Custom Search

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Is our city safe?

Please click onto the COMMENTS for a requested post by Jeff Matiatos.

89 Comments:

Anonymous Mayor Coleman said...

Dear Jeff,

I appreciate that you contacted my office with your concerns about the crosswalks on West 7th Street and Kellogg Boulevard. Since we at the city of Saint Paul take safety of pedestrians very seriously, I share your concern with our Public Works department to see if any changes were necessary and feasible.

They have informed us that as you have witnessed, there are literally millions of pedestrian crossing movements at this intersection every yea. Despite this high volume,there have been only two reported crashes at this intersection over the last three years. While this indicates that the intersection is very safe for pedestrians, my office asked if any improvements were feasible to makes it even safer.

One option would be to paint white crosswalk lines over the existing brick pavement as you suggested. I believe this will substancially degrade the aesthetics of the intersectioin, and wouldn't necessarily improve pedestrian safety, and sometimes even decreas it because it gives pedestrians a false sence of security and prevents them from being more watchful as they cross busy streeys.

Overall, after a thorough analysis by public works, we believe there are very substancial safeguards in place to protect pedestrians and prevent accidents. They include colored pavement at the intersection, color and pavement patterns in the crosswalk areas, sidewalks leading up to the intersection, the traffic signal, handicapped pedestrian ramps at the corners, pedestrian traffic signal indications, pedestrian countdown timers and a regular and noticible stream of pedestrian traffic that indicates to everyone they should excercise caution.

Because of all of these safeguards, it is our position that the addition of white painted crosswalk lines is not merited and no changes should be made.

I appreciate that you shared your thoughts with the city of St.paul and that you value making our city even safer.



Sincerely,


Christopher B. Coleman

Mayor

3:19 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

I thought the letter was informative and well thought out.

Kind of an honor Jeff to have the Mayor put so much effort into a response.

I am concerned about the state law requiring motorist to yeild to pedestrians in cross walks.

I have to pick and chose when to obey this law and when not to obey the law, because there has been occasions when I have stopped for a pedestrian in a cross walk and they almost got hit by a car in the lane next to me that didn't stop.

I have even seen the Saint Paul police violate this law when it wasn't safe for a pedestrian to cross. It is a law that was passed and not well thought out.

3:32 PM  
Anonymous danno the spelling nazi said...

you're right Bob, my wife drives Payne Ave every day to and from work, and I've driven her on several occasions. you're better off safety-wise not stopping for peds, because everyone behind you will just go right around you without looking to see why you're stopping...

5:09 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Thanks Bob for posting.

Minnesota Statutes require that crosswalks be painted (striped).

There is no exception to this requirement.

I told the city council this and they passed it on to the mayor and the publicworks dept.

My issue with the letter is that he (Mayor Coleman) down played the signifigance of striping the crosswalk and his statement that painting the crosswalk could give a false sence of security is troubling, especially when state law requires that crosswalks be striped.

3 months after my letter, the intersection was changed and they put new, more color effective brick so that pedestrins could see the crosswalks better.

State law says that whenever a citizen puts the public authority
(city or county) on notice of a structural or dangerous condition,
that condition must be corrected or they could lose immunity from suit in the event they are sued from the deficiency or dangerous condition.

Anyways, I am glad the city did something,although the crosswalk is still in violation of the law because it is not striped.




Jeff Matiatos

10:00 PM  
Anonymous Alex said...

Interesting Jeff..

However, don't you think white lines would look trashy in these intersections?

The brick work brings back a sense of old Saint Paul when I was a kid.

Alex Wendt
East Side Pride

10:38 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Alex,

I think it would look foolish perhalps to paint over brick, but asphalt works just fine and I think that at this particular intersection, with the heavy traffic and so many other distractions, brick crosswalks do little to improve the surrounding structures that do not have the signifigant arcitectural qualities say like up on summit and grand avenue neighborhoods.

People should be looking straight ahead, not down looking at the crosswalks aesthetics.

I've lived in the Summit area since 1987.

They re-did some of the streets up there with the old brick, which is fine, but they are high maintenance and do not hold up to the plowing.

These bricks often get plowed up and freezing swells them and blows them out.

I am sorry if I sound so negative about this but I have another unstated reason for asking the city to fix this intersection in addition to a real safety issue.

Thanks for your input.





Jeff Matiatos

11:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"They re-did some of the streets up there with the old brick, which is fine, but they are high maintenance and do not hold up to the plowing.

These bricks often get plowed up and freezing swells them and blows them out."

You'll be happy to know Jeff that the properties that have this brick such as on Linwood in your neighvorhood do not pay the regular tax to maintain that brick. NOPE!.....the rest of the taxpayers chip in on the upkeep so these rich clown can have their nostalgia. Everyone else has to pay full frieght for their street repair, but not these folks. You pay for theirs too.

11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All someone has to do is send a copy of Jeffs letter from the mayor to as many personal injury attorneys as possible for their files, and if the city hasn't striped the crosswalks as required by law, there is proof that the city knew of the defect and can't claim immunity in the event of a personal injury involving the cross walk.



Thanks Jeff

11:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks Coleman for hanging the city out to dry !!

Good letter !

11:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mayors have lost elections over public services concerns and issues.
Anybody know who is running against Colemen ?

11:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The city of Minneapolis didn't give a shit about Memorial stadium.
(Where the Gophers football played).
We really lost a part of history there.

12:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks to Bobs blog, the word is already out and its just a matter of time before attorneys all over the place start making a memo.

12:19 AM  
Anonymous money said...

Money said:
Doesn't take long for the rats that hate the city to crawl out of the sewers of A Democracy.

***You'll be happy to know Jeff that the properties that have this brick such as on Linwood in your neighvorhood do not pay the regular tax to maintain that brick. NOPE!.....the rest of the taxpayers chip in on the upkeep so these rich clown can have their nostalgia. Everyone else has to pay full frieght for their street repair, but not these folks. You pay for theirs too.

11:20 PM

Money said:
11:20, these people pay a hell of a lot more property tax than most home owners in the city. Get a life!

***All someone has to do is send a copy of Jeffs letter from the mayor to as many personal injury attorneys as possible for their files, and if the city hasn't striped the crosswalks as required by law, there is proof that the city knew of the defect and can't claim immunity in the event of a personal injury involving the cross walk.

Thanks Jeff

11:52 PM

Money said:
I bet you are just the rat to do it too.

12:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, didnt know your blog was connected to a sewer .
Doeas it start or end at the mayors office ?
Maybe it starts at moneys house.

1:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

THE SCORE IS RATS 1 / CITY 0.
Send those letters !!!!!!!!

1:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Traffic studies show that the brick crosswalks are safer and help cars yield to pedestrians more than stripes. Drivers tend to slow down even when pedestrians aren't visible, especially if there is a bump-out at the street.

I haven't read the statute. The Mayor is lawyer and knows the law. Some of his friends and associates are personal attorneys who know how to sue. Your legal expertise is from...?

11:20
If you own a home and had any of that done, you'd know you pay for it. The tax assessment for items like speed bumps, new/repaired sidewalks, and street lanterns are assessed for the affect properties- NOT 'discounted' at any rate to be picked up by other homeowners.

There was a little gray card mailed out to the neighbors informing them of a public hearing on it beforehand. There was also notice about the issue on the city council agenda. Again, if you own a home you get this stuff and have an opportunity to show in person or send your input by proxy- or write a letter to be read at the hearing and entered in the record.

No big conspiracy folks. Can't sleep so back to my Sanford and Son DVDs.

1:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right, thats why it appears Kelloggs intersections brick was changed to reflect a more visible appearence because the other brick was not cutting it.
Where are you getting your info about studies that show brick is better ?
I think it's bull.
The mayor may be a lawyer, but he must know something you don't, thats why he told the Publicworks people to change the brick.
He is cutting corners because if he changes it to a striped crosswalk, he is admitting that its cities crosswalks are in violation of the law and the city will have to spend bucu bucks to stripe them all.

2:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:42 a.m.,

My legal expertise is from the Minnesota Statutes.
You haven't shown me your legal expertise and you can't even provide the source of your purported traffic studies that say brick is safer.
Part of a lawyers job is to fool jurys into believing the facts of the case are not in line with the evidence.
Its called deception. Coleman is one of those deceptive lawyers who has fooled you with little or no effort.
Why do you think most public officials and the legislators are attorneys and Judges ?
So you can be deceived !
Verdict ? Your the fool.

8:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where do all of these insane people come from?

Now read this slowly and see if we can see what is wrong in Jeff's thinking.

Jeff says: "Minnesota Statutes require that crosswalks be painted (striped).

There is no exception to this requirement."

If that was the case in the real world (as opposed to whatever planet Jeff lives on) then by observation we would note white lines on every intersection wouldn't we?

But in the real world we note thousands upon thousands of intersections where the crosswalks are not marked.

That would mean either we have a law that no city or town, or township or county or the state itself follows and everyone in Minnesota violates the law or Jeff and all of those who chimed in to support him need to buy more tin foil! Because those hallucinations are becoming rather annoying.

Bob, where do you find these people?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

8:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff,
University of Minnesota School of Law Class of 1992.

Now if you are claiming that 'most' elected officials are crooked and out to fool you using the law, what makes you think that the law they wrote (Minnesota Statutes) is straight forward as you read it?

Afterall, according to you, the only reason they are public officials is to deceive you.

Can you legalese your way into an explanation.

9:17 AM  
Blogger AMANDA said...

So much humour in the mis-guided anger of some of the posters here.

9:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, Jeff which statute are you thinking says that all crosswalks need to be striped?

Chuck

9:53 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

9:17,

If I haven't posted my name to a comment here, its not mine.

But for fun, lets assume it was mine so I will comment on your responce to it.

My answer to you is that we citizens are required to abide to the laws and statutes .

You know as well as I do bonehead, that many laws and statutes have been determined to be unlawful and unconstitutional.

This would be my reasoning (there is more) for calling you lawyers
crooked and corrupt for cashing in on the laws that are self serving to yourselves.

How about this example.

You lawyer lobbyists ask the legislators to create laws so that you have something to do.

Sue people and make a living.

You lawyers also take the food out of childrens mouths when you charge such high attorneys fees in child dissolution and divorce cases.

How come you scumball attorneys always seem to get the lions share of personal injury awards ?

Like you were the one injured ?

I hear you attorneys approach emergency room doctors to call you when an accident victim comes in .

Enough said unless you want more !






Jeff Matiatos

10:04 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

My answer to you Chuck is to have you go down to the mayors office and get a copy of my letter.

Your always the funny one Amanda.

You a shrink or something ?



Jeff Matiatos

10:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

169.21 Subd. 2. "Rights in absence of signal. (a) Where traffic-control signals are not in place or in
operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the
roadway within a marked crosswalk or at an intersection with no marked crosswalk. The driver
must remain stopped until the pedestrian has passed the lane in which the vehicle is stopped."

OK Jeff read that again. The state clearly discusses crosswalks at intersections that are not marked and that vehicle need to stop. Get it?

There is nothing in the statutes that says that signalized intersections must have marked crosswalks, so what in the heck are you thinking?

Or do you at all?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

chapter 169.06 sub 5 iii "Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian-control signal as provided in subdivision 6,
pedestrians facing any green signal, except when the sole green signal is a turn arrow, may proceed
across the roadway within any marked or unmarked crosswalk. Every driver of a vehicle shall
yield the right-of-way to such pedestrian, except that the pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to
vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that the green signal indication is first shown."

Jeff - just to make sure you see that the state law clearly suggests that there will be intersections with green lights and pedestrian signals AND NO MARKED CROSSWALK!

Get it?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:30 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

169.01 subdivision 37.

If there is a crosswalk, it should be marked according to the definition of a crosswalk.

Minnesota law it appears, does not require a marked crosswalk at every intersection, contrary to my previous understanding.

A twinkie for you !

However, a citizen can challange a citys refusal to mark a crosswalk
via a declaratory judgement or injunction.

Not all lawyers are scumbags.




Jeff Matiatos

10:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Subd. 37. Crosswalk. "Crosswalk" means (1) that portion of a roadway ordinarily included
with the prolongation or connection of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections; (2) any
portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings
on the surface."

So you sent a letter to the Mayor thinking that you could start some kind of a law suit because you can't READ!

(1) Explains that the if you draw a straight line from sidewalk to sidewalk across a street where two street intersect that is a crosswalk marked or not marked.

(2) Explains that any other place that the city or town wants to allow people to cross the street they can do it by marking the street.

What you have here is nothing more then the definition of what a crosswalk is.

Try Cub for that tin foil need of yours Jeff I am sure the aliens are tampering with your thought process.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:16 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

I didnt send a letter thinking I could start some kind of lawsuit.

You haven't seen my letter you dope on a rope.

If a crosswalk means what you acknowledge is a crosswalk according to statute, then crosswalks not marked are really not crosswalks now are they.

Just what the hell are they, cattle crossings ?

Seems to be a conflict within the statutes.

Your the one who can't read jack off.

11:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Holy Crap has this spun out of control.

I doubt if a U attorney writes like that (8:12am), so I'll call bs on the 1991 U grad. Not the point.
--
Jeff your words in italics, my response in bold.

You lawyer lobbyists ask the legislators to create laws so that you have something to do.
Seeing that I'm one- da da da da! Now you know. Lobbyist either advocate for something, or against something. Lawmakers judge on the greater good of what they're advocating for and maybe a bill is written. It goes from relevant committee to committee where if it survives that, goes to floor for a vote. If it passes, then the governor decides if its something that within their agenda for the state, or at the least, not offensive to their agenda. He signs it, it becomes a law.
Not an easy process which is why good lobbyist must understand the process, players and the issue.


Sue people and make a living.
So now are you against the Constitution? Something about the Bill of Rights disgust you? You hate the 7th Amendment? You only care about some civil rights and not others? What's your problem?

You lawyers also take the food out of childrens mouths when you charge such high attorneys fees in child dissolution and divorce cases.
Not the case at all. Chuck has proven that you don't do your homework or care much about facts but, your one subjective experience doesn't represent the fact that attorneys who handle CHIPS and TPR cases are paid by the county on a case by case basis and its a small fee ($75/hr) that in reality cuts into what they make in private practice($225/hr). They don't do it for the money.

The divorce attorneys range from the $99.00 complete divorce ones to the $500/hr ones that are use to handling complex cases. It was your choice to get one and your choice to divorce. Those fees are all discussed upfront. If you can't afford them, you may want to remember the lyrics to an old Blues song that goes 'Its Cheaper to Keep Her'


How come you scumball attorneys always seem to get the lions share of personal injury awards ?
I assume 'lion's share' means more than 50%. Personal Injury attorneys don't take any fees up front. They work through your case (discovery, tracking down witnesses, court fees, mountains of paperwork, evidence and copies, hundreds of phone calls etc.) on contingency. Which they only get paid if there is a favorable judgment. Many times this takes years, its never quick. At the end, that contingent fee is about 28% in Minnesota. Nationwide its between 25% and 40%. Find me one case where the attorneys took the 'lion's share'. You won't. One case like that and they are finished in the business.


