Mar 10

Update Mar. 10th, 2011




The attached the text of the 10-page (plus attachments) Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration includes focal points of (1) our rebuttal to Attorney Robert Snook's statement that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss was timely, (2) our re-assertions to the unchallenged matters that errors of the statewide election process were not simply random but were both multiple and in patterns and often intentional, and that there is not adequate remedy in state forums (factors which allow for federal court jurisdiction) and (3) the inclusion of details of my 1995 federal lawsuit against the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority and of the significance of those unresolved matters to the present lawsuit.  For the nature of the legal debate which is apparent from this Reply, it is clear that this case is winnable!

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Author: administrator
Print PDF