Draft of recusal motion for IN, seeking to recuse judge Shaheed
Posted on | April 3, 2012 | 11 Comments
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ.
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Ste. 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Ph 949-683-5411 F949-766-7603
CA Bar License 223433
In propria Persona in IN
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
MARION COUNTY
) CASE #49D0103MI012046
DR. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ )
KARL SWIHART )
EDWARD KESLER )
FRANK WEYL )
BOB KERN )
V )
ELECTIONS COMMISSION )
SECRETARY OF STATE OF INDIANA )
MOTION TO RECUSE JUDGE SHAHEED UNDER RULE 79 OF INDIANA RULES OF TRIAL PROCEDURE.
Plaintiffs herein are seeking recusal of judge Shaheed under rule 79 and appointment of a special judge from a contiguous Morgan county.
ARGUMENT
Rule 79 states. . .
Rule 79. Special judge selection: circuit, superior, and probate courts
(A) Application. When the appointment of a special judge is required under Trial Rule 76, the provisions of this rule constitute the exclusive manner for the selection of special judges in circuit, superior, and probate courts in all civil and juvenile proceedings. Trial Rule 79.1 constitutes the exclusive manner for the selection of special judges in all actions in city, town, and the Marion county small claims courts.
(B) Duty to notify court. It shall be the duty of the parties to advise the court promptly of an application or motion for change of judge.
(C) Disqualification or recusal of judge. A judge shall disqualify and recuse whenever the judge, the judge’s spouse, a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, the spouse of such a person, or a person residing in the judge’s household:
(1) is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director or trustee of a party; (2) is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(3) is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding; or
(4) is associated with the pending litigation in such fashion as to require disqualification under the Code of Judicial Conduct or otherwise.
Upon disqualification or recusal under this section, a special judge shall be selected in accordance with Sections (D), (E), and (H) of this rule.
(D) Agreement of the parties. Within seven (7) days of the notation in the Chronological Case Summary of the order granting a change of judge or an order of disqualification, the parties may agree to an eligible special judge. The agreement of the parties shall be in writing and shall be filed in the court where the case is pending. Alternatively, the parties may agree in writing to the selection of an eligible special judge in accordance with Section (H). Upon the filing of the agreement, the court shall enter an order
1
appointing such individual as the special judge in the case and provide notice pursuant to Trial Rule 72(D) to the special judge and all parties or appoint a special judge under Section (H).
A judge appointed under this section shall have fifteen (15)seven (7) days from the date the appointment as special judge is noted in the Chronological Case Summary to decide whether to accept the case in accordance with Section (G). The filing of an acceptance vests jurisdiction in the special judge. An oath or additional evidence of acceptance of jurisdiction is not required.
This provision shall not apply to criminal proceedings or election contests involving the nomination or election of the judge of the court in which the contest is filed.
(E) [Reserved] Deleted, eff. Jan. 1, 20xx. Selection by court. In the event the parties fail to agree or are not permitted to agree to the appointment of a special judge under Section (D) of this rule, they may consent to the appointment of a special judge by the judge before whom the case is pending. A party in an ex parte proceeding may also agree to the appointment of a special judge under this provision. If the judge before whom the case is pending is unavailable, the parties may agree to the appointment of a special judge by the regular judge of the court.
Upon being advised that the parties agree to the selection of a special judge by the court, the court shall enter an order appointing an eligible special judge in the case and provide notice pursuant to Trial Rule 72(D) to the special judge and all parties. A judge appointed under this Section shall have fifteen (15) days to decide whether to accept the case and enter his or her acceptance in accordance with Section (G).
(F) [Reserved] Deleted eff. Jan. 1, 20xx. Selection by Panel. In the event a special judge is not selected under Sections (D) or (E) of this rule, this section shall be used for the selection of a special judge.
(1) Naming of Panel. Within two (2) days of deciding that a special judge must be appointed under this section, the judge before whom the case is pending shall submit a panel of three persons eligible under Section J to the parties for striking. In the event
the judge before whom the case is pending is unavailable to submit the panel, the regular judge of the court where the case is pending shall submit the panel to the parties.
(2) Striking From Panel. In an adversary proceeding, each party shall be entitled to strike one judge from the panel. In an ex parte proceeding, the sole party shall be entitled to strike one judge from the panel. The moving party shall be entitled to strike first, and shall have seven (7) days from the day the clerk mails the panel to the parties to strike. The nonmoving party, or the Clerk of the Court in an ex parte proceeding, shall have seven (7) days from the date of the first strike to make the final strike.
(3) Failure of Nonmoving Party or Clerk to Strike. If the nonmoving party, or the Clerk of the Court in an ex parte proceeding, fails to strike within the time required by subsection (2), the moving party shall have seven (7) days from that time to make the final strike.
(4) Failure of Moving Party to Strike. If the moving party fails to strike under either subsection (2) or (3) within the time limits required by those subsections, the judge who submitted the panel shall resume jurisdiction of the case.
(5) Appointment of Special Judge. The judge who submitted the panel shall appoint the judge remaining on the panel as special judge in the case.
(G) [Reserved] Deleted eff. Jan. 1, 20xxAcceptance of appointment. A special judge selected under Sections (D), (E), or (F) of this rule shall have fifteen (15) days from the date of appointment to decide whether or not to accept the case and enter his or her decision. The filing of the acceptance vests jurisdiction in the special judge. An oath or additional evidence of acceptance of jurisdiction is not required.
(H) Selection under local rule. In the event a special judge does not accept the case under Sections (D), (E) or (F), or a judge disqualifies and recuses under Section (C), In the event a judge disqualifies and recused under Section (C), or does not accept the case under Section (D), the appointment of an eligible special judge shall be made pursuant to a local rule approved by the Indiana Supreme Court which provides for the following:(1) appointment of persons eligible under Section J who: a) are within the administrative district as set forth in Administrative Rule 3(A), or b) are from a contiguous county, and have agreed to serve as a special judge in the court where the case is pending;
(2) the effective use of all judicial resources within an administrative district; and
(3) certification to the Supreme Court of Indiana of cases in which no judge is eligible to serve as special judge or the particular circumstance of a case warrants selection of a special judge by the Indiana Supreme Court.
A person appointed to serve as special judge under a local rule must accept jurisdiction in the case unless the appointed special judge is disqualified pursuant to the Code of Judicial Conduct, ineligible for service under this rule, or excused from service by the Indiana Supreme Court. The order of appointment under the local rule shall constitute acceptance. An oath or additional evidence of acceptance of jurisdiction is not required.
Plaintiff here in Bob Kern ia a Democrat, who qualified for the ballot and who is directly challenging in 2012 primary election US representative Andre Carson. Andre Carson is married to Mariama Shaheed-Carson. Mariama Shaheed is the daughter of judge David Shaheed, who was assigned to preside over this case. (See exhibit 1, printout from “My Life” on line search)
Outcome of this case, which is an elections fraud case will affect Mr. Kern’s position as a candidate and might give Mr. Kern an edge in the contest against judge Shaheed’s son in low.
Based on Rule 79 C(3) judge Shaheed will need to recuse himself from presiding over the case at hand.
Based on Rule 79(H) a special judge needs to be appointed from a contiguous county. Plaintiffs are moving this court to appoint a judge from the contiguous Morgan county.
CONCLUSION
Based on the above Judge Shaheed will need to recuse himself as a presiding judge in the case at hand. A special judge from the Morgan County will need to be appointed.
Respectfully submitted
/s/ Orly Taitz
/s/ Bob Kern
/s/ Karl Swihart
/s/ Edward Kesler
/s/ Frank Weyl
Certificate of Service
I, Lila Dubert, am over 18 years old, not a party to this legal action, attest that I served the defendants with above pleadings on April 3, 2012 by first class mail, postage affixed
/s/ Lila Dubert
04.03.2012
Comments
11 Responses to “Draft of recusal motion for IN, seeking to recuse judge Shaheed”
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
April 3rd, 2012 @ 3:05 pm
Dr. Taitz, I apologize if this post is somewhat off topic, but I believe it is important>
What do you think…?
SNOPES NO MORE…
Many of the e-mails that have been Sent or forwarded that had any anti Obama in it were negated by Snopes. I thought that was odd. Check this out.
Snopes, Soros and the Supreme Court’s Kagan. We-l-l-l-l now, I guess the time has come to check out Snopes!
You don’t suppose it might not be a good time to take a second look at some of the stuff that got kicked in the ditch by Snopes, do ya?
We’ve known that it was owned by a lefty couple but hadn’t known it to be financed by Soros!
Snopes is heavily financed by George Soros; a big time supporter of Obama!
In our Search for the truth department, we find what we have suspected on many occasions. We went to Snopes to check something about the dockets of the new Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan who Obama appointed and Snopes said the e-mail was false and there were no such dockets so we Googled the Supreme Court, typed in Obama-Kagan, and guess what?
Yep you got it; Snopes Lied! Everyone of those dockets are there. So Here is what we wrote to Snopes:
“Referencing the article about Elena Kagan and Barak Obama dockets: The information you have posted stating that there were no such cases as claimed and the examples you gave are blatantly false.
We went directly to the Supreme Courts website, typed in Obama Kagan and immediately came up with all of the dockets that the article made reference to. We have long suspected that you really slant things but this was really shocking.
Thank You, We hope you will be much more truthful in the future, but I doubt it.
