Judge Denies Detroit's Bid to Block Robert Davis' Legal Maneuver in Pistons Suit
Joe Guillen , Detroit Free Press
9:31 p.m. ET July 7, 2017
Detroit Councilwoman Mary Sheffield held a meeting to explain to residents the details behind the funding deal for the new Detroit Pistons arena. Ann Zaniewski/Detroit Free Press
A federal judge's ruling on Friday sets the stage for Robert Davis to continue his legal challenge against the use of public dollars to support the Pistons' move into Little Caesars Arena.
Last week, Davis sought to drop one lawsuit against the arena's public financing to focus on a more recent suit to force a vote on the public funding. The latter lawsuit is against the Detroit Public Schools Community District.
U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith on Friday denied an attempt by city lawyers to block Davis' voluntary dismissal of his first lawsuit.
He applauded the judge's decision and chastised lawyers for the city and the Detroit Downtown Development Authority for wasting taxpayer dollars with a "frivolous" argument against his attempt to dismiss his first lawsuit challenging public financing of the Pistons' move.
"These lawyers are not doing the citizens any justice. They're wasting resources," Davis said.
John Roach, a spokesman for Mayor Mike Duggan, declined to comment on Friday's ruling. Duggan is chairman of the DDA.
“We were not surprised by the judge’s decision,” according to a statement from Detroit Economic Growth Corp. Chief Financial Officer and interim President and CEO Glen Long Jr. “We still expect to prevail on the merits of the case — no matter in what case or court they are presented. We were also very pleased that the Downtown Development Authority’s request for sanctions will still be heard, and that the judge has set an aggressive schedule to consider it.”
Davis and City Clerk candidate D. Etta Wilcoxon filed the first federal suit June 1, to block $34.5 million in public funding to support the Pistons' move downtown. They argued the arena project should not be funded with public dollars without a vote of Detroit residents.
Davis has a long history of suing public bodies in Detroit and Highland Park for violating government transparency laws. Some public officials have criticized Davis' suits as frivolous, but Davis disputes such characterizations.
On Thursday, DDA attorney David Fink argued before Goldsmith that he believes Davis attempted to "circumvent the judicial process" by dropping one lawsuit and pursuing another. Fink argued Davis wanted to drop his first lawsuit because he feared an unfavorable ruling by the judge.
But, Goldsmith wrote in his order Friday, federal rules of civil procedure allow such a maneuver.
"A plaintiff’s intent to avoid what he believes to be an impending unfavorable ruling on a motion to dismiss is not bad faith; rather, the rule contemplates exactly this sort of strategic escape hatch," the judge wrote.
The DDA also argued that Davis sought to voluntarily dismiss the case only to draw out his other case against DPSCD and further threaten the public financing being sought to move the Pistons downtown.
But the DPSCD case has unique characteristics and does not simply mirror the case Davis sought to dismiss, Goldsmith wrote. One notable difference is the DPSCD case raises questions about the school district's authority to put an issue on the ballot.
Attorneys for the DDA wanted all legal issues resolved before Tuesday when the NBA's Board of Governors is slated to vote on the Pistons' move.
The next step now will involve attorneys discussing on Monday when to schedule a hearing on the DPSCD lawsuit.
9:31 p.m. ET July 7, 2017
Detroit Councilwoman Mary Sheffield held a meeting to explain to residents the details behind the funding deal for the new Detroit Pistons arena. Ann Zaniewski/Detroit Free Press
A federal judge's ruling on Friday sets the stage for Robert Davis to continue his legal challenge against the use of public dollars to support the Pistons' move into Little Caesars Arena.
Last week, Davis sought to drop one lawsuit against the arena's public financing to focus on a more recent suit to force a vote on the public funding. The latter lawsuit is against the Detroit Public Schools Community District.
U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith on Friday denied an attempt by city lawyers to block Davis' voluntary dismissal of his first lawsuit.
He applauded the judge's decision and chastised lawyers for the city and the Detroit Downtown Development Authority for wasting taxpayer dollars with a "frivolous" argument against his attempt to dismiss his first lawsuit challenging public financing of the Pistons' move.
"These lawyers are not doing the citizens any justice. They're wasting resources," Davis said.
John Roach, a spokesman for Mayor Mike Duggan, declined to comment on Friday's ruling. Duggan is chairman of the DDA.
“We were not surprised by the judge’s decision,” according to a statement from Detroit Economic Growth Corp. Chief Financial Officer and interim President and CEO Glen Long Jr. “We still expect to prevail on the merits of the case — no matter in what case or court they are presented. We were also very pleased that the Downtown Development Authority’s request for sanctions will still be heard, and that the judge has set an aggressive schedule to consider it.”
Davis and City Clerk candidate D. Etta Wilcoxon filed the first federal suit June 1, to block $34.5 million in public funding to support the Pistons' move downtown. They argued the arena project should not be funded with public dollars without a vote of Detroit residents.
Davis has a long history of suing public bodies in Detroit and Highland Park for violating government transparency laws. Some public officials have criticized Davis' suits as frivolous, but Davis disputes such characterizations.
On Thursday, DDA attorney David Fink argued before Goldsmith that he believes Davis attempted to "circumvent the judicial process" by dropping one lawsuit and pursuing another. Fink argued Davis wanted to drop his first lawsuit because he feared an unfavorable ruling by the judge.
But, Goldsmith wrote in his order Friday, federal rules of civil procedure allow such a maneuver.
"A plaintiff’s intent to avoid what he believes to be an impending unfavorable ruling on a motion to dismiss is not bad faith; rather, the rule contemplates exactly this sort of strategic escape hatch," the judge wrote.
The DDA also argued that Davis sought to voluntarily dismiss the case only to draw out his other case against DPSCD and further threaten the public financing being sought to move the Pistons downtown.
But the DPSCD case has unique characteristics and does not simply mirror the case Davis sought to dismiss, Goldsmith wrote. One notable difference is the DPSCD case raises questions about the school district's authority to put an issue on the ballot.
Attorneys for the DDA wanted all legal issues resolved before Tuesday when the NBA's Board of Governors is slated to vote on the Pistons' move.
The next step now will involve attorneys discussing on Monday when to schedule a hearing on the DPSCD lawsuit.
No comments:
Post a Comment