Plaintiffs lose summary judgement in Saint Paul Fair Housing Lawsuits. The plaintiffs are appealing to the Supreme Court
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Friday, December 19, 2008
Custom Search
Friday, December 19, 2008
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- Automakers bail out
- Aurelia Tessmer Relator -vs- The City of Saint Paul
- Convicted St. Paul killer is suspect in another ki...
- The Citizens Of Saint Paul -vs- The City Of Saint ...
- Amish homeowners: Religion trumps building codes
- Santa on cops!
- Politics / FBI interest in Coleman donor pleases h...
- St. Paul homeowners caught in tax assessment adjus...
- Blowing Smoke: Is there a movement to recall City ...
- St. Paul whistleblower prompts audit
60 Comments:
Hi All,
I have bad news for property rights advocates every where. The plaintiffs in the Fair Housing Lawsuits against the City of Saint Paul lost summary judgement today.
I have been informed the judgement will be appealed to a higher court.
In Morris -vs- Sax the plaintiffs expected to lose in the lower courts. When they appealed to the higher court they expected to win and they did. The plaintiffs in the fair housing lawsuits feel the same way.
So as they say, "It isn't over until the FAT LADY sings". And folks the Fat Lady is the higher court.
Chuck, you DFLers better hope these guys win. What will they do with their cash if they aren't spending it on a lawsuit. Maybe changing the face of politics in Saint Paul.
They're not spending their cash are they? I heard that 2 of them have wealthy relatives who are going to fund these lawsuits all the way to the Spupreme Court if they have to. It's going to be a long time before this is over.
Well I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.
The case never had any chance as either a RICO case or a Fair Housing Case. It just isn't anything that resembled a Federal Case.
For this to have been RICO there had to be a conspiracy and someone who directly beneffitted from the loss of someone else. There was never anything shown that anyone was ever looking to benefit anyone anything.
And, for it to be Fair Housing you had to believe that low income and communities of colors desired to live in substandard housing over repaired housing.
The big difference between this and Sax is that Sax was saying that the City of Morris had written laws beyond what was allowed by the state. Not that they were out to get him personally or that they were conspiring to hurt people. They had a written ordinance. He had facts.
What you have here were a group of people who had properties where there had been write ups by the City and in court show that there were problems with the properties but assume that the only possible reason that they got written up over someone else was either the City was out to destroy them personally or it hated all poor people and their case was since they had no evidence the City must be extremely good at hiding it.
That isn't a case.
As to appeal Bob, this is a Summary Judgement, meaning that the facts of the case have been presented, they are generally agreed to and there is NO EVIDENCE of any criminal wrong doing.
An appeal would be to the U.S. Supreme Court. So, a Supreme Court judge would have to look at the case an determine that this mish-mash of accusation and assumption had enough that it should have gone to trial.
That isn't going to happen.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Sounds like Repke is bucking for a promotion to Field Marshall at DSI Nazi Headquarters(D-ip S-hit I-diots).
The inspectiors have done a lot to undermine the good will and trust a lot of people in Saint Paul had built up. I hope the plaintiffs win.
Careful Repke......don't step into it too far. You may be suprised at what happems mext.
These guys with their promises.
If you spend your money on campaigns like you do court cases- nobody should be worried. The people of St Paul are not behind landlords who don't want to take care of their property. As demonstrated in some of testimony, even tenants are not fans of some of these guys.
So now what? Supreme Court? Good Luck, see you in no less than five years. Actually since there is a pretty straight ruling on the summary judgment, it will go nowhere.
"We're gonna sue the city, wah, wah, wah", "Just wait until we drop the bomb on the city and win millions Repke", "Wah, Wah, Wah"
You got nothing and will get the same.
Eric
Who said, two minds are better than one?
Congratulation Ms. Seeba
Slumlords, Shoemaker & Engel roped some dopes. :-)
Amanda, why don't you stick your head in a bucket of ice to take the swellinbg down, this case isn't over yet !
\
Jeff Matiatos
Its over if you let this scumbag Shoemaker take your money.Let me guess Mr.Shoemaker the government makes clouds?Get a clue a women beat you ya F-en clown!You Plaintiffs had a case until you let this nut case run the show.
Chuck and Eric the Citys lucky that these plaintiffs didn't have a half decient attorney.If they did this would be going to trial.
