Andy Martin's (a.k.a. Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona) Dirty Tricks Do Not Fool Federal Courts 2/19/2010

 Andy Martin, a.k.a. Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona will stop at nothing to abuse the United States court system.  In one of his most recent lawsuits filed in September 2009, Martin made some of the most bizarre claims against the Washington Post News and on of it's reporters, Google, three Maryland Judges, an entire Maryland County Government, a small video production company called ADR Productions and several individual citizens of Maryland, Oklahoma and Florida. (see lawsuit at Martin Lawsuit).

Martin then went on with his futile attempt at another run for office in the United States Senate race for the State of Illinois while many of the defendants named in his lawsuit worked on presenting motions for dismissal based on several laws which fully supported their position.  Martin spent so much time concentrating on making outrageous radio ads and claims against one of his opponents and not caring about or respecting the court system and the rules which these courts have put in place, that he never responded to the court or the motions filed against his lawsuit.  The courts even offered him additional time to respond and in an almost arrogant manner, he refused to respond to the olive branch offered him.

After the Honorable Judge Jeanne E. Scott granted the motions for dismissal due to Martin's lack of response to the motions, Martin claims to have never received any notice from the courts.  He claims the Court sent the notices to the wrong address at his Chicago office and they sould have been sent to his New York office.  He even goes as far as to claim that the Chicago mail is a month behind in delivery.  This claim by Martin (link Martin's Motion to Vacate) is clearly one of his "Dirty Tricks" to try and scam the courts again.  All motions have been posted on both Justia.com at http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/illinois/ilcdce/3:2009cv03295/47891/ and on the Court's "Pacer" system site (read Judge Scott's opinion below or at link Opinion).  Further investigation shows that three of the defendants in this case clearly mailed certificates of service to both Martin's Chicago address and his New York address making his claims all that much more bogus.

It's nice to see that the rantings of a lunatic madman who files more frivolous lawsuits than flies in a slaughter house are dismissed by one of our most sacred institutions in the United States, our Court Systems.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

ANDY MARTIN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 09-3295

)

WASHINGTON POST CO., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION

JEANNE E. SCOTT, U.S. District Judge:

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Andy Martin’s

Motion to Vacate Order of Dismissal and to Extend Time for Responses (d/e

15) (Motion to Vacate), and Motion to Clarify Notice in This Lawsuit (d/e

14) (Motion to Clarify). The Court interprets the Motion to Clarify as a

notice to the Court that future correspondence, including notices and

orders, should be sent to the Martin’s post office box in New York, New

York, listed on the Motion to Clarify. The Court allows this request and

directs the Clerk to change the address to which correspondence will be sent

to the New York post office box. The Motion to Clarify is denied to the

extent that he seeks any other relief.

Dockets.Justia.com

2

The Motion to Vacate states that Martin seeks relief from this Court’s

Text Order entered February 10, 2010 (Dismissal Text Order) pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. The Dismissal Text Order dismissed

Martin’s claims against Defendants Daniel Morse, Scott Shirley, John

Gilchrist, and Montgomery County, Maryland. A Rule 59 motion is not

appropriate at this time because there has been no final judgment entered.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The Dismissal Text Order was an interlocutory order.

Martin has alleged claims against several other Defendants that have not yet

been resolved. Notice of Removal (d/e 1), attached Complaint; see Fed. R.

Civ. P. 54(b). Relief under Rule 59, therefore, is not appropriate.

The Court, however, may reconsider any interlocutory order at any

time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The Court, therefore, interprets the Motion to

Vacate as a motion to reconsider the Dismissal Text Order. Motions for

reconsideration, “serve a limited function: to correct manifest errors of law

or fact or to present newly discovered evidence.” Caisse Nationale de Credit

Agricole v. CBI Industries, Inc., 90 F.3d 1264, 1269 (7th Cir. 1996). Martin

has failed to demonstrate a manifest error of law or fact and has failed to

present any newly discovered evidence that merits reconsideration.

Martin filed this action in Sangamon County, Illinois, Circuit Court.