I hear you attorneys approach emergency room doctors to call you when an accident victim comes in .
B.S. I can't prove what you "hear", but it must be from someone as bright as you. Its unethical (which could jeopardize one's license), not worth it as we've already talked about how cases takes years and borderline, illegal. Ironically, the insurance representative come to you in the hospital and try to get you to sign off on liability or screw you on your claim while you're still in traction. You got no problems with the way the Insurance Jackyls forget about being a good neighbor and paying you what you've already paid for, do you?

Jeff, reading a statute does not give you expertise on the law or any parts of the law. Reading the statute is the beginning, not the end, and you messed up in the beginning.


Eric

12:36 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Whats up Eric, Chuck call you for reinforcement ?

Most of society thinks most lawyers are crooks.

I happen to know a lawyer or two who has told me first hand how alot of them are making payoffs to effect the outcome of cases and court rulings.

Your one blind mother if you deny this doesn't occur.

Typical that you and Chuck have so much in common.

You and Chuck are part of those in abstencia to whats going on in the real world.

You resort to insults of posters ability to type.

You have your own way of trying to weasel out of explaining with an open mind, rather than dealing with the truth.

You talk about how unethical it would be for a lawyer to call a hospital to drum up buisness /

So your saying it has never happened ?

What makes you know so much ?

Your phoney.



Jeff Matiatos

1:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff said "If a crosswalk means what you acknowledge is a crosswalk according to statute, then crosswalks not marked are really not crosswalks now are they."

Sorry, Jeff this stuff is just to much for you isn't it? The definition explains in (1) that a crosswalk is that space in a road between where the two sidewalks would run if they crossed the street. It says nothing about that space in a road ever having to be marked. It declares that space to be a crosswalk. It then goes on in (2) and says that anywhere that a city or town marks up a street with lines and declares it to be a crosswalk is a crosswalk.

What you were looking at was the section of the statutes where the state defines what they mean by the word "crosswalk."

I am sorry that you don't even understand the Minnesota laws well enough to understand what you are reading.

...and I doubt that you can get some kind of an injunction to make the City paint a crosswalk when there is no law that requires crosswalks to be painted.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff, again in italics, me in bold.


Most of society thinks most lawyers are crooks.
So what? That's your support statement?

I happen to know a lawyer or two who has told me first hand how alot of them are making payoffs to effect the outcome of cases and court rulings.
Its always someone you know or somebody told you, or somebody you know who's cousin heard... You were a hit in junior high weren't you? Again. Personal Injury Attorneys work on contingency basis. Many of those cases takes years to get a judgment and the attorney collects a percentage after judgment. Nothing before. So, yes, the outcome of some cases can produce a pay day like you enjoy on the 15th and 30th of every month. Their payday takes a couple of years to hit their hands and then its between a quarter and a little of a third of the judgment. Also, many judgments based on the case are capped as are some fees.

Your one blind mother if you deny this doesn't occur.
Its part of the process. I explained to you in my first post. I'm a father, not a mother.

Typical that you and Chuck have so much in common. You and Chuck are part of those in abstencia to whats going on in the real world.
Really. Because to the person reading here, you're the one that lives in his own world and not aware of much of anything. When you don't understand it you poo-poo it, or the messenger that explains you err. Chuck and I are commenting on people we KNOW, the process we KNOW, about the city we KNOW.

You resort to insults of posters ability to type.
Says the guy that starts off calling all lawyers crooked and scumbags. The guy who accuses lawmakers and judges of being purposefully deceit. You, the one throwing insults in every post actually wrote that?


You have your own way of trying to weasel out of explaining with an open mind, rather than dealing with the truth.
I don't weasel out of anything Jeff. Everything I write I back up and deal with. You throw out rumors and innuendo (I heard...I know someone who said...Everybody knows that...) as fact. So tell us what is the truth and how did you come to this truth?

You talk about how unethical it would be for a lawyer to call a hospital to drum up buisness /
So your saying it has never happened ?

Saying it never happened what remove the probability of it ever happening. I'm saying it DOESN"T happen and its NOT an ongoing norm in the practice among those who practice personal injury.

What makes you know so much ?
Jeff, its my job. It really is. I wrote that in the last post.

Your phoney.
Phony? Me? You're the one mouthing off about a lot of shit you don't know about and when you're called on it, you get insulted. You've been busted. LIve with it.


Eric

1:38 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

You and Chuck just keep living in your world of I know everything and you don't.


Jeff Matiatos

1:44 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Chuck,

If a citizen follows the proper procedures for informing the city of a dangerous condition and the city does not agree that such a condition exists, we citizens have a right to compel the city to conform through the judicial process.


Its done guite often.

In your world it doesn't happen.



Jeff Matiatos

1:48 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Chuck said;
Bob, where do you find these people?

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

my response;
I have no clue where everyone comes from. They show up and I welcome them with open arms regardless of their opinion or how they feel. Everyone has a right to speak at the town hall.

3:16 PM  
Anonymous Rodney said...

Can't we all just get along?

3:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff said, "If a citizen follows the proper procedures for informing the city of a dangerous condition and the city does not agree that such a condition exists, we citizens have a right to compel the city to conform through the judicial process."

I am so sorry that you don't even get how silly that sounds. Do you really think that people go around suing cities to get crosswalks painted and stop signs put in? Is that how you think the world works?

An unmarked crosswalk at a signalized intersection in a 30 MPH speed zone in an urban setting isn't a "dangerous condition" on any planet that I have been to. Your notion at first was that this was dangerous because the City was violating an imaginary state law.

Please sue Jeff you have as much of a chance as the RICO guys.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

9:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thats alright Chuck, I won't be suing for a crosswalk in your neighborhood by your home in hopes that you will be crossing the street and a semi squashes your shit for brains head.
With a little luck, your but buddy Eric will get his brains squashed too.

10:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of shit for brains, Anonymous poster at 10:10pm reminds us what you could sound like if you get your brains knocked out.


Eric

10:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You don't know what you're talking about Eric. Jusy another bunch of shit as usual. The attorney talking all the money that Jeff is talking about is true and you know it. True the attorney fee is only a third, but then the attorney bills the client for whole host of things from paralegals to investigators to expert witness opinions to phone bills and the list never stops. By the time the attorney gets his money and pays the rest of the bills the guy who got hurt gets shit. He would have come out better collecting cans and selling them for the years it takes to finsih the case.

Your just trying (as usual) to take advantage of people's ignorance as to how the process really works to make it look like something it's not. When ya gonna stop this lying thing Eric. It's not going to get you into heaven you know.

You're right jeff and most of us know it.

2:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck said, "An unmarked crosswalk at a signalized intersection in a 30 MPH speed zone in an urban setting isn't a "dangerous condition" on any planet that I have been to."

But Chuck isn't this a double standard considering the rationale the city uses to condemn people's homes?

4:55 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Eric said at 12:36 p.m. :

" Not the case at all, Chuck has proven that you don't do your homework or care much about facts... "




Eric said again at 1:38 p.m. about Jeffs comment on weasle, over charging ambulance chasing attorneys and their fees :

" I am saying it DOESN''T happen and its not an ongoing norm in the practice among those who practice personal injury ".

Ok big shot, see kennedy vs. City of St.Paul(Your ass buddy), Minnesota Court of appeals
CX-99-259

The court of appeals affirmed aan ALJs order reducing attorneys fees from 1'515,75 hourd to 1'006.9 hours based on vague entries, duplication of attorneys tasks, EXCESSIVE FEES for some tasks.

Ok Mr.smart man Eric, how many hours did this attorney over charge ?

Can you subtract ?

If you figure it out, you can have a twinkie too, just like Chuck.





Jeff Matiatos

5:59 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Hey Eric, where are the attorneys that charge $99.00 an hour ?

Sounds like a going out of buisness fee !!!!!!!!

Another cap in your ass !!!!!!!!



Jeff Matiatos

6:07 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Wow Eric, at $250.00 per hour as a starting fee for an average attorney, over 500 hours of excessive hours adds up to:
HOW MUCH ?

$ 125.000.00 Dollars.


Thats not so bad now is it.



Jeff Matiatos

6:21 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Want to hear the good news ?

If you sign up with Erics $99.00 an hour attorney, you only get jewed $49'000.00 dollars !!!!!!!

Want more Eric ?



Jeff Matiatos

6:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That doesn't even include what the otherside paid the ALJ to reduce the fee award !

Sorry, thats not noted in the case, but payoffs usually are :
" under the table "



Jeff Matiatos

6:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An attorney I know personally says
his associate friend Judges wife in another city and state( I will not name the attorney or judge ),
woke up to find a new caddilac in the driveway in the name of the judges wife.
This was about one year after an enormous jury verdict in favor of the attorney and the lawfirm trying the case.

6:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Eric....I think you are gettingyou butt kicked here. Jeff is so worked up I'm worried that he might sue you for distributing false inforamtion. How can you seem to be such a nic eguy Eric, but be so full of hot air?

7:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eric, you got some of that Hemroid cream left over ?
People say your ass is bothering you right now !
Hmmm, maybe you know a good proctologist.



Harold s.

7:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Eric just learned a couple new tricks with his computer.You have such great italics and bold print.He's sooooooooo smart.


Tanesha

8:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like the two city rats crawled back into the sewer.
Chuck, Eric where are you ?

9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One at a time folks:

2:07 wrote:
The attorney talking all the money that Jeff is talking about is true and you know it. True the attorney fee is only a third, but then the attorney bills the client for whole host of things from paralegals to investigators to expert witness opinions to phone bills and the list never stops. By the time the attorney gets his money and pays the rest of the bills the guy who got hurt gets shit. He would have come out better collecting cans and selling them for the years it takes to finsih the case.

As i have already pointed out, all of that is paid out of the attorney's pocket with the hope of getting it back in their earned percentage.

Jeff goes crazy and begins writing to me every ten minutes. Serious mental issues at play here. Jeff- you opened your trap about the law, lobbying and attorney fees. Three things that are actually part of the field I work in and I keep up daily. You're shooting from the hip and left with nothing when caught not being able to even read a statute correct so you have to try and show you're not a complete idiot by trying to trap me into some argument on hearsay. Not going to happen. You're still a loser who has proven to be kind of just plain ol' dumb.

