Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 57

Thread: WCI v. GFSZ Countdown

  1. #1
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187

    WCI v. GFSZ Countdown

    Has the Fed. Court that is hearing this case now on summer recess?

    What is the status of this case?

    What is the outline for entire the process?

  2. #2
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    So far....
    Comlaint
    Ammended Complaint
    Answer
    Motion to Dismiss
    Oppisition to Motion
    Judgement

    What else is there to be had?

    Does this Court operate like SCOTUS?
    IF anyone could give a lesson OR provide a link to study, it would be much appreciated.

    Thank You.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    The United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin Local Rules

    Complete Local Rules

    http://www.wied.uscourts.gov/index.p...d=81&Itemid=30

    Specific Local Rules by section

    http://www.wied.uscourts.gov/index.p...d=12&Itemid=39

    The general rules are the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

    http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/Rul...les/CV2009.pdf
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 07-01-2010 at 07:06 AM. Reason: If it was easy then everyone could do it

  4. #4
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Thank You, Doug.

    I will read them when I get home.

    And I don't care what others think. You are a valuable contributor to this online community.

    I wish everyone understood the 80/20 rule.

  5. #5
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    I have talked to our attorney recently, though on another issue/potential lawsuit we may file other than the one already filed.

    Last we spoke about the GFSZ lawsuit all parties had responded except Manitowoc. That was several weeks ago, I presume Manitowoc has responded by now but I haven't seen their response.

    Once Manitowoc responds my understanding is the attorneys for all parties will "talk" but the next notable happening will be when the judge rules on the motions to dismiss.

    Each defendant (except Manitowoc which I haven't read yet if they have) has made a motion to dismiss (those documents are all up on the WCI site) and our attorney has filed his response to those motions to dismiss. The judge will read the defendants motions to dismiss and our attorneys brief why they shouldn't be dismissed and rule on those. If he agrees with the defendant and dismisses, we can then appeal that dismissal (and finally be at a court that has binding precedential value). If the judge agrees with our attorney's arguments why they shouldn't be dismissed, we proceed towards trial. Before the trial I believe discovery will take place, depositions, etc.

    Other recent happenings, a letter was sent to Frank by the Racine DA completely vindicating him of any wrongdoing and expressing errors the DA made in a previous letter to Frank following the incident. I will have copies of those letters uploaded to the WCI site and made available for review.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  6. #6
    McX
    Guest
    Other recent happenings, a letter was sent to Frank by the Racine DA completely vindicating him of any wrongdoing and expressing errors the DA made in a previous letter to Frank following the incident. I will have copies of those letters uploaded to the WCI site and made available for review.[/QUOTE]


    this moment has been brought to you by: Wisconsin Carry Inc.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran logan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Greeley, CO
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    ...we may file other than the one already filed.
    Well I can't wait to see what that is!

    I'd love the vehicle carry to be removed...but it would be hard to drive around with a gun without going through a school zone. But with how long lawsuits take, I'm sure the new one wouldn't be done before the school zone one.
    Logan - Laugh lots, Love Often, and Defend the Irreplaceable
    Walther PPS 9mm, Ruger LCP
    CC permits: MN, FL, NH, PA and CO

    Member of:
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc., Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, and National Rifle Association

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by logan View Post
    Well I can't wait to see what that is!

    I'd love the vehicle carry to be removed...but it would be hard to drive around with a gun without going through a school zone. But with how long lawsuits take, I'm sure the new one wouldn't be done before the school zone one.
    I agree, your vehicle is an extension of your property anyway. You should be allowed to carry in your vehicle.
    I hope this is the next law suit.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET View Post
    Has the Fed. Court that is hearing this case now on summer recess?

    What is the status of this case?

    What is the outline for entire the process?
    as much as I would like to see the GFSZ go away like everyone here, I won't hold my breath on this.
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  10. #10
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Glock34 View Post
    as much as I would like to see the GFSZ go away like everyone here, I won't hold my breath on this.
    Why?

    Even the Sheboygan DA is on record saying he thinks Wisconsin Carry "has a point" with our lawsuit.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  11. #11
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GF...ne-Letters.pdf

    Here are the documents I spoke of.

    There is the original letter to Frank from the Racine DA right after his unlawful arrest in 2009. That letter and the comments in it by the Racine DA which misrepresented the law were the basis of the DA being named a defendant in the lawsuit (along with the other defendants)

    The new letter received this week indicates the DA's admission that his previous letter mis-stated the facts of the situation and re-affirms WCI's and Franks contention in the lawsuit (which the Racine City attorney already has admitted as well) that the Racine police had NO probable cause to arrest Frank
    Last edited by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman; 07-02-2010 at 08:51 AM. Reason: spelling
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  12. #12
    Regular Member AaronS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,497
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GF...ne-Letters.pdf

    Here are the documents I spoke of.

    There is the original letter to Frank from the Racine DA right after his unlawful arrest in 2009. That letter and the comments in it by the Racine DA which misrepresented the law were the basis of the DA being named a defendant in the lawsuit (along with the other defendants)

    The new letter received this week indicates the DA's admission that his previous letter mis-stated the facts of the situation and re-affirms WCI's and Franks contention in the lawsuit (which the Racine City attorney already has admitted as well) that the Racine police had NO probably cause to arrest Frank
    Thanks, that was a nice read.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    But not the Jackson County DA

    Even the Sheboygan DA is on record saying he thinks Wisconsin Carry "has a point" with our lawsuit.
    But not the Jackson county DA. Here is the list of what he regards as unconstitutional, post-Mcdonald;

    • Section 167.31, prohibiting uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles;
    • Section 941.23, prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, including firearms;
    • Section 941.235, prohibiting the possession of firearms in public buildings;
    • Section 941.237, prohibiting the possession of firearms in establishments where alcohol
      may be sold or served; and,
    • Section 941.24, prohibiting the possession of knives that open with a button, or by
      gravity, or thrust, or movement.

    All of these statutes constitute unjustifiable infringements on the fundamental right of
    every law-abiding American to arm themselves for self-defense and the defense of their
    loved ones, co-workers, homes and communities.

    http://www.co.jackson.wi.us/html/dis...%20Chicago.pdf

  14. #14
    McX
    Guest
    wow guys. historic days! historic documents! historic moments! Mr. Chairman, frank's letter blew me away! Doug, the letter you posted blew me away!

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    Doug, the letter you posted blew me away!
    Which letter please?

  16. #16
    McX
    Guest
    the one about the da not going forward with any charges on the 'unconstiutional' things he sees!

  17. #17
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    wow guys. historic days! historic documents! historic moments! Mr. Chairman, frank's letter blew me away! Doug, the letter you posted blew me away!
    Holly cow!!!! So CC is legal in Jackson County!!! I will forward his letter to the Walworth County DA for his comment.

    If we can get more DA's to agree, we now would have permit less CC. The only thing left is GFSZ.

  18. #18
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GF...ne-Letters.pdf

    Here are the documents I spoke of.

    There is the original letter to Frank from the Racine DA right after his unlawful arrest in 2009. That letter and the comments in it by the Racine DA which misrepresented the law were the basis of the DA being named a defendant in the lawsuit (along with the other defendants)

    The new letter received this week indicates the DA's admission that his previous letter mis-stated the facts of the situation and re-affirms WCI's and Franks contention in the lawsuit (which the Racine City attorney already has admitted as well) that the Racine police had NO probably cause to arrest Frank

    Interesting on the original letter dated October 2009, "The defense, of course was that you were on your own property" when it comes to the GFSZ violation. I guess he didn't realize it didn't matter whose property he was on as long as it was private. Have they figured that out since?


    Dooohhh!!!! Never mind, read the 2nd letter.
    Last edited by paul@paul-fisher.com; 07-02-2010 at 08:54 AM. Reason: Fixed my stupidity.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Please be careful!

    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    So CC is legal in Jackson County!
    Please be careful! That's not what he said. The cops detain, investigate and recommend charges. The DA will not accept these specific charges. There's nothing about felonious mopery, disorderly conduct, obstruction and, worst of all, misdemeanor intent to qawp.

  20. #20
    McX
    Guest
    what's a quarp? well anyway, i'm so damn happy maybe i'm going to change my byline on here from opencarry encouraged, to carry encouraged- period!

  21. #21
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    But not the Jackson county DA. Here is the list of what he regards as unconstitutional, post-Mcdonald;

    • Section 167.31, prohibiting uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles;
    • Section 941.23, prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, including firearms;
    • Section 941.235, prohibiting the possession of firearms in public buildings;
    • Section 941.237, prohibiting the possession of firearms in establishments where alcohol
      may be sold or served; and,
    • Section 941.24, prohibiting the possession of knives that open with a button, or by
      gravity, or thrust, or movement.

    All of these statutes constitute unjustifiable infringements on the fundamental right of
    every law-abiding American to arm themselves for self-defense and the defense of their
    loved ones, co-workers, homes and communities.

    http://www.co.jackson.wi.us/html/dis...%20Chicago.pdf
    What is your point Doug? The Jackson County DA will still enforce the GFSZ? Is that what you contend?

    Having read the entire Jackson County DA's memo (long before you posted it) I believe there is far more reason to believe he wouldn't enforce the GFSZ statute than that he would.

    I recognize that you do have that incessant need to disagree with anything you didn't post (and surely anything WCI does) but I think you made vast assumptions in your last post that you can't justify.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  22. #22
    McX
    Guest
    still jumping up and down! gonna toss out a few dancing monkeys too!
    dang, i can't find the button for dancing monkeys!

  23. #23
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    still jumping up and down! gonna toss out a few dancing monkeys too!
    dang, i can't find the button for dancing monkeys!

    Just type : monkey (remove the space)

  24. #24
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Please be careful! That's not what he said. The cops detain, investigate and recommend charges. The DA will not accept these specific charges. There's nothing about felonious mopery, disorderly conduct, obstruction and, worst of all, misdemeanor intent to qawp.
    I understand but I stand by my statement that it is legal. I'm not saying you won't get arrested and potentially one of the municipalities won't try to prosecute.

  25. #25
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    I understand but I stand by my statement that it is legal. I'm not saying you won't get arrested and potentially one of the municipalities won't try to prosecute.
    If you were prosecuted and convicted by a municipality you'd appeal to the circuit (county) court correct?
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •