After their last defeat in the state courts, Susan Gray and her merry band of plaintiffs went to back to the federal courts with their attempt to overturn fifteen years of land use decisions in Howard County including the Wegmans store in Columbia. Followers of this legal action may recall that when this case was first filed in the federal courts, U.S. District Judge J. FredericK Motz dismissed the case by ruling that this was a matter for the state courts to decide. The state court subsequently dismissed the case, ruling that the plaintiffs did not have standing.
Now Ms Gray is arguing that since the state court has ruled that they have no standing the federal courts are the only venue left to them to seek redress. The latest news is that Ms Gray has now filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals give them more time for “filing opening brief and to supplement the record.”
The defendants in this case, the county government, have objected to any extension. In an email to Susan Gray, county attorney Lou Ruzzi informed Ms Gray that “we can’t agree to further postponing the briefing schedule for the preparation of a transcript that has little or no value to the appeal.”
I should note that Ms Gray is also appealing the dismissal in the state courts.
This will apparently continue on so long as the union continues to support it. It may be one of the reasons that Wegmans has now delayed their opening until 2012. The union may feel that any delay is a victory for them.
Thanks to Tales of Two Cities netizen Lotsabogeys for continuing to track this legal action.
Daily
19 hours ago
9 comments:
So how much money from the hard working people, who pay their union dues, was spent to delay the inevitable? I bet many of those same union workers will be future Wegmans employees. Who can argue when Wegmans ranks among the best places to work in America!
Judge Motz is a suspect jurist at best, and ridicule is unbecoming. Move on, WB. Susan Gray is a perfectly lovely person and an intelligent attorney. If you knew her at all you'd know that already.
Your group of bailout enthusiasts are on a tightwire, stooping to incessant ridicule further putrified by name calling when your gluttonous supply chain is threatened.
Justice, truth are foreign to Chamber types. Thank God above most people are far and away unlike you all.
-signed, No Union Supporter
It should be noted that Susan Gray has made a whole career fighting development at every level, at every stage. She even ran for County Executive on a no-growth platform in 1994, a la Liz Bobo. In almost all of her pursuits and lawsuits, she has lost. Yet, Howard County is still nationally recognized as a great place to live and work by almost any measure.
Now, the "second-generation Susan Grays" are trying yet again to slow down or stop development. These include the Alan Kleins and Russ Swateks in our community.
Maybe these "no-no's" serve a purpose, but it sure would be nice if someday any one of them would actually come out in favor of a development project. Not gonna hold my breath on this wish though.
anon 8:56 I can barely count the nearly infinite number of ways your post is inaccurate. ala Bobo? Where on Earth did you get such an idea?
Well, Anon 8;56, it's called history. That's my source. Chuck Ecker beat Liz Bobo in 1990 primarily because of her poor land use policies. He then beat Susan Gray in 1994 on largely the same grounds. You can look it up!
Anon 6:33, I don't believe WB said a thing about Susan Gray as a person. My guess is she really is a lovely person - just like many of your neighbors and fellow citizens that you call "bailout enthusiasts" and "Chamber types" and thank God most people aren't like them. Seems the only person in this discussion who isn't so lovely is you name-caller. Funny how you spent 3 paragraphs discussing personality and name-calling but not a word of substance related to the actual issue in EB's post.
Once you move past the innuendo and gratuitous childish ridicule, the Gray case raises very interesting legal precedents. Howard County's biggest problem is that they've based more than 15 years of land use decisions on a process that is inconsistent with the County Charter.
Make no mistake, the stakes are HUGE $$$$. You can expect every form of defense to be raised in an effort to steer the court away from the fundamental premise of Gray's case.
If Gray has the resources and energy to continue her appeals, there is a good chance that a Federal Appeals Court will eventually step in to sadistically slap the County around over their misapplication of the law for the past generation.
When that happens...WHOA, Katy bar the door.
“If Gray has the resources and energy to continue her appeals, there is a good chance that a Federal Appeals Court will eventually…”
LegalB - Just wondering on what basis you can make this comment? If chances are “that good”, don’t you think some enterprise would have successfully challenged the county before 15 years has passed. In this particular case, it would seem more credible if this was their original argument. Instead, since the traffic issue and the multiple appeals didn’t fly, they pulled this idea out of their bag. One thing all agree with is that the stakes would be enormous, and would likely overwhelm the courts.
“If Gray has the resources and energy to continue her appeals, there is a good chance that a Federal Appeals Court will eventually…”
LegalB - Just wondering on what basis you can make this comment? If chances are “that good”, don’t you think some enterprise would have successfully challenged the county before 15 years has passed. In this particular issue, it would seem more credible if this was their original argument. Instead, since the traffic issue and the multiple appeals didn’t fly, they pulled this idea out of their bag. One thing all agree with is that the stakes would be enormous, and would likely overwhelm the courts.
Post a Comment