City Sues Robin Hooders AGAIN, Demands Jury Trial, Damages, Attorney’s Fees

Wanted Robin HoodIf you thought the first case against Robin Hooders was ridiculous, have I got news for you:

The people calling themselves the “City of Keene” have now filed another lawsuit against the same Robin Hooders (and Pete Eyre, who has never Robin Hooded) in Cheshire “superior” court. This time, they allege the same things as before, that we have cause them damage by “harassing” and “intimidating” their parking enforcers as part of a conspiracy to meddle with their employment contracts. Now, they are seeking monetary damages plus their attorneys’ fees (which are not going to be small, given the huge number of hours they have likely already billed on just the first case alone) and are demanding a jury trial! So if it weren’t bad enough that they are wasting the court’s time with one trial, now they are going to waste even more of the court’s time AND the time of a dozen innocent jurors who could be out living their productive lives.

Hey wait… I thought the city people had originally claimed this wasn’t about the revenues they had lost from the Robin Hooding!  In fact, yes, here is the city manager himself making just that exact statement to the Union Leader:

“This is not about revenue. This is not about the city losing any money,” – City Manager John A. MacLean

From the new suit:

37. The City has suffered damages, all within the jurisdictional limits of the Court, for
the following:
a. Loss of an employee;
b. A modified schedule for another employee because of the Defendants’
behavior;
c. Hiring costs to replace the lost employee;
d. Monetary and administrative expenses with regard to counseling and other
Human Resource issues; and
e. The PEOs’ inability to properly perform their employment duties.

Item “e” is another way of them saying “LOST REVENUE”.  Looks like the truth has come out.  It IS really all about their lost revenue…and the continued attempt to crush the liberty activists in the area.  The defendants must file appearances and answers in the case within 30 days of being served with the case.  Here is the 2nd lawsuit against Robin Hooders in PDF form, as filed in Cheshire “superior” court on Monday 9/23.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


23 Comments

  1. The positive attention this new lawsuit is going to bring will be awesome!

  2. Money, money money! Give me your money!

  3. So they’re going against you guys again because KPD lost a parking enforcer? They want you guys out of the picture harder than the metal on my gun.
    Let the show go on~

  4. i wonder what mr meyer thinks

  5. If your pockets aren’t deep enough to cover this battle it may be in your best interest to sit down and discuss a settlement agreement. The peaceful thing to do would be to sit down and discuss what the best course of action would be to make all parties right? Why even use the courts when they are to corrupted at this point to come to a logical fair verdict. The sheeple chosen for a jury will more than likely side with city.

  6. If your pockets aren’t deep enough to cover this battle it may be in your best interest to sit down and discuss a settlement agreement. The peaceful thing to do would be to sit down and discuss what the best course of action would be to make all parties happy right? Why even use the courts when they are to corrupted at this point to come to a logical fair verdict. The sheeple chosen for a jury will more than likely side with city.

  7. I own nothing. I recently gave my home to the Shire Free Church.

  8. Someone should inform their attorney’s of the concept of “barratry.” (note: this is sarcasm – any competent attorney already knows of barratry)

    They could have asked for a change of venue to Superior Court, but instead chose to file a separate suit for purposes of harassment.

    Filing frivolous lawsuits for purposes of harassment is grounds for disbarring a lawyer. Someone should file a complaint with the NH Bar…

  9. No, that’s not the “peaceful thing to do,” any more than discussing preferred sexual positions with a rapist would be.

    When there is an actual dispute in which both parties have acted in good faith and reached an impasse due to honest disagreement, then there is reason for attempting to reach a settlement. For example, a customer of mine has had some snags in a project in which I’m performing a portion of the work. Those snags have delayed things such that I won’t be able to do my portion in the order I had originally planned, which screws up the planned progress payments, which would have occurred at certain milestones which will no longer happen in the order that was planned. So we sat down and discussed it, and came up with a new schedule of progress payments which works for both of us – he’s still assured that he’s not paying too much ahead of my progress, and I’m assured that I’m not doing large portions of the work without getting promptly paid. Win-win.

