Tuesday, May 24, 2011


SORRY CHARLIE ATKINSON INSISTS ON BEING BROWNSVILLE'S BIGGEST LOSER WITHOUT EVER LOSING A POUND

UPDATE:  The Herald is reporting the following:  "Sossi countered that Phillips was trying to sidestep the Texas Election Code instead. Phillips said that the action he had filed on Atkinson’s behalf was not an election contest, but instead, that he was contesting her eligibility. “That is not a backdoor,” Phillips said."  Atkinson's lawyer actually made this argument.  Beyond bizarre since the lawsuit he penned for Atkinson actually says he filed it under the election contest code.  Anything short of sanctions makes a mockery of our courts.  Apparently Montoya was not lying - he was just reporting the statement of an unethical and incompetent lawyer.

I saw the story on line with the Herald concerning Atkinson's attempts to enjoin Jessica from being sworn in.  My first question is how does a man without a job afford an attorney out of San Antonio?  Does it have something to do with the continued lies about Pan Am he posted this morning to the Herald and his insistence that Fly Frontera needs to be given a chance?

Chris Davis uploaded the lawsuit.  It can be found here

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/80252667/Charlie-Atkinson-Original-Petition-for-Declaratory-Judgement

or here

http://www.cafebrownsville.com/2011/05/dont-go-away-mad-just-go-away.html

Through the lawsuit Atkinson's lawyer claims this is an election contest.  I decided to check to see if Montoya posted something on it. 

I would say in disbelief - but I cannot say that at this point because we know if Montoya speaks he lies - this is what he claims happened in the court.

"Phillips told the court that they were not contesting the validity of the election through their petition, but rather her right to run for office in District 2 because she had not met the requirements of the Texas election Code that she live at least six months within the district where she was running for office."

The lawsuit is replete with references that this is an election  contest and brought under the election contest code, but Montoya claims it is not an election contest.  Why? Because the law is black and white, in an election contest the original winner remains in office until all appeals are done, and therefor no TRO or injunction is possible - as a matter of law.  This was tried in the Diana Flores case out of Dallas.  While we lost every time at the trial level she remained in office pending every mandamus or appeal, which we won.  No TRO or injunction is allowed in an election contest.

Years ago I represented John Loza former Dallas city counsel person before the grand jury on  criminal charges - the DA chose to seek a criminal indictment rather than allow the parties to fight it out in a civil proceedings.  The same evidence of living in the district used by Jessica was used by John - the grand jury refused to indict and John went on to represent the district.  Further, I represented Diana Flores  - in an election context - I won several mandamuses - the first being an order removing her from office pending the appeal - I also won several appeals in the case - we lost every time in the trial court - we won every mandamus and appeal - pending each mandamus and or appeal under the law she was allowed to remain in office - Diana's case lasted 6 years  - even if Atkinson were to win because Banales were to ignore the law, Jessica would remain in office - the election code is black and white on this issue.

But note, in the Pan Am story today, before going to court Atkinson announced his continued support for Fly Frontera - in his post he point blank lies about the planes - The BEDC report noted that Brownsville was going to have to pay to bring the planes to Brownsville - so they are not here - as to the timeline for Pan Am - Pan Am and St Louis this week are signing the contracts with China Cargo - the planes will be flying by years end.

This guy still wants to give $1.5 million dollars to Public Charter for Fly Frontera- this according to the BEDC was the minimum guarantee.  He does not have a job - who is paying for this San Antonio lawyer?

 So now we know Robert Lopez supports Atkinson and Fly Frontera - more on that tomorrow.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Fly Frontera has nothing to do with the filing of the Atkinson lawsuit, the only lawsuit that is going to be filed is against Pan Am and its owners and investors.

Fly Frontera

BobbyWC said...

keep on dreaming Carlito - there is no lawsuit to be filed - Pan Am had nothing to do with the BEDC report - but just dream on

further only a moron believes you can sue investors - Carlito you need to stop speaking like a fool.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Mr Bobby,

Though I appreciate his, uh, "tenaciousness" I think it's time for him to move on.

Seriously, at the end of the day, she was elected for the people BY the people she will represent.

The voice that was heard was theirs that day.

Til next time...

Anonymous said...

"No job"? Are you kidding me? Please don't tell me ANOTHER man over 40 STILL depending on his parents or in-law's? WHY does that seem to be the way of life for some in this city? What an example for their kids to follow! PAY HIGH TAXES like the rest of us, better yet:
GET TO WORK like the rest of us!

BobbyWC said...

I am unconfortable with teh above commment - I have no evidence he li ves with his parents -s some people are claiming he is suspended others are saying he has been fired and is appeal - I do not know which one it is - I have confirmed with Homeland Security he no longer works for Homeland Security - whether he is suspended or appealing a discharge who knows

I decided on allowing the post because he invites this type conduct - he lies - he disrespects - he deserves what he is getting

bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Bobby, no day off. Too much of a story with Charlie vs Jessica.

Anonymous said...

Didn't mean to make you "uncomfortable" I did not mean he WAS, I just know for a fact that there are a LOT of men out there over 40 who still DO depend on their parents/in-laws when it really should be the other way around (especially if they're elderly or sick). That's another story.

My bad.

BobbyWC said...

Thanks - on the issue of adult children living with their parents - big issue with me - in fact I deal with this issue all of the time in helping seniors - I see all of the time children trying to get the parents to put the house in their name

I am actually working on a project right now - it sickens me because everyone has told this woman he son is trying to rob her blind and she refuses to accept it - the only good news is, she has refused to sign anything without my permission and will never allow him to put anything in his name - but I see this garbage all of the time.

The first WIll I did some 20 years ago this man grabbed his mother when I told him he needed to elave the room while we discussed the Will - it was none of his business.

I actually had a woman one time try and dictate the Will of the man she was about to marry while we were mediating a case against a hospital involving her late husband - he died at the scene of the accident and the hospital tried to bill her $25,000 for emergency services at the hospital - they called her for months accusing her of lying that he died at the scene - they paid some 50k to settle the lawsuit.

Bobby WC