Or, the flip side (for those who read the Court of Appeals opinion) is that Judge Blackwood pretty much ignored their ruling, which was to order the court to determine the facts and rule on that basis. What he found was that yes, the alleged violations did occur and were quantified, but in his opinion, it didn't matter enough to order a new election.
That's really no different than not knowing the facts, but ruling that they wouldn't matter anyway (which was Blackwood's first ruling).
I still don't understand why the County Attorney isn't representing the election commission, since we have one on full-time salary now. If that were the case, it should cost next to nothing.
First of all, a frivolous law suit has no merit. This would have to be proven. If the Court of Appeals thought the lawsuit had no merit they would have dismissed the appeal. Instead, they said if the allegations could be proven than a new election could be granted.
As far as the Law Director is concerned he would argue that the Election Commission is not a county office. Now, if it is not a county office why is the county defending it and paying the attorney? The law director should have been the attorney to argue this case IMHO. Only County Commission can tell you why they chose to hire outside counsel. It would have been more cost effective to let the law director do it. The fees charged by the attorney who argued the case IMHO were a little excessive. He never even showed up at the Court of Appeals the day of the hearing.
First of all, a frivolous law suit has no merit. This would have to be proven. If the Court of Appeals thought the lawsuit had no merit they would have dismissed the appeal.
This is precisely correct. The case is clearly not frivolous.
Now that the data has been gathered but no action to resolve taken, they may see fit to make an actual ruling on the case in this second appeal.
I think at some point the law has to be clarified. It might take this to do it.
Yep, clarifying the remedy would be a giant step.
Oh, I don't disagree with NM's assessment. I was befuddled at how Blackwood came to his decision and think he made a mistake. But I'm not going to be surprised at the letters to the editor that will probably start showing up expressing exasperation with Stuart's repeat actions. There's already two such comments on the Oak Ridger's on-line edition.
BTW... the comment section on the on-line edition has led me to wonder... have you ever noticed that OakRidgerX's comments on the news stories are usually written such that they make sense, but his/her comments on the Forum are usually a verbal nightmare? Are these two different people, or what?
BTW... the comment section on the on-line edition has led me to wonder... have you ever noticed that OakRidgerX's comments on the news stories are usually written such that they make sense, but his/her comments on the Forum are usually a verbal nightmare? Are these two different people, or what?
I think his forum posts, since he is the only one posting usually, are his original thoughts and that is why they seem so befuddled.
By the way, you should use his full name OakRidger-X since negative is his middle name.
I read the comments and most of them seem to be of the same opinion that we have to clean up elections in our country but the negatives looked like people who could have a personal interest in not having a new election.
I think his forum posts, since he is the only one posting usually, are his original thoughts and that is why they seem so befuddled.
That could explain it. It's like the time I ate lunch in a local restaurant and, because of the restaurant's small size, couldn't help but overhear part of the conversation going on at the table next to me. It wasn't long before I realized one of the participants was Mushroom Cloud (plus, the "Smartyville, Tennessee" sticker on his wheelchair also gave him away). What I heard coming out of his mouth was actually coherant, nothing like his posts which are more like stream of conciousness (gawd, I hated reading that stuff in Literature class!)