August 4, 2004
Hi Everyone,
A very pleasant surprise in Michael's civil suit. First that the judge ruled so quickly, and second on his ruling.
Here is a recap of the judge's ruling:
1. The Motion to Dismiss by the defendant (Michael's trial lawyer) was allowed, regarding Michael's complaint concerning negligence on the part of the defendant. This ruling was based on the fact that a public defender working for CPCS has immunity from being sued for negligence.
However this does not dispose of the case because the judge goes on to state:
2. That in light of the plaintiff's (Michael) allegation that the conduct of the defendant was not merely negligent but included intentional torts. The judge continues to state that Intentional wrongdoing by a public employee is not covered by c. 258. McNamara v. Honeyman, 406 Mass. 43, 46 (1989) (this was the case that Michael stated when he was in court two weeks ago). The judge has required that Michael amend his complaint to show the intentional tort he is claiming. Michael has sixty days to file an amended complaint that sets forth specific intentional tort causes of action.
Michael is working on the amended complaint and is either done as I write this or soon will be done with it. He is having his complaint reviewed and then will submit it to the court. From there the court will submit it to the defendant for his action.
I talked with a retired court reporter this morning at my church who has taken an interest in Michael's case. He said that this was very good news and shows the judge is being very fair and giving Michael every chance to win this case.
Let's continue our prayers for Michael that the work he puts forth in this suit brings a fair ruling for him.
I'll keep you informed as further developments in this suit happen.
God bless all of you.
Dick Blanchard
dickleb@aol.com
P.S. If these email messages and updates are not in harmony with your thinking at this time please let me know, and I'll remove your name from this list.
