• 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.

WCI v. GFSZ Countdown

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
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?
 

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
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.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
Last edited:

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
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.
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
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.
 
M

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.
 

logan

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
433
Location
Greeley, CO
...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.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
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.
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GFSZA_Legal_Documents/Hannan-Rock_Racine-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:

AaronS

Regular Member
Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
1,497
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GFSZA_Legal_Documents/Hannan-Rock_Racine-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.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
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/district attorney/Documents/McDonald vs. City of Chicago.pdf
 
M

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!
 
M

McX

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

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
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.
:banana::monkey
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GFSZA_Legal_Documents/Hannan-Rock_Racine-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:
M

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!
 
Top