Just heard that Joe P. lost the south side complex case because he forgot to put the proper court number on the documents. Also all the lawsuits filled by m-7 will all be kicked out of court because a non-attorney cannot represent a corporation. Nice.
Joe was escorted out of the courthouse by 2 sheriffs after throwing papers around in Judge Walsh’s chambers. Joe is banned from coming into the court without having a sheriff with him. Carl kicked Joes A$$.
Aww Stewey dont worry after the original complaints gets kicked by a friendly judge on November 9 I hear that the complaint against the U of S is ready to go. Big Corporations just cant buy parks in pa...ROFLMAO
You are a liar. But your deceitful attitude and false claims can only help to contribute to the mayor's loss on Nov. 8th. So keep them coming. You have nothing to support your statement, nor can you bring forth anyone who witnessed what you have stated. There were several people who were at the courthouse this morning who know what really happened.
What is revealing about your consistently false posts about my husband is that you have nothing to say about the mayor's record. Joe is not running for mayor, however, you seem to feel very threatened by his exposure of inappropriate conduct and fiscal irresponsibility on the part of this administration. The facts and truth stand alone, and if Joe wasn't a public figure promoting the same, the mayor's record would still be his downfall.
The absence of any intelligent debate or supportive facts on your part in this election season speaks volumes to the lack thereof. You are a classic example of the type of footsoldier supporting the current administration, and how lucky for us. Anymore of you out there? Bring them to the front line, we're waiting.
If you stand behind your statements identify yourself, place yourself at the hearing, and name the sheriff's who escorted my husband from the courthouse.
The complaint and injunction have not been thrown out. Joe did not put the wrong number on the action, and the issue of representation was not argued.
I hope you are not the paralegal working for Farrell in City Hall, for we are paying you far too much based on your lack of intelligence and lack of legal knowledge and experience. Perhaps a Pro Se like Joe can teach you a thing or two.
There are to separate cases against the Complex sale although they tried to lump them into one for their own sake. I truly have no idea what happened with regard to one of them. The other I know is on appeal in front of the Commonwealth Court and briefs are due right before or after the election. Now knowing how the Harrisburg network works I dont expect that the plaintiffs will be successful. But one thing I am sure of is that if they are not the U of S will be named as a defendant in no less than three complaints by two individuals and one conservation group in federal court. I have seen the drafts of that complaint. This will be tied up for years and discovery for Fr. Pilarz and the U of S is going to be a very very very ugly and public process. They (you) are not getting that park.
WHAT WAS THE RESULT OF THE HEARING? AND WHY DID YOU NOT POST IT ON YOUR WEBSITE?
What I post on the Scranton Political Times message board is my business. Why did you not post it? Or are you one of the posters who continually harassed the others with stupid, vacuous statements which could never be documented with supportive facts?
The complex will not be sold, and we were not thrown out of court.
I know wrote: WHAT WAS THE RESULT OF THE HEARING? AND WHY DID YOU NOT POST IT ON YOUR WEBSITE? What I post on the Scranton Political Times message board is my business. Why did you not post it? Or are you one of the posters who continually harassed the others with stupid, vacuous statements which could never be documented with supportive facts? The complex will not be sold, and we were not thrown out of court.
Why do you not post the results of the hearing? Your husband is also silent, very intresting. I am sick of the rhetoric and bomb throwing regarding the stealing of the complex, the theft of the complex,etc. The fact of the matter is the city is getting 1.5 million for the fields, putting in a new playground and basketball court, and giving the city 100k for a new lighted softball field. The South Side Complex will also be open from may-september when school is out of session. And don't give me that the U will restrict access. I have read how posters on Joe P's website have used the University library, and I have seen locals on the existing sports fields.
Please, Mr. Phillips, tell me in what federal court the U is going to get sued and under what statute?
With all due respect, my husband and I owe no explanation to anyone on this board about our affairs. If we knew you and respected you that would be a different story. I will tell you that any information about the complex's legal process is public record.
This battle over the complex has taken an unnecessary distasteful course. If the proper process had been followed to include a petition by the city to orphans court, and public hearings, and the sale was approved, it would still be wrong. And even after that the people could still have redress within the government to prevent a sale. In this case, the process was intentionally corrupted and the citizens were maliciously manipulated.
I've been told that you are connected to the U, and I don't know if that is the case, and I really don't care; only to the extent that it would more directly define the scope of my argument against the sale. Basically, the bottom line here for me, is that in south side, the complex is the only sports field that serves the most members of the community, from all ages to all sports. It also is along a trail which offers yet another type of recreation. It has been that way for over 30 years. That part of town needs such a recreational venue.
The people have to have something positive and substantial provided by their government. Otherwise, morale and hope, which is more often than not the driving force for social progress and success, would fade, leaving behind the shells of humanity. Our country offers more than that in terms of expectations. We expect 'no taxation without representation'. We expect the opportunity to enjoy a better standard of living if we so choose. We expect our officials to empathize and represent us accordingly. The people of this community and the people of south side need and deserve and own that park.
The sale price of the park is not at issue. That price was derived from the U's own appraisal service. What we are being offered in return is not an issue, besides $100,000 is peanuts compared to what the field is worth to the U of S, and peanuts in terms of what they are worth and what they should morally be contributing to their community - the city of MFEMFEMF. None of this is the issue. It is a moral question of right and wrong.