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 2 of 7

3

Complaint, at 1. Defendant Morse removed this action to this Court.

Notice of Removal. From December 18, 2009, to December 21, 2009,

Defendants Morse, Shirley, and Montgomery County, Maryland, filed

Motions to Dismiss on various grounds (d/e 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12). Martin was

obligated to respond to the Motions within fourteen days of service. If he

did not do so, he was deemed to have no objection to the Motions. Local

Rule 7.1(B)(2). Martin did not respond within the required fourteen days.

This Court then specifically directed Martin to respond to these Motions by

January 18, 2010, or the Court would deem that he had no objection to the

Motions, and the Court would rule on the Motions without further notice

to the parties. Text Order entered January 8, 2010. Martin did not

respond by January 18, 2010.

Defendant Gilchrist also filed a pro se request to dismiss the case

against him. The Clerk erroneously docketed the request as an answer

rather than a motion to dismiss. The Court directed the Clerk to docket

Gilchrist’s motion correctly as a motion to dismiss and send a copy to

Martin, and the Court directed Martin to respond by February 8, 2010.

Text Order entered January 21, 2010. The Clerk then correctly docketed

Gilcrhist’s motion (d/e 13) and sent a copy to Martin. Martin did not

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 3 of 7

4

respond to Gilchrist’s Motion to Dismiss, or to any of the Motions to

Dismiss filed by any of these parties.

On February 10, 2010, this Court entered the Dismissal Text Order

dismissing the claims against these Defendants. The dismissal was proper.

Martin failed to comply with Local Rule 7.1(B)(2), and so, was deemed to

have no objection to any of these Motions. This Court then gave Martin

additional time to respond, but he simply failed to act. The Court sees no

basis to reconsider given his failure to comply with the Local Rules or the

orders of this Court. The Court, therefore, denies the Motion.

Martin complains that he did not receive any notices or orders from

this Court. Martin listed on his Complaint his address as a post office box

in New York, New York, and he also listed an additional address in Chicago,

Illinois. Notice of Removal (d/e 1), attached Complaint, at 17. Martin,

however, listed only his Chicago, Illinois, address on the Summons to be

served on the Defendants. Notice of Removal, attached Summons. Martin

was required to place his correct address on the Summons. Illinois Supreme

Court Rule 101(a). The Chicago address, therefore, was an appropriate

address for notices in this case. The Clerk of this Court properly sent

notices to the addresses listed on the Summons. There was no error.

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 4 of 7

1Local Rule 5.6 became effective on January 20, 2010. Emergency Order

Adopting Local Rules, entered January 20, 2010. Before that date, this Court’s

Administrative Procedures required pro se plaintiffs to seek leave of court to participate

in the electronic filing system. Administrative Procedures for Filing, Signing, and

Verifying Pleadings and Papers by Electronic Means in Civil Cases (Revised October 22,

2007), § I.B.2.

5

Martin complains that he requested notice by facsimile transmission

or email, but none was provided. The Complaint states under the signature

block in all capitals and bold print, “SERVICE OF NOTICES IS

RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED BY FAX OR E-MAIL.” Complaint, at 17.

This Court, however, only provides electronic notice through this Court’s

CM/ECF electronic filing system. A pro se plaintiff must secure leave of

court to participate in the electronic filing system. Local Rule 5.6.1 Martin

did not file a motion for leave to participate in the electronic filing system.

He, therefore, was not entitled to receive notice from this Court by

electronic means. Martin is proceeding pro se, and so, is responsible to

review and comply with this Court’s rules and procedures. He did not

receive electronic notice because he failed to comply with those rules and

procedures. In the future, he should review these matters more carefully.

There was no error.

Martin claims that the docket sheet for this case on the public PACER

system contains nothing after December 21, 2009, so he could not have

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 5 of 7

6

received notice from that source. He attaches to the Motion to Vacate a

printout from PACER dated February 15, 2010. Motion to Vacate, Exhibit

D, PACER Docket Sheet. The attached PACER Docket Sheet only shows

entries from the date of removal, November 10, 2009, to December 21,

2009. The Clerk’s computer technical staff has reviewed the docket sheet

on PACER and determined that all of the docket entries in this case are

available on PACER, including those entered after December 21, 2009.

