Supreme Court Docket
[Click here for 2003-2004 Docket]
Many documents listed on this page are PDF files that may be viewed using AdobeReader.
Tuesday, February 22
- Fifth Amendment, Due Process, Public Use, Eminent Domain
- What protection does the Fifth Amendment's public use requirement provide for individuals whose property is being condemned, not to eliminate slums or blight, but for the sole purpose of "economic development" that will perhaps increase tax revenues and improve the local economy?
- Supreme Court of Connecticut Opinion Filed: March 9, 2004
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: September 28, 2004
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Public hearing to consider the request of the Saint Paul Port Authority to take the property at 1400 Jackson Street for the mitigation of a blighted area, remediation of an environmentally contaminated area, and/or removing a public nuisance. (Public hearing continued from October 15)
"This bloggr has been victimized heinously by kathy lantrys MS609.43
City Council Meeting
29B. Public Hearing to consider the request of the Saint Paul Port Authority to take the property at 1400 Jackson Street for the mitigation of a blighted area, remediation of
nonprofit "stealing" propertys without 5th Amend. Takings without Just Compensation Sharon Anderson aka Scarrella had her Car,Personal Propertys Stolen by Lantry and her CoTarts (sp)
Port Authority Board of Commissioners:
Board Chair Joan Grzywinski, Vice-Chair Richard Anfang, Secretary-Treasurer Kathleen Lantry, Commissioner Daniel Bostrom, Commissioner Scott Hutton, Commissioner Nneka Morgan, and Commissioner John Regal.
St. Paul City Council:
Ward 1 Russ Stark, Ward 2 Lee Helgen, Ward 3 Melvin Carter III, Ward 4 Dan Bostrom, Ward 5 Pat Harris, Ward 6 Kathy Lantry, Ward 7 Dave Thune
Secretary-Treasurer Kathleen Lantry, Ward 6 Kathy Lantry
Commissioner Daniel Bostrom, Ward 4 Dan Bostrom
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
"A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust, such as a lawyer, insurance adjuster, A POLITICIAN, executive or director of a corporation or a medical research scientist or physician, has competing professional or personal interests. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties impartially. A conflict of interest exists even if no unethical or improper act results from it. A conflict of interest can create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine confidence in the person, profession, or court system."
"Those with a conflict of interests are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisions where such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal varies depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute. For example, if the governing board of a government agency is considering hiring a consulting firm for some task, and one firm being considered has, as a partner, a close relative of one of the board's members, then that board member should not vote on which firm is to be selected. In fact, to minimize any conflict, the board member should not participate in any way in the decision, including discussions."