Bill
What did you expect with a local Judge in a high profile political case. It will be interesting to see what the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has to say about it.
I was a little worried about the case a while ago. I'm no lawyer, but I was concerned that the plaintiffs were taking a bunch of infuriating stories to court - not a case that showed a pattern of offenses that met the *legal* (not ethical) definition of "discrimination".
The problem with the law is, it means what it says it means. Terms like "discrimination" have definitions under *the law*; your case has to show that something meets the definition *as it is in the law*. Again, I'm no lawyer, but it didn't look like he plaintiffs brought anything close to meeting the definition in the law.
Should the plaintiffs appeal? Ask yourselves these questions:
1) What is the legal definition of "discrimination" under the applicable state and federal laws? Don't make it up as you go along; look it up in the law.
2) What is the legal definition of conspiracy? Not according to what your buddy told you; look it up!
3) What, in the plaintiffs' cases, addresses those definitions, directly and word for word?
Remember; "Dismissal on summary judgment" doesn't mean you don't have *a* case; it means the one you brought doesn't address any matters of law, and therefore can't go to trial.
There is no question that the City of Saint Paul is using DSI unethically, as a cudgel to enforce unfair (and, in the long run, stupid) policy. I really don't think the case the plaintiffs brought is going to be the vehicle to fix that.
My suggestion: Find out what the laws are, and find behavior that breaks it.
And then go to court.
And, for it to be Fair Housing you had to believe that low income and communities of colors desired to live in substandard housing over repaired housing.
Er, Chuck? I'll be charitable and say you're not thinking clearly.
Would people *prefer* a "standard" house over a "substandard" one, all things considered? Of course.
Would people *prefer* a standard one they can't afford (or can only afford with intrusive, humiliating government aid) over a "substandard" one they can afford?
Would someone who has a job in Saint Paul prefer a "standard" house in White Bear to "substandard" house that's a ten minute bus ride or five minute walk to work?
Would they prefer a "substandard" house to being homeless?
Especially if the "standards" applied have mostly to do with cosmetics and the kinds of things that make guilty white liberals from Merriam Park wrinkle their noses in distaste, but the rest of us pretty much take in stride?
When my kids were babies and I was down on my luck, we had choice:
1) Get divorced so my wife and kids could get housing assistance; lose my kids.
2) Find a "substandard" place we could afford.
We took 2. The place would probably never pass a code inspection today, but we could afford it,so it was infinitely better than the alternative.
Would the system be better if it systematically made that alternative impossible? Because that's what's happening.
Is it "discrimination"? Maybe, maybe not. But it is stupid and shortsighted.
I'm not surprised you can't see that, Chuck, but I sure wish you could.
Couple of things first 8:11, when I was young I lived in some places that might not meet the code either. There are plenty of places today that would not meet code compliance, but that doesn't mean that when the City inspects house A and gives orders on it that it is discriminating against the people that live there. And for this to be a fair housing case the plaintiff would have had to show that the City's desire was to shut the house down, not to get it repaired. Thousands and thousands of extentions on demo orders prove just the reverse, that the City wants the property repaired.
There is a state code and the City is obliged to enforce it. Your discrimination/targetting issue would say that if the City of Saint Paul can't inspect every house in the City on the same day then it is discriminating against those who it did inspect. What happens on this list is that people then assign all sorts of evil motives why this house got inspected and not that one. There is no evidence of that only the assumptions of those that are not happy. That is why it had no chance in court.
The City hears from over a hundred people a day calling into complain about problem properties. Those people would say that the City's policies are not agressive enough. They remind the City that protecting the health and safety of the community is an obligation of the City. That is why the City's policy is not going to be viewed as discrimination. There is a desire of the public to maintain the quality of life in the community.
And finally there was never anything that the plaintiffs had in comman as a class other than they had properties that needed repair. There was code violations. Not a one of them had a clean slate and were able to show that, because if they did, they would have taken it to state/district court. So, again the Federal Court had no evidence of any conspiracy or discrimination accept in the minds of the plaintiffs.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
St. Paul / Suits brought by landlords dismissed
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 12/20/2008 01:38:50 AM CST
A federal judge dismissed a series of long-standing lawsuits against the city of St. Paul, brought by a group of landlords who claimed they were discriminated against because they rented to "protected classes," particularly minorities.
