Heller: Gura's fee response

[hoffmang]

Can I just say that reading a Gura brief is a lesson in persuasive argumentative writing?

Gura defends the fee request (http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/files/hellerGura.pdf) - stunningly I might add.

There are so many awesome lines I can't even pick a favorite.

-Gene

[bear308]

Awesome, absolutely awesome.

[CCWFacts]

What's hilarious is that this case has been helped by various nincompoops (ie, mayor, chief of police, etc) blabbering in the media, from the very first day all the way to fight over the fees. This case wouldn't have even had standing had the chief not said, "yes, we'll prosecute these guys if they break this law", and now the argument for fees is sprinkled with helpful media quotes from the city. You would think they would keep their mouths shut about ongoing litigation, something which every lawyer everywhere tells his clients. I guess you could say, "with enemies like these, who needs friends".

[CCWFacts]

Reading further, I don't like that he awarded the defendant the merit of having chutzpah. Chutzpah is not the same thing as contempt for the lives and safety of the people living in one's own city, or contempt for their fundamental rights.

[hoffmang]

In this case I'm pretty sure Gura was using chutzpah in it's original meaning:

chutzpah is: "A boy, having just been convicted of murdering his parents, begs the judge for leniency because he is an orphan."

Only in very modern times has Yiddish given the term a positive connotation.

-Gene

[oaklander]

Yes, the current meaning of chutzpah is something like "has big cohones" - but the older more correct meaning was more like "has some nerve."

Picked up some Yiddish over the years. . .

Here's the Hebrew word it is derived from: חֻצְפָּה - it means insolence.

:D

[brassburnz]

Excellent. Brilliantly excellent!

[duenor]

When public interest lawyers who
have risked significant amounts of their time and money vindicating a dormant civil right seek
fair compensation after years of being paid nothing, charges of avarice are inappropriate and not
well-taken.


see ?

[sorensen440]

That is awesome !!

[Ford8N]

You would think our own DOJ and rulers of the State would take note of the potential cost to the tax payer of denying us of a cheap piece of plastic on the bottom of our rifles. Especially that it is legal just across the border in the rest of Free America and the really weak legal argument that the California AW laws are based on. It's just cosmetic for crying out loud.

[Mulay El Raisuli]

You would think our own DOJ and rulers of the State would take note of the potential cost to the tax payer of denying us of a cheap piece of plastic on the bottom of our rifles. Especially that it is legal just across the border in the rest of Free America and the really weak legal argument that the California AW laws are based on. It's just cosmetic for crying out loud.

And that's the value of Gura's Motion. It isn't just that he should be paid a fair wage for good work done. If (once) he gets paid for this, it'll send a message to Sacramento (and the other gun-grabbers all across the land) that trying to defend unconstitutional crap carries a cost as well. Given that we're in a never-ending financial crisis, the state fathers will now have to give thought to the cost of litigation.

The Raisuli

[CCWFacts]

I've explained in other posts, the "anti-" side LOVES to be in these win-at-all-costs fights. Why? Because they get to hand MILLIONS of dollars to their friends at various law firms. And the law firms love receiving these millions of dollars. And it's even better; there isn't really an expectation of winning, and the lawyers who fought get to be heroes whether they win or lose. The belief on the "anti-" side is that it's worth spending $1mil if it keeps one gun off the street, or even if it just delays one gun being on the street by a few years.

That's (partly) why these PDs are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting against issuing a single CCW.

[jb7706]

Given that we're in a never-ending financial crisis, the state fathers will now have to give thought to the cost of litigation.


I really don't think that the bubble heads under the dome will give one second of real thought to the cost of defending unconstitutional legislation. Seems lots of folks think that politicians treat the budget as if it were their own money. If that were true then we would not be billions of dollars in the red right now.

