Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Md Troopers Assoc #20 & Westminster Md Fire Dept Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Thursday, January 10, 2008

20080110 Judge rules procedural error does not nullify tax increases

Judge rules procedural error does not nullify tax increases.

4:00 PM Thursday, January 10, 2008

Carroll County Circuit Court Judge Thomas F. Stansfield delivered his decision shortly after 3 PM this afternoon in the special session lawsuit: Case No.: 06-C-07-0496648: Michael D Smigiel Sr, et al vs Peter Franchot, et al., which had sought to invalidate the legislation passed in the Maryland General Assembly’s 22-day special session that ended November 19.

The judge decided that the procedural error during the special session did not rise to the level of nullifying the tax increases.

I’ll post more about the ruling once I get a chance to read the ruling more thoroughly.

Update on Smigiel v Franchot decision

I put the text of the decision up on www.kevindayhoff.net. You can find it here: 20080110 Smigiel v Franchot C-07-49648 (Summary Judgment) Text

It’s a really good read. In addition to this post, 20080110 Judge rules procedural error does not nullify tax increases, I have a longer piece up on the Westminster Eagle: http://news.mywebpal.com/index.cfm?pnpid=978

EAGLE ALERT: Judge rules procedural error does not nullify tax increases

In reading the text, be sure to not miss:

"Although the Court is inclined to agree with the Plaintiffs regarding the reprehensible nature in which the Legislature conducted itself, the remedy they seek in redress is too drastic a notion to accept. The Court can simply not agree that when a technicality in procedure is violated, the entire slate of lawfully enacted legislation should be invalidated."

“Ultimately, this Court is loathe to allow for the relief sought by Plaintiffs inasmuch as it would give rise to a most terrible precedent.”

“While the Court herein holds that the legislation at issue passes constitutional muster, it feels compelled to observe that if the actions presented by way of deposition are business as usual for the General Assembly, the citizens of Maryland deserve far better.”

Kevin Dayhoff 7:45 PM January 10, 2007

Kevin Dayhoff writes from Westminster Maryland USA.

www.kevindayhoff.net

E-mail him at: kdayhoff AT carr.org or kevindayhoff AT gmail.com

His columns and articles appear in The Tentacle - www.thetentacle.com; Westminster Eagle Opinion; www.thewestminstereagle.com, Winchester Report and The Sunday Carroll Eagle – in the Sunday Carroll County section of the Baltimore Sun. Get Westminster Eagle RSS Feed

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.