In a summary judgment, U.S. District Judge Joan Erickson dismissed three suits brought by 16 plaintiffs — identified as "current or former owners of rental properties" — who say they were targeted by the city when it began to enforce a more stringent housing code.
They also alleged the city conducted unconstitutional searches of their properties, held their properties to a different standard than public housing and violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
Erickson noted repeatedly that the plaintiffs did not provide adequate evidence to support their claims.
Also named as defendants in the suit were more than a dozen individuals, including former Mayor Randy Kelly and officials with the Department of Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement, including former director Andy Dawkins and supervisor Steve Magner.
— Tad Vezner
I am certain that all along the plaintiff's expected this to go to appeal. If you were actually a victim of the cities tactics you would understand that your rights had been violated and you would know that the plaintiff's in the end will win this case. None of these big cases are won in the lower courts.
St. Paul cleared in housing-code bias lawsuits
A federal judge said that three suits against the city and its housing code enforcement officials and staff failed to show sufficient evidence of discriminatory motives. The plaintifs are promising to appeal.
By CHRIS HAVENS, Star Tribune
Last update: December 19, 2008
A federal judge has dismissed three lawsuits against the city of St. Paul that claimed the city was discriminatory in enforcing housing codes and unfairly targeted some landlords who rented to low-income and minority tenants.
The decision was hailed by city officials, who claimed vindication after criticism that was lobbed at housing officials and inspectors.
The property owners are likely to appeal, their attorneys said, so four years of legal wrangling may not yet be at an end.
Thomas Gallagher, Sandra Harrilal and Frank Steinhauser III were lead plaintiffs in the lawsuits. In all, 16 plaintiffs filed against the city and 17 other named defendants, including former Mayor Randy Kelly and Andy Dawkins, former director of the defunct Department of Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement.
In a 53-page decision, U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen broadly noted claims that did not have evidence to support them.
The landlords alleged the city unfairly targeted them because they rented to low-income and minority tenants. City officials exaggerated and lied about housing code violations at their properties, encouraged tenants to file false court claims against them and used police to intimidate them and their tenants, the suits said.
The landlords said the city's actions violated the Fair Housing Act and federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
City Attorney John Choi called the dismissals monumental. "The way I'd interpret this decision is it validates what the city residents have asked for for a long time: aggressive enforcement of our housing code to maintain our neighborhoods," he said.
The city's housing standards are generally stricter than federal Housing Quality Standards. Over the past several years, the city has increased its enforcement of its housing code by rewriting ordinances and performing more frequent inspections, as well as working to increase penalties and shorten response times when complaints come in.
Bob Kessler, director of the Department of Safety and Inspections, said people don't realize how important the service is until weeds, trash and deteriorating houses appear in a neighborhood.
"I think this really reaffirms the integrity of the staff, that the people who do the work on the street are good civil servants," Kessler said.
Aggressive enforcement of the housing code is important, said Tait Danielson Castillo, executive director of the District 7 Planning Council, which includes Frogtown. "I think the city has a valid mission to make sure all housing in St. Paul is safe, secure and adequate," he said. "But with that comes responsibility. They need to ensure all staff are well-trained, that they apply law fairly and that they are fully trained in race relations and anti-discrimination."
City Council President Kathy Lantry lamented the time and city resources spent defending against a "frivolous lawsuit."
Choi said his staff reviewed and disclosed 2.5 million e-mails requested during the course of the suit.
"Obviously, all of the plaintiff property owners are disappointed in the decision of the court," said attorney John Shoemaker, who represents Steinhauser and Harrilal. Attorney Matthew Engel, who represents Gallagher, declined to comment.
The property owners are preparing to appeal the decision to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, both attorneys said. "We are confident that the claims and evidence will be presented to a jury following that appeal," Shoemaker said.
Chris Havens • 651-298-1542
The property owners are preparing to appeal the decision to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, both attorneys said. "We are confident that the claims and evidence will be presented to a jury following that appeal," Shoemaker said.
And when it get's to jury the city leaders past and present will be eating CROW.
Ya, you plaintiffs were confidant you would win in the lower courts two.
What happened, was the judge corrupt ?
Forcing the plaintiff's to do a code compliance to new codes is a violation of Morris vs Sax. Hello Judge - but what do you mean there is no evidence. It's clearly apparent you were out to protect the city. In the end the plaintiff's will prevail.
