Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Moyer off Moss v. Bush?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
georgia10 Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:14 PM
Original message
Moyer off Moss v. Bush?
Courtesy of terriersmith over at dkos:

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1027

Yesterday, December 23, 2004 attorneys for Plaintiffs successfully filed Motion to disqualify Justice Moyer from sitting as the Judge on the Moss v. Bush matter based on the fact that he has an apparently conflict of interest in that the election challenge of the Presidency potentially affects his race (and the suits are effectively collateral actions) The Ohio Code of Judicial ethics, Canon 3 specifically requires that any judge with any financial interest in the outcome of litigation recuse him or herself or be disqualified. (Similar Codes of Judicial ethics exist for virtually every Judicial office.)

Thoughts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
berniew1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. And documentation of Arnebecks case keeps growing: more fraud found
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lauri Donating Member (63 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. The freepress article
is what it is all about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-04 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Arnebeck's tireless! Got to give him credit!
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
read the law first Donating Member (398 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't know what successfully filed means.
Does that mean that they were successful in giving it to the clerk and the clerk was succssful in stamping the document "filed?"

Seems like it's a motion to disqualify. Don't know why "successfully" needs to be added. Maybe the snow and ice prevented them from filing? Strange use of the word. Makes it appear that the motion was granted but the "fine print" indicates that its just a motion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
georgia10 Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-04 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Yeah, that's what I thought too.
I think "successfully filed" may mean they made it through the snowstorn and got it stamped at the courthouse :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
read the law first Donating Member (398 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-04 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Today's activity certainly shows the difference between a ....
Today's activity certainly shows the difference between a successfully filed motion and a motion that has been granted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mordarlar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. He should have done this himself...
before an order had to be handed down. Shows his character though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mordarlar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-28-04 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. oops, i took it to mean it was ordered. strange wording no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaliTracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-04 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. They asked, but Moyers refused to Recuse n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC