Friday, June 21, 2019

CitySt.PaulhiringOursideCouncilOutRageousFeesBassfordasBriggsOptedOut



Mark

https://www.bassford.com/people/mark-bradfordile

 R. Bradford

SHAREHOLDER
  •  
Practice Groups
Appellate Practice, Commercial Litigation, Insurance Coverage, Professional Liability/Claim Prevention#R
eseach Cases :RES 19-1082    Version: 1
Name:
Appointment of Bassford Remele as Special Counsel in matter of Bruce Clark, et al. v. City of Saint Paul

Referendum Update
 

During the past two weeks, a number of events have transpired within the lawsuit.

The law firm of Briggs & Morgan appeared on behalf of the city and filed a Notice of Appeal.  The city also filed a motion seeking accelerated review of its appeal by the Minnesota Supreme Court.

The city also filed a motion to be heard by Judge Castro, seeking to extend Judge Castro's stay beyond the June 30, 2019, deadline set in his May 30, 2019 Order.

On June 18, 2019, Briggs withdrew as counsel for the city, citing a recently discovered conflict of interest.

On June 20, 2019, the Bassford Remele firm appeared as the new counsel for the city. (The city continues to be represented by the City Attorney, as well).

On June 21, 2019, the city filed a Motion for Expedited Consideration of its Petition for Accelerated Review.

All of the court filings can be viewed via the links found on the Referendum Court Filings page in our website Resources.

 
 

You can contact us:

info@stpaultrash.com
Call or Text: (651) 300-7808
www.stpaultrash.com


Type:ResolutionStatus:Agenda Ready
In control:City Council
Final action:
Title:Appointing the firm of Bassford Remele under the direction of Mark R. Bradford as special counsel representing the City of Saint Paul in the matter of Bruce Clark, et al. v. City of Saint Paul.
Sponsors:Amy Brendmoen   
AmyBrendmoenakaNeskeakaHahn,MuslinBusuri,MayorMelvinCarter
Attachments:1. Administrative Code 3.02, 2. Bassford Remele Engagement Letter, 3. Bassford Remele Signed Acknolwedgment, 4. Financial Analysis
 Add New Comment
Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
6/21/2019 9:43 AM
CandidateSharonAnderson
AgainstNotice of Objection to any outside Council, Fees are outrageous, City is self insured, therefore either eliminate City Attorneys http://lying-lawyers.blogspot.com




Sunday, September 23, 2018

JohnGentryUSSC

https://www.real.video/5834021454001

September 2018 Education Panel media clip from DC this month : WeThePeopleVs.TheFiftyStates
With John Gentry at the helm .
REAL.VIDEO
Education panel on family court tyranny, Washington, D.C., 9-11-18 Organized by: https://www.4thechildren.center/ John Gentry is co-host on Kirk's Law Corner and administrator of: WE THE PEOPLE v. THE FIFTY UNITED STATES https://www.facebook.com/groups/382091295593083/




NEED PRAYERS & POSITIVE ENERGY
Tomorrow, for both of my cases before the Sup Ct of the U.S., determination will be made as to whether or not they will hear my cases and grant certiorari (reveiw). If you pray..., pray they do the right thing, or alternatively spend a few moments in hope, that they will do the right thing. Perhaps the positive energy will sway a majority vote.
Below are the questions I've presented to our highest court. If these cases are heard, the results can be a meaningful step toward reform and re institution of fair due process.
Case against bad actor judge:
1. Whether constitutionally guaranteed rights are usurped when they are not enforceable in either state courts or federal courts, under false cloak of sovereign and judicial immunity even when a plaintiff seeks only equitable relief.
Case against state & bad actor attorneys:
1. Whether a state’s sovereign immunity is vitiated when the state government is no longer republican in character or form.
2. Whether a citizen of a state has a right to effect reform of the state government through suit in federal court, when a state’s constitution expressly guarantees its citizens an unalienable and indefeasible right to reform the government in such manner as they may think proper and the imperative for reform is undeniable.
3. Whether attorneys are held above the law when state and federal courts wrongfully abrogate jurisdiction, and wrongfully deny fair due process, in cases alleging civil and criminal law and rights violations perpetrated by licensed attorneys.
LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, www.taxthemax.blogspot.com 

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.
Ch.119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this "Message,"
including attachments, may contain the originator's
proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies
recipients Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based
actions. Authorized carriers of this message
shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients.  See: Quon
v. Arch
Files are out there