View Single Post
Old October 26, 2011, 10:08 PM   #135
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
I simply can't believe this Judge! See the last entry (#130) of the Docket.

Quote:
MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Status hearing held on 10/26/2011. Fact Discovery ordered closed by 4/20/2012. Dispositive motions with supporting memoranda due by 7/13/2012. Responses due by 8/10/2012. Replies due by 8/24/2012. Ruling will be made by mail. Status hearing set for 4/23/2012 at 09:00 AM. to inform the Court if the parties would like to engage in settlement negotiations. Defendant's oral motion to answer the complaint by 11/16/2011 is granted. The Court denies the entry of a preliminary injunction by the plaintiff.Advised in open court notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 10/26/2011)
Not only is this Judge denying the PI, she is going to let Chicago stall for another year!

ETA:
Quote:
For the foregoing reasons, the City’s motion to dismiss the case as moot is denied. By September 30, 2011, the parties shall file an agreed proposed injunction order, or separate proposed injunction orders if they cannot agree. Ezell must file her amended complaint by October 15, 2011. The parties shall appear for a status on October 26, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the schedule going forward.
That was a direct order. Chicago would not and did not comply. Yet, they are not in contempt? Of course not. The Judge never meant a word of what she wrote, after all!

So, between now and the 16th of November, should Chicago once again, change their code, will that necessitate yet another amended complaint? And another 30 days for response? Ad infinitum?

At this point, I suggest that both Chicago and the district Judge are acting in bad faith.

Last edited by Al Norris; October 26, 2011 at 10:32 PM. Reason: more data/rants
Al Norris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04557 seconds with 7 queries