• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Dickson City Lawsuit

LOERetired

New member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
434
Location
, ,
imported post

Want to read all the current filings on the Dickson City Lawsuit follow this link.





Court Filings



[align=center]DATE FILED[/align]

[align=center]DOCUMENT[/align]


[align=center]6/11/08[/align]
Complaint (4 Plaintiffs: Banks, Banks, Meyer, McCarren)


[align=center]6/21/08[/align]
Complaint (Kraft) (5th Plaintiff: Kraft - filed separately)


[align=center]7/9/08[/align]
Motion to extend


[align=center]8/4/08[/align]
Defendants' response to complaint / Motion to dismiss


[align=center]8/8/08[/align]
Scheduling order / assignment to MDJ


[align=center]8/18/08[/align]
Plaintiff's response/opposition to motion to dismiss


[align=center]8/25/08[/align]
Scheduling/mgmt plan


[align=center]9/22/08[/align]
Defendants' reply to amended complaint.


[align=center]8/17/09[/align]
Defendant Mariano statement of facts in support of MSJ


[align=center]8/17/09[/align]
Defendant Stadnitski statement of facts in support of MSJ


[align=center]8/17/09[/align]
Defendant Stadnitski motion for partial summary judgment


[align=center]8/17/09[/align]
Defendant Gallagher Statement of Facts in support of MSJ


[align=center]8/17/09[/align]
Banks (Plaintiff) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment


[align=center]8/28/09[/align]
Richard Banks (Plaintiff) Brief in support of his Motion for Partial Summary Judgment


[align=center]9/21/09[/align]
Counterstatement of facts in opposition to the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Defendants, Dickson City, Stadnitski, Gallagher and Mariano.


[align=center]3/18/2010[/align]
Court response to defendants motion for partial summary judgement.


[align=center]3/19/2010[/align]
Court response to defendant Stadnitski and City motion for partial summary judgement.


[align=center]3/22/2010[/align]

Case stayed pending outcome of McDonald v. City of Chicago


Don
 

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Thanks for the post. I downloaded all the pdf files and read about half of them. Each side seems to go back and forth asserting one thing and then another. Too bad it wasn't videotaped. There would be none of this "he said, she said" rhetoric. I don't know what the electronic wiretapping laws are in PA but here we CAN videotape them without their consent.

I hate it that I have to be a "quasi-lawyer" just to exercise my rights.
 

Article1section23

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
489
Location
USA
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
Thanks for the post. I downloaded all the pdf files and read about half of them. Each side seems to go back and forth asserting one thing and then another. Too bad it wasn't videotaped. There would be none of this "he said, she said" rhetoric. I don't know what the electronic wiretapping laws are in PA but here we CAN videotape them without their consent.

I hate it that I have to be a "quasi-lawyer" just to exercise my rights.
+1 I read the last 3 PDF's. That was a lot of reading. It appears they got a good Judge and he is taking his time, doing it right. I think it's great that he iswaiting on McDonald. This case has about 4 more months to go, before an opinion is issued, in my opinion.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

I've only read the last document, the stay.

What does McDonald have to do with it? PA has an RKBA even stronger than the federal 2A: the RKBA cannot even be questioned in PA. And, as I recall, there was no allegation of a crime for the incident, meaning the police had zero RAS for a detention, nor probable cause for the arrest/unarrest of Banks.

I wonder if the stay is becausea federal court is being asked, in part, to hold the 2A operative against the state of PA. I guess that if McDonald goes against incorporation, those parts of the suit citing 2A become void, and the other points then continue on through the process?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
I hate it that I have to be a "quasi-lawyer" just to exercise my rights.
I understand. Realize that the mere existence of the Bill of Rights is your first clue that you need to be a street lawyer to protect your rights. If government could be trusted to protect your rights, there would be no need for the Bill of Rights.

Regarding being a street lawyer, belowis one of my all-time favorite quotes. It is from Edmund Burke's speech to Parliament about conciliation (state of goodwill) with the colonies.The speech was given just prior to the revolution.

Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our colonies, which contributes no mean part towards the growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study...all who read, and most do read, endeavour to obtain some smattering in that science...This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other countries, the people, more simple, and of a less mercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze.

That speech was given on March 22, 1775. The first shots of the revolution disturbed the tranquility of Lexington green on the morning of April 19, 1775, less than one month later.Thus, studying lawis patriotic!
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Citizen wrote:
rcawdor57 wrote:
I hate it that I have to be a "quasi-lawyer" just to exercise my rights.
I understand. Realize that the mere existence of the Bill of Rights is your first clue that you need to be a street lawyer to protect your rights. If government could be trusted to protect your rights, there would be no need for the Bill of Rights.

Regarding being a street lawyer, belowis one of my all-time favorite quotes. It is from Edmund Burke's speech to Parliament about conciliation (state of goodwill) with the colonies.The speech was given just prior to the revolution.

Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our colonies, which contributes no mean part towards the growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study...all who read, and most do read, endeavour to obtain some smattering in that science...This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other countries, the people, more simple, and of a less mercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze.

That speech was given on March 22, 1775. The first shots of the revolution disturbed the tranquility of Lexington green on the morning of April 19, 1775, less than one month later.Thus, studying lawis patriotic!
Indeed the patriot thus would be the better for having read the law.

Yata hey
 

gnbrotz

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
247
Location
Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, USA
On 7/6/2010 Karen Gallagher filed for Bankruptcy. This placed an "automatic stay" on the proceedings in this case in which she is a defendant. This week the plaintiff's attorney has filed paperwork with the Bankruptcy Court seeking this stay be lifted.
 

ChazzMatt

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
1
Location
metro Atlanta area
Update?

OK, it's been over a YEAR (10/2010) since the last development. It's now 12/2011. What happened to this case? I've been following it since the beginning in 2008.

I want the town to cry uncle and admit they were horrendously wrong, especially the DA who personally told the officers to arrest those people.

http://righttocarry.blogspot.com/2011/02/pennsylvania-open-carry-and-dickson.html

The police also illegally told the open carry people NOT to record them, which suppressed other civil rights besides the 2nd amendment.

It's an EASY civil rights lawsuit to win.
 
Last edited:

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
It's Like The Case Just Disappeared....

OK, it's been over a YEAR (10/2010) since the last development. It's now 12/2011. What happened to this case? I've been following it since the beginning in 2008.

I want the town to cry uncle and admit they were horrendously wrong, especially the DA who personally told the officers to arrest those people.

http://righttocarry.blogspot.com/2011/02/pennsylvania-open-carry-and-dickson.html

The police also illegally told the open carry people NOT to record them, which suppressed other civil rights besides the 2nd amendment.

It's an EASY civil rights lawsuit to win.

Here is the only thing I can find on this case: On 7/6/2010 Karen Gallagher filed for Bankruptcy. This placed an "automatic stay" on the proceedings in this case in which she is a defendant. This week the plaintiff's attorney has filed paperwork with the Bankruptcy Court seeking this stay be lifted.

Even the various PA forums have nothing else on it that I can find.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Don't despair.

Just the fact the case is alive and could go against the cops will make the rest of the cops cautious. The case wasn't thrown out at the outset, its alive.

Also, the cops who are defendants are having no fun with this hanging over their heads day in and day out for years.

So, while I would like a resolution sooner, and the plaintiffs seem to deserve it from what I recall of the encounter, its not like there is no effect on the rights-violators. They get to feel that anxiety tug at them every time they think about the case.

Also, think about the discussions between husbands and wives. "You did what to some open carriers!?!!" "And, now our finances are in limbo until the case is sorted out!?!!" I'll bet this has put some real strain on households. Maybe the cop won't clean up his act by himself, but I bet the specter of his angry and nagging wife will make him think twice before throwing his weight around without legal authority next time.
 
Top