Speaking as an attorney, I am guessing the hearing today was simply an initial Motion to Dismiss on the pleadings. The bar for getting an action dismissed at this early a stage is incredibly high. Basically all you need to do is plead the basic elements of a case and it will go forward.

 

This does not mean that the case will not get dismissed further down the line. It will just take a little longer to get to that point.

Hopefully there is a settlement and this goes away, and the stadium will continue.

I'm a Marlins fan(obviously), and I'd like to see things work out so the franchise ultimately stays here in South Florida.

.

.

But let's not be hypocrites here. Braman has a valid point. If you can't agree with that then you're willing to bend the law as it suits your own personal feelings.

.

.

I have no idea why Braman is on this jihad against the Marlins, and I'm not an attorney, so I can't voice a qualified opinion on what the ultimate court ruling and/or commission ruling will be....but Braman does raise a valid issue. His lawsuit is not frivolous or else the judge would have dismissed it today.

I'm a Marlins fan(obviously), and I'd like to see things work out so the franchise ultimately stays here in South Florida.

.

.

But let's not be hypocrites here. Braman has a valid point. If you can't agree with that then you're willing to bend the law as it suits your own personal feelings.

.

.

I have no idea why Braman is on this jihad against the Marlins, and I'm not an attorney, so I can't voice a qualified opinion on what the ultimate court ruling and/or commission ruling will be....but Braman does raise a valid issue. His lawsuit is not frivolous or else the judge would have dismissed it today.

i dont see what point he has...we elect officials into office to do our thinking for us...thats the whole point of democracy...imagine if the delegates of the constitution had to go back to each of their respective colonies and have a vote on whether or not they should pass it...lets put it this way...it wouldnt have passed without a doubt in my mind...some things, we leave to those who we give power to

I'm a Marlins fan(obviously), and I'd like to see things work out so the franchise ultimately stays here in South Florida.

.

.

But let's not be hypocrites here. Braman has a valid point. If you can't agree with that then you're willing to bend the law as it suits your own personal feelings.

.

.

I have no idea why Braman is on this jihad against the Marlins, and I'm not an attorney, so I can't voice a qualified opinion on what the ultimate court ruling and/or commission ruling will be....but Braman does raise a valid issue. His lawsuit is not frivolous or else the judge would have dismissed it today.

i dont see what point he has...we elect officials into office to do our thinking for us...thats the whole point of democracy...imagine if the delegates of the constitution had to go back to each of their respective colonies and have a vote on whether or not they should pass it...lets put it this way...it wouldnt have passed without a doubt in my mind...some things, we leave to those who we give power to

Jimmy....you almost sound like a staunch Republican there. Which I know you're not. What's this about letting our elected officials "do our thinking for us"? You don't question the elected officials in the White House? And democracy and municipal policies in Miami-Dade are, well, ..... :whistle

Don't be a hypocrite and allow your own personal fandom to cloud your judgement of right and wrong. All I'm saying is that if Braman's suit was considered frivolous it would have been ended today. He's questioning the validity of the commissioner's position. Why, I don't know, but he evidently has some valid point, and he's got the right to question the elected officials. Let's see how the case proceeds. As a fan I hope that the case is dismissed or if it reaches trial that the judges rule against him. We'll see.

I'm a Marlins fan(obviously), and I'd like to see things work out so the franchise ultimately stays here in South Florida.

.

.

But let's not be hypocrites here. Braman has a valid point. If you can't agree with that then you're willing to bend the law as it suits your own personal feelings.

.

.

