~ Shameless Nonsense and Bullsh*t ~
PERMANENT INJURIES
"Certainly, we hoped Judge Madenspacher would view the documents the same way we did. He did not. He had a different interpretation. I believe on appeal, an appellate court might take a different view," said Lancaster County attorney Howard Kelin.
WGAL-TV (click here).
I think any judge outside of Lancaster County would take a different view. This is really a shameless decision by Judge Madenspacher that needs to be appealed. Items in “bold” below are quotes from his opinion which is available here.
However, the three (3) witnesses who were most familiar with financing all testified that budget meant balanced budget. It was most aptly put by Mr. Edelman when he stated that if the word budget meant unbalanced budget that would be a ridiculous interpretation given the scope of this document and the requirements of the marketplace.
Is that so, Judge Madenspacher? Ridiculous? Apparently you’ve forgotten Mayor Gray’s recent two week scramble to find $20 million dollars. Do you remember all the times the project has been declared "dead" for lack of money? I’m sure that Mr. Edelman of Stevens & Lee knows what a balanced budget is. His law firm has received over $6 million dollars from the Plaintiff’s with no explanation of the charges.
The second criterion, that an injunction is necessary to avoid an injury that cannot be compensated by damages, has been met. The Court’s analysis here is the same as in its order of July 24, 2006. If there is no injunction then there is no refinancing. If there is no refinancing the project cannot be built. The Court cannot imagine any way to calculate any potential damages if Plaintiffs are ultimately proven to be correct in their position.
Why is the court concerned with whether the project is built or not? You cannot imagine “any way to calculate the damages if Plaintiffs are ultimately proven to be correct?” Nonsense and bullsh*t. Get a new job then, Judge.
“The final criterion is that greater injury will result from refusing rather than granting the relief requested.”
Who is the greater injury to, Judge Madenspacher? What is this great “injury” that will be suffered? The use of over $100 million dollars of the public’s money to build a white elephant?
The Court notes that Mr. Ebersole’s testimony as to potential operating losses of the Convention Center differ substantially from those of the Plaintiffs’ evidence, however, the Court does not need to do any analysis as to which projections are correct. True, if the operating losses of the Convention Center are greater than Plaintiffs’ forecast, then hard business decisions will have to be made. It is also true, as stated in Defendants’ brief that a future Board of Commissions may face a Hobson’s choice, requiring a hard political decision. This Court cannot be concerned with that.
So which is it, Judge Madenspacher? Why is the court concerned whether the project is built or not if you can’t concern yourself about potential operating losses and future decisions of the Board of Commissions? Why even bring it up?
This is a disgraceful opinion that needs to be appealed and Madenspacher’s ties to the Plaintiffs need to be investigated. Should he have removed himself from this case?
Please check back tomorrow…
