Good news! Rinehart appeal court decision!

[Bnugget]

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/C074662.PDF

Good news! The California Third District Court of Appeals validates the federal preemption defense, but sends the case back for trial as to, among other things, whether the refusal to issue suction dredge mining permits renders it “commercially impracticable” to exercise mining rights.

Unfortunately, the Court also declared that the opinion should not be published, meaning, in theory, that other litigants in California are forbidden to cite it. I have always regarded this rule as an obvious violation of the First Amendment right to petition the government, and at some point, some one should invest in striking down the “no citation” rules

Please note that under Rule 8.1120 of the California Rules of Court, “any person” may request that an unpublished opinion be published. Mining and other interests throughout the West may wish to do so in compliance with that rule (see the Rule here).

Many thanks to those who have supported this litigation, and whose continuing support will be required to make a good record in the Superior Court of Plumas County going forward.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James L. Buchal
Murphy & Buchal LLP
3425 SE Yamhill Street, Suite 100
Portland, OR 97214

Phone: 503-227-1011
Fax: 503-573-1939

 

[timberjack]

Im going to have to get a printer! Cant write out 6 requests by hand,,long letter to meet requirments..should the requests be certified mail? Thanks for the info

 

[2cmorau]

those of you out-of-state and supporting this cause, donating to PLP, PLF, Rinehart Thank you, tip of the hat for those that stay and fight here in Crazyfornia , rather than run and hide.
i too have thought about the move, seems that the cancer is slowly moving out to other states NV, Toiyabe NF some areas now wilderness, WA would like to shut down dredging, ID Kodos to yah standing up and dredging anyway, even Blowhard Quartszite AZ, is having their own Gov. fraudulent behavior problems
Timber got a libary near by? load on a card just a thought

 

[KRIKITTS]

The New 49'ers :: Members Forum :: Sample letter to request publication of the Rinehart Decision


Sample letter to request publication of the Rinehart Decision ( 02:48:36 Thu Sep 25 2014 )



According to our sources, the more people who express an interest in seeing the Rinehart Decision published, the more likely that it will happen. So we encourage you guys to pass this around far and wide.

Here is a barebones sample letter that should be sufficient to meet the requirements of Rule 8.1120. You are encouraged to provide further information in the second paragraph concerning who you are and your interest in the case.

Title Eight Rules

You may also think of other reasons to add to the third paragraph for why the opinion meets the Rule 8.1105 standards for publication.

Title Eight Rules

Please note that in addition to mailing the letter, you are required to mail copies to the parties on the service list for the case; the second form below is the “proof of service” form that contains those addresses.


Hon. Justice Harry E. Hull, Jr.
Hon. Ronald B. Robie
Hon. Andrea Lynn Hoch
914 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: People v. Rinehart (Case No. C074662)

(Date)

Dear Honorable Justices:

Pursuant to California Rule of Court 8.1120, I write to request that the Court order the slip opinion issued in People v. Rinehart (Case No. C074662) be certified for publication.

As a miner in the State of California, I have a keen interest in establishing that federal mining laws impose substantive limits on the power of the State of California to regulate my activities on federal land.

Publication is appropriate because this opinion establishes a rule of law not previously set forth in California opinions, though established in federal court cases, and involves a legal issue of continuing public interest. There are numerous ongoing lawsuits in California concerning the scope of the State’s regulatory powers over mining on federal land, and the absence of California precedent has caused increased costs and delay for litigants and the State.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,

_______________________
(full name and address)



PROOF OF SERVICE

I am over the agent of 18, not a party to the above action. My address is

________________________________________________________.


On ______________, 2014, I served the attached letter requesting publication in this action by placing true copies thereof in sealed envelopes and mailing them by First Class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to:

Matthew K. Carr
Deputy District Attorney
Plumas County District Attorney
520 Main Street, Room 404
Quincy, CA 95971

Marc N. Melnick
Deputy District Attorney
Office of the Attorney General
1515 Clay Street, Suite 2000
Oakland, CA 94612

Clerk of the Court
Plumas County Superior Court
520 Main Street, Room 104
Quincy, CA 95971

Jonathan Evans
Center for Biological Diversity
351 California Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104

Lynne Saxton
Saxton & Associates
912 Cole Street, Suite 140
San Francisco, CA 94117

Damien Schiff & Jonathan Wood
Pacific Legal Foundation
930 G Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

James Buchal
3425 SE Yamhill Street,#100
Portland, OR 97214

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on _____________, at _______________.

 

[2cmorau]

Krikitts, welcome, and thanks big time was having difficulty figuring this one out. will have this out this morning


http://www.uhuh.com/constitution/calconst.htm#Oath of Office

thought i would throw this in for principle

 

[KRIKITTS]

NP, I "borrowed' it from The New 49'ers website, they just put it up...
I heard 'Behind The Woodshed ' the other day that it's considered 1 letter represents 7,000 like minded opinions....

EDIT: I may heard this on a talk radio show- not Behind The Woodshed... My apologies.

 

[Hefty1]

PROOF OF SERVICE

I am over the (agent) age of 18, not a party to the above action. My address is

Correction...age

 

[Hefty1]

Dear Honorable Justices:

Pursuant to California Rule of Court 8.1120, I write to request that the Court order the (slip) opinion issued in People v. Rinehart (Case No. C074662) be certified for publication.

What is a slip opinion? Or should this word be taken out?

Got it.....leave the word slip as is.