grim

I know because I am a legal assistant and looking this stuff up is easy if you work where is have access to Pacer and West Law.

According to this weeks Northwest Current, all candidates were emailed an invitation to this event. When I heard that Rees rejected the offer, I did call yesterday and asked if it was true and Mr. Brandon said that Rees merely wrote thanking him for the opportunity but he was not interested without further explanation.

I see your point. That 1991, case surrounded a claim that Rees had fathered a child with that woman but when that woman refused to submit to DNA testing after hearing after hearing going on for years, Magistrate Judge Dennis Doyle dismissed the matter in 1998. The DC Court of Appeals seems to have been asked to rule on a matter of law for purposes of instructing the lower court on what direction it should take.

Why would Rees not be invited?

Truthseeker I am me and what I say can be checked out to be correct if you take the time. I believe that Rees has publicly made it clear a good time ago that debates were not for him especially in a thing he wrote for The Mail at DC Watch.

I do not have that case in front of me but if you use Pacer you can see it up on your screen.

Sorry, I thought you meant US Court of Appeals for DC. The only case I found for Rees at the DC Court of Appeals was in 1991 not 1995.

These government officials are lazy and do not want to be bothered with requests to do their job.

That case is open to the public. It is Case No SP-1-98. It is available online or in person. I am quoting from the court records and not a news reporter and you might want to do the same in the future so as to be accurate in all that you say.

Bob Brandon who is in charge of the Ward 3 Democrats said that Rees declined theor offer to participate. You can call them and ask.

True Bfrankdc. I would say that more of my friends got Rees campaign thing by email than in hand sort to say. I called D.DOT about Rees putting his stuff up on poles, they looked into it and came back and said that he is not violating any laws and that they have on file a copy of what he is putting up. I asked the DC BOEE if I think anybody is lying about themselves can they do something about it and they said NO as most politicians are not always truthful and pad their credentials. I even asked if Rees could be forced to disclose where he got that so called super email list of voters and ditto, they said they have no authority to compel such. I have gone down that Road Bfrankdc on two candidates without luck. The other candidate I am concerned with is Erik Gaull.

That appeal was up at the US Court of Appeals in Boston not the one here in DC. Rees does not have any cases at the US Court of Appeals in DC. What cases I did find in DC about Rees were more favorable to him than against him.

I read the entire text from Pacer. It said Rees created a website that was insulting and somebody emailed a note to all the judges directing them to look at it. At the hearing, Judge Rankin agreed what Rees did was a protected right, there is no evidence that Rees was the one who sent the email to the judges but the Asst US Attorney Boasberg said if it happens again and Rees can be found to be the one who sends it then they would prosecute but sadly, it is a civil matter subject to a fine if found to have been committed. Often the papers do not report things clearly.

What I am referring to Bfrank is that Rees has been floating around a Spanish version of his ad that does indicate that it was created in the Dominican Republic by a company out of Puerto Rico. I do not see anything illegal in that or the ad you have posted.

What I read was the court awarded Rees the basic damages he asked for but not the punitive damages so Rees appealed to get those punitive damages but his appeal was denied and he had to accept the judgment in his favor for just real damages.

I heard that this coming Tuesday at St Columba Church in Tenletown there will be the first debate between the ward 3 candidates beginning at 7:30 PM. Rees will not be participating because he stated to the DC Democratic Party for Ward 3 why waste time on such an event when less than 1% of all voters will come or even care. While I will agree with Rees on the lack of interest, I think that he is running a very unorthodox campaign and I do not know if he is immitating someone else or this is just his way of being.

Bfrank, When I called over to the Prince Georges Hospital Center and asked about Rees and IDC, I was put through to a Mr. Singh who oversees the hospitals outsourced contracts and he stated that Mr. Rees is the dental clinic administrator and that they do have a contract with IDC. I think everybody spoke to the wrong people when they called. As for other matters, I have no knowledge of them.

Factchecker2 some of the literature I have seen says at the bottom (Printed in the Dominican Republic by Ricardo Cruz & Associates, San Juan, Puerto Rico).

Again checking the Pacer system, Truthseeker...Rees did not send any email to judges. This case you speak of surrounds an internet website despicting a judge Bayly as a drunk watching TV, Bayly took offense to it, ordered Rees to be charged for insulting a judge but the US Attorney refused to charge Rees claiming it would violate his rights to free speech and aother judge agreed and the case was kicked out. You guys need to subscribe to Pacer.

According the Pacer system we have in our offices, Rees v. Lugo was a case where Rees sued Lugo and others over some breach, Rees won on a summary judgment without a hearing although he requested one and they appealed as he wanted to argue for punitive damages not just what he got. The other case listed by Bfrankdc does exist under that federal court case number.