That being said, I’ll bet you didn’t know this. Kagan was representing Obama in all the petitions to prove his citizenship. Now she may help rule on them. Folks, this is really ugly. Chicago Politics: and the beat goes on and on and on.
Once again the US Senate sold us out! Now we know why Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court. Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docket and search for Obama. She was the Solicitor General for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owed her big time.
All of the requests were denied of course. They were never heard. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesn’t it? The American people mean nothing any longer. It’s all about payback time for those who compromised themselves to elect someone who really has no true right to even be there.
Here are some web sites of the Supreme Court Docket:
You can look up some of these hearings and guess what? Elana Kagan is the attorney representing Obama!
Check out these examples:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-8857.htm https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-6790.htm https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-724.htm
If you are not interested in justice or in truth, simply delete. However, if you hold sacred the freedoms granted to you by the U.S. Constitution; by all means…
PASS it ON!
April 3rd, 2012 @ 3:44 pm
Court tells DOJ to write memo by thursday!..
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/firing_back_re_obama_judicial_activism_comment_fedl_appeals_judge_tells_ag_/
April 3rd, 2012 @ 5:22 pm
I hope he is a brave Shaheed :))))))
April 3rd, 2012 @ 5:24 pm
7209 Robin Hood Drive!!!!!!!!
Upper Marlboro/Winston/Lucky Strike!!!!! Priceless!!!!!:))))
April 3rd, 2012 @ 8:33 pm
M.S.Willet,
it IS ugly but the masses are totally
waking up to Obama’s real agenda and everyone is putting his corrupt puzzle together- he’s got to be FREAKING!
Redd,
I guarantee arrogant Obama and his strongarm arrogant bodyguard Holder thumb their noses and NEVER provide that 3 page letter by this Thursday deadline at noon.
Mark my words they won’t do it!
April 3rd, 2012 @ 9:21 pm
Orly,Have you seen this article? An Alabama State Supreme Court judge recognizes the fraud but claims no jurisdiction over SoS
High court justice: Obama birth certificate fishy
Says evidence raises ‘serious questions about authenticity’
Published: 4 days ago
by Drew Zahn
An Alabama State Supreme Court justice earlier this week agreed that findings suggesting Barack Obama presented a forged birth certificate to the nation “would raise serious questions about the [document’s] authenticity” if presented as evidence in court.
Though the Alabama court denied a a petition filed by Hugh McInnish seeking to require an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate before the sitting president would be allowed on the state’s ballot in November, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.
Parker writes, “Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”
The “certain documentation” Parker refers to is the findings of an investigation conducted by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
As WND reported, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse announced there is probable cause indicating the documents released by the White House last April purported to be Obama’s original, long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration card are actually forgeries.
McInnus describes himself in his petition as “a person educated and experienced in … computer science,” and cites the work of Arpaio and WND articles repeatedly in his claim that the documents Obama has presented to public as proof of his eligibility to serve as president are “forgeries.”
In his concurrence, Parker describes McInnish’s petition as follows: “McInnish seeks from this court a writ of mandamus, directly ordering Beth Chapman, as secretary of state for the State of Alabama, ‘to demand that [President Barack Hussein] Obama cause a certified copy of his bona-fide birth certificate be delivered to her direct from the government official who is in charge of the record in which it is stored, and to make the receipt of such a prerequisite to his name being placed on the Alabama ballot for the … November 6, 2012, general election.’”
Parker, who also wrote a concurrence in another case arguing Roe v. Wade should be overturned, agreed that Arpaio’s findings were legitimate cause to question Obama’s presented documents, but nonetheless joined his fellow justices in denying McInnish’s petition.
“The Alabama Constitution implies that this court is without jurisdiction over McInnish’s original petition,” Parker explains. “The office of the secretary of state of Alabama is not a ‘court of inferior jurisdiction’ that this court may control through the issuance of a writ in response to a petition.”
April 4th, 2012 @ 10:01 am
I trust everyone here is aware what a “shaheed” is in Islam.
April 4th, 2012 @ 10:54 am
Hey, I just stopped in to visit your blog and thought I’d say thank you.
April 4th, 2012 @ 4:21 pm
I am not sure, I think it means righteous or martyr, not sure. What does it mean
April 4th, 2012 @ 10:22 pm
Snopes is a group that made me doubt their authenticity about 3-years ago! Little distortions kept creeping up and I’d try to get others to see this. Finally, more people have become aware of the so-called “online” experts in politics!
And…I didn’t know that Soros was behind this con! But that now makes sense! He’s behind most everything that deals with the destruction of America. So everyone needs to begin to see WHOM the real problem people really are!
The treason is all over the place, but we do have a CURE for this. In due time, Patriots!
April 5th, 2012 @ 2:36 pm
shaheed – Arabic term for holy martyrs;
applied by Palestinians to suicide bombers.
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/shaheed