HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018CV149 - SUTHERLAND V. CITY OF FORT COLLINS, STEVE MILLER & IRENE JOSEY - 149D - EXHIBIT D TO MOTION1
Loehr, Rosemary Ann
From: Eric Sutherland [mailto:sutherix@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2019 10:19 PM
To: Loehr, Rosemary Ann <RLoehr@shermanhoward.com>
Cc: Mill, John W. <jmill@shermanhoward.com>; Carrie Daggett <cdaggett@fcgov.com>; John Duval
<jduval@fcgov.com>
Subject: Re: Filed today in 2018CV149
Ms. Loehr,
Please see my Response to the City's Motion to Dismiss. My theory of law regarding a petitione'rs standing to
bring a declaratory judgment action when faced with a non-claim statute was clearly articulated in that
Response. pages 5-10. There was no need to articulate this theory of law in the complaint. Stating the theory
when I stated it was the first and best time to do so.
You are apparantly unschooled in law and the procedural history of this case. You have just wasted more
money that is coming out of the pockets of my neighbors and friends.
As I have written before, I have since found authority from another jurisdiction that props up my theory of law
completely. Remarkably, the reasoning of the court in that case is nearly identical to the reasoning I presented.
Alternatively, I have not found any authority where a court has denied standing to a petitioner in the face of the
nonclaim statute. Even if an authority contravening my theory of law existed, you could not raise an argument
on appeal that you did not raise in the trial court.
Thank heavens for the First Amendment. It will survive your ignorance and willingness to argue that citizens
have no right to petition.
Eric Sutherland
Exhibit D
DATE FILED: July 25, 2019 10:54 AM
FILING ID: 1243363B9C700
CASE NUMBER: 2018CV149