My mother used to call things “kooky” when she was trying hard not to use more colorful language in front of the children.
The latest developments in our legal battles are kooky, damned kooky.
Both the Advertiser and the Advocate run stories attempting to make sense of the latest developments in the legal case brought by a batch of class action lawyers from Plaquimines on behalf of two mysterious clients that are supposed to be from Lafayette.
Here is, if I’ve got it right, the list of developments:
- The Lafayette Parish Utility Authority (LPUA) met and passed new rules governing the appeal of rates changes.
- Members of the LPUA expressed a desire to be shown the
extortionistsplantiffs Matthew Eastin and Elizabeth Naquin; apparently some doubt exists that they exist and have standing to sue.
- LPUA chair Marc Mouton calls the whole affair: “some net-dragging class-action lawsuit.”
- Lawyers for Lafayette ask Judge Rubin to follow the intent of the bond law and not “suspend” a court hearing for 21 days that is required by law to be decided in 10 days. (uh…duh)
- Lawyers for Lafayette ask Judge Rubin to find that the LPUA can’t rule on bond issue questions because state law defines rigid ways that involve him ruling quickly and exclusively based on that law on any matters concering bond issues.
- Lawyers from Plaquimines get around to a formal complaint against the bond issue with the LPUA.
- In the same filing where they ask for bond relief lawyers from Plaquimines ask the LPUA in to recuse itself because it is the agency responsible for making decisions about utility matters, including rate increases, and because the larger council of which the LPUA is a subset passed the laws governing, well, the LPUA. (Recuse yourself from deciding on the request we just made because you are the decision-makers. How Kooky is that?)
- Lawyers from Plaquimines also ask for the lawyers for Lafayette to recuse themselves. Because they are also lawyers for the city. Wait, won’t that be the case for any lawyers that defend the city? Wouldn’t that logic that make it impossible for the city to defend itself against “net-dragging” lawsuits? …Oh! Clever boys! (Kooky? Kooky.)
I think that’s most of it. Read the articles for details.