5:59am Jeff wrote:
The court of appeals affirmed aan ALJs order reducing attorneys fees from 1'515,75 hourd to 1'006.9 hours based on vague entries, duplication of attorneys tasks, EXCESSIVE FEES for some tasks.

Ok Mr.smart man Eric, how many hours did this attorney over charge?

Jeff I answered this and you even copied it. Right above you copied my words " I am saying it DOESN''T happen and its not an ongoing norm in the practice among those who practice personal injury ". That's a typo where I should have said I"M NOT SAYING... You can tell its a typo because there would be no need to emphasize 'its not an ongoing norm'. For the idiots, that means you can find examples of bad players, like in any field, but its not the norm of activities.


Wow Eric, at $250.00 per hour as a starting fee for an average attorney,
An Attorney that charges that is not starting out. Although its not a far out number and there are plenty that will and can charge more. We have an over-flow of attorneys today so you can shop around for one that fits your needs and money. Most people understand you pretty much et what you pay for. Its called the free market too. You don't like it? Move to Cuba.

Hey Eric, where are the attorneys that charge $99.00 an hour ?
Sounds like a going out of buisness fee !!!!!!!!
Another cap in your ass !!!!!!!!

No fault divorce. Look in the back of your paper. Again, yuo get what you pay for.

If you sign up with Erics $99.00 an hour attorney, you only get jewed $49'000.00 dollars !!!!!!!
Jewed? So you are an anti-semitic bigot as well as being stupid?

That doesn't even include what the otherside paid the ALJ to reduce the fee award !Sorry, thats not noted in the case, but payoffs usually are :" under the table "

Alright!!! I wasn't sure you could do it but, you rarely disappoint. I knew you'd squeeze your conspiracy in here some how. Now everyone's corrupt too. Do you also pray and dance to the Moon god?

Must you just dismiss everything as a conspiracy against you if you don't understand it? Also, stop writing snonymous post supporting your other posts. Its obvious.


Jeff- I means 6:42:
Like all of your other 'my friend' stories, this never happened. No city, no names, just horrible innuendo. I bet you also really do have a girlfriend, she just lives in another state, right?

7:24
Jeff apparently could even hire decent representation for himself. I wouldn't worry about him suing anyone but his doctor for not prescribing a strong enough prescription.

Harold,
Shut up.

Tanesha,
Yes I am. You get control of yourself though young lady, I'm already spoken for.


Eric

9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My ass is fine because Jeff got owned on his this one. He should have taken the nice letter from the Mayor and let it go.

Chuck and I first kicked Jeff's ass on the his assertion that the city is not safe because of the crosswalks. Jeff proved that reading is not his strong point.

Second, he got taken to the shed on his lack of knowledge of judicial and governmental procedures.

So what has he left? Bad lawyer jokes and rumors about stories friends tell about lawyers as proof that people don't care for attorneys. Newsflash.

Jeff is a joke and got exposed. He post a thousand times and it doesn't change the fact that on the subject he picked, he got owned. He's also got some pent up feeling against Jews.

Sick man.


Eric

9:54 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

What was that Kool mo d sang
" YOU COLD BUSTED ".

Ya, thats you man.

You have the case and you have the facts and now you want to twist your words around after the fact because you look like an ass !

Excuse me, are an ass.

If your so up in the field of being
learned in the law, oh let me amend that, confused, so what is it you don't understand about the case before your eyes ?

That shit happens all the time and you know it.

What lawyer would openly admit that they do this shit ?

I could cite another 10 cases here where lawyers try to scam for fees and costs but I have made my point and again, you are the minority in more ways than one.

People will read this here what you say and say that your full of shit .

As to my legal experience, it far surpasses yours.

Jeff Matiatos

10:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff might not know the inner workings of haw like Eric and his elites, but Jeff does know what the end result is and that's what bugs people like Eric.....they can't pull the wool over our eyes. Most people here are going to stand with Jeff Eric. They knows he's right about the end result and that's what they care about, not your silly word games and charater assasinations. Now why don't you just take your licks and apologize to Jeff and we can get on to ripping up someone that deserves it? Like one of your favorite politicians perhaps.

10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff

Neither Eric nor I am lawyers. We just read reasonably well and have some touch with reality.

We read a letter like the one you got from the Mayor and think that the City gave you a reasonable response to a concern about pedestrian safety.

When you say that there is a state statute requiring crosswalks to be painted we actually go and look it up. We don't just jump on the first thing we see, we research and ask questions. (I even asked you what section you were reading.)

Crazy people on the other hand have strange beliefs and only need the slightest reinforcement of their bizarre thoughts to be convinced that their fantasies are reality. They jump on the first thing that even sounds like it is close to their strange thoughts and then become convinced that there are mysterious forces that are conspiring to stop them from being able to share their strange truths that only they know. They want to sue everyone, so that the world will know their truths. They want the media to do stories on their imagined enemies. And when they get no press and get laughed out of court it only reinforces their belief that there is a conspiracy of forces out to get them.

You would appear to be a reasonable example of this.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:37 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Folks, I would like to conclude my thoughts about my addressing the city council / mayor on this issue.

I really believe that the intersection crosswalk at Kellogg and West 7th was a hazard .

3 months after my letter to the council and mayor, this intersection was changed in that new more distinct colored brick was placed there to be more obvious to pedestrians.

Chuck, did you get that ?????

As for wanting to sue the city over this, not likely I would have gone this far, contrary to Chucks ignorance in denying that citizens can't compel government to make our community safer.

Thanks Bob for posting the letter.

In the end, it bothered and upset Chuck and Eric real bad .

They manipulated the issue to try and attack me on issues they knew little if anything about and I won.

The majority of posters were for me Chuck and Eric !!!

Except for amanda but she is a drifter anyways and is still looking for breast milk.




Thanks Bob, it was fun destroying Eric and Chuck !!!!!!!!!!!!




Jeff Matiatos

10:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry Jeff the brick work was a part of the on going upgrade of all of the brick intersections downtown for the RNC coming in September, or did you get them to plant the flowers downtown too?

Sorry, I keep forgeting you can "compell" the City to do your bidding.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

10:53 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Sorry to burst your bubble Chuck, but I have a letter from a government official in city hall that says the decision to change the brick based on my letter was a consideration in conjunction with the RNC.


At least your half right on this one.




Jeff Matiatos

11:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff I hear there is water on Mars you might fit in there!

A word of advice for you Jeff, keep your crazy thoughts to yourself! You are making a fool of yourself, get a life!

An acquitence of yours and I hate to admit it so I will remain anonymous.

11:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, Jeff your letter was the thing that did it. You keep right on thinking that. I use to write those kind of letters for the council member and that is exactly what one hopes for when they write them.

You "compelled" the City to do it. You are so scary.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:19 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

11:15,

Obviousley Chuck is running out of ways to convince people he is right so he makes up a sentence that I have people I know that think I might find water on Mars.

We know its you chuck because your the one who keeps talking about planets.

See your posting at 8:50 a.m. :

" whatever planet Jeff lives on "

See your post at 11:16 a.m. :

" Aliens " .

Chuck, you are the one in outer space.



Nice try ET.



Jeff Matiatos

11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry Jeff but I always sign my posts. I don't go looking for reinforcements for arguements here. I have been willing to stand up for all of my opinions and take more than insults as a consequence.

I guess there is someone else out there who thinks you may be a bit "teched".

More than you might want to know.

Though it appears that person isn't very creative, I will admit.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice try Chuck, I always sign my posts here too.

Sometimes i don't and I say nasty things to people.

What makes you such an honest person that your to much of a coward to admit you do the same.

People here just assume you do because no one likes you or believes you anyways.

You will excuse me if I dont sign my name. See this is what it looks like !

12:03 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

You can't mix words with me Chuck, I am not offended.


Jeff Matiatos

12:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:03 you idiot. I have been writing this entire time that I thought Jeff was insane. Reread the posts. It may be to subtle for you but then that would be something about how quick you are.

Now, after multiple posts of spelling out in great detail that I thought that Jeff was crazy and needed mental health counseling to deal with his delusions why would I post some random comment about Mars and claim to know him?

Once again to jump to that conclusion isn't rational and Jeff's assuming that I would do that says something about his paranoia. Jeff would think that I make up things about him rather than be able to follow how bizar his train of thought has been.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

12:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


They manipulated the issue to try and attack me on issues they knew little if anything about and I won.

The majority of posters were for me Chuck and Eric !!!


Jeff, I am a lobbyist and spokesperson for the attorneys you talk about. I think any normal person would defer to me on knowing a bit more about this than you.

Chuck has worked in city hall for a few years. There are few people around that understand that process better Chuck. He stays on top of what's developing around town.

You sit in your basement with your computer and Cheetos stained fingers pulling stuff out of your butt and then measuring your importance or esteem on how many A-Democracy people agree with you.

Sad and Sick.


Eric

12:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, your a poster here to so I guess you measure up the same way.

If your to good for us A-Democracy
posters here, get the hell out.

Chuck, I see you got Eric to get his ass off the toilet to come to your aid .

You two fags ?

12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:36
What has that to do with anything?
You must be new here because if my esteem was based on approval at A-Democracy. I would have shot myself by now. These people for the most part are interested in conspiracy and magic, not truth. I'm confident enough with myself to go at alone. Its not that hard when you know what you're talking about.

Jeff,
You keep this going and I'll go into detail on why you're the real phony. You put up all of those attorney fees that appear to be soaking people out of six figures when in reality, your problems that you got into a tiff about paying was $60.00 to an attorney that charged $40/hr. A reasonable rate and much lower than the one I gave earlier. You didn't like the outcome so you refused to pay and no you got this gripe against the family court system.

12:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:44=Eric

Eric

12:44 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

First of all you nit wit, that situation involved fees of a guardian ad litem, not an attorneys
hourly fee.

Get your facts straight bozo.



Jeff Matiatos

12:52 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Another thing bozo, try getting custody of your kids without an attorney.

