Update/ Fair Housing Lawsuit against the City of Saint Paul
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Friday, March 20, 2009
Custom Search
Friday, March 20, 2009
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
- Gods house a Cat 2 Vacant?
- Melvin Carter, Krenik, Urban League owe back taxes
- St. Paul City Council OKs final plan for Central C...
- The face of pot politics: Why Don Haumant - and so...
- Mom says police dog's attack on son, 13, in South ...
- I wonder if Matt Bostrom recognizes any of these g...
- IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS/ Appeal No. ...
- St. Paul pitches new hockey rink as X's little bro...
- A very hellish journey!
- What would you do if you found $18,000 in a ditch?
11 Comments:
There maybe copy errors.
COUNSEL: NAME, JOHN R. SHOEMAKER SHOEMAKER & SHOEMAKER, P.L.L.C.
International Plaza, Suite 200
7900 International Drive
Bloomington, MN 55425 (952) 224-4610
Appellants
SANDRA HARRILAL AND
STEVEN R. JOHNSON d/b/a
MARKET GROUP AND
PROPERTIES,
VS.
COUNSEL:
STEVE MAGNER, et al.,
Louise T. Seeba
St. Paul City Attorney’s Office
750 City Hall and Courthouse
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
(651) 266-8772
(1) In denying Plaintiffs’ Motions for Sanctions for spoliation of evidence, did the District Court base its ruling
on an erroneous view of the law and/or on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence and thereby abuse
its discretion where following commencement of Plaintiffs’ action challenging Defendants’ code
enforcement policies and operations, including targeting rental properties with code enforcement for alleged
tenant “behavior,” Defendants destroyed 15,000-18,000 relevant housing code inspection records in their
possession and destroyed virtually all e-mail communications and other e-data of Defendants and other key
City officials and employees for the periods relevant to Plaintiffs claims?
(2) In denying Plaintiffs’ Motions for Sanctions for spoliation of evidence, did the District Court abuse its
discretion where Defendants failed to produce or belatedly produced long after the discovery period was
over, City records related to its contract relationship with the Public Housing Agency (PHA) including
documents relevant to the City’s provision of special police services to PHA under contract due to
uncontested PHA’s tenant “behavior” problems and documents relevant to the City’s “hands off” code
enforcement policy on PHA rental properties with code enforcement violations similar to, and in many cases
worse than, claimed violations at Plaintiffs’ properties?
Case 0:05-cv-00461-JNE-SRN Document 255-2 Filed 03/02/2009 Page 1 of 2
2
(3) In denying Plaintiffs’ Motions for Sanctions for spoliation of evidence, did the District Court abuse its
discretion in allowing Defendants to bring a motion for summary judgment following Defendants’ massive
destruction of relevant evidence during the litigation, Defendants repeated delays in providing other relevant
evidence for use by Plaintiffs in discovery, and Defendants complete failure to produce the City’s written
“Analysis of Impediments to fair housing choice” required of the City by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development related to City code enforcement policies directed at “protected class”
members during the time period relevant to Plaintiffs Fair Housing claims?
(4) Did the District Court abuse its discretion by denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Alter the Judgment where
Plaintiffs, providers of low-income housing to “protected class” members, included notice in multiple
versions of their Complaints that the challenged code enforcement actions of Defendants, recipients of
federal funds, were contrary to federal low-income housing policies, Plaintiffs in opposing summary
judgment presented uncontested evidence to support this claim and at that time renewed Plaintiffs’ motion
for sanctions for Defendants’ destruction and non-production of e-mail/e-data evidence relevant to this
claim, Defendants failed to contest such facts and failed to address Plaintiffs’ arguments that the challenged
actions constituted a violation of Defendants’ duty to affirmatively further fair housing (“AFFH”), and the
District Court erroneously claimed that Plaintiffs had belatedly made this claim for the first time at the
hearing on the summary judgment motion?
(5) In granting summary judgment, did the District Court err in determining that Defendants had met their
burden of proof and persuasion in seeking to dismiss: (a) Plaintiffs’ Fair Housing claims where Defendants
in their motion papers and submissions and oral arguments failed to contest the evidence presented by
Plaintiffs and failed to address the arguments made by Plaintiffs that the challenged action of Defendants
violated Defendants’ duty to “AFFH”; (b) Plaintiffs’ Fair Housing claims where Defendants failed to
produce the City’s “Analysis of Impediments to fair housing choice,” evidence under the exclusive control
of Defendants and unproduced by Defendants in this litigation and directly relevant to the Court’s
determination of the Fair Housing issues; (c) Plaintiffs’ RICO claims against City officials and employees;
and (d) Plaintiffs’ other claims?
(6) In reviewing the summary judgment record de novo, viewing all evidence in a light most favorable to the
Plaintiffs, and making all reasonable inferences based upon that evidence, did the District Court err in
granting summary judgment to Defendants on all of Plaintiffs’ claims?
(7) Did the District Court abuse its discretion in denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Discovery to support
Plaintiffs’ RICO claims where Plaintiffs sought the “personal cell phone records, tax returns and bank records” of City code enforcement official Defendant Steve Magner, where other property owners provided affidavit testimony that following Magner’s code enforcement against their properties, Magner had either
offered them “cash” to buy their property, or threatened to tear down their property if the owner did not sell the subject property to Magner’s associate?
FOR LEAD COUNSEL ONLY
I have discussed settlement possibilities on appeal with my client. This appeal is amenable to settlement.
Submitted by: s/ John R. Shoemaker
SHOEMAKER & SHOEMAKER, P.L.L.C.
International Plaza, Suite 200
7900 International Drive
Bloomington, MN 55425 (952) 224-4610
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
I have discussed settlement possibilities on appeal with my client. This appeal is amenable to settlement.
LMAO LMAO LMAO
LOL LOL LOL
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Chuck sounds like a laughing hyenah.
I'm pretty sure you won't be laughing for long Chuck.
Chuck do you think your above the rest of the people on this blog, or do you laugh at us because you know the truth on how St.Pail's Government works and you can't fight City Hall.
We all say?
HE WHO LAUGHS LAST "LAUGHS BEST"!
Go Landlords.
PS we all laugh at the city.
Folks, I fight City Hall as often as I am a part of City Hall, it all depends on what my employer(s) want. That's what I do. Its a job.
What this motion is, is a plea for a settlement. Read it.
It says, throw us a bone, let us save face and we will go away.
Please give us a little money and we will leave you alone.
Its pretty sad actually.
PS - Bob, didn't see you at the DFL convention today.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
A lot of the hope of a better city hinges on thes court action. Hope the dead asses don't win!
So how big of a bone do you think Thune will throw to these guys Chuck?
To win on appeal to 8th, Exhaustion of all remedies must be taken Its far from over. The City,Magner continually in a "Patterned Enterprise" causing major harm,injuy to property owners
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Federal+Settlement+Appeals&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
You don't show your hand and indicate you'll be willing for a settlement if you have a strong case.
Especially if you were confident enough to appeal a federal court decision.
Usually, its the accused (the city), that indicate their willingness to settle if they forgo the process.
They landlords have indicated that they will settle. It can only mean that their case is not as strong as some of you have worked for two and half years to make the readers here believe. Its as weak as Chuck and I have told you it was.
I have discussed settlement possibilities on appeal with my client. This appeal is amenable to settlement.
Submitted by: s/ John R. Shoemaker
Eric
Chuck, I missed the city convention. A family matter came up.
Post a Comment
<< Home