The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin makes mind-bogglingly false assertions in his various court filings. Consider this from his opposition to my motion to dismiss his first amended complaint in his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.
The Smith case he mentions is a case from the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland which interprets the Maryland one year statute of limitations on defamation as also applying to false light invasion of privacy. It’s the controlling legal authority in the court handling the RICO Madness. TDPK states that Maryland’s highest court, that would be the Court of Appeals, has ruled otherwise. If that were the case, that would settle the law because defamation is a matter of state rather than federal law.
However, …
The Allen v. Bethlehem Steele case TDPK cites never went to the Court of Appeals. It is a Court of Special Appeals case, and that court is an intermediate appeals court. It’s decisions on matters of law are not binding on any federal court. The Court of Appeals has never ruled on the statute of limitations for false light, so the federal court’s precedent controls. Furthermore, there is no such case citation as 314 Md. 458 (1988). The proper citation for Allen is 76 Md. App. 642 (1988).
Oops.
There has been a certain sense of TDPK sorta/kinda making it up as he goes along. It will be interesting to see what kind of bizarre legal theories he will put in his omnibus opposition to the motions to dismiss his second amended complaint.
Stay tuned.
Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.
When does he blame it all on GW?
Claiming that “the Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin makes mind-bogglingly false assertions in his various court filings” is exactly what Team Themis did.
So, if you make an incorrect reference in your pleadings, does it invalidate your argument? This is a non-lawyer asking just for better popcorn munching from the peanut gallery.
So if you act like Neal are you?
Lol, no. I just didn’t know if your argument was legally invalidated. Logically it’s not the case, and it’s just a simple matter of misplaced references, but I didn’t know if legally that meant you got the big, red X. Like I said, IANAL
So if you make an assertion, and provide your reference, and it doesn’t support your assertion, is the assertion true?
No. Unsupported it is.
If you are who I think you are, please email me.
Email sent, but I’m not who you may think I am. Sorry 🙂
That’s okay dear, I’ve responded.
The only thing that can invalidate an argument is if a judge or jury rule against it. You are free to argue any old thing. You don’t get marked down by the teacher for logical fallacies or lying, or whatever (In Maryland District Court and the Federal Court in Maryland, you are also free to forge evidence). Theoretically, though, in an adversarial process, the other side can point out your errors and then the decider, the judge or jury, makes a decision.
However, neither judges nor juries are bound to apply the law or rules to their decisions. I mean, they kind of are, but there is no sanction against doing whatever the heck they want. Ever hear of jury nullification?
So if you go in and argue that Abraham Lincoln warned against believing what you read on the Internet, and the judge or jury buys it, well, your argument was valid – bunny with flapjacks on his head or not.
Just an example, I once saw in court an attorney argue that a particular clause in a legal document was 1) explicitly defined in a way that would lead to sanction against one party (on the other side) and 2) too vague to be enforceable against his client. Literally in the same breath. One would think that such an argument would be self-invalidating, but one would be wrong. Someone posted one of these TKPOD’s that what was needed was one of those judges from Law & Order. It just doesn’t work the way you see it on TV.
Shorter: the only bad argument in court is a losing one.
Lol works for me!
understanding now your comment please disregard the neal comment with my most humble apologies = Popcorn this week is on me!
Mmm nom nom! 🙂
In this case, the “incorrect reference” does indeed invalidate the argument because it’s an argument from legal precedent—but the “incorrect reference” actually misstates the ruling court in order to elide the fact that the “precedent” actually has no precedential value in federal court.
Reblogged this on That Mr. G Guy's Blog.
I’ve seen the wrong citation trick before. In cases where a party is bombarding the judge and staff with a large number of cases being cited they may sometimes deliberately use the wrong citation. That way, when the court does an initial cite search by copy and pasting the provided cite it doesn’t find a valid case. The hope seems to be that the court will be so busy that, rather than doing the very simple party-names-state-year search next, they’ll just throw their arms up in the air and believe what the party is claiming about the case must be the truth. It may occasionally work when it comes to cases that don’t actually matter to the resolution of the case, but on something like this? Yeah, they’re going to actually find and read the case.