    When one party is acting in bad faith, flat-out attacking the other party, then a settlement makes no sense. If someone breaks into your house and you catch him, are you going to sit down and listen to his “peaceful” offer that he’ll only take your TV and stereo and all of your money, but if you let him go, he won’t also urinate on your couch out of spite?

  10. The venue has always been “superior” court, FYI.

  11. Kind regards from Montreal to everyone down in Keene.

    Seems your city is out to get Robin Hooders.

    Any chance for a counter suit by Robin Hooders against your city for harassment?

  12. I thought so, but figured I was mistaken – of course, filing an essentially-identical lawsuit in the /same/ court is an even-worse example of harassment. They would have moved to amend the existing lawsuit if they were acting in good faith, so it’s pretty evident that this is being undertaken in bad faith.

  13. Did you forget to type “capper” after “attorney’s”? Or did you erroneously insert an apostrophe where it oughtn’t to be?

  14. They probably figure they’re going to win either way.

  15. You don’t get it. This was all planned. The city people, I’m surprised to say, fell into the trap. Freestaters wither and die without sufficient court-time. This second lawsuit is just going to invigorate and embolden them. This will be like a shot of a adrenaline for the Keene liberty movement.

  16. Neither. I re-wrote my sentence and forgot to remove the apostrophe, since I’ve been our working all day and was just typing up a quick reply.

  17. Rather dangerous assumption, given that their behavior is such an eggregious violation of both the letter and spirit of the law that they will be lucky if they don’t end up being personally held liable.

  18. Incidentally, those PEO’s don’t work for free. If they all quit the city would be saving six figures a year. They ought to be paying you for the financial savings you provided by getting one of them to quit.

  19. I was kidding. I’m going to start writing an article here that will show why the City *intends* to lose either or both cases.

  20. They are going to sit their appropriate jury for a conviction. This is why they are demanding a Jury Trial. CORRUPTION IS ALIVE AND WELL! Start filing suits against them for harassment.

  21. How can you sue the same people twice for the same thing?

  22. Even though you may not own anything, a judge can still rule in the favor of the city. This would mean that you owe them money, this would take the burden from the taxpayers and put it on you. We all know what happens when you don’t pay right, it’s off to the keene spiritual retreat as you like to call it. Are you prepared to go to jail for not paying a court ordered restitution?

  23. Um, no, that’s actually not what happens. There are no longer “debtor’s prisons.” If a civil case goes against you and you are unable to pay, you simply have an outstanding debt.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. City Sues Robin Hooders AGAIN, Demands Jury Trial, Damages, Attorney’s Fees - Unofficial Network - [...] View original article. [...]
  2. City Sues Robin Hooders AGAIN, Demands Jury Trial, Damages, Attorney’s Fees - [...] Source Post Categories: NewsTags: announcement, case, corruption, court, court-on-monday, defendants, employment, human-resource, issues, jurisdictional, national, robin-hood, robin-hooding, stuff-as-before…
  3. City Sues Robin Hooders AGAIN, Demands Jury Trial, Damages … | Merolog Web Host - [...] Read More: City Sues Robin Hooders AGAIN, Demands Jury Trial, Damages … [...]
  4. CopBlock Radio Show - Episode 24 | Cop Block - [...] Keene Sues Robin Hood Again with First Case Still Going [...]
  5. CopBlock Radio Show – Episode 24 - Unofficial Network - [...] Keene Sues Robin Hood Again with First Case Still Going [...]
  6. CopBlock Radio Show – Episode 24 - [...] Keene Sues Robin Hood Again with First Case Still Going [...]
  7. CopBlock Radio Show – Episode 24 | ANOMALY RADIO - [...] Keene Sues Robin Hood Again with First Case Still Going [...]
  8. Robin Hood of Keene Cases DISMISSED!! - Unofficial Network - [...] decision from Cheshire “superior” court judge John C Kissinger Jr., which also dismisses the second civil case against us that…

Care to comment?