I have no idea why Braman is on this jihad against the Marlins, and I'm not an attorney, so I can't voice a qualified opinion on what the ultimate court ruling and/or commission ruling will be....but Braman does raise a valid issue. His lawsuit is not frivolous or else the judge would have dismissed it today.

i dont see what point he has...we elect officials into office to do our thinking for us...thats the whole point of democracy...imagine if the delegates of the constitution had to go back to each of their respective colonies and have a vote on whether or not they should pass it...lets put it this way...it wouldnt have passed without a doubt in my mind...some things, we leave to those who we give power to

Jimmy....you almost sound like a staunch Republican there. Which I know you're not. What's this about letting our elected officials "do our thinking for us"? You don't question the elected officials in the White House? And democracy and municipal policies in Miami-Dade are, well, ..... :whistle

Don't be a hypocrite and allow your own personal fandom to cloud your judgement of right and wrong. All I'm saying is that if Braman's suit was considered frivolous it would have been ended today. He's questioning the validity of the commissioner's position. Why, I don't know, but he evidently has some valid point, and he's got the right to question the elected officials. Let's see how the case proceeds. As a fan I hope that the case is dismissed or if it reaches trial that the judges rule against him. We'll see.

hey i never said that i dont question our elected officials...hell ill question them every chance i get...but this is a legally done DEAL voted in favor of by the city and the county...with that said, i dont see how braman has an argument with any solid footing...i mean maybe the judge in question here feels there is something worth looking into...but i cant see how or why a judge would jeopardize the agreement which has been in place for several months now

 

braman sucks at life and i highly suggest the people of miami remind him of it everyday until the dumb f*** moves outta town

I'm a Marlins fan(obviously), and I'd like to see things work out so the franchise ultimately stays here in South Florida.

.

.

But let's not be hypocrites here. Braman has a valid point. If you can't agree with that then you're willing to bend the law as it suits your own personal feelings.

.

.

I have no idea why Braman is on this jihad against the Marlins, and I'm not an attorney, so I can't voice a qualified opinion on what the ultimate court ruling and/or commission ruling will be....but Braman does raise a valid issue. His lawsuit is not frivolous or else the judge would have dismissed it today.

i dont see what point he has...we elect officials into office to do our thinking for us...thats the whole point of democracy...imagine if the delegates of the constitution had to go back to each of their respective colonies and have a vote on whether or not they should pass it...lets put it this way...it wouldnt have passed without a doubt in my mind...some things, we leave to those who we give power to

Jimmy....you almost sound like a staunch Republican there. Which I know you're not. What's this about letting our elected officials "do our thinking for us"? You don't question the elected officials in the White House? And democracy and municipal policies in Miami-Dade are, well, ..... :whistle

Don't be a hypocrite and allow your own personal fandom to cloud your judgement of right and wrong. All I'm saying is that if Braman's suit was considered frivolous it would have been ended today. He's questioning the validity of the commissioner's position. Why, I don't know, but he evidently has some valid point, and he's got the right to question the elected officials. Let's see how the case proceeds. As a fan I hope that the case is dismissed or if it reaches trial that the judges rule against him. We'll see.

hey i never said that i dont question our elected officials...hell ill question them every chance i get...but this is a legally done DEAL voted in favor of by the city and the county...with that said, i dont see how braman has an argument with any solid footing...i mean maybe the judge in question here feels there is something worth looking into...but i cant see how or why a judge would jeopardize the agreement which has been in place for several months now

 

braman sucks at life and i highly suggest the people of miami remind him of it everyday until the dumb f*** moves outta town

I believe that the IRAQ adventure is also a legally done deal. :mis2

Let's wait and see. I know a lot more about the IRAQ fiasco than I do about the Marlins stadium deal. I wish the IRAQ tragedy could have it's day in court. I'd love to see Cheney and Co. squirm under the spotlight of a trial. Let's let this Braman thing go on, in the sense of fair play and democracy for all, not just the few who care, specifically Loria and us fans. If it turns out that his case gets dismissed or he loses in court, that's great.

He may not win but I would not bet against him.

Hi im new, life long Marlins fan. Now to Satan, I mean Braman. Why doesn't someone organize some kind of protest outside of his dealership. We could walk around outside, on the other side of the street, which I believe would make it legal, so people know what an arse this guy is, and not to buy a car from him!

