http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/sep/08/south-lawrence-trafficway-appeal-awaits-oral-argum/
Both sides have filed their written briefs to the 10th Circuit court of appeals, and both sides agree on one thing - Oral Argument would be a good thing.
Everything else, of course, is the reason we're at this stage.
In a nutshell: In 2003, The US Army Corps of Engineers issued a EIS approving of a route that traverses a wetlands area. In doing so, they stated that the secondary impacts that would occur with the avoidance alternative were greater than a direct and mitigable impact of the selected alignment. In 2009, the Federal Highway Administration signed on to the 2003 EIS.
The opponents of the trafficway aren't buying it. As Bob Eye, the Lawyer for the opponents put it in today's article:
Quote
That logic has always been contrary to both common sense and what we believe the law requires.
The written briefings are available in PDF format from the J-W. The article will provide the link.
You can also read the comments, if you dare. If you do, pay particular attention to the poster "tuschkahouma" (Real Name: Mike Ford). He probably is one of the best representatives of the opponent's line of thinking, IMHO.
Quote from: route56 on September 09, 2011, 11:25:03 AM
"tuschkahouma" (Real Name: ***)
Is there a reason you're telling us this?
Bob Eye is a criminal defense lawyer. In Lawrence he was heavily in the public eye about six years ago when he (working with Pedro Irigonegaray of Topeka) unsuccessfully defended former KSU professor Tom Murray, who was accused of killing his ex-wife, on charges of first-degree murder. Why has he taken on an environmental-law case?
Quote from: NE2 on September 09, 2011, 12:00:45 PM
Quote from: route56 on September 09, 2011, 11:25:03 AM
"tuschkahouma" (Real Name: ***)
Is there a reason you're telling us this?
I would imagine that if he found it important to say it would be because Mr. Ford was somehow involved in the Real World discussion of the project under his real name in some way (frequent writer to the local newspaper, actually involved in the legal process, etc etc) but Richie would have to tell you for sure.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 09, 2011, 05:12:23 PM
I would imagine that if he found it important to say it would be because Mr. Ford was somehow involved in the Real World discussion of the project under his real name in some way (frequent writer to the local newspaper, actually involved in the legal process, etc etc) but Richie would have to tell you for sure.
He definitely is a frequent writer to the
Journal-World regarding the SLT and other tribal related issues. I do not know if he has been actively involved in the lawsuit.
Quote from: J N Winkler on September 09, 2011, 12:10:45 PM
Bob Eye is a criminal defense lawyer. In Lawrence he was heavily in the public eye about six years ago when he (working with Pedro Irigonegaray of Topeka) unsuccessfully defended former KSU professor Tom Murray, who was accused of killing his ex-wife, on charges of first-degree murder. Why has he taken on an environmental-law case?
Nice idea about impeaching Mr. Eye's ability to handle an environmental law case - however, it doesn't hold water. Mr. Eye has more than one specialty:
Quote from: Kauffman & Eye, Attorneys at Law
Bob's extensive experience includes the areas of criminal defense, civil rights, employment law, environmental law, and appellate practice.
Quote from: route56 on September 09, 2011, 06:40:47 PMNice idea about impeaching Mr. Eye's ability to handle an environmental law case - however, it doesn't hold water. Mr. Eye has more than one specialty:
Quote from: Kauffman & Eye, Attorneys at LawBob's extensive experience includes the areas of criminal defense, civil rights, employment law, environmental law, and appellate practice.
I wasn't impeaching his expertise--I just wondered why he had taken on the case. In Kansas lawyers are not licensed by legal subspecialty, so any lawyer in good standing with the state bar can in principle try any kind of case in state court, though in practice it would be a little strange for (e.g.) a
guardian ad litem to take on a capital murder case or a complex product liability case.
In any event, the capsule biography on Mr. Eye's law firm site notes that he has served as general counsel for KDHE and also that he is active with the ACLU. In point of fact, he was mentioned in yesterday's
Eagle as Kristin Ann Neuhaus' lawyer (Dr. Neuhaus is accused of inappropriately fast-tracking psychiatric evaluations which are legally required in Kansas for women seeking late-term abortions).
BUMP!
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/nov/21/state-contact-lawrence-property-owners-about-purch/
In a Nutshell: KDOT is beginning the process of right-of-way acquisition. KDOT also put out a press release stating the same thing.
A sidebar in the article also noted that oral arguments are scheduled for January 19.
UPDATE!!
The idea of placing tolls on the SLT has been killed. According to a KDOT survey, enough drivers would shun a tolled SLT that it would require a reopening of the EIS process
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/jan/05/state-transportation-officials-abandon-idea-tolls-/
No word on what would happen if the EIS is overturned on appeal.
As I said in a earlier post, Oral arguments were scheduled for the 19th. Today's the 20th, so here's the low-down from the J-W:
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/jan/19/attorneys-south-lawrence-trafficway-supporter-oppo/
NEWS FLASH: Environment Impact Statement supporting 32nd Street alignment for the South Lawrence Trafficway upheld by 10th Circuit.
Lawrence Journal-World article (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/jul/10/10th-circuit-court-appeals-upholds-states-approved/)
link to the decision in PDF format (http://www2.ljworld.com/documents/2012/jul/10/10th-circuit-corut-appeals-south-lawrence-trafficw/)
And... in other news, Bob Eye is running for congress :hmmm: