U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-15-2014, 06:37 PM
 
527 posts, read 637,926 times
Reputation: 267

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Maybe I'm missing something
ya think?


Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
since the court never ruled on discovery in the first place, then it's a possibility it may simply dismiss the entire thing.
When exactly was "the court" asked to rule on discovery?... um, never. The plaintiffs asked for an accelerated discovery and UCPS, knowing it would be granted since they had already violated every premise of FOI, agreed to the request out of court... therefore, the court never had to rule.

 
Old 04-16-2014, 01:12 AM
 
45,252 posts, read 17,960,183 times
Reputation: 18944
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxhawMike View Post
ya think?

When exactly was "the court" asked to rule on discovery?... um, never. The plaintiffs asked for an accelerated discovery and UCPS, knowing it would be granted.....
Like they thought they would be granted an injunction? LOL

Given that you didn't have an answer to my question beyond opinion, I'd say another perfectly valid opinion is that agreeing not to have the meeting was a delaying tactic. If they had actually gone to the discovery hearing, they risked being completely shutdown by the judge ruling there was no basis in NC law for any discovery. BTW, discovery /= FOI request.

Meanwhile, the school system is moving forward with redistricting. Get back to us if the court does something to actually change this.

Last edited by WaldoKitty; 04-16-2014 at 01:21 AM..
 
Old 04-16-2014, 07:48 AM
 
547 posts, read 537,254 times
Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxhawMike View Post
Nice try to be witty... but money isn't going to be an issue.
Really? Unless CAPS raised a whole lot of money at their BUNCO game, they are still a long way from their $200K goal. I don't know many attorneys who work for free.
 
Old 04-16-2014, 09:31 AM
 
527 posts, read 637,926 times
Reputation: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaHelms View Post
Really? Unless CAPS raised a whole lot of money at their BUNCO game, they are still a long way from their $200K goal. I don't know many attorneys who work for free.
The goal went from $80k to $200k?
 
Old 04-16-2014, 09:48 AM
 
527 posts, read 637,926 times
Reputation: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Given that you didn't have an answer to my question beyond opinion, I'd say another perfectly valid opinion is that agreeing not to have the meeting was a delaying tactic. If they had actually gone to the discovery hearing, they risked being completely shutdown by the judge ruling there was no basis in NC law for any discovery. BTW, discovery /= FOI request.
Look, it's clear you have no idea how civil suits work and we can debate and have fun with this all we want, but at least put factual information out there. IT IS A FACT that the judge was never asked to rule on discovery. Period, end of story. It is also A FACT that in cases like this there is very little judicial oversight of the discovery process. There typically isn't anything to rule on unless one of the parties isn't playing nice in the sandbox.

Another FACT for you... if UCPS wants to end this thing today, the avenues for that are filing a motion for summary judgement or a motion to dismiss. The judge isn't going to simply toss the suit out unless he/she is asked via a motion.
 
Old 04-16-2014, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,787 posts, read 8,435,498 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxhawMike View Post
Look, it's clear you have no idea how civil suits work and we can debate and have fun with this all we want, but at least put factual information out there. IT IS A FACT that the judge was never asked to rule on discovery. Period, end of story. It is also A FACT that in cases like this there is very little judicial oversight of the discovery process. There typically isn't anything to rule on unless one of the parties isn't playing nice in the sandbox.

Another FACT for you... if UCPS wants to end this thing today, the avenues for that are filing a motion for summary judgement or a motion to dismiss. The judge isn't going to simply toss the suit out unless he/she is asked via a motion.
Stop feeding the Kitty since it's pretty clear it doesn't bother to understand what is happening and only cares to rub the redistricting into the faces of those impacted... for some unknown reason.

The lawsuit will play out as it will, the political posturing will continue, and we'll enjoy the entertainment of the upcoming primary/election season. We both know that the redistricting is far from "over" and its impact on the county as a whole will carry well through the end of the year because of all the seats up for grabs. This is in addition to the potential continued shake-up at UCPS with Jackson now gone... more rats to leave a sinking ship? lol
 
Old 04-16-2014, 11:39 AM
 
547 posts, read 537,254 times
Reputation: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxhawMike View Post
The goal went from $80k to $200k?
That was the number given to the media. If CAPS revised it downwards, that is just not going to cut it. At $250 per hour, $80,000 is only going to buy you 320 hours of attorney time. CAPS better significantly cut back on its fishing expedition.
 
Old 04-16-2014, 12:46 PM
 
527 posts, read 637,926 times
Reputation: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaHelms View Post
That was the number given to the media. If CAPS revised it downwards, that is just not going to cut it. At $250 per hour, $80,000 is only going to buy you 320 hours of attorney time. CAPS better significantly cut back on its fishing expedition.
A lot of us will now quadruple our giving. Thanks for the heads up and keeping the fight alive.
 
Old 04-16-2014, 02:31 PM
 
45,252 posts, read 17,960,183 times
Reputation: 18944
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxhawMike View Post
Look, it's clear you have no idea how civil suits work .....
Like much that surrounds this redistricting for some people, a lot of what is said has no basis in reality.

I believe it was you who said that no "harm" had to be demonstrated since no damages were involved. . You were wrong on this of course because this was the exact reason the judge refused the injunction. An action, which I predicted before it happened. You and I had a conversation on the matter and you fell silent on it when it turned out that I was right. I will be glad to point this post out to you if you have forgotten it.

I don't profess to be an expect on civil court lawsuits. I've never had a need for one since I prefer to negotiate as an adult which has never failed me. On the other hand it shouldn't take too much effort to simply read the NC Statutes and realize the law is on the BOE's side. The court actions have affirmed this.

If and when the judge is asked to do rule on something else then it might be worth another discussion, but clearly you are in the camp that doesn't wish to accept what everyone else's eyes tells them. i.e. This redistricting battle is over and the lack of any court activity aside from the failed injunction is proof enough of that.

Last edited by WaldoKitty; 04-16-2014 at 03:49 PM..
 
Old 04-16-2014, 06:00 PM
 
631 posts, read 738,317 times
Reputation: 305
Are there any active lawsuits right now? CAPS initially filed the restraining order and the expedited disclosure claims but was there another filed at the same time for the open meeting violation? Or did they need the disclosure details before they could determine if they pursue that last part? The restraining order was declined and CAPS/BOE settled the disclosure out of court, hence my question if anything else is actively filed at the moment. My understanding was that no one had officially asked for the injunction yet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:30 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top