Question about the Ferndale Court Case

imported post

Was this actually a Supreme Court decision? From what I can find, what we commonly quote as a Supreme Court decision was actually a circuit court case, which the Michigan Supreme Court granted a Summary Disposition.
While this might be a minor thing, I just wanted to get clarification about it, I dont want to incorrectly quote the State SC when it was actually Court of Appeals.
Ive done my share of reading legislation and court cases, but im no expert, so Im just asking for some help here.

imported post

According to docket # 242237, Appeals Court, the case is closed, and the official version of the case was available on 6/13/03. From what I understand, Ferndale tried to take it to the Supreme Court, but they refused to hear the case. I believe that makes it final, or closed, as it states on the record at the court web site. You can find it at Michigan.gov web site. Click on the courts link to the right.

imported post

hamaneggs wrote:

According to docket # 242237, Appeals Court, the case is closed, and the official version of the case was available on 6/13/03. From what I understand, Ferndale tried to take it to the Supreme Court, but they refused to hear the case. I believe that makes it final, or closed, as it states on the record at the court web site. You can find it at Michigan.gov web site. Click on the courts link to the right.

Click to expand...

What I am wondering though is if it is proper to quote the appeals court opinion as "Michigan Supreme Court said", or is that a mistake to quote the opinion in that way?

In a letter I am writing, I put it as:
On April 23, 2003, the State of Michigan Court of Appeals found in MICHIGAN COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS V CITY OF FERNDALE[/i], Docket Number 242237, that the City of Ferndale was not permitted to enact an ordinance prohibiting legal possession of firearms, as this was a violation of MCL 123.1102. Consequently, the City of Ferndale had no choice but to repeal their ban on the legal possession, either concealed or openly carried firearms. The Michigan Supreme Court on June 13, 2003 issued a summary disposition of this case as no further review was necessary.

imported post

Thats exactly what I have read before, I just couldn't remember the wording.Thanks!

imported post

hamaneggs wrote:

Thats exactly what I have read before, I just couldn't remember the wording.Thanks!

Click to expand...

Yeah. I have read before people saying that the Mich SC has ruled that Ferndale's ban was illegal, but I cant find that. So I rewrote it as you can see above. I think it is more accurate, though longer. I am drafting a letter to Kent County about their firearms in parks ban.

imported post

Furner wrote:

hamaneggs wrote:

Thats exactly what I have read before, I just couldn't remember the wording.Thanks!

Click to expand...

Yeah. I have read before people saying that the Mich SC has ruled that Ferndale's ban was illegal, but I cant find that. So I rewrote it as you can see above. I think it is more accurate, though longer. I am drafting a letter to Kent County about their firearms in parks ban.

Click to expand...

It was the Court of appeals and NOT the MSC. I made the ereror in the info packett I made up where I quote both. I will be correctting the posts and the info as time allows. SORRY. But the general info is correct.

imported post

Venator wrote:

Furner wrote:

hamaneggs wrote:

Thats exactly what I have read before, I just couldn't remember the wording.Thanks!

Click to expand...

Yeah. I have read before people saying that the Mich SC has ruled that Ferndale's ban was illegal, but I cant find that. So I rewrote it as you can see above. I think it is more accurate, though longer. I am drafting a letter to Kent County about their firearms in parks ban.

Click to expand...

It was the Court of appeals and NOT the MSC. I made the ereror in the info packett I made up where I quote both. I will be correctting the posts and the info as time allows. SORRY. But the general info is correct.

Click to expand...

Glad we could clear it all up.
Are you planning on attending the Grand Rapids picnic?

imported post

My mom knows the then mayor of Ferndale. Chuck Goerdert, that might not be the right spelling. The jack ass is a lawyer, and yet he still pushed the issue, and tried to ban guns in Ferndale city property, contrary to state law. He knew damn well he was out of line, and didn't care. That jack ass is worthy of about as much respect as Janet Reno.

imported post

Furner wrote:

Venator wrote:

Furner wrote:

hamaneggs wrote:

Thats exactly what I have read before, I just couldn't remember the wording.Thanks!

Click to expand...

Yeah. I have read before people saying that the Mich SC has ruled that Ferndale's ban was illegal, but I cant find that. So I rewrote it as you can see above. I think it is more accurate, though longer. I am drafting a letter to Kent County about their firearms in parks ban.

Click to expand...

It was the Court of appeals and NOT the MSC. I made the error in the info packets I made up where I quote both. I will be correcting the posts and the info as time allows. SORRY. But the general info is correct.

Click to expand...

Glad we could clear it all up.
Are you planning on attending the Grand Rapids picnic?

Click to expand...

IF it's the one for July 12th, then no I will be doing the show with Warchild, but do call in with any stories. The show is at 3:00 PM. Ask Warchild for the number to call aside from the website..that is his cell or the stations phone number and we can relate any stories live on the site.

imported post

Furner wrote:

I have read before people saying that the Mich SC has ruled that Ferndale's ban was illegal, but I cant find that.

Click to expand...

Here is one way to cite and wield this case succinctly in any letter:

--

Dear _________:

I am writing you to ask that you repeal ______ City ordinance number ___ purporting to ban gun carry in City Hall and other City facilities. Michigan state law strictly forbids localities from enforcing such gun carry restrictions. Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners v. City of Ferndale, 662 N.W.2d 864, 866 (Mich. App. 2003) ("At issue in this case is whether local units of government are precluded from enacting and enforcing ordinances that make local public buildings gun-free zones. We hold that M.C.L. § 123.1102 preempts local regulation of this kind, and contrary to defendants city of Ferndale and city clerk Karen Pedro's argument, M.C.L. § 28.425c does not return to local units of government the authority to regulate in this area. Accordingly, we reverse the circuit court's order granting summary disposition in favor of defendants, and upholding the validity of defendants' ordinance prohibiting the possession or concealment of firearms in municipal buildings.")

Please let me know what you are going to do in this matter.

YOUR NAME

YOUR ADDRESS

imported post

And yet they still have the signs on the front doors of the library and city hall. I've wondered if they'd still try to enforce their illegal law.

imported post

cupcake wrote:

And yet they still have the signs on the front doors of the library and city hall. I've wondered if they'd still try to enforce their illegal law.

Click to expand...

And yet several communities still have ordinances on the books about restricting firearms. They keep them up to control and manipulate the uneducated masses.

imported post

cupcake wrote:

And yet they still have the signs on the front doors of the library and city hall. I've wondered if they'd still try to enforce their illegal law.

Click to expand...

If they post signs, start a campaign to force them to remove the "illegal signs."

imported post

cupcake wrote:

And yet they still have the signs on the front doors of the library and city hall. I've wondered if they'd still try to enforce their illegal law.

Click to expand...

Ferndale? I never did spend much time there at their library, Ferndale's library kind of sucks. I liked the bigger ones a few miles north or west.

What might fix them up good is a big old OC read in, followed by a short walk over to tour city hall. :celebrate

Although, Mike's idea is probably a lot better, expecially considering the FPD is a fairly reckless and half assed department which is located in that same building as city hall.:?