Comm2A files second Carry Suit, Batty v. Albertelli

Comm2A

Director Comm2a
Dealer
NES Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
168
Likes
1,256
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Comm2A has done what the court has asked and refiled against Weymouth in a separate suit. This time we brought new dance partners. Weymouth is now joined by Winchester and Lowell. The new case is Batty v. Albertelli and more can be found here.

ETA: We will be amending this complaint and if you want to see your town on this list of defendants all you need to do is contact us if you had applied for your LTC or renewed after 8/14/14. We are looking for more people from Lowell and Winchester as well.
 
Last edited:
Comm2A has done what the court has asked and refiled against Weymouth in a separate suit. This time we brought new dance partners. Weymouth is now joined by Winchester and Lowell. The new case is Batty v. Albertelli and more can be found here.

ETA: We will be amending this complaint and if you want to see your town on this list of defendants all you need to do is contact us if you had applied for your LTC or renewed after 8/14/14. We are looking for more people from Lowell and Winchester as well.

Emphasis on people who have received their LTC since 8/14/2014. Report Here.
 
I asked a friend who just got a restricted license from BOSTON last fall if they want to participate. This could get interesting. [wink]
 
offline question said:
I would love to add 'my' city to this case, but why does it have to be after 8/14/14?
It's a legal issue with the new law and sustaining a federal civil rights claim. Like a civil class action, not being named doesn't mean it doesn't apply to you and your town if we win.
 
If the law was passed on 8./14/14 but didn't go into effect until 1/1/2015 - why looking at those that got caught in "limbo?"
 
How about non-residents who have applied through the State Police?

Not yet. Once we have residents, we can deal with the second order issue of whether the constitution means the states need to grant these privileges and immunities to non residents. Of course, they need to but of course they will claim it doesn't and claim it's perfectly acceptable to enslave polka dotted people because Lincoln only freed them black folk. It's a gigantic CF of a legal make work program...
 
Hopefully someone who was recently restricted in Medford will step forward. Nothing would brighten this otherwise dismal winter than seeing Chief Sacco as a named party in a lawsuit over his utter disregard for the law abiding residents of the community he allegedly serves.
 
is there a reason why you don't go after EVERY police department that infringes?
Watertown or Brookline for example?

just curious thanks.
 
Not anymore, looking at Comm2A's data.

About 60% unrestricted in Winchester.

30% seems to be the baseline level of unrestricted in communities where only persons of privilege, power and influence get such LTCs (Brookline, Springfield and Lowell all hover around the 30% unrestricted mark)
 
I would love for them to go after Brookline.

Comm2A needs a specific plaintiff in each town. If there are any Brooklinites who would like to step forward, email info at comm2a dot org.

We are effectively "going after everyone", as we seek a decision that will change public policy in the area and be binding on all departments in the state. Specific plaintiffs and defendants are a tool towards that end.
 
It looks like there was a hearing scheduled for Batty et al V Albertelli et al is there any up date? I am interested in the out come since the city council told Taylor to meet with gun owners of Lowell and come up with a less convoluted policy.
 
Today's hearing is strictly on scheduling and case management. Nothing substantive will come out of it. To get a sense for today's proceedings, you can review the parties' Joint Statement.

The way I am reading Section 3: Contemplated Motions seems to indicate that Lowell could be dropped as a Defendant if they introduce their new LTC policy and then remove the current Plaintiff's restrictions if they so asked. Is this a correct read?
 
From today's conference:

The Court imposes following deadlines: Initial disclosures shall be due by 12/15/2015. Amendments to pleadings shall be due by 12/15/2015. Written requests for discovery shall be served by 2/1/2016. Depositions, other than expert depositions, and fact discovery to be completed by 6/3/2016. Expert discovery not anticipated. Dispositive Motions shall be due by 6/30/2016. Status conferences set for 2/9/2016 at 2:30 p.m. and 5/6/2016 at 2:00 p.m
 
A wise man once said" In the halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls"

Halls of justice painted green
Money talking
Power wolves beset your door
Hear them stalking
Soon you'll please their appetite
They devour
Hammer of justice crushes you
Overpower
The ultimate in vanity
Exploiting their supremacy
I can't believe the things you say
I can't believe
I can't believe the price you pay
Nothing can save you
[video=youtube_share;CQ4GbcuBvUQ]http://youtu.be/CQ4GbcuBvUQ[/video]​
 
Back
Top Bottom