The missing emails are comparable to the famous 18 minute gap in the Nixon era. This is where it was claimed secretary Rosemary Woods accidently erased the tape, but analysis showed the tape had been erased numerous times.
With the fair housing lawsuits out of the hands of the local judge, the decision will be reversed.
OK folks, remember the last hearing in front of the judge as reported here she had almost no questions for the City and was asking all sorts of questions of the Plaintiffs. You all were very sure that the judge was going to rule for the plaintiffs because it was clear that the judge understood their side of the case and didn't want to even listen to the City. I said then, that I thought that meant that the judge was desperate to get any evidence even a sliver of evidence to get this thing to trial.
Ultimately, there was nothing. It isn't going to be any different in trying to appeal. There isn't one person saying they were a part of a conspiracy and there isn't one scrap of paper or email suggesting one. And, over and over again the facts show that the interest in the City in enforcing the code was in getting properties repaired, or they wouldn't give the number of extensions that they do.
Sorry, the case was always about wasting the City's time and money.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
You People fail to read the "Order"
techinally a RICO lawsuit must be presented to the US Attorney and or Grand Jury, that why Joan Erickson dismissed without prejudice, meaning it can be brought again,again,again, even before
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the files, records, and proceedings herein, and for the reasons stated above, IT
IS ORDERED THAT:
1. Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 198 in Civil
No. 04-2632, Docket No. 173 in Civil No. 05-461, and Docket No. 166 in
Civil No. 05-1348] are GRANTED.
2. All Counts in Civil Nos. 04-2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to John Doe, Jane Doe, and Jane Roe.
3. Counts VI in Civil Nos. 04-2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the extent they are based on the right to
freedom from the taking of property without just compensation under the
Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
4. Count VIII in Civil No. 05-1348 is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
5. Except as stated in paragraphs 2-4, all remaining claims in Civil Nos.
04-2632, 05-461, and 05-1348 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: December 18, 2008
s/ Joan N. Ericksen
JOAN N. ERICKSEN
United States District Judge Appeal
If you have a link to the order please post it. That was just a link to the story.
Thanks
Chuck
I think the cases had merit but also believe when you hire inexperienced lawyers you a destined to fail.These attorneys were way out of their league and if you guys paid more then 75.00 an hour you got ripped off.4 years in these suits and the couldn't give the courts anything to make it hard for them to dismiss?
I'd ask for your money back!
Steven
OK Repke here's the link to the Order, http://grandjury.googlegroups.com/web/SummaryJudgementOrder.pdf?gda=yRkNkUsAAADNUQirfbZP6Jtq1Sar6lZLy0HYusgcDcOylquoGTOZG-ZoJDtPv5pFpPxL6UfejeVsvru8aEQSUkcvPQWnwumBBkXa90K8pT5MNmkW1w_4BQ&hl=en
Again, I haven't seen the order, but from what you posted above the things that are dismissed without prejudice are: any future cases of "John Doe," (meaning anyone not named in the suit as plaintiffs); any "takings" claims since they were never argued and should be done individually; and the potential civil rights claim in the last suit of any tennants that were not a part of the suit. That means any of those people can sue again.
All of the rest are dismissed WITH PREJUDICE meaning in favor of the City and that those claims of those plaintiffs are gone. They can appeal, but they can't bring them back. It is over.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Judge was wrong or corrupt.
Thanks for the link. Yup, pretty much what I said. The case of these landlords is done With Prejudice meaning they can't bring it back. They can appeal, but they have to argue where the court made a mistake.
The judge goes through every charge, spells out what the plaintiff accuses the City of and then shows where the plaintiff offers no evidence or facts.
Its done.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Oh no it's not Repke. It's just starting. You haven't seen anything yet!
Chuck,
I just cannot believe the people of St. Paul want excessive code enforcement.
The people just want to be fair and reasonable.
The city's indoctrinations are cynical and criminal.
The city's indoctrinations are cynical and criminal.
3:51 PM
"Repke"!
Do you, and your people that run this city think these landlords are just going to walk away with their tails between their legs "like dogs"?
I started my battle with city hall and all its corruption witch is really criminal act.
If our city could not shut me up and I have no money, how do you think this city can beat people with money and lawyers?