Here is the Herald's article on today's happenings...turns out it wasn't much of a victory for Braman after all:

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_n...ory/526378.html

 

Parts of Braman's suit over Miami plan going to trial

Posted on Thu, May. 08, 2008Digg del.icio.us AIM reprint print email

BY MATTHEW I. PINZUR

mpinzur@MiamiHerald.com

Finding that local leaders were not illegally secretive, a Miami-Dade judge ruled Thursday against part of auto magnate Norman Braman's challenge to the government's massive downtown development plan.

 

Miami Mayor Manny Diaz called it a ``huge victory for both the city and the county.''

 

But Circuit Judge Pedro Echarte allowed Braman's other claims to move forward toward a July 1 court date.

 

''It means there will be a trial,'' said Roberto Martinez, a former U.S. attorney and part of Braman's legal team.

 

The split decision allowed both sides to claim victory in a fight that has often been about swaying public opinion as much as settling a legal dispute.

 

County Mayor Carlos Alvarez and Miami's Diaz have stood firmly behind the plan, which includes a $619 million ballpark complex for the Florida Marlins, a major face-lift for Bicentennial Park and a new funding source for nearly $500 million in construction debt at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts.

 

TUNNEL

 

The deal also includes about 5 percent of the funding for an underwater tunnel to the Port of Miami and an estimated $1.7 billion through 2030 for development in the impoverished Overtown and Omni areas.

 

The deal was announced in December, just days before both city and county commissioners approved. Braman said Florida's Sunshine-In-Government Act required public notice of the earlier negotiations, an argument Echarte rejected.

 

''It is evidence that Miami-Dade County has acted responsibly and within the law,'' Alvarez said in a written statement.

 

Braman's remaining legal arguments center around the deal itself rather than how it was negotiated. Among them:

 

? The ballpark budget includes $50 million that voters earmarked for renovations at the Orange Bowl. The county commission shifted that money after plans were made to demolish the football stadium.

 

Braman contends that violated voters' intent and, moreover, shifted money from a public to private project. ''It's like taking money earmarked for Metrozoo and giving it to Animal Kingdom at Disney World,'' Martinez said.

 

The county has retorted that it followed its own procedures for making changes to that voter-approved bond issue.

 

? Many of the projects, including the arts center debt, would be funded from Community Redevelopment Agencies -- special funds that require new property-tax money in blighted areas to be used for neighborhood improvements.

 

VIOLATION?

 

The bonds used to build the arts center were partially backed by tourist taxes, and Braman said the infusion of CRA money violated the terms of those bonds.

 

The government has rejected that interpretation, saying the original tourist taxes will still go to the arts center; if they are not needed to pay off construction, they will help subsidize operations.

 

? The deal said the additional CRA money for the arts center debt was ``necessary to provide for the city and county contributions to the baseball project.''

 

County Manager George Burgess has repeatedly insisted the ballpark will actually use tourist taxes, not CRA money, but Braman has called that plan a ''shell game'' to move money outside the neighborhood's boundaries.

 

? Finally, Braman's suit argues the ballpark does not serve ''a paramount public purpose,'' which would make it ineligible for government backing.

 

The lawsuit is hardly the only roadblock for the downtown plan. The souring economy has brought the big-ticket projects under increasing scrutiny, and critical votes still lie ahead at both city and county hall.

 

Martinez predicted the case will not end in Echarte's courtroom. ''No matter who wins here,'' he said, ``this is going to be appealed.''

 

Miami Herald staff writer Michael Vasquez contributed to this report.

So PeteU, since your an attorney, let me ask you something. Since the deal is essentially finalized, and it is being challenged in court, would the Marlins be able to actually break ground while this is going on? I mean they have not said the project is to be halted while court proceeding's play out right?

from a source that is as close as you can get on this, i will say that braman's motives are not altruistic, and that this suit was filed to have the city give Braman concessions on certain zoning issues and the sale of land to Braman for existing/future car dealerships. this has nothing to do with his fight for the people.

So PeteU, since your an attorney, let me ask you something. Since the deal is essentially finalized, and it is being challenged in court, would the Marlins be able to actually break ground while this is going on? I mean they have not said the project is to be halted while court proceeding's play out right?

yes, they can break ground, unless Braman gets an injunction.

Thanks!^

So PeteU, since your an attorney, let me ask you something. Since the deal is essentially finalized, and it is being challenged in court, would the Marlins be able to actually break ground while this is going on? I mean they have not said the project is to be halted while court proceeding's play out right?

yes, they can break ground, unless Braman gets an injunction.

if their appeal could that halt agreement and goundbreaking or could marlins still break ground to have it open 2011??????

So PeteU, since your an attorney, let me ask you something. Since the deal is essentially finalized, and it is being challenged in court, would the Marlins be able to actually break ground while this is going on? I mean they have not said the project is to be halted while court proceeding's play out right?

yes, they can break ground, unless Braman gets an injunction.

if their appeal could that halt agreement and goundbreaking or could marlins still break ground to have it open 2011??????

 

 

an appeal cannot halt construction. the only thing that can halt construction is braman actually winning or the judge issuing an injunction. it is possible that braman may move for an injunction, but he probably wont get it unless he has a compelling reason, and i cant think of one at this point.

Speaking as an attorney, I am guessing the hearing today was simply an initial Motion to Dismiss on the pleadings. The bar for getting an action dismissed at this early a stage is incredibly high. Basically all you need to do is plead the basic elements of a case and it will go forward.

 

This does not mean that the case will not get dismissed further down the line. It will just take a little longer to get to that point.

 

 

i believe it was a motion for summary judgment

The spin from MLB.com:

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...sp&c_id=mlb

And here's the non-spin from Sara Talalay:

.

.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/services/newsp...0,6218074.story

.

.

.Suit against new Marlins ballpark to proceed

By Sarah Talalay | South Florida Sun-Sentinel

May 9, 2008

Article tools

E-mail Share

Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo Print Reprints Post comment Text size: MIAMI - A lawsuit filed by luxury auto dealer Norman Braman challenging a plan to finance a Florida Marlins ballpark will go forward after a judge chose Thursday not to dismiss complaints that the plan is unconstitutional and misappropriates voter-approved bond funding.

 

Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Pedro Echarte Jr. let stand Braman's claims that the proposed $515 million ballpark at the site of the Orange Bowl violates Florida's constitution. Braman's suit says the deal relies on public funding for a private business and uses $50 million approved by voters in 2004 to renovate the Orange Bowl, not build a ballpark.

 

Echarte dismissed claims that County Manager George Burgess violated the state's public records law by negotiating the agreement in private.

 

"[it's] a good day for the people of South Florida because finally we'll have an opportunity to have a trial," said Bob Martinez, an attorney representing Braman, said.

 

 

 

 

The case is scheduled to go to trial on July 1.

 

County officials declined comment, but County Attorney Robert Cuevas issued a memo to commissioners explaining the court had ruled in favor of the county on the public records issues. Cuevas said the court will consider the funding arrangements and whether the stadium "serves a paramount public purpose."

.

.

.

Wonder what the definition of "paramount public purpose" is legally in this case?

That's right, "for the people of South Florida" as if this is a regional rather than a local issue. Talk about hyperbole.

When is Bramen gonna shutup already

When is Bramen gonna shutup already

 

When either a judge, or someone else shuts him up. Seriosuly, does anyone have an interest in protesting outside of his dealership. I would do it but im disabled and am unable to. It would probably make the news, and go to show just how dedicaded us Marlins fans really are!

I am moving back to Miami on Tuesday and nothing would make me happier than staging a small protest outside a dealership. We need to put the pressure on this douche cake

I am moving back to Miami on Tuesday and nothing would make me happier than staging a small protest outside a dealership. We need to put the pressure on this douche cake

 

It has to be accorss the street, to make it legal. Since im new here, ill ask this here. Is there enough interest in this idea for a moderator/admin member to make an offical thread on this idea? I'd be happy to try and help organize it even though do to my disability I cannot particicapte. If im breaking the rules by talking about this, please someone tell me!

I may be wrong but I think you actually need a permit to protest across the street from any business.

 

I am game on participating

 

Are we targeting the Braman dealership on 2060 Biscayne Blvd., Miami, Fl. :shifty