Chiburbian Posted September 30, 2013 at 10:46 PM Share Posted September 30, 2013 at 10:46 PM I will be there. If I recall about half the gallery left after the orals last time and many if the people there were law students. It's not that big so it's not a huge deal to stick together. I am up for something after... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:00 PM Share Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:00 PM We could all wear empty OWB holsters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrowningHP Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:04 PM Share Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:04 PM I'm planning on attending. I thought it would be nice to meet up with a few people before, or after for lunch. I'll probably show up 30-45 minutes before in case I have trouble finding it or something hangs me up. Is anyone still interested in meeting afterwards? I can probably do an early lunch, plan to head back to office to get a half day of work in. Keep us posted where you guys plan to meet. I have no idea what anyone looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:18 PM Share Posted September 30, 2013 at 11:18 PM You all let us know everything you all can as soon as you all can! And thanks for taking the time to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markthesignguy Posted October 1, 2013 at 07:34 AM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 07:34 AM I almost hate to bring this up, but would this be affected by the shutdown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrpapageorgio Posted October 1, 2013 at 10:00 AM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 10:00 AM I almost hate to bring this up, but would this be affected by the shutdown? Courts are essential services, so no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VannDaddy Posted October 1, 2013 at 11:10 AM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 11:10 AM I almost hate to bring this up, but would this be affected by the shutdown? Courts are essential services, so no. Yeah, courts are a major source of income for governments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM I'll be there. Frank, you know what I look like hehe. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Not your first bro date? Lol Nope! Ran into Skinny at Shooting Sports in Moline a few months ago. Unfortunately, I won't be able to make it to Chicago on Thursday. I was really looking forward to going and hearing what the panel had to say to the AG's office, and getting a chance to meet some more IC'ers. Good luck, all. -- Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domin8 Posted October 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM We could all wear empty OWB holsters If this can be legally done in a courtroom, and done silently, it would make for an interesting protest. I am not aware of any rule banning or outlawing empty OC holsters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03rev Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:02 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:02 PM I'll be there. Frank, you know what I look like hehe. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Not your first bro date? Lol Nope! Ran into Skinny at Shooting Sports in Moline a few months ago. -- Frank How did you figure that out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm.stites Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:10 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:10 PM We could all wear empty OWB holsters If this can be legally done in a courtroom, and done silently, it would make for an interesting protest. I am not aware of any rule banning or outlawing empty OC holsters.common sense would tell you not too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:51 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 01:51 PM Just over 48 hours out, looks like this is likely to be our last bit of excitement until later this month when the GA veto session comes to order. I find it a bit funny ISP released the press release saying instructors can start teaching immediately with so much confusion out there. They must have realized they would not have instructor packets out by Thursday and had to react for the sake of going into orals without training being allowed. Is 20 minutes going to be enough for our side to make their case? So many points to be made and such little time to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domin8 Posted October 1, 2013 at 02:49 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 02:49 PM We could all wear empty OWB holsters If this can be legally done in a courtroom, and done silently, it would make for an interesting protest. I am not aware of any rule banning or outlawing empty OC holsters.common sense would tell you not too.Although I agree, Civil Disobedience may have something to argue about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatty Posted October 1, 2013 at 02:55 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 02:55 PM Is 20 minutes going to be enough for our side to make their case? So many points to be made and such little time to do it.That's plenty of time. Our entire argument boils down to one basic point: Moore held that a flat ban on carrying firearms in public is unconstitutional, and currently there is still a flat ban on carrying firearms in public in Illinois because it is impossible to obtain a license to carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 1, 2013 at 04:25 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 04:25 PM It should be very interesting watching Mr. Berlow (yeah Triebel got the boot heh) get grilled by the panel. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 1, 2013 at 11:40 PM Share Posted October 1, 2013 at 11:40 PM Nope! Ran into Skinny at Shooting Sports in Moline a few months ago. -- Frank How did you figure that out? Well, I saw this skinny, scholarly fellow in the corner. I walked up to him and said, "SkinnyB82, I presume." J/K!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 2, 2013 at 12:42 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 12:42 AM It should be very interesting watching Mr. Berlow (yeah Triebel got the boot heh) get grilled by the panel. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 So will they use booting Triebel as part of their defense? Or did they boot him because he's likely to muck it up? Think you said he was like $58k per year so couldn't have been a trimming the fat decision lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:20 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:20 AM Our good friend Karl will not be presenting orals this time around. Berlow filed the Rule 34(e) notice that he will be presenting orals way back on the third of September. Shame, I was not in attendance last year, I was really looking forward to watching him try to and answer questions for which there is no answer Mr. Clifford W. Berlow, who is actually QUALIFIED to handle this as my Google Fu has discovered several civil appeals that he has handled, also earned both his BA and JD from a school that's a bit more familiar than Triebel's alma mater of Chapman University. Berlow went to Northwestern. Even more interestingly, his wife is an attorney at, wait for it...none other than Chicago's pro bono law firm Jenner & Block where she is an associate in the "Litigation Department" where she specializes in, ah yes you guessed it, litigation and also white collar crime (which could come in very handy for...well, damn near every politician in Chicago) Who wants to play a game called "Who's got the bigger paycheck" hmm? Karl Triebel's salary is even larger than Berlow's, $53,508 for Karl and $50,800 for Cliff. New briefs filed lately. CA7 granted a motion filed by Shepard today. Counsel filed a motion to take judicial notice regarding the, ahem, change in the ISP timeline for when applications will be made available. When the appeal was originally filed, the ISP plainly stated "by" January 5, 2014. Now, applications "will be available in early January, 2014.” Charles Cooper felt compelled to notify the Court of this "minor" change and FRE permits judicial notice when things like this happen as in changing the rules of the game while the game is still being played. I'm not even gonna bother reading the 2 page piece of garbage filed in response followed by 42 pages of more garbage (see below) but one of those pages is a screen grab of the "Instructor Registry" showing 757 instructor approvals and the remainder of that consists of the approved curriculum list (which makes me question Berlow's competence as an attorney, to so stupidly submit that...unbelievable) along with cover pages and his signature. I'll attach the motion, response, and order and Berlow submitted Judge St. Eve's memorandum and order dismissing Queen v. Alvarez as moot as "additional authority" and the Court granted the State permission to use that. The first two pages are the load of crap that Berlow wrote to the panel's Clerk. All relevant filings below. Order granting Plaintiffs'-Appellants' Motion to Take Judicial Notice which was just granted today 10/1Order.Granting.MTTJN.35.1.pdf Motion and Exhibit (Screenshot of ISP Website hehe) - Filed on 9/25Plaintiffs-Appellants.Motion.to.Take.Judicial.Notice.DE30.1.pdfPlaintiffs-Appellants.Exhibit.ISP.Press.Release.DE30.2.pdf State's Response, filed on 9/30, drafted by Berlow...yes, the ENTIRE list the ISP released last night...including duplicates, "None Listed," the approved curriculum without the approved instructor, etc. Appellants should've filed a reply in response with a screen grab of "1400 Approved Instructors by 5 pm on 9/30" heh:Response.to.MTTJN.35.4.pdf Citation of Additional Authority (just read the first two pages):Appellees.Citation.of.Additional.Authority.DE33.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:40 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:40 AM Thanks Skinny. I don't see any updates in the Queen v. Alvarez thread, and a Google search came up short. Seems from your comment above that Queen v. Alvarez was dismissed as moot? http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=37608&st=60 I wonder if it would be helpful to get any updated documents added to the Queen thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:45 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:45 AM Ya I wasn't aware but hasn't been keeping up with it. I'm more than happy to update the thread but it seems Judge St. Eve believes that the FCCA cures the defective law. That's not what the IL SC said in Aguilar (void ab initio) but hey who cares Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:50 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:50 AM From the Alvarez thread: On 05/09/2013, a class action complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Andre Queen v Alvarez and Berlin, 13 cv 03483. The complaint essentially seeks to enforce the Moore ruling. [i looked but could not find another thread on this case]. So the relevance to the Shepard case is, the Alvarez suit was filed prior to the passage of FCCA. At that time, the version of UUW and AUUW which do NOT have the conceal carry exception were in force. And the Illinois supreme court in Aguilar struck portions of that version (not the current one) of UUW/AUUW as unconsitutional under 2A. So it seems this supplemental authority the state is bringing via Alvarez has already been overturned by the Illinois supreme court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:52 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:52 AM They were approving instructors just to approve them and then removing them. Shows they were trying to pad the numbers to look good, they proved their point with the screen grab all about what they've done. Ask Maxcapp about that, they approved him before realizing they couldn't do a mental health check on Missouri residents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:52 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:52 AM Hm, I just realized that Aguilar is an Illinois supreme court case, while Alvarez is a federal district court case. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:53 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:53 AM Yup that was exactly my line of reasoning as well or as I like to call it, "The Reverse Paul Castigliano" hehe. "The IL SC has ruled contradictory to the federal district court...." Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:57 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 02:57 AM I'm sorry for my ignorance, but doesn't the federal district court trump the Illinois supreme court? And in that case, wouldn't Alvarez, a federal district court case, being dismissed as moot, hurt us, since (if my understanding is right) the federal district court has more authority than the Illinois supreme court (which did us a favor striking UUW as unconstitutional)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 2, 2013 at 03:15 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 03:15 AM The IL SC court ruling is binding over a federal district courts interpreting state law under diversity jurisdiction. She even cited Aguilar in her memorandum. This is quite vexing as diversity of citizenship isn't just U.S. citizens but this was seeking to certify a class of FOID card holders yada yada. Diversity jurisdiction is a part of subject-matter jurisdiction. She addressed this. "Because a 'flat ban on carrying ready-touse guns outside the home' is no longer the law in Illinois, Plaintiffs’ lawsuit is now moot" Oh really can I carry outside the home, legally? No. "In order for the State of Illinois to establish 'reasonable limitations, consistent with public safety,' as the Seventh Circuit desired it to do, it was left to the state to decide how to move forward. The district court’s decision in Shepard is thorough and well-reasoned and the Court adopts its reasoning" Left the state to decide how to move forward? Really? It takes 210 days to figure that out? She really has no idea what went on between December and June. Like the ILGA was deciding how to best serve us. Judge St. Eve went right through the same cookie cutter crap filed in ILSD and parroted off Stiehl's legal reasoning and icing on the cake is the part about Alvarez and Berlin being improper defendants. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockerXX Posted October 2, 2013 at 04:40 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 04:40 AM IMO the recent filing by the State are the same snubbing their nose at the courts attitude that they have played time and time again on 2nd issues, but this time they stepped it up and brought in the ISP err Romper Room Gang and a purple crayon to the debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 2, 2013 at 06:05 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 06:05 AM Yeah I have to agree. That or the attorney handling the case is actually THAT incompetent. Going from Triebel to Berlow, not a step in the right direction. No direction, maybe. Wrong direction, debatable. Right direction, not a chance. I can't imagine being a federal appellate court judge, or any judge for that matter and seeing that gaggle of mess when I'm preparing for arguments. I can only imagine what the clerks think about the ISP much less the AG's office after seeing that "Exhibit." I doubt the judges have read it yet. I just CANNOT believe that he submitted the entire thing haha I'm truly in awe because that...whatever it is wouldn't have made it into the filings otherwise. As a judge I'd be thinking "OK, almost 10 months later and they have THIS? Anything else nope just this AND it's 21 days late?" Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockerXX Posted October 2, 2013 at 07:16 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 07:16 AM I can't imagine being a federal appellate court judge, or any judge for that matter and seeing that gaggle of mess when I'm preparing for arguments. I can only imagine what the clerks think about the ISP much less the AG's office after seeing that "Exhibit." I doubt the judges have read it yet. My girlfriend works in risk management, seeing stuff like this bring back memories of when she worked for a pharmaceutical company, they had this guy they dubbed the 'cereal box plaintiff' every couple of years he would file a pro se wrongful death suit against the company on behalf of his deceased wife... He would show up in court with piles of used cereal boxes stuffed full of irrelevant unorganized paperwork and who knows what else, all while spewing the same drivel he spewed in his previous attempts to sue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoadyRunner Posted October 2, 2013 at 11:22 AM Share Posted October 2, 2013 at 11:22 AM Further evidence that many consider the flat ban still in effect.. This from 'The Association of Corporate Counsel' - just a couple of weeks ago. http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=41fe6f0c-8d5e-4d45-bd1a-526418493331 "This mean that until the Illinois licensing board actually begins issuing licenses to carry concealed firearms, Illinois employees remain prohibited from doing so, irrespective of any license they may have obtained in other states." [purple]Our side should have these guys testify...[/] Also, a gross misinterpretation of the parking lot provision "That said, there are a litany of locations where concealed weapons remain prohibited (including parking areas), such as the following....". Then a list of all prohibited places, like parks,transit etc. Fun times ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.