Bill Dahn
PS. Take care when out on the roads everyone, Have a Merry Christmas.
Merry christmas to you to Bill.
Having read here for quite a long time, and having looked at a good many of the facts and squabbles that have gone on in this lawsuit, I think the city is going to be in for a suprise when the appeals court gets done with this matter. I suspect a lot of the different things that were lost by the plaintiffs along the way with the various Motions are now going to be turned around against the city. It looks to me as if this lawsuit is just getting started.
...and before people start hoping for a better judge, Judge Ericksen was made a District Court Judge by Republican Governor Carlson, and Minnesota Supreme Court Justice by Republican Governor Carlson and a Federal Court Judge in 2002 by Republican George Bush.
She is a well respected justice and I doubt she will be overturned.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Her "well respected status" is about to get nipped in the bud Chuck.
Hey Repke
Do you think any politicians are on the level?
Be it R or D.
We in the real world know better.
It's sad that Judges have become nothing more than politicians. It really dims ones hopes for any kind of fair treatment from the courts.
Repke, your so out of touch with the reality of political appointments of Judges,
Thanks for partial posting
Even Lawyers are "taking" these Judges on Do a Google on Joan Lancaster Erickson re: MN Court Reform Dale Nathan_ former Candidate AG Decedant Dick Bullock These guys have tried for over 30 years to expose
http://www.mncourtreform.org/cases.html
Landlords,
Make no mistake. I'm on your side on this. I think the City of Saint Paul is embarking on an incredibly stupid series of policies. I think that if the people of Saint Paul knew what these policies were doing to their h ome values, they'd storm city hall with pitchforks and torches, and put everyone involved in stocks in Rice Park for people to pelt with garbage.
I think the evidence of corruption in DSI is compelling enough that, in a just world, the bureaucrats involved would be in deep trouble.
But you're not going to prove it with this suit.
Wrong as Chuck is on most things, he's right about this; the only thing an appeal will decide is "did the original judge make any mistakes". And there were none. And it's not a matter of corruption.
It's a matter of the wrong lawsuit being filed.
We need to document a pattern of behavior on the part of the City and DSI that systematically violates the letter of the law.
That means: Find the law. Read it. Understand what all the terms mean.
And then find episodes of City and DSI behavior that exactly violate the law in the sense of "a judge will look at the evidence and see that there IS a question of law serious enough to go to a jury". And then have evidence that a jury will look at and go "yeah!"
The City IS wrong, and a bunch of fascists to boot. But not in a sense that violates the letter of RICO statutes or discrimination law.
The only real solution to this, by the way, is cleaning out City Hall. And the only way to do that, over this issue, anyway, is showing how the City's vacant building policy is killing property values (even as they they continually jack up taxes).
I'm afraid the landlords' money would be better spent on cultivating candidates who can toss the sitting Council and Mayor out of office.
I read the Judge’s response and the comments out here. I don’t understand the attacks on the judge; I thought her findings were articulated well and based on law. I think if an appeal leans on a premise of the judge is wrong (evil, biased, etc), we should all prepare for another loss.
It seems to me the plaintiffs failed to articulate how laws were broken. I suspect most of us – maybe on a good day even Chuck and Eric – would agree that St. Paul’s implementation of code enforcement should not include behavior issues, should not have the disparate impact on people of color that it does and should not force a building to code compliance as quickly as it does. Maybe we could even agree on more?
But, grievances do not make a case – and it appears the plaintiffs failed to turn these grievances into a case of how St. Paul has broke the law. While it might be a “Biased” judicial system, I personally think we must question the plaintiff’s attorneys. If I were one of the plaintiffs, I would spend the money to seek out a second opinion from a hot shot attorney that knows how to win complex (and unpopular) cases such as this one.
I hope this doesn’t embolden St. Paul’s aggressive approach. I hope they instead take a step back and ask what is working and what is not. I don’t think it is a coincidence that St. Paul property values are falling further and faster than the rest of the metro.
Bill Cullen.
This comment was posted at twincities.com
Now what?
Now that the suit has been thrown out will Bob Johnson and his internet posse be forced to get real jobs?
posted by lexluger on Dec. 20, 08 at 9:20 AM |
0 of 1 people liked this comment.
First of all I have a REAL job.
We will continue to do what we have been doing, investigating civil rights violations. Only,
en-light of what has happened in the fair housing lawsuits, we will be re-evaluating strategies and objectives.
The magistrate didn't say these allegations didn't happen. She said there wasn't enough evidence. Tough to compile evidence when so much of it was destroyed. The Supreme court has to decide whether this judge in this lower court ruled fairly on this issue.
There is still hope for the fair housing lawsuits. Also, do not forget Robert Campbell still has a suit against the city.
2.5 million emails were presented. You saying you can't prove it because ALL of the evidence has been destroyed?
2.5 million!!!
Listen Dummy. It doesn't matter what you "think" or "feel". You can't force the courts to turn over 300 years precedent-
You make the accusation, back it up with evidence.
You got no evidence? You got no case!
2.5 million emails were turned over.
There was a large number of emails "critical to the case that may of produced the evidence needed and they were destroyed.
For example, correct me if I wrong someone, I think there was less than 10 emails from Dawkins. A man who surely would have 3 times as many emails as city employees under him.
There is other discrepancies like this.
Nobody cares what you say Bob. You are merry band of unemployed blogging buddies just lost your golden goose.
What is good about this is that people do know you. You are known as a an ignorant clown.
Look at this blog and look at yourself. Where's the reality?
11:58, you are entitled to your opinion. And I wouldn't think of deleting it since it is only a bunch of bullshit.
I haven't LOST ANY GOLDEN GOOSE. I have never expected money from the fair housing lawsuits and I have never asked for it. My only concern is the women and children, and the elderly you and the likes of your kind have condemened to the streets without due process of law.
11:58, you said nobody cares what I have to say. Then what the hell are you here for?
I think they do care. In fact, you would like me to quit my activism I am assuming. IT ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN NO MATTER WHAT GARBAGE SPEWS FROM YOUR MOUTH Or ANYBODY ELSE! In fact my donations went up big time since the breaking of this news.
I am pondering stories for the next A Democracy News Letter. I will be contacting Jim Swartwood of the WATCHDOG NEWS and letting him know I might as well distribute the Watchdog News Paper at the same time.
We have a lot of work to do legally and politically.
Bobby when your attacked: it means your giving the system a hot foot, Your more professional and can take the heat,
Techinally its an Honor that your now Bobby the Blogger Thanks for Posting FAMILY FIRST
lAW SUITS LAST
Apealls are made on the Errors of Judges 8th Cir is no better, this is the fastest way to publish the Abuses in St. Paul
Nows the time to check All Case Law, http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=anderson+v.+liberty+lobby+summary+judgment&aq=2&oq=Anderson+v.+Liberty+Lobby
Bob,
Keep up the good work.
Because when people say bullshit like...:
nobody cares what you say Bob. You are merry band of unemployed blogging buddies just lost your golden goose.
Hey, slapnuts - the only "golden goose" I have is the home I own in Saint Paul, whose value is plummeting faster than the metro at large, largely because of city policy.
What is good about this is that people do know you. You are known as a an ignorant clown.
I actually do know Bob. He's aharp, articulate, and knows this issue better than anyone, in OR out of St. Paul government.
Look at this blog and look at yourself. Where's the reality?
The ONLY reality is this; Property rights activists in Saint Paul face an interventionist administration that enacts policy without a rat's ass' worth of care what it'll do to property owners; which presumes that landords are slumlords until proven innocent; which rewards political ass-kissing and cloutmongering and penalizes hard work, especially by people who don't have the clout or the connections to cover for bad circumstances; who've pretty much extincted the small landlord in Saint Paul; who will, if they hold to their current policies, make it impossible for anyone in Saint Paul making less than $100K a year to live in the city (regardless of their race).
Bob's blog will never be more important than it will be between now and the 2011 elections, and probably beyond.
Keep up the good work, Bob.
As to you, 11:58? Grow some cojones and use a real name, or get some manners.
Well, an out of control DSI has destroyed the SPIRIT of the city. By letting DSI get away with it (by ignoring destroyed documents), the judge has demonstrated a lack of care for the people.
Bob, I can't imagine there were only 3 emails from Dawkins, lets go on a wild limb and say there were only 300 emails from Dawkins and there should be thousands... So What?
