169 replies to this topic

[steveTA84]

^^^


So, it’s over and Deerfield lost completely?

[Molly B.]

No, this does not mean they are 100% forbidden from trying again, given the technically-still-pending nature of the other case, and the Appellate Court may still wind up hearing this issue.  But for now the attempts at appeal have been quashed. 

[InterestedBystander]

The web site indicates a future Oct date

FUTURE COURT EVENTS
Event Date Event Time Courtroom Event Type
2019-10-04 09:00:00 C204 STATUS

[Molly B.]

That must be for the other case that gsl is a plaintiff.

[InterestedBystander]

That most be for the other case that gsl is a plaintiff.

Thanks. Yes, you are correct. That future event is for the GSL case 18CH00000498. The ISRA/SAF case 18CH00000427 has nothing future scheduled.

[gunuser17]

Neither lawsuit has had an explicit final judgment entered by the trial court nor is it clear to the appellate court whether the two cases were formally consolidated.  Therefore, the appellate court found that it had no jurisdiction over the appeal.  Both cases now go back to the trial court, either for further trial or entry of a final judgment depending on how the plaintiffs elect to proceed.  One or both cases would then be ripe to go back up on appeal.  This appellate court has not ruled in any manner on whether the permanent injunction was properly entered except if the cases were not consolidated.  If the trial court enters a final judgment that shows that the cases were not consolidated then the Easterday case may be finished and no other appeal may be heard - note the court's parenthetical:  "(If the two actions did not merge, Deerfield’s failure to establish that fact in the present appeal is fatal to any appeal in the Easterday action.)"  I suspect the trial court will find consolidation and preserve both cases for potential appeal given that they will tend to give the government entity the benefit of the doubt.

Edited by gunuser17, 12 June 2019 - 04:51 PM.

[es503IL]

 

Deerfield decides to appeal the ruling. Wasting more of our tax payer $$.

https://patch.com/il...ntent=deerfield

 

The Village of Deerfield’s appeal has been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, which was Mr. Sigale's argument.


Easterday Opinion of 061219.pdf

 

 

Looks like he remembered to file his paperwork on time in this case and not wait until literally the last minute.....

Edited by es503IL, 12 June 2019 - 09:12 PM.

[Molly B.]

 

 

Looks like he remembered to file his paperwork on time in this case and not wait until literally the last minute.....

 

 

I haven't worked with an attorney yet who does not use the filing at the last minute strategy.  It has always stressed the daylights out of me for just this reason - and because I don't trust the illinois.gov websites.  It's not a matter of remembering. Even some of our NRA attorneys use this strategy with a 4:30 p.m. email  "please look this over, it's due by 5:00 p.m. today.

[Flynn]

I haven't worked with an attorney yet who does not use the filing at the last minute strategy.

 

Everyone I have come across does the same, the wife also used to be a legal sectretary for an attorney (before the internet took off) and he would pile up all his documents for the end of day then blast off faxes right before he left the office, then he would unplug his fax machine so no one could fax documents to him overnight.  Seems to be the modus operandi, probably because it occationally beneftis them especially with demand letters with set time periods.

[mauserme]

 

 

SAF, ISRA WIN AS ILLINOIS APPEALS COURT DISMISSES DEERFIELD APPEAL

 

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has posted yet another victory in Illinois, as the Second District Appellate Court has dismissed an attempt by the Village of Deerfield to challenge a permanent injunction against the community’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines.”

 

SAF was joined in the case by the Illinois State Rifle Association—it’s partner in the landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago—on behalf of Deerfield resident Daniel Easterday. Deerfield’s appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, the court ruled.

 

The plaintiffs were represented by Glen Ellyn attorney David Sigale.

 

“This effectively shuts down any further effort by the Deerfield administration to encumber law-abiding citizens in the community who own the kinds of legal firearms city officials want to ban,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We were delighted to once again be working with our good friends at the Illinois State Rifle Association. Together with David Sigale, we make a pretty good team.

 

“But this was always about much more than teamwork,” he continued. “We’re talking about the right of honest citizens to live without fear of suddenly being turned into criminals by an overzealous government that arbitrarily decides to prohibit possession of a perfectly legal firearm, purchased in accordance with applicable state and federal laws, because of political correctness.”

 

“Many thanks to Alan M Gottlieb, the Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, David Sigale, and all of the people that have supported me,” Easterday said in reaction to the court ruling.

 

The case had been consolidated with a separate challenge to the Deerfield ban.

 

“Constitutionally-protected rights cannot be subjected to the extremism of social justice crusades,” Gottlieb said. “It should take more than the mere stroke of a pen to criminalize something so much a part of the American fabric as the legal ownership and possession of firearms that are in common use.

 

“This is just one more chapter in SAF’s effort to win back firearms freedom, one lawsuit at a time,” he concluded.

 

[gunuser17]

The press release to me overstates what the appellate court said.  The cases for now are still alive and are back in the trial court.  It is nice that the injunctions hold for now but they can still be overturned.  I am not sure how anyone would read the decision to definitely be able to say that the decision "effectively shuts down any further effort by the Deerfield administration..."  Maybe I am missing something but I would like to hear Mr. Sigale explain how that statement is true.

[InterestedBystander]

Court Rejects Deerfield's Assault Weapon Ban Appeal

..."The village's appeal was too early, too late and initially in the wrong court, but it will get another chance to try to enforce its gun ban."...

https://patch.com/il...apon-ban-appeal

Edited by InterestedBystander, 17 June 2019 - 04:20 PM.

[NakPPI]

The Wombacher case needs to be voluntarily non-suited so that the Easterday opinion is the law. They need to suck it up and realize that for the benefit of everyone the Easterday case needs to stand as the final order.

[Hap]

The Wombacher case needs to be voluntarily non-suited so that the Easterday opinion is the law. They need to suck it up and realize that for the benefit of everyone the Easterday case needs to stand as the final order.

2A advocates would be well served by careful study of the discipline shown by black civil rights leaders in the 20th century as they fought their way through the courts. In particular, a solid biography of Thurgood Marshall - covering his years leading the legal struggle, before he became a judge - should be required reading for all of us.

[McCroskey]

How much more of Deerfield's taxpayer's money will Mayor Harriet squander before people start getting upset?

[InterestedBystander]

How much more of Deerfield's taxpayer's money will Mayor Harriet squander before people start getting upset?

I thought a lot, if not most, of the legal prior work was reported as being pro bono. I would assume that has not changed.

[C0untZer0]

Deerfield Gets Pro Bono Legal Defense In Assault Weapon Ban Suits

 

https://patch.com/il...eapon-ban-suits

 

 

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Seattle-based Perkins Coie have been appointed as pro bono special counsel to represent Deerfield in two lawsuits filed in state court since the passage of an amendment last month to a local ordinance prohibiting the possession, sale and manufacture of certain semi-automatic weapons.   

 

 

[kevinmcc]

How much more of Deerfield's taxpayer's money will Mayor Harriet squander before people start getting upset?

I thought a lot, if not most, of the legal prior work was reported as being pro bono. I would assume that has not changed.

Lawyers are doing pro bono for Deerfield, but I would assume the plaintiffs will ask to recover legal costs.

[Skolnick]

Lawyers are doing pro bono for Deerfield, but I would assume the plaintiffs will ask to recover legal costs.

 

If they frame it as a civil rights issue, then the government pays if the government loses.

 

It's called the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act (yes friends, attorneys need Acts of Congress to help them do what they must do).

 

This Act of Congress was supposed to help plaintiffs in civil rights cases, but advocacy groups, such as the ACLU, use it as part of their business model. Now, the NRA has gotten into the -- ahem -- act.

 

For its work in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the NRA got $663,294.10 from the Village of Oak Park and another $663,294.10 from the City of Chicago.

 

Want to see something wonderful?!

 

Go to: http://michellawyers...icago-check.pdf

 

And gaze at that signature of Rahm Emanuel on that check made out to the National Rifle Association.

[Lou]

Off topic posts have been removed.