Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: N. Las Vegas Case Lost

  1. #1
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    N. Las Vegas Case Lost

    I hear the judge ruled in favor of the City of North Las Vegas and Clark County in the matter of Hanes v. Clark County? can anyone confirm this?

    Clark County District Court:
    Case number A-10-622398-C+
    Last edited by Nevada carrier; 04-30-2011 at 09:18 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Sabotage70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fabulous Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    844
    According to this post from the CC park thread, the case was not supposed to be seen till July.


    Quote Originally Posted by SimplyTom View Post
    Thanks for the info and the court case.

    The case is Hanes v. Clark County and the City of North Las Vegas, case # A-10-622398-C.


    Did some research on the District Court website and, after several Motions to Dismiss asked for by CC and NLV, the judge denied their motions and a court date has been set for a bench trial (judge will decide the matter) on July 5, 2011 @ 1:30 pm with Judge Susan Johnson to decide the matter. Judge Johnson presides over Department 22 and is located in Courtroom 15D on the 11th floor of 330 S. Third St.

    I wonder if the court date is just a coincidence and portends a decision in our favor?

    From what I understand about the premption issue this case should be a "no brainer" for the judge and she should promptly nullify all NLV and CC ordinances concerning this matter, IMHO.
    EDC=XDm40 16+1+16+16

    RED DRAGONS!!!!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    208
    I'm a little confused now...
    At first glance, it looks like the case is still open with a scheduled trial date of July 5.
    https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Ano...CaseID=7676999

    BUT, if you look at the last minutes from 4/25, it appears as though both sides made a motion for summary judgement, Hanes was denied, but NLV was granted.
    https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Ano...ewMode=Minutes

    It seems as though they may have denied Hanes' motion, and granted NLV some similar motion to dismiss Hanes' motion? I don't know why there is a denial and a granted with a single "Lacks standing to seek declaratory relief" reason.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    8
    Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and this is just my opinion from what I can determine.

    From what I can determine from the case record of April 24, 2011 the following happened:

    Mr. Hanes requested summary judgment ("rule in my favor and nullify the NLV and CC laws judge") and the judge denied his request.

    NLV requested summary judgment ("rule in our favor and keep the NLV law intact judge") and the judge granted the request because, in the courts eyes, Mr. Hanes "lacks standing to seek declaratory relief". In essence, the court said Mr. Hanes doesn't have a "requisite personal interest" (isn't the right plaintiff to bring suit against NLV possibly?) in overturning the NLV law. This could be because he may not be a resident of NLV.....just a guess on my part.

    What's interesting is that the other defendant in this case, Clark County, didn't seek a counter-motion, as NLV did, for summary judgment also. This could be because Mr. Hanes, by being a resident of CC, does have a "requisite personal interest" in overturning the CC law.

    Still, the case is still set to be heard on July 5, 2011 with CC as the only defendant since NLV was granted a summary judgment in their favor.

    All is not lost though because Mr.Hanes can appeal the judges decision to the NV Supreme Court which functions as the NV Appeals Court. This probably won't happen until the case is decided in July.

    If someone has a different interpretation of what happened in this case please share.

    Tom

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    I too heard (from a reliable source) we lost.

    BUT the case will be appealed.

    Am trying to get document(s).

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763
    If true this is really a let down. Seemed like a slam dunk for us. How or whom let us down on this? What will it take? One of us actually getting arrested?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    I have the document - will post as soon as I get a chance.

    And, standby - I suspect there will be an appeal.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927
    Here it is, "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order," by District Court Judge Susan Johnson, April 25, 2011:

    http://www.stillwaterfirearms.org/ph...428_154432.pdf

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    Appeal!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763
    So it will take someone being arrested it seems.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegassteve View Post
    So it will take someone being arrested it seems.
    Arrested and prosecuted it sounds like.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    208
    Conclusions Of Law, Paragraph 10, in part
    ...Although the court does not require Mr. Hanes to await arrest or prosecution before entertaining a challenge to the codes or ordinances, the threat of enforcement must at least be credible, and not simply imaginary or speculative.
    Sounds to me like the courts just said they won't or can't enforce the code. If Mr. Hanes' belief that enforcement is imaginary or non-credible, then obviously no fear of enforcement can exist, right?

  13. #13
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by gmijackso View Post
    Conclusions Of Law, Paragraph 10, in part


    Sounds to me like the courts just said they won't or can't enforce the code. If Mr. Hanes' belief that enforcement is imaginary or non-credible, then obviously no fear of enforcement can exist, right?
    Soooooo....they must at least threaten arrest? Then if you ask the city/county authorities and they tell you that you will be arrested, then you have a case? Until then the code means nothing. Seems to me the judge is saying that the local codes can't be enforced, but you can't get them to change it until they try. Hmmmm. Do I have that right?

    TBG

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    Soooooo....they must at least threaten arrest? Then if you ask the city/county authorities and they tell you that you will be arrested, then you have a case? Until then the code means nothing. Seems to me the judge is saying that the local codes can't be enforced, but you can't get them to change it until they try. Hmmmm. Do I have that right?

    TBG
    That's kinda how I understood it too. IANAL though. But, it also stands in line with my previous thoughts and mentions in another thread that the municipalities/LEO would rather have the law on the book and not enforce/not be allowed to enforce rather than enforce it and have it tested and removed. This is because, to me looking through their eyes, with a non enforcible law on the books, there still stands a chance that somebody might "abide" by the "law" and thereby conform to their desires, whereas if the law were removed that chance is also removed. It's kind of a managing of the people through indirect intimidation via a dead law stuck in limbo. They desire everybody to adhere to the dead law, but to enforce that would mean removal of the dead law, so they'll happily not enforce and keep the percentage of the people they can get to adhere to the law via fear of prosecution.

    Tricky and wrong in all aspects, but tis what it appears to me.

    The thing I found most interesting is the "threat of prosecution" part. To me, a law abiding citizen, the fact that a law exists has always meant that breaking said law, would likely invoke prosecution. So, to me, the existence of a law alone, threatened prosecution of said law for its violation. The court has pretty plainly said that is not the case. Would be interesting to know what other laws the court feels this way about.
    Last edited by gmijackso; 05-06-2011 at 03:17 AM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TigerLily's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Polygammyville, Utah
    Posts
    138
    Well, my son was just arrested and jailed on May 26th in North Las Vegas for alleged violation of the city ordinance - dangerous or deadly weapon in vehicle. He was stopped by a NLV Motor Officer for a minor traffic violation. When my son advised the cop he was open carrying, the cop freaked and called a 413. They arrested him, impounded his car, and carted him of to the NLV detention center. I would think that this instance would satisfy the court, don't all of you?
    YouTube OC activism vids: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...ature=view_all
    TigerLily's Freedom ROAR Radio show
    Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/TLRoar/
    Blog: http://tlroar.blogspot.com/
    http://guerrillalawfare.com/
    http://tigerlilsblog.blogspot.com/
    I don't ride to be safe, I ride to be free.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Yes, and when they realize that they risk having their law overturned, they will drop the charges.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by TigerLily View Post
    I would think that this instance would satisfy the court, don't all of you?
    Rock and roll!

  18. #18
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Get in touch with the Lawyer in Reno that brought the case, and the NRA and let them know immediately.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763
    Plus one what the BigGuy said. Also contact Stillwater Firearms, I think they were helping in tat case also.
    Guess we need to call for a NLV boycott?

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    Get in touch with the Lawyer in Reno that brought the case, and the NRA and let them know immediately.

    TBG
    No offense to the Big Guy, But Please read the WHOLE case before you invite the attorney , or the NRA into the mix again... the first criteria in a civil case is "Harm" if you bump someones car, but do not leave a mark or injury, what on earth can they sue you for.

    I have the whole case on pdf and will send it to anyone that wants it, or can possibly provide a link, if I can talk the web guy into putting it on the website. P.M. Me

    My take is that the NRA did not find a suitible "injured person" nor did they lay down a foundation, or a case. in the second pleading the atty, for Hanes (up in Reno!?!) did a better job, but did not even work. IMHO I think this was theater and that it has Bolstered NLVPD- Is this a way to increase membership for the NRA ?
    Last edited by DON`T TREAD ON ME; 06-12-2011 at 03:29 AM. Reason: sp..... bet theres more.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Tread, can you send me the case file?
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by DON`T TREAD ON ME View Post
    My take is that the NRA did not find a suitible "injured person" nor did they lay down a foundation, or a case. in the second pleading the atty, for Hanes (up in Reno!?!) did a better job, but did not even work. IMHO I think this was theater and that it has Bolstered NLVPD- Is this a way to increase membership for the NRA ?
    Members of the NRA have been requesting they get involved in this specific. From what I recall of how this even started, the NRA did not "ride into town looking for a fight." People who were affected by the laws being enforced looked for remedy. As this case shows, finding remedy in this specific is proving to be quite difficult.

    Someone first needs "standing." So far, that is lacking.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  23. #23
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Put the NRA on the spot. There is now someone with standing to go after the law. Let's see how willing they are to pick it back up and go for the ring. Being a life member of the NRA for over 30 years I still have lots of problems with them. I don't think they are what they say they are but if they can be used to win this I say go for it. All NRA memebers should call and write the organization telling them to do so. Put pressure on them.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    It appears that Tim Bedwell is at it again, NLV dropped the "Dangerouse weapon" charges On Tiger Lilys son. I talked to him last night.

    I have been fighting this in the motorcycle helmet arena for two years. here is the Drill:

    Unenforcable law: charge anyway!

    Defendant Pays, Or Plea's City wins and bad law propagates.

    If the Defendant is willing to fight, the charges are dropped as late in the case as possible (to punish the defendant)

    I had two helmet tix. recently 1 in Boulder City and one in North Las Vegas.
    Both Courts are currently Courts of non record.

    I was convicted in Both Courts and in NLV the judge feeling the heat of my defense said "the law does not matter in my Court, what I say matters here"

    I instantly appealed, and had a hearing in District Court where the Judge allowed us (Travis appeared with me in District court) to file a "Legal brief" to challange the constitutionality of the stop.

    We submitted my legal brief, and it was never responded to, Boulder City did not even show for their hearing. It was that Damn good.

    When they did show, the Judge recognized the pattern and practice explained above, and allowed Travis to file an affidavit of fees and costs, which he did.
    There is a hearing on it this week, I will keep you posted.

    Our remedy in this matter is to file a Class action Lawsuit against the offending partys for unconstitutional enforcement of the helmet law. there are many similaritys here and it appears very possible that we could do a repeat. If you would like to help with the helmet lawsuit or learn from it etc. contact me, I say we come after NLV.

  25. #25
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    [QUOTE=DON`T TREAD ON ME;1551810]It appears that Tim Bedwell is at it again, NLV dropped the "Dangerouse weapon" charges On Tiger Lilys son. I talked to him last night.


    From what I understand the judge ruled, wouldn't there be standing now to file a suit on the legality of the law? They certainly have arrested someone and charged them. The fact that they later dropped it should not really protect them.

    I guess the thing to do is if stopped by NLVPD, and they do find your piece and say they are going to charge you, act happy about it. Say, "oh good, we've been waiting for this to happen so we can file suit again. Thank you for giving me standing. Can we go to jail now?"

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •