It appears that John Murphy and or Atwater Murphy exposing Lesbian Judge Joanne Smith is still alive. SHAME SUPREME COURT MN FOR DENYING MURPHY WHO IS DYING, FURTHER WILFUL FAILURE OF JUSTICE GILDEA TO REAPPOINT LESBIAN JUDGE JOANNE SMITH TO THE SCAP PANEL 2012.
Crimes Against Humanity: JohnRyberg_SexOffender v. SCAP ...
crimes-against-humanity.blogspot.com/.../johnryberg...Share
Shared on Google+. View the post.
Mar 11, 2011 – SCAP JudgesLesbianJoanneSmith,KathleenGearin,LeslieMetzen et al ... (1) JOANNE SMITH: re: Institutionalized John Patrick Murphy and ...
A life in prison | mndaily.com - The Minnesota Daily
Nov 2, 2009 – Facing colon cancer, John Patrick Murphy, a former University student ... to prove his involvement in terroristic acts against Judge Joanne Smith, Busch ... of judges and placing gay and lesbian classified ads on their behalf.
crimes-against-humanity.blogspot.com/.../johnryberg...Share
Shared on Google+. View the post.
|
Mar 11, 2011 – SCAP JudgesLesbianJoanneSmith,KathleenGearin,LeslieMetzen et al ... (1) JOANNE SMITH: re: Institutionalized John Patrick Murphy and ...A life in prison | mndaily.com - The Minnesota Daily
Nov 2, 2009 – Facing colon cancer, John Patrick Murphy, a former University student ... to prove his involvement in terroristic acts against Judge Joanne Smith, Busch ... of judges and placing gay and lesbian classified ads on their behalf.
|
SPECIAL RELEASE OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
FILED AUGUST 27, 2012
A12-0920 League of Women Voters Minnesota; Common Cause, a District of
Columbia nonprofit corporation; Jewish Community Action; Gabriel
Herbers; Shannon Doty; Gretchen Nickence; John Harper Ritten;
Kathryn Ibur, Petitioners, vs. Mark Ritchie, in his capacity as Secretary
of State of the State of Minnesota, and not in his individual capacity,
Respondent.
Supreme Court.
1. Permissive intervention of the Minnesota House and Senate is appropriate when the intervenors present common questions of law and fact with the present action. Intervention of a nonprofit organization is inappropriate, however, when the entity’s only interest in the proposed constitutional amendment at issue is lobbying for passage and the entity’s interests will be adequately represented by the House and Senate intervenors.
2. Minnesota Statutes § 204B.44 (2010), provides this court with subject-matter jurisdiction over a claim that a ballot question is so misleading that it violates the Minnesota Constitution because it deprives voters of the constitutional right to cast a vote for or against the proposed constitutional amendment.
3. The ballot question on a proposed constitutional amendment implementing a photographic identification requirement for Minnesota voters is not so unreasonable and misleading as to be a palpable evasion of the constitutional requirement in Minn. Const. art. IX, § 1, that constitutional amendments shall be submitted to a popular vote.
Petition denied. Per Curiam.
Dissenting, Justices Alan C. Page and Paul H. Anderson.
Dissenting, Justice Paul H. Anderson.
A12-1149 Warren Limmer, et al., Petitioners (A12-1149), vs. Mark Ritchie, in his
A12-1258 official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Minnesota, et al,
Respondents (A12-1149), and Mary Kiffmeyer, et al., Petitioners
(A12-1258), vs. Mark Richtie, in his official capacity as Secretary of
State of the State of Minnesota, et al., Respondents (A12-1258).
Supreme Court.
When the Legislature has included a title for a ballot question in the bill proposing a constitutional amendment, the “appropriate title” the Secretary of State must provide for that ballot question, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 204D.15, subd. 1 (2010), is the title designated by the Legislature.
Per Curiam.
Dissenting, Justices Alan C. Page and Paul H. Anderson.
Dissenting, Justice Paul H. Anderson.
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
FILED WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2012
NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.
A11-0070 De-Aunteze Lavion Bobo, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.
A11-1671 Hennepin County.
1. The postconviction court did not err when it failed to hold an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s ineffective-assistance-of-appellate-counsel claim because appellant failed to allege facts that, if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, would satisfy the first prong of the Strickland test.
2. The postconviction court erred when it failed to hold an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s newly discovered evidence claim because the record does not conclusively establish that appellant failed to allege facts that, if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, could satisfy the Rainer test.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Chief Justice Lorie S. Gildea.
Concurring in part, dissenting in part, Justices David R. Stras and Christopher J. Dietzen.
A10-1992 Remodeling Dimensions, Inc., Appellant, vs. Integrity Mutual Insurance Company,
Respondent.
Court of Appeals.
1. Homeowners’ claim for moisture damage caused by the contractor to preexisting walls and structure located adjacent to work performed by the contractor satisfies the definition of an “occurrence,” and is not excluded under the business-risk exclusion of the applicable commercial general liability insurance policy.
2. When an insurer notifies its insured that it accepts defense of an arbitration claim under a reservation of rights that includes covered and noncovered claims, the insurer not only has a duty to defend the claim, but also to disclose to its insured the insured’s interest in obtaining a written explanation of the award that identifies the claims or theories of recovery actually proved and the portions of the award attributable to each.
Reversed and remanded. Justice Christopher J. Dietzen.
A11-1052 In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against David Lawrence McCormick,
a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 259500.
Supreme Court.
Respondent’s conduct warrants a 60-day suspension. Per Curiam.
