Judge Ochoa rules tommorrow in San Bernadino cases on Preemption.

[Oakview2]

Lets say our prayers and keep our fingers crossed.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oakview2]

Hope this works

KEEP YOUR FINGERS CROSSED

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[H-2 CHARLIE]

Green tree hugers should be brought up on charges for manufacturing made up crap .

 

[Clay Diggins]

I am concerned that the ruling was not published as was announced in open court at the last hearing. Further the state is attempting to have the case retried under CC 166.1 in the fourth appealate court, seeking another bite of the apple, and rendering the Rhinehart case null. This is another delay tactic by the state and it gree allies to delay the start of the dredge season in 2015, and the courts need to hold these people held liable in both a civil and criminal proceeding.

The stay was lifted. Isn't that the ruling you were waiting for? I'd like to see that ruling since the docket doesn't give any details.

Thanks for posting the CC166.1 Oakview. The CC166.1 is a desperation move - not much chance of that succeeding anywhere. The courts hate ruling against other districts without an original jurisdiction matter before them. Asking one court to overthrow another's decision just because you didn't like the first court's decision is not going to fly.

This isn't over for this case yet. Rhinehart settles one of the issues but that shotgun approach in the original complaint means there are at least 5 other rulings to come. This will drag on for a long time if the State won't cooperate in the private "sue and settle" talks. Look for the greenies to appeal after all that is finished. They have lost several cases because "sue and settle" is illegal. You can expect them to turn the tables on any deal reached in those settlement talks.

Rhinehart is the only real opportunity now to have this matter settled quickly. A single issue case is the proper way to a quick resolution. Shotgunning with nuisance complaints like unsupported "takings" claims makes good fodder for lawyers but it's no way to get a back to dredging.

Just one man's opinion

Heavy Pans

 

[Oakview2]

Finally figured out the site would except the PDF. Question, if Ochoa issues a ruling that the state prempted mining, and no acceptance by the Ca Supreme Ct, and Ochoa, denies the CCP 166.1 challenge, as I see the states only chance is to go back to superior court in Plumas county and retry the case against Brandon there, but considering that preemption at that point would be settled law, I don't think the court would even hear the case. Am I all wet on this?

 

[ScottC]

There are a lot of claim owners watching and waiting for going on 6 years now. And should be reinstated due to the new evidence about the mishandled study that was fraudulently manipulated for a predetermined outcome. The new evidence proves dredging is not harmful to humans or the environment.

 

[Hoser John]

The 16th is the preemption ruling date curretly and case the 23rd hearing was still on, but on a slippery slope anything can happen. Only 1 thing is for sure...Rhinehart is one tough fella and we all owe him a debt of gratitude forevermore-win/lose/or draw he IS the man....respect-John

 

[Oakview2]

The mandatory settlement hearings on the 23rd, but the judge after he lifted the stay at the last hearing, he said he would publish his ruling in the first week of January...

 

[ScottC]

John well said, I would like to say thank you to him and his family for remaining strong through this and standing up for what's right. Justice will prevail.

 

[Hoser John]

First week of january over 5 days ago---real slippery slope for sure as to who,what and where-John

 

[Oakview2]

This quote from the ICMJ article, makes me a bit nervous that he did not make the date he stated in open court. Especially when the state is coming out of right field with the CCP 166.1 challenge

"Judge Ochoa responded that he intends to use the Rinehart case, now that it has been published by the Third Court of Appeals, to give the court direction. He declared he will be ruling and, “Let the chips fall where they may.” He also agreed with Mr. Young that two tracks are a good idea and his rulings will be made the first week of January, 2015. Judge Ochoa gave clear indication of what he will rule in his statements about the Rinehart case?

 

[H-2 CHARLIE]

Opinions on the next hurdle ?

 

[Oakview2]

Delay, delay until the judge steps up and follows the rule of law. I personally think this will NEVER be over until we hold those responsible for this travesty held liable in a civil and criminal court. The state is going to keep trying to railroad minning in this state. IMHO

 

[theseeker]

If/When, Judge Ochoa rules that federal law preempts the State of California rules and regs currently in place, It would be great to see a class action lawsuit against the state for monetary losses suffered by all claim holders affected by those regs. That would get them to think twice before cow towing to the enviro groups in the future. But I digress, putting the cart before the horse. Got to have a ruling first.

 

[Bejay]

Delay, delay until the judge steps up and follows the rule of law. I personally think this will NEVER be over until we hold those responsible for this travesty held liable in a civil and criminal court. The state is going to keep trying to railroad minning in this state. IMHO

What do you think keeps the attorneys for the State of Calif employed? State attorneys like their employment! It brings meaning to their job; working for the Dept of Justice. The more they work, the more they get paid. Job security as well. When they finally retire; they get a nice pension. State Pensions are derived from keeping a job for a long time. A long time DOJ job requires appeasing the Dept of Justice and the Governor. I am sitting here thinking: this all makes sense if you are an attorney for the State. "Never being over" sounds good to a State Attorney wanting to retire someday.

I believe there was a recent Calif dredger who was caught dredging as a means of protest. He got his hand slapped and told not to dredge anymore. Civil protest was determined to be "free speech"....as I recall!

Interesting thought. I wonder if that case was published?...or if it could have been? Not sure on that one. But I am only thinking I recall such a case! But it kinda stuck in my mind. I like civil protest!...and the right to do it!




Bejay

 

[Oakview2]

I know a lot more than one, and all those that asked for a trial by jury, were finally dismissed, after months an months of appearances.

 

[fowledup]

If/When, Judge Ochoa rules that federal law preempts the State of California rules and regs currently in place, It would be great to see a class action lawsuit against the state for monetary losses suffered by all claim holders affected by those regs. That would get them to think twice before cow towing to the enviro groups in the future. But I digress, putting the cart before the horse. Got to have a ruling first.

I would rather see it against the Center for Bio. Div., Krooks, and SIerra Fund. Tie them up in court for the next 50 years and bankrupt them to their last penny. The state isn't going to learn anything from a tort suit, what do they care, not their money, they will pass the burden on to the taxpayers.

 

[2cmorau]

well WMA came out with that newsletter, proving that Dr Alpers withheld data, and how corrupt the DOJ is, time to recall justices and file lawsuits, small claims action, class action. been longer than 5 years
oh wait, just figure out why it will not work, justice system is corrupt, CBD, TSF, and all other leftwing Propagandist for the past 60 years have turn a lie into a profitable market, for politicians and themselves

 

[Hoser John]

They not only withheld data BUT also planted that mercury in the river at Coloma. I have MANY pics and a VIDEO of me/friends dredging that very same spot about 5 weeks earlier and 0-nyet-natha mercury,still got the raw gold as proof as I never clean polish,just stash in the bank. If cleaned with acid/heat the gold has surface defacing and nothing ever done. That whole Waterboard study was 100% bs as NO facts just blue sky and bs....as usual....John

 

[goldenIrishman]

Well until we can find a way to make it so these green groups can not profit by twisting the laws, using false science and making it so the political types can profit from their action as well, we are going to be fighting them from now till the cows come home. They have been using the laws to their advantage and now we need to use it to ours. Thanks to this ruling, our California dredging brothers should be back in the water soon, but we need to stay on top of things. California is not the only state that miners have been fighting for their right and as I see it, we still have a long way to go. This ruling will help, but the fight is far from over.

 

[2cmorau]

Bejay i have heard the same here in the Sierra County of those that were cited for using a dredge and got a slap on the wrist, community service, small fine, probation, but i think they also lost there equipment

pushing

What do you think keeps the attorneys for the State of Calif employed? State attorneys like their employment! It brings meaning to their job; working for the Dept of Justice. The more they work, the more they get paid. Job security as well. When they finally retire; they get a nice pension. State Pensions are derived from keeping a job for a long time. A long time DOJ job requires appeasing the Dept of Justice and the Governor. I am sitting here thinking: this all makes sense if you are an attorney for the State. "Never being over" sounds good to a State Attorney wanting to retire someday.

I believe there was a recent Calif dredger who was caught dredging as a means of protest. He got his hand slapped and told not to dredge anymore. Civil protest was determined to be "free speech"....as I recall!

Interesting thought. I wonder if that case was published?...or if it could have been? Not sure on that one. But I am only thinking I recall such a case! But it kinda stuck in my mind. I like civil protest!...and the right to do it!




Bejay