Further Proof Alabama Supreme Court Justices Are A Bunch of Crooked Ass Judges

Rickey Stokes

Viewed: 6538

Posted by: RStokes
Date: Jul 14 2016 10:51 AM

The article below from the Alabama Political Reporter is further evidence the Alabama Supreme Court is a bunch of crooked ass judges.

Without allowing the other party to respond, the Alabama Supreme Court Justices: Tom Parker, Lyn Stuart, Michael F. Bolin, Glenn Murdock, Kelli Wise, James Allen Main, Greg Shaw, Tommy Bryan ( Roy Moore excluded because he can not stay out of impeachment proceedings ) granted a request to stay actions without the opposing party having a chance to respond.

All anyone can ask for is "fairness". I recently experienced the crooked bull in a local municipal court. Before the hearing ever occurred the Judge had already ruled and signed the ruling. Why waste my time for a hearing if you have already ruled?

The Alabama Supreme Court’s actions  Tom Parker, Lyn Stuart, Michael F. Bolin, Glenn Murdock, Kelli Wise, James Allen Main, Greg Shaw, Tommy Bryan ( Roy Moore excluded because he can not stay out of impeachment proceedings ) is further proof they are a bunch of stupid ass crooked judges.

I have no dog in the fight of the parties. I only know what I have read. But these Judges should be impeached and flogged on the steps of the Alabama Supreme Court building for such stupid actions.

Court is to be fair. At least follow your own rules of allowing a response to be filed, STUPID

________________________________________________________________

By Susan Britt
Alabama Political Reporter

MONTGOMERY—On Wednesday, the Alabama Supreme Court (ASC) granted a stay, before the deadline, for a response from the attorneys for Greenetrack had expired.

Circuit Judge Houston L. Brown, ruled on June 22, that the machines seized from Greenetrack were, in fact, bingo machines and therefore legal in the State of Alabama. The State responded on July 7, with an Emergency Motion for Stay, Pending Appeal and Memorandum in Support of the ASC.

Rule 27(a) of the Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure provides 7 days for other party’s response, in opposition to a motion, unless the court shortens the time for response.

“[a]ny party may file a response in opposition to a motion, other than one for a procedural order (for which see subdivision (b)), within 7 days (1 week) after service of the motion; but the court may shorten or extend the time for responding to any motion.”

Since the court did not enter such an order, the time for the response would not have expired until July 14.

On Monday, counsel for Greenetrack called the Supreme Court Clerk’s office and confirmed, with a staff attorney, that Greenetrack had 7 days to respond to the motion. A source close to the case said, “Without shortening the time, without allowing a response, and without adhering to its own rules, this Court entered an order granting the stay, before the time had expired for Greenetrack to respond.”

Greenetrack attorneys intend to file a motion to reconsider asking the court to withdraw its order, and to consider arguments in their response, as to why there should not be a stay granted.

<- back