The point in a case is that you are suppose to have one before you make accusations and go to court. You should have had one email or one scrap of paper that suggested a conspiracy before you/they accuse the City of being in a conspiracy. The essence of this conspiracy is, we have no evidence so everything that is missing must be the evidence we need. And see they only produced 2.5 million emails so they must be hiding something!
That isn't a case it proves nothing, and now their wad is shot. These landlords will not be able to make the same charge again. They can appeal this, but good luck with that. Any judge is going to see the same thing. There isn't even enough evidence to allow this to be argued. It has all been assumption based on anger and hatred of the City.
I have always said if someone was unfairly treated they should have taken this to district court, but none of these guys have even tried that.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
By letting DSI get away with it (by ignoring destroyed documents), the judge has demonstrated a lack of care for the people.
With all due respect, I think Bob needs to get someone to give landlords, and some of you in his audience, some legal education.
When you file a lawsuit (or make a criminal charge), you file a *petition* in which your (and/or your lawyer) show what the defendant did and how that action violates the law (as in the specifics of a law,exactly as it written.
Say you write a petition that says:
"1. Defendant stole my car,
2. Defendant took my drill
3. Defendant kicked my dog".
When the case goes before a judge, the judge will ONLY care about the car, the drill, the dog, and whether the evidence shows ALL the elements of the laws against stealing cars and tools and kicking animals were violated (and will instruct the jury to care only about that, as well).
If you go to court and tell the judge "but the defendant also said my mom was a whore", the judge will go "that's too bad, but that's not part of tis case".
The "destroyed documents" are unethical. They are evidence that the City is corrupt. They would also be parts of a SEPARATE CASE, not the one on the petition in front of the judge.
File another case.
While I'm no lawyer, I'm getting less and less impressed with Mr. Schumacher, esq.
"As to you, 11:58? Grow some cojones and use a real name, or get some manners."
OK "Doobie Houser".
So many accusations, so little support.
Spend your money on finding a candidate to run for Mayor. If you are so confident that the people of the city are behind you. Put your balls on the line.
Bob is nothing but a 21st century hustler for the slumlords of the city. He's done nothing but create this blog for our entertainment purposes. Clowns in Cyberspace. I can't even read it with having the Benny Hill theme music in the background.
OK "Doobie Houser".
That IS my real name, you illiterate f**k. Darren Brian Houser. Everyone calls me Doobie because of my initials and because I owned so many cheech and chong records back in the day.
OK, genius. Your turn.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bob is nothing but a 21st century hustler for the slumlords of the city. He's done nothing but create this blog for our entertainment purposes. Clowns in Cyberspace. I can't even read it with having the Benny Hill theme music in the background.
1:50 PM
My response;
You look like an idiot to all the folks reading here who I have spent hours free of charge repairing their homes to help them stay out of trouble with DSI. You look like an idiot to all the folks here who's story's I have told concerning their troubles with DSI.
I am a threat to you for reasons I can only ponder. And this is why you attack me.
I agree with Bill.I think these cases were bigger then these two attorneys could handle.They seemed to be all over the board and couldn't focus on what mattered most in the case.These attorneys were not ready for a case like this and should refund their plaintiffs some of their money back.
The moral of the story is----Ya get what ya pay for boys.And ya got just that, two borderline attorneys.
Rick
Really, 1:50 p.m. sounds like Eric and his private resentment for Bob.
One problem with your theory "anonymous 8:31"- I sign each and every one of my posts. I stand up and in front of my opponents when I take a shot at them. I want them to know its me. The reason you know I have some disagreements with Bob is because I sign my name to those disagreements after writing them.
I haven't commented but once on this one because Repke has done an excellent job of putting the facts of this ruling out there. He's handling you by himself. Some of you, have done the predictable thing of blaming the judge, city and now attorneys.
One of you has even rightfully said that the merits of the case were not there. If there was wrongdoing, it should have be documented and taken on case by case, not wrapped up in an over-reaching RICO suit. I remember a certain DFLer who writes on here under his real name saying the same things over and over starting three years ago.
Eric <----- See that?
Its coming from the Courts see Publshed Advance Shoring http://mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/opa072206-1223.pdf
so far, its:
City of St Paul - 1
Landlords - 0
It doesn't give me a lot of confidence in our legal system at this point. It doesn't change anything - St Paul is a chickenshit city that doesn't deserve many of the good things it has.
Post a Comment
<< Home