A12-1014 In re Petition of Jesse Pfliger to Correct Omission Regarding Candidate Filing
for Minnesota State Senate.
Supreme Court.
The Secretary of State properly rejected an affidavit of candidacy for elective office that lacked the telephone number required by Minn. Stat. § 204B.06, subd. 1b(a) (2010).
Petition denied. Per Curiam.
A12-1139 Rae Anderson, Petitioner, vs. Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Secretary of State, Respondent.
Supreme Court.
The Secretary of State properly rejected the nominating petition of a candidate whose statement of political party or political principle exceeded the limit under Minn. Stat. § 204B.07, subd. 1(c) (2010), of three words.
Petition denied. Per Curiam.
Added to website on August 23, 2012
ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR FURTHER REVIEW
Filed August 21, 2012
(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)
1. State of Minnesota vs. John Scott Zavoral – A11-1063 – Denied
2. In re the Custody of: D.T.R. Michael L. Richards, Petitioner Below vs. Derek Reiter,
Lynette A. Marthe – A10-1098 – Denied
3. State of Minnesota vs. George Allen Machen – A11-1034 – Denied
4. State of Minnesota vs. Reginald Neal Birts – A10-0322 – Denied
5. State of Minnesota vs. John Wesley Defatte, Sr. – A11-0908 – Denied
6. State of Minnesota vs. Walter Alexander Williams – A11-1158 – Denied
7. Steven M. Johnson vs. USL Products, Inc., Defendant, Clam Corporation, Inc. – A11-1774 –
Denied
8. Mary Jane Novitske vs. Target Corporation – A11-1551 – Denied
9. State of Minnesota vs. Roger Allen King – A11-0956 – Denied
10. State of Minnesota vs. Robin Kimberly Magee – A11-0772 – Denied
11. State of Minnesota vs. Bret Thomas Ninefeldt – A11-1061 – Denied
12. State of Minnesota vs. Corey Daniel Bell – A11-0933 – Denied
13. Red Wing Port Authority vs. Osemi, Inc. – A11-1851 – Denied
14. Paul Orsello vs. Steven D. Gaffney, et al. – A12-0900 – Denied
15. State of Minnesota vs. Juan Francisco Martinez – A11-1179 – Denied
16. State of Minnesota vs. Steven White – A11-1030 – Denied
17. State of Minnesota vs. John Leslie Anderson – A11-1002 – Denied
18. State of Minnesota vs. Carol Jane Baker – A11-1590 – Denied
19. State of Minnesota vs. Michael David Roberts – A11-1947 – Granted/Stayed
20. In Re John Patrick Murphy, John Patrick Murphy vs. State of Minnesota – A12-0559 – Denied
21. AgStar Financial Services, FLCA vs. HJR Farms, LLC, et al., Steven J. Bautch, et al., Todd E.
Rodenwald, Sarah Rodenwald – A11-1571 – Denied
22. State of Minnesota vs. Theran Robert Stai – A11-1095 – Denied
23. DeJuan Haywood Higgins vs. City of Bloomington, et al. – A11-2059 – Denied
24. State of Minnesota vs. Donna Jo Spangler – A11-0797 – Denied
25. In re the Guardianship of Christine Rose Samson, Proposed Ward and Protected Person –
A11-2180 – Denied
26. State of Minnesota vs. DeAngelos DeManye Cook a/k/a DeAngelas Cook – A11-1309 – Denied
27. State of Minnesota vs. Jeremy Roy Kruger – A11-0713 – Denied
28. State of Minnesota vs. William Arthur Bickel – A11-0982 – Granted/Stayed
29. State of Minnesota vs. Chia Yang – A10-1590 – Denied
30. Donald Morris Fernow, Country Mutual Insurance Company vs. Michael Donald Gould, et al. –
A11-1904 – Granted31. Robert McCaughtry, et al. vs. City of Red Wing – A10-0332 – Granted32. State of Minnesota, byFriends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness vs. AT&T Mobility, LLC, et al.
– A11-1725 – Denied
33. Yatau Her vs. State of Minnesota – A11-1462 – Denied
34. Joseph Anthony Favors vs. Jamie Jungers, et al. – A11-2055 – Denied
35. In re Keith A. Thompson, Grefe Construction, Inc., Otimbum LeRoy Wilson, Jr. and Daniel
P. Freiborg, Juanda R. White, trustee for the next-of-kin of Deallo D. Felder, deceased vs.
Otimbum LeRoy Wilson, Jr., et al., Keith A. Thompson, et al. – A12-0838 – Denied
36. Steven Dargi, et al., Citizens Independent Bank, Involuntary Co-Plaintiff vs. City of Golden
Valley, Northwest Asphalt, Inc. – A12-0727 – Denied
37. State of Minnesota vs. Danny Lewis Stamps – A11-0760 – Denied
38. State of Minnesota vs. Natalie Ann Brown – A11-0662 – Denied
39. Frontier Pipeline, LLC vs. Metropolitan Council – A12-0022 – Denied
40. State of Minnesota vs. Joshua Dean Lee – A11-0978 – Denied
41. Mark Kohout vs. Homecomings Financial, LLC, et al., and Mark Kohout vs. Ronald R. Reitz,
et al., GMAC Mortgage, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, International Fidelity
Insurance Company – A11-1765 – Denied
42. State of Minnesota vs. Shane Michael Brunner – A11-1077 – Denied
43. State of Minnesota vs. Toraus Marquis Eason – A11-0835 – Denied
