UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 18, 2009
ANTHONY MARTINI, ET AL.
WILLIAM JOSEPH MARTIN, JR., ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Andrew J. Guilford
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Proceedings: [IN CHAMBERS] ORDER RE HEARING ON STATUS AND RULE 11 COMPLIANCE
Plaintiffs Anthony Martini and Annette Martini ("Plaintiffs") filed this action against several Defendants. This is not the first case Plaintiffs have filed in this Court. Being familiar with Plaintiffs' prior actions, and after reviewing their newest Complaint, the Court is concerned about whether the Complaint complies with the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 11(b) requires, for every pleading, motion, or paper presented to the Court, that the presenting party or his attorney:
"certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) the details of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b).
Plaintiffs' Complaint makes highly doubtful assertions. For instance, the Complaint states that Defendants are government workers that "are current and active Members of the Terrorist Group Bilderberg, Freemasonry or Freemasons, [and/or] Skull and Bones" that continuously conspired to have Plaintiffs murdered. (Compl. ¶¶ 48; 60-93.) Before the many individual Defendants are forced to respond to these very serious and doubtful allegations, Plaintiffs should be required to show that their allegations have merit. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(3) ("On its own, the court may order an attorney, law firm, or party to show cause why conduct . . . has not violated Rule 11(b).")
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to appear on September 28, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. and show cause why the Complaint does not violate Rule 11(b). At the September 28, 2009 hearing, the Court may also consider how this matter may be handled in a manner that is just, speedy, and inexpensive, including what would be an appropriate early date for trial. Plaintiffs shall appear, either individually or through counsel, or shall dismiss this case.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.