The politicians are not spending their own money, they are spending MY money..and yours. Do you really think they give a rats @$$ about losing thousands or millions in legal battles? They are in a no lose position. They pass a law that takes our freedoms they win. We fight back (justly) and take them to the cleaners. They lose...nothing. After all, it did not come out of their pockets. It came out of mine. It came out of yours. I think the only way our pin-headed "leaders" would ever think twice about passing stupid unconstitutional laws would be to hold those that voted for and signed the bill into law as individually liable for the costs of unsuccessful litigation to defend their attempts in infringe upon our rights.

[sierratangofoxtrotunion]

End of page 6, he referred to the DC council as a "veritable militia of high-powered attorneys." I lold with irony.

[N6ATF]

Good stuff.

I think the only typo was:
Page 25 (blue)/21 (footnote)
Opposing half of Defendants’ endless requests for delay was in that vain.

The idiom is "in that vein". Unless it's an intentional play on words! LOL

[sierratangofoxtrotunion]

Good stuff.

I think the only typo was:
Page 25 (blue)/21 (footnote)


The idiom is "in that vein". Unless it's an intentional play on words! LOL

I found two other typos.

What else could Plaintiff’s counsel have been
reasonably expected to do that day.
This needs a question mark. There was one other grammar error before this, but I can't find it now.

[ilbob]

Gura is one of the very few lawyers who can write a legal brief that is actually readable by us normal humans.

[eltee]

I especially enjoyed the characterization of the opposing legal team as, "...a veritable militia of high-powered attorneys..."

[aileron]

I found two other typos.


What else could Plaintiff’s counsel have been
reasonably expected to do that day.

This needs a question mark. There was one other grammar error before this, but I can't find it now.


Actually, not trying to be a punctuation Nazi, but you can use a period in a sentence that asks a question if your being sarcastic. Its called an Indirect/Declarative; which is what he was doing. So its good. :D

[Liberty1]

you can use a period in front of a sentence

:confused: :p

[aileron]

you can use a period in front of a sentence

:confused: :p

figures.... One beer and I'm useless. :p

[tetris]

DC and Fenty are so full of shiat that its hilarious to see them hyperventilate over every mandate of the court. Slowly, they always come to the realization that their "marshal law" situation due to "out of control gun crime" doesn't give them a free pass to overlook court orders. The way they think, the legal ownership of guns by licensed individuals is going to turn to take DC from the murder capital of the US to....wait...the murder capital of the US---therefore---Fenty can suspend habeas corpus, activate the militia, order a curfew, violate court order, suspend search and seizure, or whatever else he deems necessary to preserve their murder capital status.

Its a lot like watching salt being sprinkled on snails. They writhe and twist in pain and agony. Or perhaps its like the case of the Hindu slaves in Texas who were forced to eat meat. Fenty has a religious obsession with banning guns. Fenty freaks out about the 2A just as the evangelicals freak out about stem cells and abortion.

Watching this whole drama play out in DC is loads of fun, just like watching the snails! I can see Fenty melting away like the Wicked Witch of the West, shouting "Ahhh!!! The Guns! The Guns!! Ahh! I'm Melting!!"

But, alas, we knew that he had to be crazy. Anybody with half a brain realized that with the current makeup of the SCOTUS, the antis didn't stand a chance. But they had no choice! For to allow law abiding people to own guns like almost every other city in the US, including NYC, would absolute destroy DC. If you ask me, it says more about the residents of DC than anything else. I guess they really are all a bunch of stupid hoodlums if they can't be trusted with the same inalienable rights that the rest of America can.

[N6ATF]

Actually, not trying to be a punctuation Nazi, but you can use a period in a sentence that asks a question if your being sarcastic. Its called an Indirect/Declarative; which is what he was doing. So its good. :D

Instinctually knew that... just not formally.

[mikehaas]

...Anybody with half a brain realized that with the current makeup of the SCOTUS, the antis didn't stand a chance...
Really? Heller was 5-4 and popular wisdom at the time said it was close, could go either way (remembering that "justice" in the courts often has little to do with facts.) There was scuttlebutt that Scalia had to bargain with Kennedy by adding certain language to the decision.

