If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Not really an option to just "let it die" for the courts.Got a feeling this is gonna be a dead issue since all anyone wants to do is restrict us more.
wont die as with anything the courts all it takes is timeGot a feeling this is gonna be a dead issue since all anyone wants to do is restrict us more.
He works for "us"? ROFL. He's a lawyer. He works for himself. If tomorrow a town will hire him to defend them agains people who have issuing problems, he will. That's his job. I don't say there's anything wrong with that, it's just the way it is..He used to work for the FRB and now he's in a private practice. You should stop bashing him so damn much, he's been incredibly helpful through this whole process, constantly calling and ensuring I'm updated on every step of the way.
He is a great attorney and you should stop focusing on the fact that he used to work for the FRB, he now he works for us.
Update?
Could police depts that are backed up simply issue a denial on the 40th day so that they are in compliance with the law?
............ When the chief starts to blow smoke up the judge's ass blaming it all on the state, Jason will politely put
him in his place and the judge will have to listen since Jason "was the state" that the chief is trying to pin the blame!
in many cases it's the State Police, a town cannot issue a license until the applicant is cleared by the SP.... MGL ch 140 s. 131(e)
Of course the real problem is the Massachusetts laws on licensing. The SP are required to respond to the town within 30 days, but they don't and there is no penalty nor is there a "failure to respond shall be deemed approval of the applicant."
He used to work for the FRB and now he's in a private practice. You should stop bashing him so damn much, he's been incredibly helpful through this whole process, constantly calling and ensuring I'm updated on every step of the way.
He is a great attorney and you should stop focusing on the fact that he used to work for the FRB, he now he works for us.
The Everett lawsuit on Channel 5: http://m.wcvb.com/news/Everett-poli...ses/-/17428308/18133564/-/f36o9j/-/index.html
"We know why Everett's numbers are down, theyre not actually processing applications." -KD
LOL.
I trust Comm2A has their bases covered on this one. They aren't exactly ambulance chasers.
They didn't run my best quote: "The Everett PD can keep on top of Facebook and Twitter, but can't keep up with what the law actually requires them to do".The Everett lawsuit on Channel 5: http://m.wcvb.com/news/Everett-poli...ses/-/17428308/18133564/-/f36o9j/-/index.html
"We know why Everett's numbers are down, they're not actually processing applications." -KD
LOL.
This was in court today. Rumor has it the judge ruled in our favor but we need to wait for Brent to come back and let us know the details. Regardless, we aren't done with this issue. This was step 1.
If the judge rules in our favor what does this actually mean? What are the steps?
Next steps are more litigation and/or Everett cleans up their act. Either one, we are seeing this through to the end. Stay tuned. You will note we posted for more plaintiffs in Everett yesterday.
The judge took a quick recess prior to hearing our case and decided to set the application date at December 10, the day that our plaintiff returned to the PD to have his prints taked for a second time.
Just out of curiosity, is that the date that your client actually applied?
No, but that's a second order problem. The key here is the judge upheld that there is a 40 day limit and enforced it. That she set the date wrong for the application date is a new problem. And it's not one that we are going to ignore.
Cool. I know you are well aware of other towns (Worcester) that are telling potential applicants that they can't apply or have to wait months to apply based on some bogus idea that applications must be submitted in person.