REQUEST TO SUSPEND THE LAW FIRM OF GORDON AND REES FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW FILE WITH THE ARDC

11/22/2009

CHICAGO-(AEAE) THE AMERICANS FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF ATTORNEY ETHICS (AEAE) an
ATTORNEY WATCH DOG GROUP member has filed a request before the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) www.iardc.org . In a appeal brief filed before the Illinois Appellate Court last week in the Stoller v. Johnson 100 million dollar defamation appeal a clear misstatement of material fact and/or law has been identified, a violation of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 3.3(a) has been identified by Stoller consequently he has now moved to have Gordon and Rees disqualified from the practice of law pending the resolution of the ARDC complaint. It is not uncommon for the ARDC to suspend lawyers from the practice of law pending resolution of an ARDC complaint.
Stoller has asserted that Gordon and Rees made three big mistakes. The first was to take the cas. The second according to allegations in a criminal contempt proceeding involving Gordon and Rees attorneys was to engage in subornation of perjury and the third mistake was to file a response appeal brief containing a misstatement of material fact or law.

8 Comments

EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY
Internships not available now

Help the Equal Justice Party www. equaljusticeparty.org a registered political party in Illinois, support conservative candidates and endorses AEAE. Contribute today!
FREE SPEECH ON THE NET IS NOT 'FREE'. PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR BLOGGING ALL OF THE TIME. THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY IS FIGHTING TO MAINTAIN THE FIRST AMENDMENT WHICH IS SUPPOSE TO GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. , the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Police Dep't of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 95, 33 L. Ed. 2d 212, 92 S. Ct. 2286 (1972); see also Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 530, 537, 65 L. Ed. 2d 319, 100 S. Ct. 2326 (1980)

YOU CAN SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY SUPPORTING THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY. DONATE ON-LINE
Supporting Equal Justice Party helps to maintain the Internet a free voice and EJ supports the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.
The Equal Justice Party (EJ) is a registered Political Action Committee in Chicago, Illinois S 10127 L 15656. The EJ supports conservative causes, conservative candidates, small government.
Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) www.rentamark.net is a not for profit group that supports Equal Justice www.equaljustice.org and advocates the strict enforcement of attorney ethics since 1974.
The purpose of the AEAE Blog is to exalt the law, by holding to the fundamental right of “Equal Justice” for all. It keeps “watch” on attorney and judicial misconduct issues, evolving trademark and constitutional law. It assures all people with the “good news” that in American “right” will prevail especially for those who “never” give-up “fighting” to obtain “justice”. This site adheres to the Law and the Constitution as its authority. The AEAE, is a attorney rating Service. The comments made by AEAE are not actionable because they are statements of opinion Moriarty v. Greene 732 N.E.2d 730, 740 Ill.App), citing Owen v. Can 497 N.E.2d 1145, 1148 (Ill.1986) see Law offices of David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al No 18-3216 Seventh Circuit No 18-3216 decided 01-28-2022.
Ratings are non-actionable opinion statements David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al citing Syngenta Seeds Inc v. Bung North America,Inc 773 F.3d 58 (8th Cir 2014) Illinois Law on expressions of Opinion , an unexplained one star review simply could not be actionable as defamation David Freydin case citing Cf. Kimzey v. Yelp!Inc. 836 F. 3d 1263, 1269-70 (9th Cir 2016)
AEAE LEGAL ETHICS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY EXPERTS, valuations, expert
witness testimony, trademark surveys, brief writer, Appellate Expert.
The author(s) graduated from Mayville State College with a BS Degree, North Dakota State University, MASTERS DEGREE and attended the University of Iowa a for a PHD. The Author(s) are the nation's most renowned
Legal Ethics experts and Intellectual Property Entrepreneur(s) with many years of experience in the field of brief writing, trademarks, licensing and
enforcement, expert witness testimony, trademark valuation Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) an attorney watch dog group since 1974. AEAE has appeared on FOX NEWS, CBS and in
numerous national news papers including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Sun Times etc and on many radio talk shows. AEAE accepts political contributions. AEAE, P.O. Box 60645, Chicago, Illinois 60660. Email [email protected]
312-545-4554
Copyright AEAE 2017, all rights reserved. AEAE accepts no liability for incorrect or inaccurate information appearing here. The opinions expressed here are those o f AEAE Use of this site is subject to our "terms of use" which is published here. Nothing can be duplicated without written permission.
"Litigation is the Sea We swim in,
Litigation is the Air We Breathe
Litigation is War,
Welcome to the Front!"

To Prove Defamation Case?
What Do You Have To Prove? There are two things you have to prove to be true in order to win a case of defamation of character in the court of law. First of all, you have to prove without a doubt that what was said or written about you is not true. Once you have proved that the statement is, in fact, false you have to prove that the other person said the false statement with the intent of causing you some form of harm.
The Fair Reporting Privilege is a defense to any claim of Defamation

The Fair Report Privilege applies to the information contained on this web site.

“[T]he fair report privilege has two requirements: (1) the report must be of an official proceeding; and (2) the report must be complete and accurate or a fair abridgment of the official proceeding. [Citation.] *** For a publication to be considered a fair abridgment, the report must convey to readers a substantially correct account of the official proceedings. [Citation.] A reporter is not privileged to make additions of his own that would convey a defamatory impression or to indict expressly or by innuendo the veracity or integrity of any of the parties. [Citation.] Finally, it is the accuracy of the summary, not the truth or falsity of the information being summarized, that is the benchmark of the privilege. [Citation.]” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Eubanks, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 749 (citing Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 588-90 (2006)). ¶ 30
AEAE argues it reports on the law and law suits and it is the intent of AEAE to "fairly report" these official proceedings.

AEAE has the legal right to evaluate and rate attorneys, government officials, College educators, business leaders See JOHN HENRY BROWNE, et al., AVVO, INC., et al Case No. C07-0920RSL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 18th day of December, 2007. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge

VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT

DISCLAIMER: The AEAE does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.

Phil DeGardinia

11/22/2009 07:16:50 pm

What's a "cas"? and where did they take it? If every lawyer who made a misstatement of fact or law in a brief was suspended, the practice of law would come to a halt. I guess that's what Leo wants, since not being a lawyer, he doesn't have to worry about that. BTW: can ARDC be a "group" if it has only one member?

Perry Mason

11/23/2009 04:20:58 am

Stroller, you just don't get it. You have zero credibility with anyone. Listen very carefully. The courts are not going to take any action against anyone regarding one of you BS "complaints" or motions. Each day you dig yourself into a deeper hole & the governments noose around your neck gets tighter.

Sanctions:

* U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board: In a July 14, 2006 order by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), Stoller was sanctioned by the Board for filing more than 1100 requests of an extension of time to file oppositions for time period between November 2005 and March 2006.[30] The Board vacated all the time extensions filed during that time period and prohibits Stoller from filing any additional extensions for two years.[31] Stoller will be able to file extensions again after two years but only if the extension is filed by an attorney. The appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The time for filing any appeal to the district court has lapsed.

* U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois: On March 8, 2007, the Executive Committee for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois sanctioned Stoller and entered an injunction precluding him from filing any further lawsuits without first obtaining leave of court.

* U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: On August 23, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit imposed a $10,000 fine on Stoller.[33] Stoller's sanction included an order requiring that all courts within the Seventh Circuit not to accept any papers filed by Stoller, until the fine was paid.[33] In April 2008, the court noted that the sanction remained outstanding.

* U.S. Supreme Court: On May 27, 2008, the United States Supreme Court denied Stoller's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his petition for certiorari. The court noted that he had "repeatedly abused this Court's process," and directed its clerk not to accept any further filings from Stoller in noncriminal matters unless Stoller made a compete filing in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 33.1 (i.e., forty copies in typeset booklet form) and accompanied by the required filing fee.

* Other sanctions: In addition to being fined and sanctioned, Stoller or his entities have been ordered to pay their opponents' attorneys' fees in at least seven reported cases.

Anon

11/23/2009 09:49:56 am

Stoller is a joke, pure and simple. His threats are as lacking in credibility as he is. No one has been sanctioned, disbarred or disciplined over the thirty years Stoller has been performing his clown act in the courts. Not one single person who Stoller has attacked. In fact, the only person who has ever been sanctioned on his motions, applications, etc. is Stoller.

Bite Me

11/24/2009 11:12:35 am

Stoller is hilarious. I don't know what we'll do for entertaining reading if he is sent to jail yet again.

fed watcher

11/24/2009 11:49:00 am

Mans a buffon. As I understand it his father Russell was a thief cheat liar and bankrupt also

Dick Daley

11/24/2009 09:24:42 pm

Where is Leo? No posts since 11/22. Is he incarcerated again?

Sybar

11/25/2009 05:29:39 am

Upon information and belief Stoller has been engaged in reading Paul H. Smith's book "Reading the Enemy's Mind" for the last few days before he will give thanks for 2009 "thanksgiving" and the "best" year of his life 2009. Which has given Stoller more "valid" causes of action that will last him the rest of his life....Let us all pray and give thanks over our turkey dinners that Stoller has enough parties to sue for the rest of his life to keep us all entertained....

Nona-Grandma in Italian

11/25/2009 12:00:21 pm

I stumble onto this and find those posting here to be quite the Mansonistas, or more like the Chicago copsters that beat up on the bartender. Sure everyone has his/her day in court or hell. Take your pick...Wish you much enjoyment when you're there.

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics