From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rhodes v. MacDonald

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Mar 15, 2010
368 F. App'x 949 (11th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-15418 Non-Argument Calendar.

March 15, 2010.

Jonathan Harris Levy, Hilton Head, SC, for Interested Party-Appellant.

Eric Fleisig-Greene, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. D.C. Docket No. 09-00106-CV-CDL-4.

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.


Orly Taitz appeals the district court's imposition of a monetary sanction against her in the sum of $20,000 pursuant to Rule 11(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Taitz argues that (1) the district court was required to recuse after she challenged the procedure the court was employing to determine whether to sanction her under Rule 11 and (2), assuming that recusal was not required, the court failed to afford her the due process Rule 11(c)(3) requires.

We have fully considered Taitz's arguments. We find them unpersuasive and therefore affirm the district court's sanctions judgment.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Rhodes v. MacDonald

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Mar 15, 2010
368 F. App'x 949 (11th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

Rhodes v. MacDonald

Case Details

Full title:Connie RHODES, Captain, M.D., F.S., Plaintiff, Dr. Orly Taitz, Interested…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: Mar 15, 2010

Citations

368 F. App'x 949 (11th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Liberi v. Taitz

Some of these parties have a long and complicated litigation history. See e.g., Berg v. Obama, 586 F.3d 234…

Liberi v. Taitz

Some of these parties have a long and complicated litigation history. See e.g., Berg v. Obama, 586 F.3d 234…