Author Topic: MOC files lawsuit against Clio Area Schools, Seeks to protect law abiding gun ow  (Read 5273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Clio schools claim open carry gun lawsuit based on misunderstanding of law

http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/07/clio_schools_ask_for_dismissal.html
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Wow, Mlive actually used the words "hoplophobia" and "anti-gun" to describe public officials, and in a headline no less.

Clio schools' anti-gun stance based on 'hoplophobia,' not law, father says
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/07/clio_schools_anti-gun_stance_b.html
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
  • Karma: +591/-37
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip

Wow, Mlive actually used the words "hoplophobia" and "anti-gun" to describe public officials, and in a headline no less.

Clio schools' anti-gun stance based on 'hoplophobia,' not law, father says
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/07/clio_schools_anti-gun_stance_b.html

Actually, that's what Dean said in his brief.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/08/judges_ruling_allows_open_carr.html

Genesee Circuit Judge Archie Hayman on Monday, Aug. 10, ruled in favor of Kenneth Herman, who filed the lawsuit March 5 in Genesee County Circuit Court against the Clio Area School District after he was denied access to Edgerton Elementary multiple times while attempting to pick up his daughter because he was open-carrying a pistol.

"The ruling today does not come as a surprise, the law is the law," Herman said after Hayman's decision. "Now that Clio Area Schools have heard the ruling, read the laws and the Court of Appeals case law has been explained to them, I [hope] they stop burning through tax dollars fighting the law and common sense."

School officials and district attorney, Timothy Mullins, could not be reached for comment on the decision.

Some background on Kenneth Herman:
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/general-news/20131213/firearms-in-the-family-families-changed-by-guns-share-stories

"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
BAM! WIN!

Clio might appeal. If they do, we expect the same result. In that event, state wide precedent would be set.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Ooh, look at the twisting panties in the Detroit News editorial staffroom:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2015/08/16/schools-place-open-carry/31657559/

Our Editorial: Schools no place for open carry
The Detroit News 12:05 a.m. EDT August 16, 2015

Advocates for unrestricted gun rights are provoking a reckless fight with school districts; it’s one they should lose


Open carry advocates who are insisting on exercising their rights to carry pistols and rifles into schools, unconcealed, should put themselves in the place of principals who have the heavy responsibility of keeping a few hundred children safe from harm.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch

More of the same, this time from a Freep reader:
http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/readers/2015/08/20/open-carry-rights-michigan/32081331/


It is time the Michigan Legislature takes a stand against the powerful gun lobby to protect the right of Michigan children to learn in a safe environment. There is no way a school employee can determine who is a God-fearing, law-abiding, gun-toting parent exercising his or her Second Amendment right or who is a unbalanced individual entering a school to kill.

Districts are correct in ordering a lockdown to keep our children and educators safe, even as it robs children of educational time and promotes a climate of fear. I hope they will continue to do so. For some in this country, the exercise of their individual freedoms are much more important than respecting the common good.

The courts can do nothing. Schools can do nothing. Are there any legislators in Michigan who will stand up to give children the same safe environment for learning as they give judges and lawyers to go about their day in courthouses throughout our state?

Nancy Guregian

Livonia
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline Super Trucker

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 443
  • Karma: +18/-2
Can this person determine which 4x4 pickup is going to drove down the sidewalk 5 minutes after the bell rings? Guess the legislation needs to make a law of no vehicles within 1 mile of a school.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Today, Judge Hayman denied our request for fees and costs. While unfortunate, it was not unexpected.

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3887
  • Karma: +129/-128
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Boo.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
The judge also narrowed his ruling to simply a matter of law. While this does give the school a bit of wiggle room, it puts us in a very good position for the Court of Appeals. The only thing they will have to look at is the law, without any case specific facts to muck up the waters. At least, that's my understanding.

Offline LD

  • Legal Musings
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • Karma: +6/-6
Today, Judge Hayman denied our request for fees and costs. While unfortunate, it was not unexpected.

Did the judge give a reason for the denial?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
*** MOC/Herman v. Clio Area Schools Update ***

Please support this case today. www.miopencarry.org/donatelegal

Last month CAS filed their brief in their appeal of a circuit court judge's ruling that public schools are preempted by state law and thus cannot enact their own weapons bans.

In August, Genesee Circuit Court Judge Archie Hayman rejected CAS's motion for summary judgement (dismissal) and instead granted declaratory judgement in favor of MOC/Herman stating:

"Only the Michigan Legislature can completely ban the possession of firearms on school property; and, as of yet, the Michigan Legislature has not fit - or seen fit to impose that ban."

CAS is now appealing that ruling. In their 23 page Brief on Appeal CAS essentially reargues the same points they brought up in circuit court. State statute does not preempt schools, a case that has nothing to do with firearm preemption is controlling, and guns are bad because bad people have used them to harm others in schools before.

While we do not believe their arguments hold merit, based on the language used to state those arguments it is becoming increasingly clear that large and well funded forces are aligning against us. This appeal, the MGO v. AAPS circuit ruling, the Wade v. UofM Court of Claims ruling, and a recent update from NEOLA (and organization that helps schools write policy) all contain substantially similar language.

Make no mistake, the people pushing an extreme agenda who are trying to take away your rights are well connected and well funded, often with taxpayer money. Will you help us stand up and fight them?

Please consider donating today. Even small reoccurring donations add up over time and area greatly appreciated. www.miopencarry.org/donatelegal

If you would like to read the brief, it can be found here:
https://media.miopencarry.org/litigation/Clio/CoA/Clio%20Brief%20on%20Appeal%2019NOV2015.pdf

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
*** MOC/Herman v. Clio Area Schools Update ***

Please support this case today. www.miopencarry.org/donatelegal

CAS is now appealing that ruling. In their 23 page Brief on Appeal CAS essentially reargues the same points they brought up in circuit court. State statute does not preempt schools, a case that has nothing to do with firearm preemption is controlling, and guns are bad because bad people have used them to harm others in schools before.

So, they're saying, in effect:
1) preemption doesn't apply to them
2) they hope the judges are idiots
and
3) they hope the judges are idiots

Does Indiana assess triple attorney fees on the losing municipality in preemption cases?
I like that idea.
This post is all I've seen on that subject:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?95080-Open-carrier-sues-Evansville-IN-for-removal-from-zoo&p=2154748&viewfull=1#post2154748
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
I don't know about triple attorney fees, but we are working on HB 4795. http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2015-HB-4795

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
4795 would be a huge step forward, making costs and attorney fees the responsibility of the voters and forcing a fine of "up to $5k" on the elected official. It would be amusing to see how the courts determine the size of those fines, I can imagine my local judges bending over backwards to protect other local politicians. If the actual fines are closer to $100 the deterrent value goes away.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
You're not wrong, but even a $100 fine would be a huge step forward. My guess is it would curtail at least 99.99% of future issues.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
And it appears the text says 'shall assess a fine', and that makes some fine mandatory, right? (although I guess the judge could just avoid finding that the public official acted willfully)

If a voting majority of the county commissioners got whacked $5k each, mass politician panic would ensue.
"Plaintiff awarded $10k damages in false arrest suit, commissioners fined $40k" sounds great for a headline, eh?
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline linux203

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 706
  • Karma: +21/-16
  • First Name (Displayed): Daniel
If a CADL board member was fined, the money would go back to CADL.  Food for thought...
When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace. Luke 11:21

Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."  Luke 22:36

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
If a CADL board member was fined, the money would go back to CADL.  Food for thought...

Yeah, we thought about that. 'Wait, THIS organization wants to create fines that go towards libraries?'

It is what it is and it's still way better than what we have. We did look into redirecting the fines but that would take a constitutional amendment.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
So, let me get this straight:
I sue political entity X for preemption violations, and get taxpayer dollars from X in return.
Judge fines the responsible official whose willful illegal acts got X sued, and X gets dollars from the official.
It sort of sounds like the official is indirectly paying my settlement/judgment, which beats the heck out of the taxpayers footing the whole bill.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Karma: +27/-28
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
That would only work in the case of libraries and it would only work indirectly.

We actually wanted the fines to be used to repay the legal fees for the LUG, but as stated that would have taken a constitutional amendment.

A big part of this bill is not only protecting gun owners, but also protecting taxpayers. If an official says "meh, I'm not paying for it' then they can still cause a lot of harm to people that don't deserve it.

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
  • Karma: +591/-37
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Another thought that we had was to use the fines for the public defender fund. Again, constitutional amendment.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline MI_XD

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Karma: +10/-9
  • First Name (Displayed): Bob
Another thought that we had was to use the fines for the public defender fund. Again, constitutional amendment.

Is that a MOC constitutional amendment, or Michigan?
MI_XD
SW Michigan
I finally can be Proud of America, again!

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1054
  • Karma: +28/-43
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Michigan ... MOC does not have a constitution. Or public defenders.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline Ultra

  • More Than You Bargained For
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +25/-27
  • Ultranewschannel.tumblr.com
    • Autopuzzles
What is the status of the lawsuit against Clio and the one against Ann Arbor. I'm failing to find any updates...
Ultranewschannel.Tumblr.Com

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3887
  • Karma: +129/-128
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Appeals Court oral arguments are Tuesday Dec 13.  This has been announced in the Nov and Dec newsletter as well as the email updates, none of which you receive I assume?

It's also on facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/MichiganOpenCarry/posts/10154219226166234


Offline Ultra

  • More Than You Bargained For
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +25/-27
  • Ultranewschannel.tumblr.com
    • Autopuzzles
Not on facebook. Have had some email issues lately. Sorry that I hadn't caught the info.  Thx for the update.
Ultranewschannel.Tumblr.Com

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3887
  • Karma: +129/-128
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
You can read the fb post without having an account on fb, but I know a lot of people don't read fb.  Are you going to be able to attend the oral arguments at the court on Tuesday?

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
facebook, fbcdn, etc, are all banned domains on my home network.
If 100 million gun owning families did the same we could bring Zuckerberg to his knees.

I'm starting the week with two full days of CPE, so I'll be watching lectures and eating catered lunch on Tuesday.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline Ultra

  • More Than You Bargained For
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +25/-27
  • Ultranewschannel.tumblr.com
    • Autopuzzles
I will not be attending arguments.  I will be in my pizzeria working.
Ultranewschannel.Tumblr.Com

Offline Neilmrb

  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
Where and what time  is hearing?
Is our attorney the only one going to be there ?

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3887
  • Karma: +129/-128
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Begins at 10AM.  MOC argument is first, MGO argument is second.  You can see the address and day calendar here:

https://media.miopencarry.org/litigation/Clio/CoA/CoA%20Oral%20Argument%20Schedule%2007NOV2016.pdf

Also:

WHEN: Tuesday, December 13th at 10:00am
WHERE: District 1 – Detroit3020 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit – 14th Floor

* Public parking at daily and hourly rates is available at several locations within one block of Cadillac Place. Fisher Building public parking and the Victory parking lot are located at the corner of West Grand Boulevard and Third Avenue. New Center One public parking is located behind the St. Regis Hotel off of Lothrop. Additional parking is available off of Baltimore Avenue just west of Second Avenue.

* No firearms or electronic devices are allowed.

A number of MOC members will be attending.  Some people are running car pools from various areas of Michigan.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 941
  • Karma: +24/-14
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Interesting legal analysis from a school carry opponent, presented by an accounting and consulting firm that probably works for a few school districts:
http://www.plantemoran.com/industries/k-12/documents/school-and-finance-seminar/open-carry-update.pdf
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline Ultra

  • More Than You Bargained For
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +25/-27
  • Ultranewschannel.tumblr.com
    • Autopuzzles
How'd it go today?
Ultranewschannel.Tumblr.Com

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3887
  • Karma: +129/-128
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Here are some random comments from fb.  Maybe someone else will chime in as well.

I am in the hallway outside the CoA courtroom (there is overflow -- I'm listening to the speaker). Dean Greenblatt is speaking first on behalf of MOC. The questions the court judges are asking are making it clear they are not friendly at all to our case.

Clio Lawyer to Court: I don't know why we are here today.
Presiding judge Gleicher: neither do I, but that's not a bad thing for you.
Clio Lawyer sits down. Dean Greenblatt Stands up.
Gleicher to Dean: You have a tough argument to make, go ahead.
The court's contempt that Dean disrupted their breakfast for a hearing was palpable.

They have been drilling Dean for 25 minutes now. The aggressive questions continue from the bench aimed at Dean.

Gleicher was the dissenting vote in CADL. i'm sure she'll vote against us here. That means we have to get both Kelly and Shapiro. I don't have a good feeling about this.
Kelly was very condescending and I thought biased in her questioning.
It was embarrassing that the court has less of a handle on Michigan case law than a panel of random hacks on MSNBC would.

They were not adversarial at all to Clio.  This experience is way different than CADL, where the judges were much more open minded to our case.

It seems we got two Democrat nominated or appointed judges and 1 Republican -- who wasn't very sympathetic to us.

no one expects the decision out of the CoA to be in our favor. Let me reintegrate that: no one in the know that is close to this case. NO ONE.

(From Jim Makowski) It was a little rough today that's for sure. Sometimes you get a "cold" panel that listens to what you say, thanks you and moves on. Other times you get a "hot" panel that never lets you get to your prepared arguments but instead starts pounding you with questions from the start. This was definitely the latter but Dean was beat on far worse than I.

Offline G36shooter

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 50
  • Karma: +3/-2
  • MOC Member,SE Regonal Coorrdinator
  • First Name (Displayed): Greg
In my opinion this did not go well, but who knows how the CoA will rule. With the condescending remarks and attitude of presiding judge Kirsten Kelly this case may be above the pay grade of the CoA. (my thoughts)