In an order filed late Friday afternoon, the Louisiana Court of Appeals, Second Cicuit, consolidated the appeal of two lawsuits against the Town of Jonesboro.
Essmeier, et al vs Jonesboro, is a suit filed in March 2011 against the town, controversial mayor Leslie Thompson, and three of the town’s five aldermen. It alleged that two ordinances – #700 and #701 – were illegally enacted.
State of Louisiana vs Town of Jonesboro was filed last June, and sought to install a Fiscal Administrator to oversee the town’s finances. That suit claimed that the town was in a “financial crisis.”
Both suits were decided for the plaintiffs by Second Judicial (Bienville, Claiborne, Jackson parishes) District Court Division B Judge Jimmy Teat.
In the case of State v Jonesboro, a fiscal administrator – William Ryder – has been appointed and is running the town.
Oral arguments in the appeal of Essmeier were heard at the circuit court in Shreveport in early August. Paperwork in the appeal of the State lawsuit has not yet been filed, but Friday’s order directed that a transcript of the July 16-17 hearing be prepared and forwarded to the circuit.
Notable in the order is that arguments won’t be heard until the court’s November docket. What that means is that Ryder will run Jonesboro for at least two more months.
See here the document.
09/24/2012 at 7:53 am |
Well I really don’t understand this. The case which was appealed – the Appeals Court said they would render a decision ( up to 6 weeks) and tomorrow will be 7 weeks. Now you are telling me the Appeals Court will combine two cases – even though the State V hasn’t been appealed yet??? My Lord how much more garbage will be thrown out here regarding Leslie Thompson and TOJ? I just want it over – one way or another.
09/24/2012 at 8:29 am |
Why would this be done..Consolidation? I don’t understand!
09/24/2012 at 8:48 am |
Folks….listen up…..this is bigger than the folks who care about the Town of Jonesboro.
More fingers in this pie than anyone thinks….
This is going to play out just like “the powers that be” want it to…..you all are just making it more difficult by keeping it alive.
Turn out the lights ….the party is over….and “fair” is what comes to town once a year (at least it used to come once a year to Jonesboro)
09/24/2012 at 9:27 am |
Righteous indignation is typically a reactive emotion of anger over perceived mistreatment, insult, or malice.
It is akin to what is called the sense of injustice. In some Christian doctrines, righteous indignation is considered the only form of anger which is not sinful, e.g., when Jesus drove the money lenders out of the temple. (Gospel of Matthew 21)
09/24/2012 at 5:44 pm |
You must be part of the “powers that be” if you are encouraging people to just sit down and keep their mouth closed. Please feel free to roll over and play dead and keep your mouth shut. there are plenty of people that will not just look the other way any longer…..there is a pilot light glowing and as long as it is aglow, the lights are not going out……
09/24/2012 at 10:52 am |
Good point, Bruce. Sometimes righetous indignation seems to be the only thing we have left. But persistence has been known to work when all else fails. After all, look how long it took to get the state to act on sending an FA.
09/24/2012 at 11:13 am |
The reason so many of thesw lawsutis against the Town are being appealed and contested is because they felt that the taxpayers would have to pay all the legal and court costs. The time is fast approaching, and may already be here, when theire will be no money to pay them. How many lawyers do you think will do this pro bono?
09/24/2012 at 11:15 am |
Just wait until the financial advisor’s time is up. Right back to where it all started. No nothings attempting to run the TJ.
09/24/2012 at 11:23 am |
This is a good thing. What this means is this. By consolidating the two appeals that means the judgement will be rendered at the same time. Being as the State has already put in the place the FA, as seen fit by the judge and the State, the chance of it being reversed on appeals is next to zero. If the court felt that the Essmeier suit didn’t have any legal legs to stand on it probably would have been left by itself. They can kill two birds with one stone this way. One case instead of two also means the mayors lawyers will make less money. The FA may have had a hand in that also as we are so short on cash. Y’all pray for us, and Ms. Renee, keep your head up. I think you might finally be making a difference and being heard. SHOUT IT TO THE ROOFTOPS SISTER!!
09/24/2012 at 9:01 pm |
how can that dummy use tax money for and appeal if the fa does not approve it
09/26/2012 at 2:22 pm |
I think the answer to Matt’s question is that the mayor cannot use tax money to pay for appeals costs if the appeals are not judged in the town’s favor. The town officials, and I suppose their lawyers, are gambling that the appeals will be upheld. After all, they have nothing to lose by doing it other than what they appear to have already lost.
09/26/2012 at 3:12 pm |
As I understand it, the fiscal administrator will be submitting a budget soon to the district court for approval. If it is approved by the court, and does not have enough funds in it to cover legal and court costs, the FA will not approve those bills being paid by the Town and its taxpayers. I assume that applies to any costs incurred as of the date the FA assumed responsibility. Don’t know about before that.