Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pro Se
840 Pinnacle Ct. Suite 6-B
Mesquite, NV 89024
Ph.
codyjudy@xmission.com
www.codyjudy.us
__________________________________________________
UNITED STATES COURT - DISTRICT OF NEVADA
__________________________________________________
DATE FILED
November 3, 2008
CODY ROBERT JUDY,
Plaintiff,
JUDGE:
Kent J. Dawson
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL
COMMITTEE,
Defendant,
EMERGENCY EXHIBIT OF EVIDENCE
NOTICE TO SUBMIT FOR A DECISION
CODY ROBERT JUDY
(EX-PARTE SUA SPONTE)
Plaintiff , ) ON ALL 3 PENDING
) MOTIONS FOR
CIVIL ORDER
JUDGEMENT
_________________________________________________________
Comes now the Plaintiff, pro se, and submits this EMERGENCY EXHIBIT OF
EVIDENCE & NOTICE TO SUBMIT FOR A DECISION (EX-PARTE SUA SPONTE) ON ALL 3
PENDING MOTIONS FOR CIVIL ORDER JUDGEMENT.
1Plaintiff infuses all Federal Law and Case Law applicable and attributed in the
attached Exhibit A of the Berg v. Obama case now considered in the U.S. Supreme
Court including
a.
b.
All National Security Considerations applicable in Obama v. Berg, with Sen.
John McCain.
c.
All Constitutional Considerations of National Civil Unrest and disobedience of
law represented by the lack of spine for the U.S. Constitution , application of law,
and Judicial Responsibility.
d.
All application of urgency to make a decision before the election, to avoid a
U.S. Constitutional Crisis, which could lead to an International crisis of global
proportion.
2Upwards of 100 Million of the American People have a direct awareness of the
U.S. Constitutional law now of the Natural Born qualification for U.S. President that
have logged on to www.obamacrimes.com and have real knowledge of the
Constitutional Demand for a Natural Born President. This poses a national demand
for Justice by the Judicial Branch considering the issue presented by this case.
3As Plaintiff is aware, this is the only pending case upon which direct harm
has merit and standing is appropriate, as Plaintiff is also a declared and legal
candidate for the office of the U.S. Presidency.
4With these considerations, Plaintiff request an immediate Civil Judgment
before the election to avoid the Constitutional Crisis, The plausible and potential
National Civil Unrest, and the plausible and potential global crisis of an American
U.S. President being elected who is not a Natural Born Citizen and of at least 35
years of age as the U.S. Constitution specifies plainly, simply, and very clearly.
EXHIBIT OF EVIDENCE
A
1
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
CITATION TO OPINIONS BELOW
The Memorandum and Order of the United
States District Court, Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, Berg v. Obama, et al, 08-cv-4083
(2008), is attached to the Appendix as Exhibit A.
JURISDICTION
The United States District Court, Eastern
District of Pennsylvania entered its Order on October
24, 2008. This Courts jurisdiction is invoked
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2101(e), Mr. Berg having
asserted below and asserting in this petition the
deprivation of rights secured by the United States
Constitution.
Jurisdiction of the United States Supreme
Court pursuant to is invoked under Supreme Court
Rules 10 and 11 (hereinafter, Rule 10 and Rule
11). Rule 10 provides that [a] review on writ of
2
certiorari is not a matter of right, but of judicial
discretion. A petition for a writ of certiorari will be
granted only when there are special and important
reasons therefore. Jurisdiction of this Court is
3
26
aesthetics of Morton or the party disconnect evident
in Hunt. The foundation of the claims presented by
Mr. Berg, the will to avoid a certain constitutional
crisis, certainly amount to a personal stake, but in
the case that this Court may deem otherwise, the
underlying claims absolutely present the adversarial
contest under which standing was found in the
recent decisions in Akins and APCC.
Without a doubt, the Respondents will note
that the premise behind Akins was the failure to
obtain information, and will attempt to distinguish
APCC because it involves standing in the context of
contracts, assignors and assignees. However, Mr.
Berg has indeed sought information vital to the
election process put forth in the U.S. Constitution,
and this Court in APCC stated that, apart from
historical precedent for permitting suits by assignees
under assignments for collection, [i]n any event, we
27
find that the assignees before us satisfy the Article
III standing requirements articulated in more recent
decisions of this Court. Furthermore, this Courts
treatment of the standing doctrine in APCC should
be enough to show that the reasoning exhibited by
the district court judge, grounded in Lujan,
misperceives the three prongs of standing as
enunciated just four months ago by this Court.
Therefore, because of the reasons stated above,
because of the sliding scale nature of a test for
19
SUMMARY
Plaintiff, pro se, here in request the court to make an immediate decision on all 3
pending Motions before this court, for the Plaintiff, and call by phone the Plaintiff
and Defendant to notify of Courts decision that immediate notifications can be
publically announced that a stay of election might be developed with the current
U.S. President George W. Bush by executive order.
________________________________________
Cody Robert Judy
Pro Se
28
CERTIFICATION OF MAILING
I do hereby certify that I mailed, via U.S. Mail, a true and correct copy of the
forgoing EMERGENCY EXHIBIT OF EVIDENCE & NOTICE TO SUBMIT FOR A DECISION
(EX-PARTE SUA SPONTE) ON ALL 3 PENDING MOTIONS FOR CIVIL ORDER JUDGEMENT
Postage pre-paid, to the DEFENDANT(s) at :
Rew R Goodenow Esq,
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 750
Reno, NV. 89501
29