The Georgia bar says a psychological well being examination is not key to Lin Wooden’s destiny

Attorney L. Lin Wood speaks during a press conference on the election results in Alpharetta, Ga., Dec. 2, 2020. REUTERS / Elijah Nouvelage

The Georgia Bar Association has denied L. Lin Wood’s attempt to evade the licensing authority’s request to undergo a mental evaluation.

In a series of petitions filed in Atlanta federal court Monday, prosecutors said Wood, who embraced conspiracy theories and won a major social network after contesting former President Donald Trump’s electoral defeat, would not lose his lawyer license if it wasn’t rated.

But the bar said their request for a mental health assessment was part of their overall investigation into Wood, who requested the execution of the former US vice president and allegedly assaulted two of his former fellow lawyers.

Wood could lose his license at the end of the investigation, but he will have numerous opportunities to challenge the evidence against him, the bar said. Such evidence includes physical violence allegations brought against him by Wood’s former colleagues in a pending lawsuit in the Fulton County Supreme Court.

Wood sued the Georgia Attorney General’s Disciplinary Committee in March, alleging that their request for a mental examination violated his rights to speak under the First Amendment.

“The measures taken against me by the State Bar of Georgia are frivolous,” Wood told Reuters on Tuesday. “They are driven by the political agenda of the elite establishment that currently controls the Georgia bar.”

Wood denied the allegations in Fulton County’s lawsuit, saying he never attacked his former colleagues. He also said he had evidence that Pence was guilty of treason, but alleged he did not request his execution and alleged that he used “rhetorical or political exaggerations,” which were also protected speech.

The prosecutor argued that the federal court had no power to intervene in any state-level disciplinary process, arguing that only the Georgia Supreme Court could deliberate. Similarly, Wood is also unable to obtain an injunction against the bar, the defendants claim.

In addition, Wood was not entitled to damages or legal fees, the prosecutor argued.

The defendants also deny Wood’s motion to exclude US District Judge Timothy Batten from hearing the case. Wood has alleged that Batten should be disqualified or retire for dismissing two election-related lawsuits that Wood cited.

“A reasonable person, informed of all relevant facts, would have no doubt about Judge Batten’s impartiality just because he previously served as a judge in a case involving a plaintiff,” the prosecutor wrote on their file .

Batten has scheduled a hearing on May 13th on Wood’s motion for an injunction and a new judge on Monday. Wood told Reuters that he believed Batten was “corrupt or has been threatened”.

The prosecutor’s response comes more than a week after Wood dropped a New York federal lawsuit he filed on behalf of a woman who alleged she was defamed by MSNBC host Joy Reid.

Reid and her lawyers attempted to oust Wood from the case after claiming that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump and that the U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is linked to a pedophile sect and with the help of Jeffrey Epstein illegally adopted two children. Wood told Reuters last week that he resigned because it was in the best interests of his client.

In January, Wood was banned from Twitter where he regularly spread QAnon-related conspiracy theories among his many followers. He was also prevented from representing former Trump adviser Carter Page, who said Wood’s claims about Roberts were “too disgusting and outrageous to repeat” by a Delaware State judge.

Nall & Miller attorneys representing the prosecution did not respond to requests for comment.

The case is Wood v. Frederick, US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, 1: 21-cv-011169.

For Lin Wood: Lin Wood per se; Ibrahim Reyes from Reyes Lawyers; and Larry Crain of the Crain Law Group

For defendants: Robert Goldstucker and Patrick Arndt from Nall & Miller

(Note: this story has been updated to include comments from L. Lin Wood.)

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.