Monday, August 31, 2009

Pacific Legal Foundation - My name is Sue

Comment Up
Nicholas Gieseler from the Pacific Legal Foundation was present on Tuesday for the Sunset issue. This was Sunset Holding's secret weapon. His spiel? The Bert J. Harris Act will do the City in. Pacific Legal specializes in pro business causes. Nicholas drove all the way down from his office located in Stuart.

Pacific Legal is described as "the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation. The organization has been partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations." Say what?

I asked him how much he was being paid and he said "nothing." He told me that he graduated from law school two years ago. He was an earnest and pleasant young guy and I got the impression that he probably never had to do homework when he was in law school. He was only there to try to intimidate a commission old enough, in a few cases, to be his grandparents...people who have actually lived a little and can understand what they read particularly when it comes to the Bert J. Harris Act. Nicholas says the City should settle now because Bert J. Harris is a "slam dunk" case against the City...that the City needs to settle with the property owners now before the ordinances are repealed.

Nicholas, nothing is a slam dunk and that is something that all lawyers should learn in law school. I offer you that advice for free. One thing that they probably do teach those in law school is that the man who wins is the man who thinks he can. Nicholas was not lacking in confidence.

Try again, Nicholas. This is the real world where homework would have helped you realize that there is NO Bert J. Harris taking here.
at

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousAugust 31, 2009 at 3:23 PM

    How can you be so sure the Harris act will not come into play in this case? What information do you have the would confirm this?
    It would appear after you and your friends have filed numerous frivolous lawsuits against the city over the years that now you think it's wrong if the owner of that property sues the city. What gives?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lynn AndersonAugust 31, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Name one law suit that you know of that was dismissed because it was "frivolous."

    Read up on the Bert J. Harris Act and learn something. I could care less if the owners of Sunset want to sue or think they have a case. It just is not the Bert J. Harris Act.

    It would appear that you and your friends are sore losers and more than likely do not know what you are talking about--like picking apart someone's campaign flyer or the reason why we can't do anything much at Old Bridge Park. But you don't want to learn or listen...just whine and moan and groan and poke fun and attack people. What a mission in life.

    Hey, next time sign your name.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousAugust 31, 2009 at 3:40 PM

    The attorney for the property owners just about said that there was no Burt Harris law suit there. Didn't you listen?

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousSeptember 2, 2009 at 11:42 PM

    He is very cute!

    ReplyDelete