When Jonathan Bowers (a fifth-year UO journalism student) appealed two right-of-way vacations by the City of Eugene with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, I was able to piggy-back on his appeal with no upfront cost and no financial risk and so I did. [The two alley vacations, in conjunction with 19 tax lots acquired by fraud, eminent domain or outright theft provide the footprint for the $245+ million, 12.5K seat, 400K square foot monstrosity known as fanconi’s arena.]
When Mr. Bowers appealed LUBA’s affirmation of the City of Eugene’s decisions to the Oregon Court of Appeals, it was not possible for me to piggy-back on his appeal. I would have had to pay ~$300 upfront. Also, if the appeal is rejected, the petitioner has to pay the respondents’ legal costs. Since I estimated the probability of winning an appeal of the LUBA decisions to be approximately zero percent, I chose not to join Mr. Bowers for round 2.
While Mr. Bowers did not extend me the courtesy of sending me a copy of his brief submitted to the Oregon Court of Appeals, the Appellate Division of the Oregon Attorney General's Office did. Today I received a copy of the respondent’s brief regarding Court of Appeals Case CA A141020, prepared by Attorney General John Kroger (the nominee of both the Democratic and Republican Parties of the State of Oregon in 2008), Acting Solicitor General Erika L. Hadlock and Patrick M. Ebbett, Assistant Attorney General.
While I vehemently disagree with the conclusion of the 10 page brief and find the logic infuriatingly invalid, the brief is clearly written and professionally argued. The clarity and conciseness of the brief stands in sharp contrast to the legal drivel produced by Jerome Lidz of Harrang, Harass, Hassle and Hoodwink.
Why in the world does AG Kroger want to replace the competent Ms. Hadlock with the incompetent Mr. Lidz?
