PERMIT APPLICATION RETURNED

[BUFF7MM]

There's no hand feeding me anything and you're gone for another week, since you didn't want to be here at all anyhow.

Thank you, now I can reset my ignore list to zero.

 

[TheTruth]

Exactly. The earliest date we could likely expect to hear from the judge is sometime in June.

Very true. The problem is the Judge Legg assumes senior status on June 8th... meaning he is semi retired. However, Obama put in a liberal judge (Grimm) to fill his shoes. My fear is that may change things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benson_Everett_Legg

 

[Patrick]

Senior status doesn't mean he won't continue working our case. If anything, it lowers his workload and lets him focus on this case more.

 

[MJD438]

Very true. The problem is the Judge Legg assumes senior status in June... meaning he is semi retired. However, Obama put in a liberal judge (Grimm) to fill his shoes. My fear is that may change things.

I hope this is sorted out prior to the end of June and before he assumes senior status.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benson_Everett_Legg

We do not know what is going to happen with his change in status. It just means, IIRC, that he gets to choose how much he wants to work. It does not mean the Woollard will be automatically reassigned. IMO, Judge Legg has shown a commitment to seeing this play out and I don't think he will just toss it aside due to going to senior status. Maybe one of our member lawyers has more thoughts on that issue.

 

[csanc123]

No one...no one..not one person knows the rationale through which MSP is discounting the most recent permit applications. It's only speculation but I would reckon their returning the apps has nothing to do with "saving the poor old citizen's hard earned cash". They most likely want to be seen in a "good light" so to speak and perhaps think this in some form or fashion will help in the long run as the legal process plays out.

Right now it's all a chess game and they are certainly in the midst of many rounds that will play out.

Rememeber...This is UNCHARTERED territory for the state and the MSP.

 

[Seagrave1963]

Rememeber...This is UNCHARTERED territory for the state and the MSP and us.

added

 

[csanc123]

True that!

added

 

[Broadside]

If I may, I would like to offer some commentary.

If someone who is denied a permit appeals to the Board and then is denied by the Board, it would seem to me that the Board members could then be listed as defendants in any lawsuit.

This might be interesting because from I can tell these Board members are just part-time employees of the State.

 

[esqappellate]

We do not know what is going to happen with his change in status. It just means, IIRC, that he gets to choose how much he wants to work. It does not mean the Woollard will be automatically reassigned. IMO, Judge Legg has shown a commitment to seeing this play out and I don't think he will just toss it aside due to going to senior status. Maybe one of our member lawyers has more thoughts on that issue.

That's basically it, just as you described it above. Judge Legg can work as hard as he wants or not at all. He will basically get to keep the cases he wants as well. Note that he originally closed Woollard after his March 5 order. He wants this done with. I expect he will close it again after ruling on the motion for a stay. Since the issues on appeal will be purely legal, I doubt that there will be a remand by the CA4 for further fact finding. Can not say that for sure, but it looks unlikely. This case will be over for Judge Legg in June. Enforcement proceedings, if necessary, could go to another judge or back to Judge Legg. We shall see.

 

[TROOPER]

OK, I'll admit I haven't read the whole 27 pages LOL.

But is this the MSP's way of maintaining their CCW approval ratings, by "returning" applications, and not actually "denying" them.

Hence can still boast their 90% spproval rate, or whatever BS they like to wave around.

 

[esqappellate]

If I may, I would like to offer some commentary.

If someone who is denied a permit appeals to the Board and then is denied by the Board, it would seem to me that the Board members could then be listed as defendants in any lawsuit.

This might be interesting because from I can tell these Board members are just part-time employees of the State.

Yes, they could be named individually in a 1983 action because even though they are private individuals (not even employees) they are state actors in their role as Board members. You would also name the Secretary of the MSP as well.

 

[Inigoes]

After poking around Justia

For those that are presently rejected, you have 10 days to file for an informal review

§ 5-311. Informal review of Secretary's action.

(a) Request for informal review.- A person who is denied a permit or renewal of a permit or whose permit is revoked or limited may request the Secretary to conduct an informal review by filing a written request within 10 days after receipt of written notice of the Secretary's initial action.

Then possibly apply to the board within 10 days after that.

§ 5-312. Action by Board.

(a) Request for review authorized.-

(1) A person who is denied a permit or renewal of a permit or whose permit is revoked or limited may request the Board to review the decision of the Secretary by filing a written request with the Board within 10 days after receipt of written notice of the Secretary's final action.

(2) A person whose application for a permit or renewal of a permit is not acted on by the Secretary within 90 days after submitting the application to the Secretary may request a hearing before the Board by filing a written request with the Board.

 

[Merlin]

Merlin..... in posting you don't need to make one response per comment. Please respond to multiple posts in one response, you are cluttering this and every other thread you are in.

Thanks for the help. I will try to do better. I made the mistake of reading from the start of the thread and answer the posts as a read. I guess I should have started at the end to see where we were.

 

[5.7]

This case will be over for Judge Legg in June.

So, assume that since some of us (like me) applied early march (12th for me), have been interviewed, and checks cashed, back rounds completed and clear, they hold on to our apps for now. Since mid June (greater than 12 June anyway in my example) is greater than 90 days from submission, would it be prudent to ask for a "status" at day 90? or just let it ride until the Judge denies the stay, assuming that is the outcome? I am thinking since June is right at the 90 day mark, AND I don't get a denial letter between now and then, I should just quietly ride it out and watch the wire?

Understand you cannot offer legal advise and if you don't want to answer, understand that as well. Just curious.

 

[dlmcbm]

OK, I'll admit I haven't read the whole 27 pages LOL.

But is this the MSP's way of maintaining their CCW approval ratings, by "returning" applications, and not actually "denying" them.

Hence can still boast their 90% approval rate, or whatever BS they like to wave around.

Per there numbers yes BUT if we all stick together here and get as many people together that get these letters we will have proof that it is crap. This may even be the next legislative time that Del. Smigiel might bring these forward to throw in there face about there approval rating. It still hurts them just not on there paper.

 

[esqappellate]

After looking around Justia

For those that are presently rejected, you have 10 days to file for an informal review



Then possibly apply to the board within 10 days after that.

Careful with that. a request for informal review under 311 does not expressly toll the 10 day period for 312 Board review. You may be limited to the question of whether the Secretary acted incorrectly in refusing a Section 311 review, rather than the underlying denial predating that.

 

[TheTruth]

We do not know what is going to happen with his change in status.

That is my only point to consider. Anyone can Google what senior status means. We just don't know how it is going to shake out unless you have a crystal ball.

 

[dlmcbm]

So, assume that since some of us (like me) applied early march (12th for me), have been interviewed, and checks cashed, back rounds completed and clear, they hold on to our apps for now. Since mid June (greater than 12 June anyway in my example) is greater than 90 days from submission, would it be prudent to ask for a "status" at day 90? or just let it ride until the Judge denies the stay, assuming that is the outcome? I am thinking since June is right at the 90 day mark, AND I don't get a denial letter between now and then, I should just quietly ride it out and watch the wire?

Understand you cannot offer legal advise and if you don't want to answer, understand that as well. Just curious.

I am in the same boat as you (march 14th). I personally am going to wait to see what the ruling is on the stay. I want them to have to issue permits before I am going to bug them about it. With a temp. stay in effect I am happy they are sitting on mine cause they could just deny it.

 

[esqappellate]

So, assume that since some of us (like me) applied early march (12th for me), have been interviewed, and checks cashed, back rounds completed and clear, they hold on to our apps for now. Since mid June (greater than 12 June anyway in my example) is greater than 90 days from submission, would it be prudent to ask for a "status" at day 90? or just let it ride until the Judge denies the stay, assuming that is the outcome? I am thinking since June is right at the 90 day mark, AND I don't get a denial letter between now and then, I should just quietly ride it out and watch the wire?

Understand you cannot offer legal advise and if you don't want to answer, understand that as well. Just curious.

Well, as you know, I don't give legal advice, but I will share with you what I plan on doing, as I am the same position as you (filing pre-stay). If they have not acted on my application, I plan on sitting on it until the Stay is decided, even if that means NOT going to the Board on the 91th day. The stay will be decided in June by Judge Legg. It is not much of a wait. If the stay is denied by Judge Legg, I will wait for it to be decided by the CA4 if the State is so foolish as to seek a stay from the court of appeals. When and if the stay is denied by the CA4, I will wait a small amount of time and see what is happening to pending applications and then make a decision whether to push my application to the Board.

 

[CypherPunk]

I just emailed MoM, AG Gansler, the MSP Commandant, all my state legislature reps, Del Smigiel and Sen Pipkin.
Now I am going to try to author a much more civil and measured letter to my local newspapers.
Will you do the same?