-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
St. Louis Zoo: communication log + TRO filing/status + legal/financial help needed
- Thread starter BB62
- Start date
Just got back to Cincinnati at 2AM this morning. I'm working my way through e-mails, contribution notifications, etc. right now.
I will post an update about the depositions when I'm allowed. :cuss:
Once again I will reiterate my sincere appreciation to Jane C. Hogan, OUR attorney.
In the meanwhile, for those who may have missed my latest **case status update and request for funds** (because of off-topic and non-contributory posts), please read this:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?133743-Case-status-update-request-for-funds
I will post an update about the depositions when I'm allowed. :cuss:
Once again I will reiterate my sincere appreciation to Jane C. Hogan, OUR attorney.
In the meanwhile, for those who may have missed my latest **case status update and request for funds** (because of off-topic and non-contributory posts), please read this:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?133743-Case-status-update-request-for-funds
:lol:
Well, as for a 'long term relationship', the good news is that I hoped that I'd be able to find a capable attorney with whom I had good chemistry - and my hopes were fulfilled with Ms. Hogan.
And yes, the creaky and unpredictable wheels of justice are far from my favorite thing. Fortunately, I have other things that keep me busy, and friends in distant states!
Well, as for a 'long term relationship', the good news is that I hoped that I'd be able to find a capable attorney with whom I had good chemistry - and my hopes were fulfilled with Ms. Hogan.
And yes, the creaky and unpredictable wheels of justice are far from my favorite thing. Fortunately, I have other things that keep me busy, and friends in distant states!
No guns at the St. Louis Zoo, judge rules <grrr>
Thanks to one of my Facebook friends for the link.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_7996981c-e7f2-5092-a900-0fc82f6f13f9.html
"His lawyer, Jane Hogan, said Monday that she and Smith disagree with the decision and will appeal it to a higher court. She said Moriarty has made an "overly broad" interpretation of the state's gun laws.
To say that it's a school or an amusement park, then any McDonald's that has a playground would be an amusement park because they have rides and sell food," Hogan said. "The legislature has given us no guidance here. When they say 'amusement park,' we don't know what they mean because they use 'place of amusement' in other statutes. So we have to assume they mean something different."
I may have more to say, depending on the guidance Ms. Hogan gives me.
Link from STLPD to decision: http://www.stltoday.com/news/multim...pdf_4d926e9e-3ef2-5232-b009-127b453266cc.html
A link to the decision can be found within the article, and I'll see about asking someone to post a separate link here on OCDO.
Thanks to one of my Facebook friends for the link.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_7996981c-e7f2-5092-a900-0fc82f6f13f9.html
"His lawyer, Jane Hogan, said Monday that she and Smith disagree with the decision and will appeal it to a higher court. She said Moriarty has made an "overly broad" interpretation of the state's gun laws.
To say that it's a school or an amusement park, then any McDonald's that has a playground would be an amusement park because they have rides and sell food," Hogan said. "The legislature has given us no guidance here. When they say 'amusement park,' we don't know what they mean because they use 'place of amusement' in other statutes. So we have to assume they mean something different."
I may have more to say, depending on the guidance Ms. Hogan gives me.
Link from STLPD to decision: http://www.stltoday.com/news/multim...pdf_4d926e9e-3ef2-5232-b009-127b453266cc.html
A link to the decision can be found within the article, and I'll see about asking someone to post a separate link here on OCDO.
APPEALS COURT DECISION
As posted to my Facebook page:
I would like to express my unending appreciation to Missouri attorney Jane C. Hogan, formerly of St. Louis, who agreed to represent me, and essence all legal gun owners, in this case. I simply can't fully express my full appreciation to her for her skills and determination.
Similarly, I would like to express my boundless appreciation to those individuals from Missouri and elsewhere who have donated in order that we could challenge the Zoo in court. THANK YOU.
** THE MATTER IS NOT YET CONCLUDED, though **
Background: I have been and remain subject to a restraining order sought by the Zoo in June of 2015 because of my plans to hold a handguns-only open carry "Firearms Right Challenge" at the Zoo because of what I felt/feel were their illegal 'no guns' signage. (it's a long story, which I will link to in the first comment following this post)
Rather than respond to my repeated attempts to cite the law behind their signage, the Zoo sought and received a restraining order prohibiting me and anyone else with knowledge of the order from having a firearm on Zoo property. This forced me to either accept the order, or challenge it.
I expect the zoo will appeal the ruling, which reversed and remanded the lower court ruling "for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
Because it's ongoing, I'm still restricted as to what I can say about things, but I'll try to answer things which I can, or refer interested people to other resources for answers.
Again, a sincere and deep THANK YOU again to Jane and to those who donated to advance this cause.
https://www.courts.mo.gov/file/ED/Opinion_ED105784.pdf
************
.
.
I will post the appeals court filings if someone can host them. If you're able to do so, please message me and I'll send the files to you for that purpose.
Thank you.
As posted to my Facebook page:
I would like to express my unending appreciation to Missouri attorney Jane C. Hogan, formerly of St. Louis, who agreed to represent me, and essence all legal gun owners, in this case. I simply can't fully express my full appreciation to her for her skills and determination.
Similarly, I would like to express my boundless appreciation to those individuals from Missouri and elsewhere who have donated in order that we could challenge the Zoo in court. THANK YOU.
** THE MATTER IS NOT YET CONCLUDED, though **
Background: I have been and remain subject to a restraining order sought by the Zoo in June of 2015 because of my plans to hold a handguns-only open carry "Firearms Right Challenge" at the Zoo because of what I felt/feel were their illegal 'no guns' signage. (it's a long story, which I will link to in the first comment following this post)
Rather than respond to my repeated attempts to cite the law behind their signage, the Zoo sought and received a restraining order prohibiting me and anyone else with knowledge of the order from having a firearm on Zoo property. This forced me to either accept the order, or challenge it.
I expect the zoo will appeal the ruling, which reversed and remanded the lower court ruling "for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
Because it's ongoing, I'm still restricted as to what I can say about things, but I'll try to answer things which I can, or refer interested people to other resources for answers.
Again, a sincere and deep THANK YOU again to Jane and to those who donated to advance this cause.
https://www.courts.mo.gov/file/ED/Opinion_ED105784.pdf
************
.
.
I will post the appeals court filings if someone can host them. If you're able to do so, please message me and I'll send the files to you for that purpose.
Thank you.
