|
|
Forums:
Climbing Information:
Regional Discussions:
Re: [happiegrrrl] Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association:
Edit Log
|
|
CapedCrusader
Aug 11, 2010, 6:42 PM
Views: 6003
Registered: Apr 8, 2009
Posts: 58
|
In reply to: According to what I found in a simple search, it listed 4 suits with MP as either Defendant or Plaintiff. - First case, as Defendant against a particular party. - Next 2 suits as Plaintiff against one member of the above party(along with another, related, name) Those cases are disposed of. - One active suit, as Plaintiff MPNA says there is a recent case waiting an answer - why would that not be listed if the ones disposed of are? They take it off the records in that interim waiting an answer and then reenter the data? Not that I really care. As many have noted, the OP and friends seem to enjoy employing obstinent obfuscation.
Don't ask me Terrie. I also checked the database Curt linked to. It doesn't match the database at the County Clerk's office.
In reply to: But how can one seriously suggest that four suits, since 2003, with 3 involving the same parties, is string-arm tactics against the general population of landowners in their vicinity?
It's MP lawsuits in conjunction with Shawangunk Conservancy lawsuits, Friends of the Shawangunks lawsuits, quit claim deeds, and the extensive and successful lobbying for adoption of draconian zoning laws which, taken together, constitute strong arm tactics.
In reply to: Come ON, already, Kent et al. A lawyer who actually believed their client was in the right would JUMP at the chance to represent them and "slay the evil dragon called Mohonk." They'd work on a contingency fee and profit hugely - IF they thought they had a chance of winning.
Litigation attorneys don't work on a contingency basis in these kinds of civil proceedings. Besides, being an evil dragon isn't actionable.
In reply to: I suppose you might reply with some insinuation the judges are in the MP pocket - a rather serious allegation.
This is just another straw man argument to go along with the wildly inaccurate claims that MP neighbors want to build subdivisions, chemical plants, etc. Who mentioned anything about judges being in anyone's pocket? Oh, just you. Right.
(This post was edited by CapedCrusader on Aug 11, 2010, 7:01 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