I did, and it was no small undertaking and the circumstances warrented it.

I reversed the Chief Judge on his enitial refusal to do so.


Jeff Matiatos

1:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jeff,
I would never attempt to deal with the courts without an attorney. Even for some traffic violations. They are in court everyday and are professionals when it comes to addressing the system and navigating through it.

I learned the hard way years ago, you don't walk into anyone else's arena without expertise with you. That's anything.

Eric

1:27 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Well if you couldnt afford one, what choice do you have right ?

Some people are fortunate enough to go through life without one and even you might be at a point in your life where money is tight and you need to draft a will or whatever.

Plenty of lawyers have written books on how to get things done.

What they can't tell you are the methods and ways specific courthouses operate and things litigants would benefit from knowing about certain judges.

Judges can be removed as a matter of right within 10 days after receiving notice of that judge.

Not a good idea unless you want to be the talk of all the other judges during a lunch session
(not good).

Most of these judges stick together .

To do what I have done in all my legal ventures that still continue today, require a better than fair understanding of court rules and procedures.

An understanding of relevant case law, courtroom decorum and formality.

I can be a prik and an asshole if
thats the level of civility that anyone wants to engage me in.

I take insults like you do, with a grain of salt, perhalps a molecule.

Lucky for me my family doesnt have the dough so proceed in court in forma pauperis.

None of my legal actions have ever been dismissed as frivilous.

Although Ramsey County Court has erronousley dismissed some of them but I was able to document the corrupt behaviors of government officials.

You do what you do and I do what I do.

Enough said.



Jeff Matiatos

2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

But Eric.....you walk into the ricomens arena when your so damn dumnb you can't even recognize evidense when you see it.

2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Point taken Jeff.

It looks like we closed this one down. Next subject Bob!

2:14
But Eric.....you walk into the ricomens arena when your so damn dumnb you can't even recognize evidense when you see it.
No I didn't. The RICOMEN actually sashayed into mine.

At this point they haven't provided one iota of evidence to support their case of conspiracy on behalf of the city of Saint Paul to drive low income landlords out of business based on the race of the people they rent to. They have been laughed out of court and undressed by the city attorney, dismissed by the judge and foiled by their OWN WITNESSES (ie the testimony of Frank Steinhauser).



Eric

2:43 PM  
Blogger AMANDA said...

Jeff, why are you so angry? Why do you refer to Chuck and Eric with vile language? It doesn't help your argument in my opinion.

It is obvious you have issues with authority and an axe to grind with the city.

Have you ever considered "anger management" counciling?

5:44 PM  
Anonymous Jef said...

Got yeah Eric! :)

6:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mayors have lost elections over public services concerns and issues.

Anybody know who is running against Colemen ?

Yes, John Krenik is running for mayor. I got some literature from him last week over here on the North End. You all should know this as the home of Lee Helgen, Super City Council Member (A legend in his own mind).

7:40 PM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Amanda,

Eric,Chuck and I have had enough unpleasant words today to last a week.

Where do you come off telling me I use such vile language ?

You sit back and support Chuck and Eric no matter how brutal they treat other posters here.

Your opinion is really of little value when you write like a hypocrite and for being so
one sided.

You don't seem to be offering any ideas for change anywhere.

So what if I am angry with the city. Alot of St.Paul citizens are incase you haven't been paying attention here.

Expect a new mayor, I do.

Just what issues of authority do I have ?

At least you could point it out because I disagree.

What makes you think I have an axe to grind ? My letter to the city about crosswalks ? Think again.



Jeff Matiatos

10:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And what's wrong with an axe to grind? Some people on here think no matter what happens that everyone is supposed to ignore it, pretend like it never happend and just be happy. People with an axe to grind are the ones that get something done......the others sit around advocating for the status quo.

1:41 AM  
Anonymous Jeff Matiatos said...

Thank you 1:41



Jeff Matiatos

10:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:41 but I thought we were on a truth seeking mission?

When someone comes up with wild stories and imaginary conspiracies shouldn't we question them?

Jeff made up a pretend law that the city had broken and then got people upset and thinking they should sue the city because he was screwed up.

Some of us are trying to get people to deal with the real world so that we can fix real problems.

Some of us work all of the time to bring change to the city and to government. It take more than whining to get things done.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

1:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Real good Repke, what have you done to get things done other than
doing things that are self serving to you ?

1:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Jeff said he had a letter fron the city saying that the srosswalk at Kellogg was redone in part due to his concern over the crosswalk not being up to snuff.

2:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:58 I could write a book putz.

I started being involved in civic affairs in 1970. It was a total avocation for 19 years. I change careers (gave up a stable job) so that I could have an impact on the City of Saint Paul. I have since worked as a lobbyist, community development and civic activist for the last ten.

If you don't think I haven't been offered a lot more to take those skills and contacts into the private sector than your even a bigger putz than I think.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

4:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Some of us are trying to get people to deal with the real world so that we can fix real problems."

Ricomen are going to fix your problems once and for all Repke. Sounds like jeff may fix a few also.

5:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just how much is alot more Chuck ?

10:47 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home