Martin could have produced the PACER Docket Sheet attached to the

Motion to Vacate by placing date restrictions in his PACER search request

to limit the request to entries between November 10, 2009, and December

21, 2009. The PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt (Transaction

Receipt) would have stated whether Martin erroneously placed date

restrictions in his request. Unfortunately, Martin did not include the full

Transaction Receipt with Exhibit D, so the Court cannot ascertain whether

he made this specific error, or some other error, when he viewed the Court’s

docket on PACER. Again, Martin is proceeding pro se, and so, is

responsible to learn how to use PACER correctly. In the future, Martin

should review the correct procedures for using PACER if he wishes to secure

complete information through this source. Again, however, he has

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 6 of 7

presented no error of law or fact, or newly discovered evidence that merits

reconsideration. The Court sees no basis for reconsidering the Dismissal

Text Order. Martin’s request is denied.

THEREFORE, Plaintiff Andy Martin’s Motion to Vacate Order of

Dismissal and to Extend Time for Responses (d/e 15) is DENIED.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Clarify Notice in This Lawsuit (d/e 14) is ALLOWED

in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk is directed to change Martin’s

mailing address for notices, orders, and other correspondence regarding this

case to: Andy Martin, P.O. Box 1851, New York, New York 10150-1851.

The Motion to Clarify is otherwise denied.

IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED.

ENTER: February 19, 2010

FOR THE COURT:

s/ Jeanne E. Scott

JEANNE E. SCOTT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 7 of 7

Andy Martin History

 Link to Original Article at Illinois Senate Race 2004

Martin has a storied history including multiple Senate and Presidential runs. He drew national attention during the 2000 Presidential Race when he ran an ad accusing Bush of taking cocaine:

ANDY MARTIN, REPUBLICAN FOR PRESIDENT: George Bush had a cocaine problem. His brain suffered from alcohol abuse. Don't trust Bush with your vote until he trusts you with the truth about his past. Bush wants to regulate the Internet because he is angry at the Web site gwbush.com. He wants to bomb Iraq. Bush is dangerous, and he wants to be president.

He verbally sparred with FOX News Bill O’Reilly over the ad. O’Reilly called it, “the most unfair political ad I have ever seen in my 25 years of political reporting.” Martin responded by saying he would run the ad everywhere in the country and that he would beat President Bush.

Martin’s website states the following about his military experience:

Andy comes from a family with four generations of clandestine and special operations service. He is a member of The Special Forces Club (U.K.) and an associate member of the Special Forces Association. He has been associated with Afghanistan, Cambodia, China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Saudi Arabia and South Viet-Nam.

He came back from Iraq in April and held a press conference in New York where he claimed he found Saddam:

On April 30, 2003, I held a New York news conference at which I said Saddam was in Baghdad. This was based on my extensive original research, including the use of local Baghdad dogs (called affectionately the Royal Baghdad Canine Constabulary).

My prediction on April 30th is a matter of record. Subsequent events have proven me correct. The U.S. government is finally paying some attention. Almost two months after I first investigated bomb craters for evidence of Saddam's death, the American military replicated my research. July 9th the New York Post reported Special Forces troops were searching downtown Baghdad, close to where I had originally pinpointed Saddam's location. My investigative efforts and April 30th prediction have been fully confirmed and vindicated.

Throughout his press releases he claims to be the following, “military security and intelligence consultant and a specialist in cyber war tactics,” a “respected voice in America's intelligence community,” and the host of “Andy Martin's America" and Out2.com column which are “are fulcrums of foreign policy debate, political analysis and contemporary commentary on the Internet.”

He also states that he was assistant to former Illinois U.S. Senator Paul H. Douglas, and that he was known as a maverick that fought Daley Machine corruption and helped light the fire that led to Operation Greylord. Martin is a graduate of the University of Illinois and U.I. College of Law.

