Oops! Lawyer files election lawsuit 'under plenty of perjury'
Image from Shutterstock.com.
A lawyer who filed a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s election process is attracting attention because of a typo near the end of the complaint.
The verification paragraph said the lawyer verifies “under plenty of perjury” that the facts in the suit are true and correct. The phrase should read “under penalty of perjury.”
Publications with coverage include Law & Crime, Raw Story and the Volokh Conspiracy.
On Twitter, Arnold & Porter partner John P. Elwood said the error beats the previous best legal typo he saw in 1998. That one, in an appellate brief, said the judgment below “should be revered.”
The lawyer responsible for the “under plenty of perjury” typo is L. Lin Wood Jr. of Atlanta. His typo was in a Dec. 18 lawsuit that he filed on his own behalf as a Georgia voter. He filed an amended verification to correct the typo Dec. 19.
The complaint alleges that election officials are running the upcoming U.S. Senate runoff election in Georgia in a way that conflicts with procedures set by the state legislature.
The suit said Democrats are not complying with procedures for verification of mail-in ballots, are improperly opening absentee ballots before Election Day, are wrongly allowing ballot drop boxes, and are using unreliable voting machines to count the votes.
In a rally earlier this month, Wood contended that the 2020 presidential election was rigged by Democrats, by China’s government, by the company that made Georgia’s voting machines, and by Georgia GOP officials, according to a profile by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
“It’s 1776 in America again,” Wood said at the rally. “We’re going to fight for our liberty. We’re going to send that message today, and we’re going to send it all the way to Beijing, China!”
A Delaware judge questioned Wood’s work on election lawsuits in a Dec. 18 order to show cause why he should be allowed to continue representing a former Trump campaign adviser in a state defamation lawsuit.
Bloomberg Law has coverage.
Judge Craig Karsnitz of the Superior Court of Delaware said Wood had to explain why his work in election suits didn’t violate Delaware attorney ethics rules. Karsnitz said Wisconsin suits have had “multiple deficiencies,” and a prior Georgia suit was found to have no basis in fact or law.