Now, I've since learned some inside baseball from a VERY reliable source that Kennedy's vote was never in doubt but that was not common knowledge at the time. I don't even think it's that commonly known now.

BTW, at the NRA Annual meeting in Louisville, the California contingent (about 10 of us - volunteers, Ed & Paul, a few board members) were having dinner one night when - guess who walks in the place and accepts an invitation to sit with us? Stephen Halbrook. This was a few weeks after Heller. Sat right across the table from him. We enjoyed adult beverages and had some good yuks over some of the antis testimony :-) Good times, a really nice guy.

[Lex Arma]

Alan Gura rocks. His writing talent is evidence of a great mind and even greater moral integrity.

[Mulay El Raisuli]

I really don't think that the bubble heads under the dome will give one second of real thought to the cost of defending unconstitutional legislation. Seems lots of folks think that politicians treat the budget as if it were their own money. If that were true then we would not be billions of dollars in the red right now.

The politicians are not spending their own money, they are spending MY money..and yours. Do you really think they give a rats @$$ about losing thousands or millions in legal battles? They are in a no lose position. They pass a law that takes our freedoms they win. We fight back (justly) and take them to the cleaners. They lose...nothing. After all, it did not come out of their pockets. It came out of mine. It came out of yours. I think the only way our pin-headed "leaders" would ever think twice about passing stupid unconstitutional laws would be to hold those that voted for and signed the bill into law as individually liable for the costs of unsuccessful litigation to defend their attempts in infringe upon our rights.

As a usual thing, that's true. But, things are VERY bad lately. So bad that I think even the most rabid gun-grabber is giving thought to the cost of litigation. Because now the questions will be: How many free syringes aren't going to be given away? How many children will go hungry? How many homeless are going to be left on the street? Morton Grove raised the white flag instantly. Yes, their budget isn't close to Frisco's, but even Frisco is having to pinch pennies lately. A win by Gura here (telling Frisco & the others that they'd have to pay BOTH sides of the fight) is likely to get even their attention. All the more reason to push NOW.

The Raisuli

P.S. Sorry to have taken so long to reply.

[tiki]

Actually, not trying to be a punctuation Nazi, but you can use a period in a sentence that asks a question if your being sarcastic. Its called an Indirect/Declarative; which is what he was doing. So its good. :D

Yes, but you can't use "your" when you should use "you're". :)

[aileron]

Yes, but you can't use "your" when you should use "you're". :)


:ban:


:whistling:


:p

[1911_sfca]

Just read this brief again. Defendants are freakin idiots and it's amusing to read Gura's crushing response.

[Foghlai]

This made my day a little brighter. Thanks for the post gene, there is just so much to learn from reading one of these.

[jb7706]

A win by Gura here (telling Frisco & the others that they'd have to pay BOTH sides of the fight) is likely to get even their attention. All the more reason to push NOW.

No argument here, I think we need to attack relentlessly on the legal front, that is the only way we are likely to see any progress in California. I have zero issues with taking the children in charge to court, esp. if it leads to taking the shackles off my AR's, nullifying that dim-witted handgun roster and shall issue CCW.

My problem is with the children spending our money. You obviously think better of them than I. I still don't think they give one second's thought to spending our money to advance their own interests. One way or the other they will find a way to feed the starving children, pass out syringes and make puppies softer, fluffier with less static cling. They do think about how to extort yet more money from the taxpayer, of that I have no doubt.

[Mulay El Raisuli]

My problem is with the children spending our money. You obviously think better of them than I. I still don't think they give one second's thought to spending our money to advance their own interests. One way or the other they will find a way to feed the starving children, pass out syringes and make puppies softer, fluffier with less static cling. They do think about how to extort yet more money from the taxpayer, of that I have no doubt.


Normally, I would agree with you. Certainly, spending OPM (other people's money) is something they clearly enjoy. But, at present, their ability to extort is hindered quite a bit. "Finding a way" takes time & as businesses go bust at near-record rates, time is a luxury they don't have.
Hence the call to push NOW before they can find some way to steal their way back into the fight.

The Raisuli