Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Obama Citizenship Blogs -> The Right Side of Life
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Obama Citizenship
: The Right Side of LifeDonofrio, Pidgeon on Quo Warranto: Eligibility, Illegal Use of Funds, Exercise of Authority
By Phil
In a Right Side of Life exclusive, I had reported (based on this Portland Civil Rights Examiner posting by Dianne Cotter) that attorneys Leo Donofrio and Stephen Pidgeon have, in fact, gotten together and have been retained by lead Plaintiff James Anderer and other Chrysler dealers to appeal on damages incurred in the Chrysler bankruptcy sale.
Further, the concept of quo warranto — an ancient “prerogative writ” — has been confirmed by Devvy Kidd’s recent telephone conversation with Mr. Donofrio as a petition by which he and Mr. Pidgeon will be challenging the Obama Administration under three counts.
According to Ms. Kidd’s interview, while § 16-3501. Persons against whom issued; civil action states the following:
A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.
She was able to confirm with Mr. Donofrio that the above section is a bit of a “catch-all:”
Leo points out that the statute not only applies to eligibility, but also to the unlawful “exercise” of authority via public office. At the common law, quo warranto was not only used to challenge usurpation of office but also to challenge illegal government actions and the current quo warranto statute was written as a catch all in this regard. So Leo and Steve will bring two counts under 3501, eligibility and illegal use of Government funds. The second count refers to the use of TARP funds to facilitate the Chrysler Bankruptcy sale.
An important aspect of potential “specific injury” may not have been had by creditors, but dealers face substantially greater particular harm:
The 2d Circuit Court of Appeals dealt with this issue as raised by creditors of Chrysler in an appeal of the Sale transaction to which the dealers were not a party. In that decision, the Court of Appeals stated that the issue raised “interesting and unresolved issues”, but the appellants did not have standing based upon their limited injuries. The Chrylser dealers have the requisite injury – loss of their frnachises – to meet the standing requirements. They will raise the issue in the quo warranto petition before the DC District Court.
And it looks like those TARP monies could also play a part in the filings:
You may recall that former Treasury Secretary Paulson refused to use TARP funds to bail out the auto industry indicating that to do so was not proper under the statute. A Congressional bill to allow TARP funds to be used for that purpose failed in the Senate, but the Obama administration went forward with it anyway.
Donofrio and Pidgeon also plan a third quo warranto count based upon 16-3521(2) of the quo warranto statute…
Here’s what § 16-3521. Persons against whom issued; civil action (2) states:
A quo warranto may be issued from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in the name of the District of Columbia against -
…
(2) one or more persons who act as a corporation within the District of Columbia without being duly authorized, or exercise within the District of Columbia corporate rights, privileges, or franchises not granted them by law in force in the District of Columbia.
The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.
As Ms. Kidd puts it:
In other words, the actions taken by the government were an illegal exercise of corporate authority. The government has acted as a political agent (acting as board of directors) against corporations using taxpayer money to restructure the auto industry under their vision.
In the posting, Mr. Donofrio emphasizes that he and Mr. Pidgeon represent the best interests of the dealers, leaving open the possibility of a settlement.
In reference to the bankruptcy deal, Messrs. Donofrio and Pidgeon shared with me that, per a recent article by Neil Roland of Automotive News, the House is crafting a new bill for the rejected dealers:
WASHINGTON — House leaders crafted a bill over the weekend that would provide third-party arbitration for rejected General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group dealerships using criteria more favorable to dealers than those proposed by the automakers last week.
The legislation, which is being forwarded to Senate leaders for consideration, would allow dealers who want to appeal their closures to ?present any kind of relevant information during the arbitration,? a copy of the new bill shows.
The arbitrator is directed to consider the dealer’s experience, past profitability, current economic viability and the demography and geography of the local market, the legislation says.
?The arbitrator shall balance the interests of the covered dealership, the covered manufacturer and the public and shall decide, based on that balancing, whether or not the covered dealership should be reinstated,? the bill says.
Nevertheless, both attorneys say that the proposed legislation would not satisfy their client’s needs and that they will be moving forward with litigation. “Unless the legislation returns our clients to their franchise agreements as they were in effect prior to the Chrysler Bankruptcy,” they said, “we will be forced to press on in the courts.”
In other news related to Mr. Donofrio, his Hawaiian UIPA requests are on hold as he focuses on the above.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- The background:
- The questions:
-Phil
Subscriptions -=- Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)
TRSoL News (semi-automatically-generated headlines every day): News.TheRightSideOfLife.com
Photo courtesy BrightCove
Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on December 07, 2009 (boomark / email).
Illegal Immigrant Responsibility and Reform Act of 1996
Explanation of the controversial illegal immigration law
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
How to Become a US Citizen
Citizenship Eligibility, Application, Exmaination
HIV Funds
Dallas Independent School District pays $336,000 settlement for misappropriated program funds.
Grand River Dam Authority
Faces Class Action over Flood Damage
Lake Superior Center Authority
$275,000 settlement reached in construction dispute.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
$2.3 million settlement reached in wrongful death lawsuit.
Forest Laboratories Potentially Illegal Marketing
Forest Laboratories Potentially Illegal Marketing
Imported Diets
Pills Contain Illegal Drugs

Justices to Consider Cert Petition on Citizenship
Eligibility lawyer says Homeland Security shadowing him
Supreme Court Turns Down Donofrio Appeal
JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT ALLEGED BY LEO DONOFRIO IN NJ APPELLATE DIVISION - OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE








