AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

PETER F. PAUL, Plaintiff, v. JUDICIAL WATCH, INC, et al., Defendants.

ORDER

ROYCE LAMBERTH, District Judge

Upon consideration of defendants' motion [2] to dismiss plaintiff's complaint, the opposition and reply thereto, the entire record herein, and the relevant law, it is hereby

ORDERED that defendants' motion [2] to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; it is further

ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count 1 as to defendant Fitton and Orfanedes is GRANTED. Count 1 is hereby dismissed as to defendants Fitton and Orfanedes with prejudice; it is further

ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count 2 as to defendant Fitton is GRANTED. Count 2 is hereby dismissed as to defendant Fitton with prejudice; it is further

ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count 3 as to Judicial Watch and Orfanedes is DENIED; it is further

ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss count 3 as to Fitton for unauthorized practice of law and as to Judicial Watch and Orfanedes for aiding and abetting Fitton's alleged unauthorized practice of law, is GRANTED and that count is hereby dismissed with prejudice as to that conduct; it is further

ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Counts 4 — 6 is GRANTED. Counts 4 — 6 are hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, the following counts remain in this action:

1. Count 1 as to Judicial Watch;

2. Count 2 as to Judicial Watch and Orfanedes; and

3. Count 3 as to Judicial Watch and Orfanedes.

SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PAUL v. JUDICIAL WATCH, INC (D.D.C. 2-6-2008)
(Feb 6, 2008)