Some of you may have seen Maureen Dolan’s article headlined NIC: Judge dismisses lawsuit in this morning’s Coeur d’Alene Press. Larry Spencer, Tom Macy, and I are the plaintiffs in this lawsuit filed October 27, 2009. Although the Court obviously provided the ruling to the defendants, we were not notified about the judgment nor have we yet received a copy of the judge’s ruling. We learned about the decision the same way most others did, the newspaper article. Neither were Larry, Tom, nor I contacted for comment before the Press ran the story.
When and if we receive the judge’s ruling in writing, I will scan and post it in its entirety on OpenCdA.com. We can’t comment until we know what the judge said.
Unbelieveable, but sadly true. Well, you pretty much proved that there is no justice in Idaho. It’s broken – very badly. Maybe Judge Mitchell had a bad day and needs to consult with the Wellness Committee.
BTW,he’s on one of those cozy judicial committees too. Darn,I didn’t ask for those minutes,but we should.
This is my opinion but looks like the only decent one in the whole lot may be Michael Henderson.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 20, 2010 @ 1:41 pm
I don’t get it. Did Mitchell hand the ruling to Lyons at a bar? at the gym? at a backyard BBQ they were both attending? while they were both standing in line at the bank?
Comment by Dan — March 20, 2010 @ 3:24 pm
Dan,
The decision was probably faxed to the defendants. Hopefully it was mailed to us, but we may need to go to the courthouse and buy a copy.
Comment by Bill — March 20, 2010 @ 3:26 pm
Faxed to the Press, too?
Comment by Dan — March 20, 2010 @ 5:28 pm
Dan,
You would have to ask the Press if and how it got a copy; I don’t know.
Comment by Bill — March 20, 2010 @ 5:36 pm
I cannot understand why the Plaintiffs in this suit were not contacted by telephone while the Defendants and the paper(s) were notified. What effort would it have taken to make a phone call to one of the Plaintiffs?
Comment by Susie Snedaker — March 21, 2010 @ 11:45 am
Susie,
I agree completely. Even though our response at that time would have been, “We haven’t received a copy of the decision yet, so we can’t comment until we study it,” that comment should have been included in the article. I thought it was a little iffy to publish a non-story story based entirely on the unsubstantiated comments of the NIC attorney and the NIC Vice President for Propaganda. It would have been more responsible to wait until Monday, contact the Court Clerk, and at least confirm the accuracy of the attorney’s and propaganda minister’s representation of what the judge’s ruling actually was.
Comment by Bill — March 21, 2010 @ 11:56 am
That was a concern of mine as well – how did Maureen Dolan get the story before the plaintiffs even knew about the decision? Maybe she was told to write it up and dismiss contacting any of you? Not a wonder folks jump to speculation when the news media fails to involve all parties.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 21, 2010 @ 12:42 pm
I tried to warn people several years ago about the judicial system in Idaho. As much as I like Governor Otter, I believe he took his direction from the Idaho Judicial Council (the Foxes guarding the hen-house–court rooms).
Over and over I have cited how Mitchell’s daddy was a judge, Morano got his start from another District Judge–then grants favors to that retired judge’s son in a well-publicized article. The connection between Barry McHugh & Judge Mitchell (Barry managed judges releelection campaign, then in a subsequent case while still acting as an attorney before Mitchell, refuses to recuse himself, nor did the judge. Attorney Magnuson went to h.s. with Mitchell, and cases get heard all the time by Magnuson in front of Mitchell (including a friend of mine who I counseled to settle a.s.a.p.)
I am familiar with another case Simpson has that is before one of his former law firm partners, same with now retired Hosack…and of course he agreed with just about everything his ex-law firm threw at case–now being sent back to Supreme Court a 2nd time…Yes, you are smart to be paranoid.
Comment by CaptainAmerica — March 21, 2010 @ 4:07 pm
Clarification: The Idaho Judicial Council & Or Idaho State Bar makes recommendations to Governor. The Governor acts on that ususally. Interesting point, one of the members, Ann Solomon endorsed Mitchell in his re-election campaign. Totally inappropriate conduct for a sitting member that ought to stay out of such races–in my humble opinion while sitting on made up charge against Mitchell’s opponent. Oh, and a past Magistrate Simpson heard a made-up charge against Mitchell’s opponent, too…hmm, all just a coincidence (?)
Comment by CaptainAmerica — March 21, 2010 @ 4:21 pm
Judge Mitchell’s ruling in this case was based on the information in the pleadings and summary judgment hearing. This was so early in the process that it was before NIC and the NIC Foundation might have been compelled to divulge documents and information about the mill site purchase. I don’t think they wanted to do that. If Judge Mitchell had allowed this to go to trial, much more information would have been made public and the case would have been argued, in court, on its merits. Looks like someone didn’t want that to happen. Too bad for the voters and taxpayers of Kootenai County.
Comment by mary — March 21, 2010 @ 8:57 pm
So I guess we have a rotton media and a rotton court system. What do we do now, file a Judical Complaint and get a just response? Only in my dreams.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 21, 2010 @ 9:11 pm
Stebbijo,
What we do now is wait until we receive a copy of the judge’s decision and then review it. As far as I know, the only people who have a copy of the decision are the defendants’ attorneys and the court clerk. The basis for any future action depends entirely on what the judge said in his decision, nothing else.
Comment by Bill — March 22, 2010 @ 6:49 am
Sorry, if I jumped too soon to a conclusion – it all seems like such a circle that I am still upset by you folks not even knowing before it hits the paper.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 22, 2010 @ 8:15 am
Stebbijo,
No apology necessary. Your righteous indignation is far preferable to the roll-over-and-play-dead cowardice that afflicts so many in this area.
Comment by Bill — March 22, 2010 @ 8:23 am