His press releases include the following statements:

Sharon is the 'new Hitler.' He is a bloodthirsty murderer who kills without conscience. Israel has become a pariah nation under his leadership; not one nation in the world supports Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people.

Ariel Sharon is becoming the Adolph Hitler of the 21st century," says Martin. "He slaughters human beings for sport, while his demented mind slips slowly into societal madness.”

I have asked President Bush to ban travel by Americans to Israel," says Martin. "The recent tragedy in Jerusalem, and former President Clinton's offer to 'carry a rifle for Israel' mandate emergency restraint by the U.S. Government.

I favor abolition of child support and reinstatement of Victorian
principles of divorce. The parent who can support the kids gets custody.

A news story out of the New Times Broward-Palm Beach written July 31, 2003 said this of Martin:

Martin, of course, is mad. Quite mad. He's an enigma wrapped in a riddle who probably should be wrapped in a straitjacket. The would-be senator is one of the most prolific and compulsive lawsuit filers in the United States, a first-class shadow-dwelling fugitive from justice, and a perennial also-ran political candidate whose stance on the issues has changed about as often as Michael Jackson's proboscis.

Martin claims his English grandfather fought with T.E. Lawrence against the Turks before joining a British military intelligence unit and disappearing for good.

The Illinois Supreme Court, however, refused to admit him to the bar, pointing to a military psychiatric exam that allegedly found him to have personality defects that include delusions involving both paranoia and grandeur.

Through the years, he made the ballot for numerous local and federal races in Illinois, New York, and Connecticut. After following his mother down to Florida, he's been as busy as ever, running for governor twice, the state Senate, a couple of flings for the presidency, and three times for the U.S. Senate.

Martin never won a race, but he made some headlines. In 1994, he was found to have broken election laws when he accepted a $50,000 campaign loan from Mom. While Martin is cagey about his finances, I think that loan, plus a courtroom admission that Mom pays his rent and telephone bills, gives a clue about who finances his many far-flung ventures. When I asked him about his net worth, he said it's about zero.

The AP reported in January 20, 2000 that the Florida Supreme Court the following about Martin "Nearly everything Martin files is malicious," the justices wrote. "It appears that Martin's inability to refrain from the 'tactic of injecting personal insults into proceedings' was the main reason why the Illinois Supreme Court refused to allow his admission to that state's bar." AP also reported that Martin spent time in jail:

In 1996, a judge jailed Martin for remarks during a hearing on a restraining order to keep him away from a television station and two cameramen who had scuffled with him.

Martin had called the hearing "a kangaroo court" and "a circus proceeding," but the final straw came when he accused the judge of being "bought and paid for" by the TV station's lawyers.

This seems to be corroborated by Martin himself who issued a statement about the imprisonment:

Andy Martin wrote the lawsuit [against then Secretary of State Katherine Harris] on a prison typewriter on Rikers Island, America's worst penal colony. He is in a maximum-security cell with multi-murderers with a $1 million bail. That compares with $25,000 if he had only killed a few people.

In his ‘92 bid for Senate he report $1,060 in contributions $500 of which came from his mom.  The only contributions ever reported to the FEC
He ran for Illinois Senate in 1980 as Anthony R. Martin-Trigona
Martin's current address listed on his website is:
440 N. Wabash Avenue, Suite 3010
Chicago, Illinois 60611

This is located in a 50 floor luxury apartment building next to the Chicago River.

He also has an address listed at:
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE for US SENATOR
1574 S. Ocean Lane Suite 111
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl, 33316
Tel. (888) 320-ANDY (2639)
This is luxury condo located on the beach in a zip code which the average home goes for $855,000.
In 1998, Martin received 33.6% of the statewide vote in the U.S. Senate statewide primary, carried Miami-Dade County by a landslide. Election Results
The McKenna campaign has made copies of Martins petitions, it remains to be seen whether anyone will challenge him.
Calls made to numerous numbers all led to the same voice mail system and calls have not been returned.