Update on Comm2A, filed another new case

[Coyote33]

Based on some of the other posts in this thread, the selectmen may not even know this is going on. Why not get on the agenda for the Selectmen's meeting and ask them why the town is wasting money on a suit that they are likely to lose? Maybe they will ask the TM and police chief some questions.

This, kind of. Rather than you put it on the meeting agenda, call each of them and get it on THEIR AGENDA! Once it is on their OWN agenda, THEY can put it on the meeting agenda. Multiply by 30 callers (GOAL help), and it will get some traction.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Based on some of the other posts in this thread, the selectmen may not even know this is going on. Why not get on the agenda for the Selectmen's meeting and ask them why the town is wasting money on a suit that they are likely to lose? Maybe they will ask the TM and police chief some questions.

Anyone that wants to get into this with their selectmen or at town meeting should understand a few basics about what liability the chief and town actually have. The bottom line is that the chief and town are not going to bear the burden and cost of defending a state law unless they chose to do so. They should only bear the cost of their own discretionary policies and practices, or in the case here or with Natick in the Wesson case, the cost of their own stupidity.

In Wesson, the issue was state law, as it was in Fletcher. In both cases the AG intervened and bore the burden of defending state law and the fees associated with losing. The Natick chief exercised very poor judgement in attempting to defend himself for exercising a state law that was under attack. He had no liability as the state would defend and bear the cost. However, he chose to run up a legal bill of nearly $14K for no reason.

The same sort of thing is happening here in Pepperell, although it is a little different. I believe that the chief thinks he's enforcing state law by denying the plaintiff her license. However, he's not. She already has a license and I believe, that if the chief put her application through, the FRB would issue it. That's significant, because the FRB does do a final eligibility check on all applications. He doesn't have to be in this position, but he is because he thinks he's doing what's he's supposed to me doing.

If he's smart, he would ask the AG to intervene and step away and that's where Pepperell resident should be having questions: "If this is a state law issue, why isn't the state defending it?"

 

[Len-2A Training]

Mass rules of civil procedure don't apply. This is a federal case.

http://www.uscourts.gov/file/rules-civil-procedure
Rule 4 (j)

(2) State or Local Government. A state, a municipal corporation,
or any other state-created governmental organization
that is subject to suit must be served by:
(A) delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint
to its chief executive officer; or
(B) serving a copy of each in the manner prescribed by
that state’s law for serving a summons or like process on
such a defendant.

In essence not much different than MA Rules of Civil Procedure.

 

[EC1]

Just made a donation to help the good fight.

 

[Danor]

Just got my challenge coin for donating, Nice!

 

[Darksideblues42]

$100 on the way, just donated.

Thanks for all the work you put in to these cases!