SOS an indispensable party.
You also failed to respond to the venue argument.
Jonathan, 11 months ago
If I had brought my claim under election law, it would have had to be filed in Tallahassee and it probably would have been consolidated with Mike Voeltz’s case, gaining us little, if anything.
Many courts have recognized rights that were never previously recognized. Roe v. Wade is probably the most famous case to do so.
Jerry Collette, 11 months ago
Johnathan, I don’t know which document you’re reading, but, as I stated in my opposition doc, the SOS’s job is only ministerial, and only is done after the Governor nominates the electors, which is only done after the Democrats give the governor their list. Therefore, if the Democrats are enjoined from giving the governor a list of electors committed to Obama, the governor won’t nominate those electors, and the SOS won’t put Obama’s name on the ballot.
With respect to the venue argument, I not only responded to it, I cited a case which gives the hypothetical example of an arrow shot into the air in one county and hitting somebody in another. The plaintiff can bring the action in the county where the arrow hit him. In my case, that is Pasco County.
I do thank you for pointing this out. While I did cite the case, I didn’t mention the arrow hypothetical. I’ll add that into my supplemental brief, which I expect to mail into the court next Tuesday.
Jerry Collette, 11 months ago
Looks like your nomination argument differs from Larry and Mike’s, so we have it covered either way. I love multiple strategies.
GeorgeM, 11 months ago
Yes, you’re right, George. Mike brought his case under the election code, which does require naming the SOS as a party. I brought mine as a tort, which has no such requirement.
As I also pointed out in my opposition doc, before any other factors are considered, one of the prerequisites to being an indispensable party is for the party to have an interest in the matter. The SOS, in my case, doesn’t even have that.
Jerry Collette, 11 months ago
[...] http://obamaballotchallenge.com/second-florida-obama-ballot-challenge-hearing-on-july-10 [...]
Collette v Obama FL Ballot Challenge- Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief in Opposition to Dismissal, 10 months ago