rchaos
-
Content Count
1,049 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by rchaos
-
-
Just a friendly reminder, WE ARE IN THE CAFE! Please be civil.
It is almost like a few WANT this thread to be moved somewhere else so it won't show up on a Google search. If it does, another will be started. This is news afterall. Deal with it. The notion that the thread title was posted with GLEE is laughable at best. This is a NEWS SITE according to some here. "Read All About It" has always been associated with news.
Not all facts are in yet some a screaming one side is 100% in the right. Calm down. For a news site, some posting here are awfully slanted.
-
1
-
-
For those who need catching up I found these posts from about a year ago. It's as far back as the search here will let me. Very, very good reading.
-
Wait. Maybe I'm missing something but how can a state representative fire a county attorney?
Exactly. There are people on this board who think they can.
Another thing I find quite odd is that this thread has been on this board for about 6 hours now. I have yet to see Surepip enter this thread at all? Of all the threads on this board he's been on, whether it had to do with the lawsuit or not, this would be the one I'd expect to hear from.
I, and I am sure that a lot of other people on here, would love to hear what excuse his lawyer gave him today on why they had to hear from this on PCOM, of all places, and not by him 2 days ago.
Pubby stated that he had heard about the ruling earlier but did not want to make a comment until he actually read it. How early he had known about it is unclear; however, it is safe to say that if Pubby has heard about it earlier, then others have as well. A simple Google search was done this morning and it was found within a minute on a public website. Since it is a public court document it was safe to assume that both parties knew of the outcome.
-
All I will say is that until you posted the item above, I had not seen the decision. I had heard about the decision but I wouldn't attempt to write something about a reversal without knowing anything about it.
Thanks for posting the link you did. I was unaware of the site.
Looks to me like Glenn Stinson's handling of the case was not as well based in the law as we have been led to suppose...
The issue here is whether the prayer for relief by the county - asking reimbursement of legal fees if the county prevails - is at the crux of the matter. I can't believe there isn't some conflicting prejudice on this point but if there isn't - and it was as cut and dried a situation as the appeals court asserted - then Mr. Stinson's credibility would be tarnished.
As I read the appeals court decision, they considered the prayer for reimbursement of legal fees as almost boiler plate, rather than a direct threat and certainly only something that would come into play after the facts of the suit had been adjudicated.
I think, if Stinson has legitimate precedence that contradict this appeals court hearing this should be appealed. Otherwise, I think the pitfall that led the surepips to believe the anti-slapp statute applied ought to be addressed in legislation to clarify those instances where the statute is and is not applicable.
I also blame the county's attorneys for not asserting in any public way the nature of their defense, if this was indeed the defense that was being pursued. Not once was I ever told that the issues were as presented in the appeal.
pubby
I find it interesting that neither PCom nor the Patch has seen this. Two local news agencies not given this information is very suspect indeed. It does sound political as LPPT noted earlier in this thread. Seems like someone very high up, out side of the news mind you, was trying to keep this close to the vest. I am sure that the Morrison's are having a WTF conversation right now with Mr. Stinson. Even they just found out about it this morning according to LPPT.
As for the bold, and underlined statement of Pubby above, it has been stated many, many times before in hundreds of threads, that not all information has been presented to all on this website.
-
You know I hope you are right... but the will of the people never came to play with their law suit.... did it?
So I hope she is able to get a little pay back per se .....
If I was still in Paulding county I would vote for her. In a heart beat.
You did not reside in her district when you lived here.
Your comment about payback does nothing but hurt her.
The will of the people has nothing to do about the outcome of their suit. We still reside in a land that is governed by the rule of law, NOT the will of the people.
-
After reading the ruling, it sounds like their attorney screwed up big time.
You think? What concerns me is he is the City of Hiram and the City of Dallas' attorney. Maybe open records requests for both city billings are in order.
-
I will agree it seems the itemized bill should have been included along with some other documents.
It also appears that those with the most amount of money can only win in court.
And the age old saying is that you can't fight city hall is prevailing.
I do like that she is running for office and is in effect an end run to clean up the county government.
Either way I hope she does get elected and fires the lawyer firm that has been fighting them. I would like to see her clean up the county government also....
Could make Paulding county a interesting item in the papers if she gets elected.
This statement is what causes people to think her running is for personal reasons only. Statements like this do nothing but hurt her chances, NOT help.
-
1
-
-
I think this means since it was all incurred for the same action, he did not itemize it and instead quoted the total in the filing.
If I were billed $250,000.00 in services I would fully expect an itemized billing statement. I get one from my attorney. It is a shame that it gets tossed because of this. Let's get this to court now.
-
Would you like to discuss the politics of this situation?
Lets let the readers know exactly what is going on......
There seems to have been a strategy, some people were counting on the Morrison's to beat the drum non-stop against David Austin about this law suit.
There was a huge wrench thrown in the works when Melissa decided to run for representative.
The Morrison's have been called and talked to over and over by people constantly bringing the law suit up, while the Morrison's have worked very hard to keep the issue separate from the campaign.
They have disappointed a lot of people that were counting on them to rail against David Austin about this lawsuit.
It speaks volumes about David and the Morrison's character that they have not allowed themselves to be manipulated in this way.
I can see that some are still very hopefully that they can push the Morrison's buttons and get them to start railing against David or to come out publicly and support his opponent.
Good luck folks, Melissa has a lot more class than you give her credit for.
No it doesn't, it means the case can be heard.
Both Thad and Mellisa have stated on here that their lawsuit has no bearing on her running so why would it affect their campaign? Obviously it does. I totally agree with you that they are very wise not to use this against David. Very, very smart move on their part.
I asked the question why this was not reported 2 days ago on here by the staff.
-
"During the subsequent hearings in each respective case, the Morrisons's counsel, Glen E. Stinson, was the sole witness. Although Stinson neither produced nor tendered any billing statements, invoices, or business records, he testified that he had incurred $147,765 in fees in one case and $117,348.68 in fees in the other.12 Stinson further testified that, with the exception of time spent preparing and filing the complaints, "every hour" of the fees incurred during the five years of litigation was directly attributable to the Board's Wherefore clauses.13"
"Consequently, the General Assembly adopted a mandate that, "[f]or any claim asserted against a person or entity arising from an act by that person or entity which could reasonably be construed as an act in furtherance of the right of free speech or the right to petition government for a redress of grievances . . . in connection with an issue of public interest or concern," the party asserting the claim and his or her attorney must file a verification in accordance with OCGA § 9-11-11.1 (
.18 The verification in essence certifies that the claim is well-grounded in law and fact, is not directed toward a privileged communication, and is not interposed for an improper purpose.19 If the court determines that a party falsely verified a claim, the party and/or his or her counsel shall be sanctioned, and the sanction may include dismissal of the claim and/or an order to pay the other party's attorney fees.20"If I am reading this right their attorney never provided back up for his billing. Really? Over $250,000.00 in fees and no back up? That is one kick in the head right now.
-
You're tempting me. And it's not going to be good.
What is tempting you? And why would it not be good. I asked a question in another thread about this. Turns out a ruling was handed down 2 days ago and NOTHING has been posted.
I am a tax payer in the County who likes to know what his share of money is spent on.
-
Wow! Just read the recently handed down ruling in Surepip and Ms. Surepip's ruling - the anti-slapp ruling has been over-turned!
This was handed down 2 days ago. Really surprised that this was not posted by the news crew of PCom earlier. This is big news for Paulding County residents.
-
Shame on you for hijacking Trixie's post. Have you no respect at all?
-
This thread title is a bit misleading there Pubby. This is a standard PSA. This type of email letter goes out to as many forum sites found within an affected region. They type in "All forum sites within Paulding County, Georgia. It is "blind carbon copied" to all with a generic heading such as "Dear Publisher" and so on. You, of all people, should know this.
-
I would rather see this up and going and bringing in jobs than the unused airport and half empty courthouse complex.
I'm not going to comment about the weed farm, er, airport; however, the Government Complex was almost full when it opened up 2 1/2 years ago.
That was before 3 rounds of lay-offs.
-
1
-
-
Well, my opinion is that this case has taken obscenely long to get before a jury. I don't even know if surepip is correct (as I have stated before publicly), but he does deserve to have a hearing before a jury of his peers. I am THRILLED at this ruling, and I don't care who knows it. Now they need to LET IT GO TO TRIAL.
DITTO!!!
I'd like to add that this has gone far too long to be settled out of court. This NEEDS to go to trial so all of us tax payers can see the truth behind all of this.
Don't worry about who says what in these threads Peachesga. Threads in these forums tend to be moved, changed and deleted at the drop of a hat.
-
1
-
-
Finally! Now let's see this go to court quickly!
I'm wondering how many people will be laid off and/or services cut at the County to help pay for this since it was not in the recently passed budget.
-
We may have what you are looking for after all. PM us for more details.
-
I guess possibly the same reason the county is spending so much time and money on the case - I suppose the county and their legal counsel feel strongly enough about the case and their position in the case, thus the reason for expending the money to defend the case.
In the end, I just want the party that has been wronged to win. But I won't be basing my opinion on what I "hear" on paulding.com or any other message forum - if I want to know badly enough, I will simply attend when the trial begins and get ALL the facts from BOTH sides. We should always remember there are two sides to every story and we are only hearing ONE side here.
There you go BB. This is exactly what I plan on doing and I encourage everyone here to do the same. After all, we have paid one hell of an admission fee for this, might as well stay for the curtain call.
-
The county condemned land for the north Pumpkinvine sewer treatment plant which basically opened the entire north-eastern part of Paulding to development.
Because the landowner was holding out for something approaching the value of the land, the county instead condemned it and a Paulding County Jury valued the land at the 'established value' of basically scrub forest/residential land.
What may have disturbed the landowner most was that the land was condemned by the count so a major regional developer could build a sewer treatment plant. It took some heavy negotiations but that property company subsequently had to donate the sewer plant to the county with the provision that some portion - I think half the capacity - had to allow development by other businesses.
So basically, folks that were friends of the local elites got a sewer plant built for them that allowed them to cash in on properties that, because they wouldn't perk (be salable) with septic tanks, were the cheapest land around. The trick, of course, was getting the deal with the county water Department for access to the sewerage.
I remember one project where a state grant was made to run sewerage to a business development that, because the line needed to transgress a planned PRD, basically lowered the cost of sewer pump plant and pipe. Of course the business project was later abandoned after the sewer line was built. Of course the property the business park was proposed was also sold at a profit for residential property because it had sewerage.
pubby
I still say that the worst thing that ever happened to this county, well one of the worst, is sanitary sewer. Septic tanks meant bigger home lots, not these tiny lots out there right now. How old is this Pumpkinvine Plant. I'd like to read up on this place.
-
Although I have no dog in this fight in this fight, the subsivision I moved from last March had some serious erosion and settlement issues on a few (that I know of) homes that were built back in 1994. This developer apparently just hired his lawyers to get the pissed off homeowners off his back. It's also a known fact this developer was caught by the Corps of Eng digging what he evisioned being a bigger lake, therefore putting a halt to a few more lots he wanted to sell. This developer was also thought of being in the "good ole boy" system in PC.
The subdivision is Carrington Pointe, the developer was Steve Simpson which unfortunately died in a plane crash a few years ago with some well known folks in the building industry, one of them being a PC BOC
Keep in mind that erosion and sediment issues are very different than settlement issues caused by improper filling. Two entirely different processes. Erosion is the movement of the soils via wind, rain, ice and gravity. Sediment is the byproduct f erosion, and although it can look very, very bad, it is nothing compared to settlement. Settlement is caused by improperly compacted soils or unstable residual soils that break down due to pressure, time and/or other outside forces.
So this was in the mid 90's then. Wow, almost 20 years ago. The EPD and EPA handled most of the erosion issues as well as some counties back then; however, the laws were not really put into a more state wide, "in your face contractor" type style until 2000. The first state wide official erosion and sediment control permits GAR100000 were issued by the EPD in 2000. I doubt very seriously, as an engineer myself, that any erosion and sedimentation issues affect this subdivision today. There are probably a few bury pits that are settleing right now due to age. Back then and as recently as about ten years ago a builder was allowed to bury trees and stumps and such in non structural areas of sites and lot.
-
There are at least two people who have posted here stating what seems to be even greater wrongs by the county to them than what surepip has gone through.
What sewer plant is being referenced by krwills? Land was actually stolen from the family by a municipality for use for a public service outlet and no news about this? This is real serious stuff here.
What subdivision is being referenced by cherokeewoman? Unless this developer did not have the proper environmental permits, no geotechnical and environmental engineering reports, no firm testing the density of the fill soils and no environmental, geotechnical and engineering experts monitoring each phase this development is in for some serious trouble. Significant differential settlement can occurr within a couple of months if these things are not followed correctly with just 10 feet of fill, much less 75 feet of fill. This one really scares the hell out of me and should all of you. Some of us are living in a very recently built subdivision, in the past couple of month, that our homes are fixing to fall down any minute.
-
Palisades, south of 278 just west of Bill Carruth
I was referring to Cherokeewoman's post, not yours. Everybody knows about your case SP.
BTW, you should be home now after the 2:00pm hearing. What's the word?
-
Surepip, I hope the best for you... you fought the fight a lot of us would have liked to.... Things were done wrong during development in those days, the developers thought they had the rights of God.... and the county did nothing to say they were doing anything wrong.... creeks were ruined/ all over the county.... a developer pumped out a spring fed pond into a small creek behind our home, we had video, but no reslove... the development behind us god hope for some of the land owners... the homes were made on man made plots they moved dirt packed, moved dirt packed/ to make a home plot on land I never thought could be developed - but it was ok with the officials.... some day some of these home owners are gonn wake up to land settling and cracks in basements and slabs.... but the county said it was ok to build up a 75 foot slope, that runs on our land.... we had to accept defeat. I battled with zoning officials, all officials for a year or two... did no good... a few leland cypress got planted..I am glad that someone could battle the injustice and the poor overlook of the inspections.
We could not afford to go the route you did, I am glad you could and I pray that you win what is deserved...
This case should have been settled years ago... you knew while Sheridan was in it would continue, but now, it shold be settled. I praise you on all of us homeowners that could not do what you did and hope the best for your settlement....
I can remember when you posted the consessions you had gotten from the developer..... I was so jealous.... since I prostested this development to hell in back and recieved just a few leland cypress from an area they clear cut that they should not have.... I was not like by the zoning office..
Holy cow. What subdivision is this one?
REGIONAL TSPLOST TOWN HALL MEETING
in Paulding County NEWS
Posted