Coming to Rest on a Hornet's Nest

Late last month I published an article in this space, reporting that I'd stumbled upon a filing in The US District Court, entitled Moyes v. Ogden, et al., wherein our clownish local citizen-activist-type, Don Quixote, aka Mitch Moyes, and two other citizens of Ogden, were seeking injunctive relief and damages, with the object of delaying or stopping the downtown Recreation Center project. I remarked in a later update that I'd since met with one of the plaintiffs to review the complaint, and opined that these plaintiffs' "action" would be quickly and unceremoniously dismissed, because their ineptly-drawn pleading fails to set forth any cause of action against any of the named defendants. I further expressed my hope that the assigned federal judge in the case, Hon. Judge Ted Stewart, wouldn't impose heavy sanctions against these plaintiffs upon dismissal of this facially-inadequate filing, which appeared to me to be entirely frivolous. It appears, however, based on new information, that these plaintiffs now face a far greater array of problems with respect to this lawsuit than even I imagined.

Yesterday afternoon, I received a report, from a reliable source within Ogden City government, that the named defendants have now retained an eminent Salt Lake City law firm to vigorously represent their interests in this lawsuit. This law firm, an experienced federal litigation specialist, has reportedly recommended, and agreed to pursue, if necessary, an aggressive course of litigation, which will include not only the defensive action that I predicted earlier, but also the assertion of additional claims for further affirmative relief against these plaintiffs -- to include a very substantial claim for money damages. My source did not provide all the details, but I'll logically infer that defendants' counsel is now "upping the ante," and is in the process of preparing a separate counter-complaint in this matter, to possibly allege claims against these plaintiffs for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, or other similar tortious misconduct.

If that is indeed the case, then it would seem to me at this juncture that our three local knights-errant have blindly blundered into a situation where they find themselves sitting directly atop a virtual legal hornet's nest. These plaintiffs are in federal court, without even so much as the benefit of legal representation, and are thus highly vulnerable, especially in a circumstance where thay will be faced with serious opposition from an experienced team of professional litigators. What's important for these plaintiffs to recognize is that federal courts are a venue with a pronounced dog-eat-dog atmosphere, even in the best of circumstances, where all parties are adequately represented -- which is clearly not the situation here. To compound the plaintiffs' problem, federal judges take a very dim view of frivolous "recreational" litigation generally, and are usually inclined to deal with it harshly and punitively. To further complicate things, their case is assigned to Judge Stewart, an experienced federal judge with a reputation for being particularly "old school." Judge Stewart isn't someone who'd be fairly characterized as a "bleeding heart," in other words. He's definitely not the type of judge who can be expected to take these people under his wing because of their obvious legal incompetence, and it's unlikely that he'll cut these plaintiffs any slack at all. If these plaintiffs desire to "play" in his federal courtroom, you can bet your bottom dollar that Judge Stewart will insist that their performance conform to the same high standards as are practiced by everybody else who appears before him. If they fail to do that, you can expect that they'll suffer the inevitable consequences.

However noble these plaintiffs may have imagined their own motives and goals to have been at the beginning, these people appear to be now hopelessly outmatched. The hammer appears ready to fall on these plaintiffs. When it does, it'll fall down hard and fast; and these plaintiffs will feel the pain in their wallets, among other places.

If any of these plaintiffs had the sense that God gave a goose, they'd drop this lawsuit right now. They're already well over their heads. At minimum though, common sense and good judgment would at least seem to dictate that they consult a neutral local attorney, to explain to them how really lame their lawsuit really is. These people have gotten all caught up in their cause; and like all zealots who are mindlessly locked into their "stuggle," they seem to have lost all reasonable perspective in this situation. Good judgment comes from experience, of course, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. Let's hope for the sake of these ordinary citizen plantiffs, that they won't have to develop good judgment "the hard way."

If my source is correct (and I believe it is) these plaintiffs are presently faced with insurmountable technical pleading and proof problems, among other things. My perception is that they have absolutely no idea what they're up against. I'd hate to see any of these plaintiffs get hurt; but hurt is what they'll soon be, unless they immediately undertake some sensible corrective action. As the situation apparently now stands, they've come to rest on a hornet's nest; and they're sure to soon experience the hornet's sting, barring a quick and circumspect re-evaluation of their present predicament. An immediate exit strategy would be by far the best option.

That's my opinion; and I'm sticking to it.

Comments, anyone?

06/10 5:05 p.m. update: My source reveals that the defendants' attornies will "stand down" until the defendants' Motion to Dismiss can be argued before Judge Stewart, and that they'll be called off permanently if the lawsuit is dismissed, which is the result that anybody with at least half a brain would expect. I've independently confirmed with the Federal Distict Court of Utah that such a motion has been filed with the Court, and that argument on this motion is calendered for 06/24/05. This would seem to be an ideal point for these nitwit plaintiffs to make a graceful and painless exit, and I strongly suggest that they do just that.

I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned, these amateuristic dopes are certainly the last ones on the planet whom I'd select to represent my interests as an Ogden taxpayer.

I keep hearing a voice in my head repeating the question: Why won't they just GO AWAY?