CIVIL 20-13134
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

King v. Whitmer
Decided Aug 25, 2021

CIVIL 20-13134
08-25-2021
TIMOTHY KING, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
GRETCHEN WHITMER, et al., Defendants., and
CITY
OF
DETROIT,
DEMOCRATIC
NATIONAL
COMMITTEE,
MICHIGAN
DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and ROBERT DAVIS,
Intervenor-Defendants.
LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
OPINION AND ORDER
LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
This lawsuit represents a historic and profound
abuse of the judicial process. It is one thing to take
on the charge of vindicating rights associated with
an allegedly fraudulent election. It is another to
take on the charge of deceiving a federal court and
the American people into believing that rights
were infringed, without regard to whether any
laws or rights were in fact violated. This is what
happened here.
Individuals may have a right (within certain
bounds) to disseminate allegations of fraud
unsupported by law or fact in the public sphere.
But attorneys cannot exploit their privilege and
access to the judicial process to do the same. And
when an attorney has done so, sanctions are in
order.
Here's why. America's civil litigation system
affords individuals the privilege to file a lawsuit to
allege a violation of law. Individuals, however,
must litigate within the established parameters for
filing a claim. Such parameters are set forth in

statutes, rules of civil procedure, local court rules,
and professional rules of responsibility and ethics.
Every attorney who files a claim on behalf of a
client is charged with the obligation to know these
statutes and rules, as well as the law allegedly
violated.
Specifically, attorneys have an obligation to the
judiciary, their profession, and the public (i) to
conduct some degree of due diligence before
presenting allegations as truth; (ii) to advance only
tenable claims; and (iii) to proceed with a lawsuit
in good faith and based on a proper purpose.
Attorneys also have an obligation to dismiss a
lawsuit when it becomes clear that the requested
relief is unavailable.
This matter comes before the Court upon
allegations that Plaintiffs' counsel did none of
these things. To be clear, for the purpose of the
pending sanctions motions, the Court is neither
being asked to decide nor has it decided whether
there was fraud in the 2020 presidential election in
the State of Michigan.1 Rather, the question before
the Court is whether Plaintiffs' attorneys engaged
in litigation practices that are abusive and, in turn,
sanctionable. The short answer is yes.
1 In fact, resolution of that issue was never

appropriately before the Court for the
reasons stated in the Court's December 7,
2020 ruling. (See ECF No. 62.)

The attorneys who filed the instant lawsuit abused
the well-established rules applicable to the
litigation process by proffering claims not backed
by law; proffering claims not backed by evidence
(but instead, speculation, conjecture, and

1

Select target paragraph3