Custom Search

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS/ Part 3 Steinhauser Fair Housing Lawsuit

Please click onto the COMMENTS for the appeal. Scroll down the page for parts one and two.

17 Comments:

Anonymous Appeal continued said...

City interference with the independence of the State District Court

The Defendants illegal activities went so far as to "fix" the State District Court in their favor through secret meetings to discuss City policy, "Court buy-in,
selection of judges to preside over City prosecution against property owners Defendants labeled as "problem property" owners.
Council President Bostrum and the City Attorney met with Chief Judge Mott regarding Mayor Kelly's "problem properties" priority. The City Attorney was
bringing Police and Code staff to meet the Judge. Early in 2002, Dawkins was
questioning "How pull off' a "crackdown". The City needed the District Court to
"buy-in" to ensure victory. Dawkins-City Attorneys held further private meetings
with Chief Judge. City Attorney Dolan had a private meeting with housing Referee
Yanish who later presided over City initiated-promoted Tenant Remedy Cases by
Dolan against Steinhauser, Meysembourg, Brisson, Harrilal and others. After the
civil litigation proceeded to the point that Dawkins and the City were "9 for 9" in
58
court before Referee Yanish, Dawkins returned to Judge Mott in private for a
"Thanks" and to run further City-Kelly-Dawkins plans for property owner
crackdown by Mott for approval.

1:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So much for an unbiased court and I am sad to say that it really does not suprise me at all. When does this shit end? In all the things I have read about these lawsuits, the dirt just seems to keep coming and coming. How anyone can stand up for the city is just really beyond my comprehension. Used to be this type of behavior only happened in the movies. Sad

7:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The city is an arrogance machine. It helps to have a city attorney's office without a conscience, and it has kept rolling for a long time, hopefully it will crash over this one.

9:21 PM  
Anonymous Louise Seeba Pandering said...

Should your opposition lose their Tax exempt status re: Title 26 501(c)3, How in the Hell can the City Attorney Louise T. Seeba handle this case and be a Candidate for School Board. Pandering to your opposition at www.e-democracy.org

Click here: All posts in School Board candidates for Tom Conlon's seat: St. Paul Issues Forum: E-Democracy.Org Forums

E-Democracy is controlling elections ie Seeba who techinally should be disbarred, Separation of Powers

8:28 AM  
Anonymous henry said...

Judge Mott received letters regarding code enforcement behavior and illegal inspections and he never responded. Now it is clear as to why.

11:28 AM  
Anonymous Appeal continued said...

IV. Spoliation Motions
It was uncontested that Defendants destruction of relevant evidence occurred
long after commencement of litigation and continued over a number of years of
litigation. What is shocking is the scope of the destruction and the fact it was
carried out under the eye of Dawkins a member of the Bar. When questioned
whether he directed his staff to preserve evidence following commencement of the
Staeinhauser case in May 2004, he claims he did yet virtually all internal and
external communications of code officials, inspectors, and council members for the
relevant time periods were thereafter destroyed. Dawkins depo 20. When one
reviews the e-mails between White neighbors and Councilmember Lantry and her
staff concerning the 321 Bates Avenue four plex occupied by protected class
tenants and then reviews the 2004 letter from legal aid attorney de Stefano to the
City Council its no wonder Defendants destroyed their written communications.
The destruction ofthe electronic and paper copies of written communications
of Defendants and other key officials deprived Plaintiffs of relevant evidence going
59
to the issues of Defendants' claims of immunity, defendants" motive and intent,
Defendants' decisions to violate the State Building Code grandfathering
protections, and the City's certifications and responsibilities under FHA to conduct
analysis of impediments to fair housing, actions taken to remove said impediments
and records keeping required by HUD.
Defendants destroyed 15,000 TISH records of homes in the City including
those surrounding Plaintiffs' homes and failed to timely produce a 2006 TISH
Study by City Code Enforcement of 2005 TISH reports showing 60% of City
homes had violations and 35% with serious deficiencies. Defendants destroyed the
2001-2003 TISH reports that would show where those homes were located and the
nature of the deficiencies then claimed Plaintiffs could recreate the data by seeking
those records from over 40 TISH inspectors with the tremendous expense of same.
HUD regulations require the City to conduct a full and fair analysis of
impediments to fair housing in the City, to identify those impediments, including those
based on the City'S legislative code, rules, procedures and practices related to fair
housing and "protected classes," its illegal demands to the private market landlords in
the City to meet expensive "code compliance" inspections and its creation of other
barriers to fair housing, and to maintain records regarding those City actions. The
60
City's illegal "Code Compliance" requirements subverting grandfathering protections
for older buildings in violation of the State Building Code, brings into question
whether the City falsified its certifications to HUD through material non-disclosures.

7:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where does this shit end? Either these guys are very good at spinning shit like Repke or the city is in a heap of trouble. Some of this stuff is just unbelievable!

12:52 AM  
Anonymous Appeal conculsion said...

CONCLUSION
Nowhere in the District Court's Order granting summary judgment did the
District Court draw inferences in favor of Plaintiffs, nor consider whether a reasonable
juror could view the evidence differently. This disregard for the summary judgment
standard and this kind of "trial on the paper" violates Plaintiffs' Constitutional right to
trial by jury.
Plaintiffs ask this Court to reverse the District Court's grant of summary
judgment and remand the case for trial.
Dated: May 6, 2009
SHOEMAKER & SHOEMAKER, P.L.L.C.
By: s/ John R. Shoemaker
John R. Shoemaker (Attorney Lic. #161561)
7900 International Drive
International Plaza, Suite 200
Bloomington, Minnesota 55425
(952) 224-4610
Attorney for Plaintiffs-Appellants
61

9:45 PM  
Anonymous Almanac_Andy Dawkins Fri.26Jun09 said...

Andy Dawkins on Almanac Fri.26Jun09
Interesting also Seeba withdrew her SchoolBoard DFL endorsement.

These Lawyers are still out there
misleading the public on TV
http://www.tpt.org/aatc/person/andy_dawkins

4:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steinhauser is a poverty pimp. His property was subpar and rightfully cited as he himself admitted under oath. Again, he himself admitted that he had violations.

Andy Dawkins spent over 15 years in the legislature fighting for civil rights and taking unpopular stances advocating for the poor and disenfranchised. Its vulgar and obscene what you're failing at trying to tab him with. Its why you continue to loose.

Sharon, if you weren't mentally ill, you'd be in jail for the lies you post here. You, like others, are in your situation because you refused to follow the rules. You refused to rightfully register your car, like thousands of us have to do, and you refused to pay our taxes like thousands of us- minus you and Bill Dahn, have to do.

Its these tangents of this blog that will continue to make it more of a spectacle like a car accident than a blog of facts and record.


Eric

10:09 AM  
Blogger Sharon 4Anderson said...

Eric you poor thing the DFL is falling apart, What do you think I'm in Court for against the City
62cv09-1163 as My Car fully paid for, fully Licensed and Insured was Stolen by Joel Essling and Packing Cop Tanya Hunter

Do a Google on Code Corruption with my name, the forensic evidence is conclusive. "Boy"

Hey Barb Winn is now my friend on Facebook and Twitter

Eric eat Steinhauser "dust" Boy

11:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sharon,
I'm nobody's 'boy'.

The DFL is continuing to win across the state, and nationally, which is where I work, we're set to pass more of our agenda and pick up seats starting with Franken, the Governor of South Carolina and Virginia.

In St Paul, the DFL endorsed mayor is going to cruise to another win and the school board will be full with DFL endorsed candidates.

You have as twisted logic about gaining and falling, as you do about your victimization. The Democrats are not 'falling'.

Steinhauser has admitted to being a slumlord by noting that his property was falling apart, though he 'planned' on fixing them up he never got to it after YEARS of citations. He just never did anything until they began coming after him. He is the worst of the group as he intentionally decided against fixing his property up. Some of the others just had no money and others got in over their head and had no idea but, Frank made a calculated decision to ignore citations and warnings for years. Anyone who defends him, deserves to live in the cesspool he call a rental unit.

As a taxpayer in Saint Paul, it concerns me that he can operate a business like this and have a direct affect on the value of my investment- my home. Fuck him and anyone who defends this pos.

Now that I think about it, Sharon, exactly what do you pay in taxes in St Paul? I saw you at the teabaggers party on the capitol lawn. You seem to have a lot to say for someone who is currently living on the government dole.
The only thing you need to say is thank you to those who pay taxes so that you can eat and wipe your butt without having to worry about it.


Eric

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Perez v. City St.Paul said...

Your use of "fighting" words is so unprofessional, I'm surprised you have a Job
However "BOY" check out the lawsuit Perez v. City St.Paul on the Agenda Wed. 1Jul09 Civil Rights Cases filed in the Minnesota District Court - Justia Federal District Court Filings and Dockets
No 2 PEREZ V. CITY ST.PAUL Case Number: 0:2009cv00704
Filed: March 26, 2009


http://stpaul.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=37&event_id=40
AGENDA OF THE SAINT PAUL CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 - 3:30 p.m.
PS City St.Paul cannot manulipate the EIS of the Met Council via Public Library's?
Vist Twitter and Facebook BOY

5:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, Sharon you should be calling me sir, since I'm supporting your lazy ass.

It doesn't matter too much when you use the term 'boy'. You're just a crazy cat-woman (without the cats) that absolutely nobody takes seriously. Its why you turned to the internet. However, that much crazy- still shines through in your non-sensical electronic scribes.

Go ahead Sharon, listen to the voices in your head- do it.

Eric

10:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When someone's house is condemned by wierdly acting inspectors, Sharon does an important service by making people aware of the city's issues when people do internet searches.

Otherwise they may just run into the city's BS and spin and ass kissing.

6:51 AM  
Anonymous DSI City Facebook said...

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Saint-Paul-MN/City-of-Saint-Paul/79640426150?ref=ts#/pages/Saint-Paul-MN/City-of-Saint-Paul-Department-of-Saftey-and-Inspections/94723902382?ref=mf

8:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A couple of points on this silliness...

1. The court. What the City did was go to the bench and ask the bench what the City needed to do to get the court to take these quality of life issues seriously. If they were always going to let the offender walk the City needed to know that and they would stop bothering with it. It is pointless to spend thousands of tax payer dollars to try to enforce the code if the court will let these neighborhood terrorists walk. That folks is not unusual. The issue was to find out what evidence did the court needed to see and what were prosecutors not doing to get convictions. You can scream all you want, but that isn't unusual other cities have done it about prostitution or littering. What does the court need?

2. TISH reports. Home owners on their own contract with independent non-city home evaluators to inspect their properties for the purposes of sales... it has nothing to do with city inspections. The value of what they do in relation to City work is meaningless.

3. Destruction of documents. The City has always thrown away its garbage after four years. State law allows that to occur. The court made the City go back almost eight years on its emails having an outside firm recreate as many of those as it could. No evidence of anything was found in everything that was recreated. The court can not assume that whatever was not found must be the smoking gun when the plaintiffs have shown no evidence of any crime.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

8:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home