quote:
So then it's not clear the city has authority to do this.

Which is why you grant TROs. Not because one side is right, but to figure out what side is right.

How bad must this be for the city, after all the time, to suddenly admit this?

READ

quote:
"The City maintains its position, which has been affirmed by the Courts, that it owns the PGT Beauregard statue and property which the statue sits on. The letter from the City Attorney, which was also signed by City Park Improvement Association clearly states that both sides agreed to engage in discussions over the next 30 days regarding any land ownership questions that the City Park Improvement Association has going forward. However, as the letter confirms, the City Park Improvement Association acknowledges that the City can and will move forward with removal of the monument.

1 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by LSUFanHouston

NOLA

Member since Jul 2009

37873 posts

Posted on 5/15/17 at 4:58 pm to lsupride87

quote:
lsupride87

You getting mad. You clerk for him or something?

The city is saying they think they have authority, but someone else is also saying they have authority, so, they are gonna get together and figure it out.

Clearly, it's not that clear. If CPIA claims were bogus, the city would say so and move on. The fact that the city is engaging CPIA here tells me that there is a chance, just a chance, there might be an issue here.

Not a guarantee. The city may be 100 percent correct. But obviously, there is something the city must be concerned about.

I'll give the Landrieu admin credit for taking this step. It will help to ensure the legitimacy of all of this.

As for the judge, again, he didn't actually rule the city was right... he ruled this has gone on long enough, and the plaintiff didn't prove his case.

So... then... master attorneys... what the hell transpired between Wed and Friday?

3 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board