Actually, it was in reference to what President GW Bush could have been impeached for, and no, I don’t think it could have been over going to war in Iraq. I did support that, even though that initiative very well predated my blog’s existence

-Phil

I haven’t posted here in a while, but I had read something earlier that you wrote in reference to the Iraq war that you didn’t think that we should have been in it, at least I think it was you. If it wasn’t and since I can’t find it anyway, then I do apologize. However, we should definitely have been in that war. I was trying to find a way to write you personally on this subject, but I can’t. If the Arabs really understood who we are as a nation, we have have been dead a long time ago. Keep that in mind. I’m not talking about all of them, but I’m pretty sure many may know this. And I’m talking here scripturally. Is there a place that I can write you personally, and if not, that is okay too.

Tishri

My guess is that this was a novel issue, and the judge to hear arguments on whether he had jurisdiction or not. By the time Jody’s case was heard, there had been numerous decisions that the judge hearing Jody’s case could look to in determining jurisdiction and standing.

Part of the issue is that you seem not to understand procedure. Before you can argue your case on the merits, you must prove that the court has jurisdiction to hear your case. PRoving the court can hear the case is not a matter of presenting your evidence, but showing that the court has the authority to decide the case.

It doesn’t matter if you can say “I have videotape of Barack Obama being born in Kenya. I have three priests, five nuns, and the nice little old lady who makes cookies, all of who were present at Obama’s birth in Kenya.” That isn’t relevant to jurisdiction. If that’s what you argued, that’s why you lost.

P.S.

You’ve forgotten or didn’t know that the queen is the most powerful piece.

With all due respect, Counselor, you still don’t get it. I am not referring to the rule of law here, but judgement or lack thereof on the part of Judge Kelsey.

Do you mean to suggest this venerable old judge could not have known from the outset he had no jurisdiction? He read my pleadings ahead of time. He set an emergency hearing for later in the day. He teleconferenced in two of Brunner’s counsel. He heard their arguments over the phone. Based on this emergency hearing, he set a date for the following week. He could have stopped this at any point, but didn’t. He kept going. One would think with some 30+ years on the bench, this judge would have known the limitations of his court for a suit of this nature.

So my conclusion, based on your statements is the judge was either incompetent or intrigued to hear my arguments. Either way, not my fault he “carried on.”

BTW, still waiting on your business card. You said earlier that next time I needed to hire an attorney. Are you licensed in Ohio?

You can believe you checkmated me all you want, but you’re ignoring the fact that your only piece is a pawn and it’s about 4 spaces from my king.

I am a Virgo. I have a very logical mind. If you have a JD, you must have a logical mind as well. Please don’t put any spin on my comment.

In one instance you stated my case was “frivolous and without merit”, and basically I was the loser so should pay costs.

You told Jody B. a court should only hear a case “if it has jurisdiction”, and apparently the court Jody filed in did not. So her case was not even heard.

Therefore, by logic and implication, Judge Kelsey should pay costs because he agreed to hear a case he knew he had no jurisdiction over, therefore “wasting the court’s time and money.”

I really do believe I have checkmated you, Counselor.

From reading the dismissal order, it looks as though Brunner’s attorneys filed a 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and after hearing arguments on the motion, Judge Kelsey granted the dismissal.

I don’t see how this is inconsistent with what I said above.

Please see my comment on 2-14-09 @ 5:55pm.

1Lishell is toast.

Your Fellow Compatriot,

Carol Greenberg

In Phil’s other thread, Greenberg & Brunner; you seemed to take perverse pleasure in attempting to torture me, and now Jody B; that these cases have “no merit, are frivolous, and the court lacks jurisdiction.” HOWEVER, may I point out your own words to Jody:

“Jody,
If the court doesn’t have jurisdiction to decide the case, it would be a waste of time to move on to the arguments. That’s one of the most basic principles of jurisdiction.

A court must have personal jurisdiction (the court must be able to exercise power over all the parties involved) and the court must have subject matter jurisdiction (the court must have the power to decide the issue involved). If both of those criteria aren’t met, any decision handed down by the court is null and void.”

In MY case, Judge Kelsey agreed to hear. Emergency hearing, AND hearing the following week. Part of his final decision was: “court lacks jurisdiction in this matter.”

So now you are in ESSENCE SAYING Judge Kelsey lacked “good judgment” in HEARING my case because he SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG his court lacked jurisdiction? So then HE is the one who WASTED TIME AND THE COURT’S MONEY, CORRECT??? AND I AM PENALIZED??? WITH COURT COSTS??? Judge Kelsey and I both live in the same city. We both drink the same water. PLEASE!!! 1LISHELL!!! ‘SPLAIN IT TO ME!!!

WHICH ONE OF US IS WRONG??? I WANNA HEAR YOU GET OUT OF THIS ONE!!!
TAKE IT UP WITH THE JUDGE!!! OR AS YOU SAID TO ME BEFORE: “SHUT UP.