In the course of arguing that they were "put upon" -- by having to read emails and texts -- and listen to voicemail -- over the '25 King Holiday weekend. . . the lawyers for the drummed-up plaintiffs seem to forget that the city's motion to dismiss has been on file for a full SIX
Similarly, they seem to forget that they still have not provided the actual residential addresses of the purported plaintiffs -- at any time in the last four years.
Being a resident of this city. . . is a prerequisite to filing for reparations, per the city council's own undisputed moving papers.
Long ago, the plaintiffs' lawyers filed what was only a draft, of the city's application papers -- upon which they stake their claims. [The "Draft" stamp appears on every page, as an underlay, BTW.] Tellingly, the plaintiffs have never responded to the city's clear and concise allegation -- that none of these people live in or pay real estate taxes in the city.
Frankly, the time when one could complain -- as a litigator, in federal court -- about having to read an email over the weekend. . . has long past. And I firmly believe the able USDC Judge in Chicago will say so. He is due to rule on the fact that these plaintiffs have never established standing by residence. . . under the city's well-pled dismissal motion.
Finally -- for the plaintiffs to say a motion has "failed" simply because the judge hasn't yet ruled. . . is deeply misleading. This too, the able judge is likely to address -- in his forthcoming ruling. [The fact that the able and busy judge has yet to rule on this motion, all while the plaintiffs have been left out in the cold, literally and figuratively, for almost a year -- should be ample hint to these jokers. . . that their claims are at best. . . specious.] Onward, grinning.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment