Michigan Gun Owners files suit against Ann Arbor Public Schools

[dmd7765]

Michigan Gun Owners, Inc (MGO) has filed suit against Ann Arbor Public Schools (AAPS).

This lawsuit comes on the heels of AAPS enacting policies 5400, 5410, and 5420. Policy 5400 allows the Superintendent to close schools an cancel events if there is an emergency. It specifically states the presence of a dangerous weapon, which includes a pistol, is an emergency. Policy 5410 designates all Ann Arbor School's property as " Dangerous Weapon & Disruption-Free Zones". It also mandates that the Superintendent enforce these policies. Policy 5420 states that no person in possession of a dangerous weapon will be allowed to be on Ann Arbor Public School Property. Michigan Gun Owners is seeking a declaratory judgement against AAPS from promulgating and enforcing any policy that is preempted by state law.

It costs Michigan Gun Owners, Inc. money to prosecute lawsuits such as this one. Won't you consider making a donation to our legal fund today?

http://www.migunowners.org/forum/content.php?128-Donate-to-MGO

[Tallbear]

Now that's worthy of a donation by "ALL" gun owners in Michigan.

I'm in.....

[DrScaryGuy]

How about if I just go ahead and finally renew my membership? I do hereby request you don't need to send me any of the member stuff.

[dmd7765]

Thanks for the donation

[TheQ]

Kudos, MGO. Let me stand on my head as I read the complaint. ;) (Look at the PDF)

[mikeb32]

Thanks to all that have sent in Donations to the Legal Defense Fund, Keep em coming, Guys!!

[DV8r]

Here it is right-side-up:

MGO vs AAPS.pdf (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/41065976/MGO%20vs%20AAPS.pdf)

[mikeb32]

Here it is right-side-up:

MGO vs AAPS.pdf (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/41065976/MGO%20vs%20AAPS.pdf)

Thanks Young Man!!

[mikeb32]

Not sure when it may air, but I did a quick 5 minute spot with WWJ News this morning.

[PDinDetroit]

Good job.

[PeeDee]

Here it is right-side-up:

MGO vs AAPS.pdf (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/41065976/MGO%20vs%20AAPS.pdf)

Not that it's critical, but when I try to open it I get a page that looks like Egyptian cuneiform / coded symbols.
Tried 3 different ways to 'save,' 'run,' 'open' but no dice.

Probably my computer?

[esq_stu]

Donation to MGO sent.

[Tallbear]

Not that it's critical, but when I try to open it I get a page that looks like Egyptian cuneiform / coded symbols.
Tried 3 different ways to 'save,' 'run,' 'open' but no dice.

Probably my computer?

Works for me.

[mikeb32]

Thanks Guys for the Donations. It's keeping me Busy, but its for a good cause!!

[PhotoTom]

Not sure when it may air, but I did a quick 5 minute spot with WWJ News this morning.

I heard two excerpts during the noon hour...

One were you spoke of the "big word, unalienable rights"
The other where you spoke of wanting AA schools (and others) to be set straight by the courts.

[mikeb32]

I heard two excerpts during the noon hour...

One were you spoke of the "big word, unalienable rights"
The other where you spoke of wanting AA schools (and others) to be set straight by the courts.

It took me almost 5 minutes to get that big word out!!

[Boondockdad]

Excellent work, thank you

Seems pretty open and shut
of course, IANAL

When do you expect action on this?

Is it possible a judge could deny?

This group of "educators" strikes me as particularly self-righteous
like they'd either ignore an order setting them straight, or pursue other options;
what would be the implications of disregarding?
and (without showing our hand?) are there any 'other options' for them?

[esq_stu]

Is it possible a judge could deny?Yes. No such thing as open and shut.

Even with a friendly judge, these things get dragged out with motions, adverse decisions on all kinds of issues, and ultimately one or both sides appeal. I don't expect finality for a long time.

You never know. I've been surprised both ways (winning and losing).

[PDinDetroit]

Excellent work, thank you

Seems pretty open and shut
of course, IANAL

When do you expect action on this?

Is it possible a judge could deny?

This group of "educators" strikes me as particularly self-righteous
like they'd either ignore an order setting them straight, or pursue other options;
what would be the implications of disregarding?
and (without showing our hand?) are there any 'other options' for them?

1. Takes a while, even for an Injunction.

2. Yes, see judge in CADL v MOC. That action took about 2 years IIRC and I believe that the District Court Judge got "spanked" pretty nicely.

[PDinDetroit]

Donation Made

[Shyster]

Today I've given telephone interviews to
WJR, Michigan Public Radio and WEMU. I had lunch with a Detroit Free Press reporter too.

[dmd7765]

Today I've given telephone interviews to
WJR, Michigan Public Radio and WEMU. I had lunch with a Detroit Free Press reporter too.

Thanks for all the hard work!!

[PDinDetroit]

Today I've given telephone interviews to
WJR, Michigan Public Radio and WEMU. I had lunch with a Detroit Free Press reporter too.

Cool.

[PhotoTom]

Today I've given telephone interviews to
WJR, Michigan Public Radio and WEMU. I had lunch with a Detroit Free Press reporter too.

FINALLY heard the 7.34 second sound byte from your telephone interview...AFTER an hour of listening to the play-by-play of the SCOTUS gay rights coverage!...!

[Shyster]

I also just logged my very first threatening telephone call from an anonymous number. SMH

[Mia'sUncle]

Good job mgo. I had it pretty much set in my mind to not support, monetarily, this group. I got the wallet out today. Do things like this and you just might change my mind again.

[Shyster]

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/04/28/second-amendmend-lawsuit-schools/26528953/

[somebody]

Good job mgo. I had it pretty much set in my mind to not support, monetarily, this group. I got the wallet out today. Do things like this and you just might change my mind again.

Wait...so you were NOT going to support MGO monetarily, and then today you did, and now you're saying if MGO goes to bat for our rights, you're going to change your mind and NOT support MGO again? I think you probably have a typo in there or some unclear phrasing...

[somebody]

I also just logged my very first threatening telephone call from an anonymous number. SMH

Yeah, and it's the folks who SUPPORT gun rights that we're all supposed to be afraid of, right?

[mikeb32]

I also just logged my very first threatening telephone call from an anonymous number. SMH

Then that is two......Received one this morning on the MGO "HotLine" phone.

[Purebass04]

Then that is two......Received one this morning on the MGO "HotLine" phone.

May want to notify the police. At least get it documented if nothing else. It can't hurt...

[Purebass04]

Hey Shyster, when you served the notice to AA schools at their building, were you OC?

[SteveS]

Today I've given telephone interviews to
WJR, Michigan Public Radio and WEMU. I had lunch with a Detroit Free Press reporter too.

Great job!

[Shyster]

Hey Shyster, when you served the notice to AA schools at their building, were you OC?

I should have but I was wearing a Crossbreed

[Tallbear]

Michigan Gun Owners sue Ann Arbor schools over gun ban
By Michigan Radio Newsroom • 5 hours ago
Share
Twitter

Facebook

Google+

Email

Credit michigandaily.com

A policy to ban guns in Ann Arbor schools is heading to the courtroom.

The policy stems from an incident last month when an Ann Arbor resident openly carried a gun to a high school choir concert.

Now, the Michigan Gun Owners organization and an Ann Arbor parent are suing the district over the policy, which they say violates state law.

James Makowski is an attorney for M-G-O.

“One of the arguments I hear is, 'Think of the children, protect the children.' Well, that’s precisely what we’re trying to do,” Makowski said.

State law says local government units don't have the authority to regulate firearms.

The Michigan Open Carry organization is suing the Clio school district over a similar ban on carrying guns on school grounds.

http://michiganradio.org/post/michigan-gun-owners-sue-ann-arbor-schools-over-gun-ban

[AleksanderSuave]

featuring one of our very own!

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/04/28/second-amendmend-lawsuit-schools/26528953/



Is it reasonable for teachers and parents to worry that a person is openly carrying a gun around kindergartners in a public school? Maybe; but gun-rights buffs in Michigan beg to differ.

635658368122476990-LaitnerBuy Photo
(Photo: Bill Laitner, Detroit Free Press)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
State law give broad rights to carry a firearm openly in Michigan.
Those with a CPL %u2014 concealed pistol license %u2014 can carry a handgun, but openly, in restricted areas.
Gun-rights buffs say a CPL holder can carry openly in public schools; but a few schools object.
A statewide gun-rights group this week sued the Ann Arbor Public Schools over its new weapons ban.
163
CONNECT
9
TWEET
LINKEDIN
44
COMMENT
EMAIL
MORE
A statewide gun-rights group and a father with children in the Ann Arbor schools are suing the school district over its new policies that ban firearms on school grounds.

The lawsuit, filed in Washtenaw County Circuit Court, comes just as a crowd of about 500 gun-rights advocates are expected Wednesday at the annual Second Amendment March around the Capitol Building in Lansing. After hearing speakers, the crowd of pistol packers customarily stride into the chambers of state lawmakers, prominently bearing their arm.

"We like to remind the legislators who we are and what our rights are," said Jim Makowski, a Dearborn lawyer who filed the lawsuit and said he personally served it Monday afternoon at the offices of Ann Arbor Public Schools. Makowski planned to march Wednesday in Lansing and is scheduled to speak from the Capitol steps.


DETROIT FREE PRESS
Priest says no more gun classes at Ann Arbor parish

The lawsuit challenges the Ann Arbor school board's three rulings on April 15: Policy 5400 lets the superintendent close schools and cancel events if staff see any dangerous weapons, including a handgun; Policy 5410 designates all school property as "Dangerous Weapon & Disruption-free Zones"; and Policy 5420 says no one possessing a dangerous weapon, including a handgun, can be on school property, with exceptions being police officers or individuals hand-picked by the superintendent.

Gun-rights advocates contend that the three policies violate state laws regarding gun possession on public property, including school grounds. State law allows a gun owner to openly carry a firearm on school property and other so-called "pistol-free zones" if the owner has a concealed pistol license, said State Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor. In addition, another state law — called the pre-emption statute — says that no local unit of government, such as a school district, may pass gun regulations in conflict with state law.

Irwin said he is not bothered by people openly carrying firearms, but he said "the problem is, how do you tell the difference between a violent armed attackers and a frightened patriotic type who is living in fear and wants to carry a gun all the time?"

Ann Arbor school officials could not be reached Tuesday to comment on the lawsuit. But in recent statements, the district repeatedly said that its board members, administrators and other school staff want the schools to be "weapon-free zones."


DETROIT FREE PRESS
Bill would shut Michigan open-carry gun loophole

According to the district's web site, "Michigan law authorizes school districts to exercise considerable power to ensure proper operation of their schools according to the Revised School Code." The web site goes on to say: "Public School Districts may restrict the exercise of certain constitutional rights, so long as those restrictions are reasonably related to legitimate education concerns such as causing disruption to the educational campus, activity or event."

Letting schools suspend the Constitution amounts to fighting words for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit — the Michigan Gun Owners, a group of hundreds of gun-rights advocates; and Ulysses Wong, father of a 15-year-old son and 10-year-old daughter in the Ann Arbor schools.

Wong, a computer technician for a medical-billing agency, said he would like to carry a gun when picking up his children from school but fears that school officials will call the police. He said he'd been carrying a gun for about seven years but did not wear one into a school because state law requires that it be worn in the open. He'd prefer to carry it concealed under his coat, he said. Wong's wife doesn't carry a gun but supports him in the lawsuit, he said.

"My wife, when I said I wanted to file this lawsuit, she basically said do what I believe is right," Wong said.

Makowski, who lives in Riverview, also is the father of two school-age children. He said 70% of his practice involves defending clients in firearms cases. His license plate reads GUNLWYR. Like many gun owners, he insisted that the Ann Arbor schools would be safer with licensed gun-owners carrying their weapons inside the buildings.

And he said that banning guns in a school or anywhere else won't stop a criminal from entering with a firearm.

Speaking sarcastically, he said: "Of course, someone with evil intent is going to stay away from the Ann Arbor Public Schools because they have banned guns."

Contact Bill Laitner: blaitner@freepress.com or 313-223-4485.

[french_guy_2012]

Michigan Gun Owners sue Ann Arbor schools over gun ban
By Michigan Radio Newsroom • 5 hours ago
Share
Twitter

Facebook

Google+

Email

Credit michigandaily.com

A policy to ban guns in Ann Arbor schools is heading to the courtroom.

The policy stems from an incident last month when an Ann Arbor resident openly carried a gun to a high school choir concert.

Now, the Michigan Gun Owners organization and an Ann Arbor parent are suing the district over the policy, which they say violates state law.

James Makowski is an attorney for M-G-O.

“One of the arguments I hear is, 'Think of the children, protect the children.' Well, that’s precisely what we’re trying to do,” Makowski said.

State law says local government units don't have the authority to regulate firearms.

The Michigan Open Carry organization is suing the Clio school district over a similar ban on carrying guns on school grounds.

http://michiganradio.org/post/michigan-gun-owners-sue-ann-arbor-schools-over-gun-ban

I've read all the previous posts, but I do have 1 question after reading that last one though: who really needs to bring a gun (OC or CPL) to a high school choir concert?

[Mia'sUncle]

You've never heard of a high school getting shot up and people murdered French guy?

[Boondockdad]

I've read all the previous posts, but I do have 1 question after reading that last one though: who really needs to bring a gun (OC or CPL) to a high school choir concert?

yeah, I only carry when I need to

/facepalm

[PhotoTom]

I've read all the previous posts, but I do have 1 question after reading that last one though: who really needs to bring a gun (OC or CPL) to a high school choir concert?

We (legal gun owners) shouldn't have to worry about tripping-up and accidentally breaking the law. It isn't about consciously bringing a firearm into a high school concert...it's about not having to purposely leave it out of our immediate possession.

If we didn't have this silly restriction on our licenses that we cannot carry a pistol concealed in a school, this would all be a non-issue.

Can you imagine if we had all of these laws restricting carrying a smart phone? It would be a huge PITA. Frankly, an inconsiderate person carrying a smart phone is a lot more bothersome than an individual with a holstered pistol (concealed or openly carried).

Now...imagine this...
You're sitting in the high school enjoying the concert when all of the sudden, some nut job runs in and grabs a kid and slits his throat with a huge knife in front of everybody...then grabs your child and puts the knife to his/her throat. Sure would be nice if there were a legal gun owner around to put a quick stop to this nut job's actions, no?

The bottom line is...contrary to the image that the anti's would like to portray of legal gun owners that chose to carry their pistols for defense...nobody is itching to kill. It's simply about being prepared should the need arise and not having to worry about tripping-up and carrying in a no-carry area, having to purposely unconceal the firearm, etc. But, while these restrictive laws exist, some choose not to disarm themselves and feel vulnerable as a result.

[midlandshooter]

GOOD. Sue them for MILLIONS. Make them broke, get people fired, possibly arrested. GIT EM!

[mikeb32]

Mods Please Merge this thread with one of the others, I think this is number 3 or 4

[mikeb32]

Well Stated, Tom!

[G22]

GOOD. Sue them for MILLIONS. Make them broke, get people fired, possibly arrested. GIT EM!

I believe the suit MGO filed is not for compensation, but for compliance.

Mike, I will look for an appropriate thread to merge this one into.

[mikeb32]

I believe the suit MGO filed is not for compensation, but for compliance.

Mike, I will look for an appropriate thread to merge this one into.

Thank You Young Man.

[Rootsy]

NPR had a blurb on the case this morning. Didn't mention MGO by name. Did actually state that OC with CPL is legal in a school in Michigan. Neglected to state that Michigan has Pre-emption and that this is really what this case is about. Compliance with the law.

[somebody]

Suing the district for money would just be taxpayer money, right? So compliance seems like the better way to go.

[G22]

Mods Please Merge this thread with one of the others, I think this is number 3 or 4

Duplicate threads merged

[midlandshooter]

Suing the district for money would just be taxpayer money, right? So compliance seems like the better way to go.

Tough. The taxpayers voted these idiots in. You hit them in the pocketbook enough, they'll get the point, and let the elected know they need to stop their shenanigans.

Compliance is a START, but it's not a punishment.

[ryanc]

Small donation made. Thanks for doing this.

[G22]

Tough. The taxpayers voted these idiots in. You hit them in the pocketbook enough, they'll get the point, and let the elected know they need to stop their shenanigans.

Compliance is a START, but it's not a punishment.

I'm not sure if the plaintiff would be able to recover costs and/or court fees after judgement. That would at least be something.
Maybe one of our attorneys could chime in on that.

[mikeb32]

Small donation made. Thanks for doing this.

Thank You, Ryanc

[esq_stu]

Both parties routinely demand costs and fees. Recovery of court costs is not unusual. Recovery of attorney fees is uncommon in this kind of case. If someone got improperly arrested and slapped around for carrying, attorney fees have a shot. I think the attorney for Heller and McDonald in their Federal cases in DC and Chicago did collect fees. The claims were couched as civil rights claims in those cases. This case is primarily a preemption case, and though the MI Constitution was referenced, I would not expect to see fees awarded.

I was disappointed that given the abuse of discretion by Judge Aquilina in the Lansing library case, as noted by the Court of Appeals, fees were not pursued. But as I said, nobody got bones broken in that case either.

[mikeb32]

Just another Thank You to every one who has sent Donations in for the Legal Defense Fund. The MGO Bank will open bright and early tomorrow A.M. to continue excepting them!!

[Eric D]

Donation made. I am curious, are donations tax deductible?

[PhotoTom]

Donation made. I am curious, are donations tax deductible?

Yes, they are 100% donation to a 501c3 organization.

[MI_XD]

Made my donation while at the 2nd Amendment March Yesterday!

Was a Great Day!

[mikeb32]

Made my donation while at the 2nd Amendment March Yesterday!

Was a Great Day!

Thank You!

[Magnum Man]

Yes, they are 100% donation to a 501c3 organization.

Do you need to get a receipt?

[PhotoTom]

Do you need to get a receipt?

You will need one if you happen to get audited.
If donating via PayPal, you will be provided with a receipt that clearly says it is a donation (via PayPal).

[Super Trucker]

Donation sent.

[Divegeek]

I just sent my donation through Paypal.:grin:

[dmd7765]

Thanks to all for the Donations

[Leader]

How much of a cut does PayPal take?

[Eric D]

Are there any updates on this case that can be shared?

[zigziggityzoo]

Are there any updates on this case that can be shared?

So far there isn't anything that I'm aware of.

[langenc]

I've read all the previous posts, but I do have 1 question after reading that last one though: who really needs to bring a gun (OC or CPL) to a high school choir concert?

Never heard of "better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it?"

[mikeb32]

Thanks Super Trucker and Divegeek for your Donations.

[Shyster]

Today I received a telephone call from a representative of Zurich, NA, the insurance company for Ann Arbor Public Schools. He explained to me he is a claims examiner and is investigating a claim filed by AAPS to defend the district from this lawsuit. I expressed to him my surprise and shock that an insurance company would pay to represent someone for their own intentional illegal acts. He questioned my comment and I then explained to him that not only did AAPS clearly, knowingly and intentionally violate state law by banning firearms on April 15, 2015 but that the board and superintendent bragged about doing so to the media. I then suggested that Google is his friend and that ten minutes of research on his part would probably help him in reviewing the claim.

After getting off the phone with him I was left with the distinct impression that AAPS will be paying for their own legal defense. Unfortunately it will be the taxpayers of Ann Arbor footing the bill and the children of the district losing out rather than coming out of the pockets of those who made the illegal and unwise decision to violate MCL 123.1102.

[Gray Man]

Today I received a telephone call from a representative of Zurich, NA, the insurance company for Ann Arbor Public Schools. He explained to me he is a claims examiner and is investigating a claim filed by AAPS to defend the district from this lawsuit. I expressed to him my surprise and shock that an insurance company would pay to represent someone for their own intentional illegal acts. He questioned my comment and I then explained to him that not only did AAPS clearly, knowingly and intentionally violate state law by banning firearms on April 15, 2015 but that the board and superintendent bragged about doing so to the media. I then suggested that Google is his friend and that ten minutes of research on his part would probably help him in reviewing the claim.

After getting off the phone with him I was left with the distinct impression that AAPS will be paying for their own legal defense. Unfortunately it will be the taxpayers of Ann Arbor footing the bill and the children of the district losing out rather than coming out of the pockets of those who made the illegal and unwise decision to violate MCL 123.1102.

Thanks for the update. And while that is unfortunate (That AAPS will be paying for their own legal defense on the backs of taxpayers), it is necessary. I will be mailing in more money to assist MGO with this lawsuit even though I don't live in Ann Arbor.

[JimSig]

Today I received a telephone call from a representative of Zurich, NA, the insurance company for Ann Arbor Public Schools. He explained to me he is a claims examiner and is investigating a claim filed by AAPS to defend the district from this lawsuit. I expressed to him my surprise and shock that an insurance company would pay to represent someone for their own intentional illegal acts. He questioned my comment and I then explained to him that not only did AAPS clearly, knowingly and intentionally violate state law by banning firearms on April 15, 2015 but that the board and superintendent bragged about doing so to the media. I then suggested that Google is his friend and that ten minutes of research on his part would probably help him in reviewing the claim.

After getting off the phone with him I was left with the distinct impression that AAPS will be paying for their own legal defense. Unfortunately it will be the taxpayers of Ann Arbor footing the bill and the children of the district losing out rather than coming out of the pockets of those who made the illegal and unwise decision to violate MCL 123.1102.

I hate you Shyster, now my property taxes will go up..... Again... :(

[Ricebrnr]

I hate you Shyster, now my property taxes will go up..... Again... :(


Going to anyway, their millage extension plus passed. Cuz the sheeple....

Now we get to see, how badly they want to stand on their principles. Maybe the sheeple will bleat no that it's not ins footing the bill...

Jim any way the tax payers can hold the board to account and make them pay for the suit or recoup the costs after?

[zigziggityzoo]

As elected officials, they are doing the "will of the people"...

[jgillmanjr]

Keep an eye out for a possible HB5500 redux...

[Squad51 Shooter]

I hate you Shyster, now my property taxes will go up..... Again... :(

AAPS will end up hating Shyster also ;-)

[Ricebrnr]

As elected officials, they are doing the "will of the people"...

So were the Nazis and they still got tried..

[hendo]

AAPS will end up hating Shyster also ;-)

That's the result I'm looking for, sorry Jim. :hide:

[Shyster]

That's the result I'm looking for, sorry Jim. :hide:

Meh, hate me or love me it's all good!

[esq_stu]

It's common to seek insurance coverage for errors and omissions claims against management. Normally there's an exclusion for intentional conduct. Banning firearms is definitely intentional. I've had a client get dropped and unable to obtain coverage while litigation was pending.

Tough nuggies for the school district.

[Gray Man]

Meh, hate me or love me BUT PAY ME and it's all good!

There, fixed it for ya. ;-)

[kryl]

How much of a cut does PayPal take?

I see now that it has to come directly from your bank account for there not to be a fee. How can I donate cash, or would just as soon get it through Paypal for the fee? I suppose that using Paypal would make record keeping easier.

[dmd7765]

You can send it to the po box

[kryl]

I used paypal already. I figured that ease is worth something.

[Pepe Scarcella]

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the outcome of the Clio suit will render all of this moot?

[zigziggityzoo]

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the outcome of the Clio suit will render all of this moot?

If the Clio suit has an answer first, it could inform the decision here, but until we have appellate-level decisions in either one, they both matter.

[SteveS]

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the outcome of the Clio suit will render all of this moot?

As Zig said, the Clio suit and the AA suit, no matter the outcome, are not binding on each other. An appellate decision would be required.

[Ricebrnr]

Anyone know how Clio is paying for their suit?

I tried to give mlive a scoop by following up with Zurich ins for comments on covering intentional illegal acts , but if you look on there today, she was too busy or disinterested in any meaningful reporting.

Maybe Bill Gaitner at DFP will do it..

[dmd7765]

MOC is soliciting donations to their legal fund.

http://www.miopencarry.org/donate

[Ricebrnr]

MOC is soliciting donations to their legal fund.

http://www.miopencarry.org/donate

I meant the schools. Are they also expecting ins to foot the bill?

[Hawgrider]

I meant the schools. Are they also expecting ins to foot the bill?

"Ann Arbor schools looks to insurance to cover gun lawsuit expenses "

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/05/ann_arbor_schools_looks_to_ins.html#incart_river (http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/05/ann_arbor_schools_looks_to_ins.html#incart_river)

[PhotoTom]

"Ann Arbor schools looks to insurance to cover gun lawsuit expenses "

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/05/ann_arbor_schools_looks_to_ins.html#incart_river (http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/05/ann_arbor_schools_looks_to_ins.html#incart_river)

But...
http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?327586-Michigan-Gun-Owners-files-suit-against-Ann-Arbor-Public-Schools&p=2604315&viewfull=1#post2604315

[dougwg]

Westland

[PhotoTom]

Westland

Glad you voted, Doug! :)

[dmd7765]

Glad you voted, Doug! :)

+1

[10x25mm]

Ann Arbor Public Schools Expects Insurance to Cover MGO Lawsuit Cost

MLive is reporting that AAPS officials are expecting their liability insurance carrier to pay their costs in MGO's law suit:

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/05/ann_arbor_schools_looks_to_ins.html


Ann Arbor schools looks to insurance to cover gun lawsuit expenses

Ann Arbor Public Schools officials do not expect the district's liability insurance cost to rise because of a gun lawsuit.

Deb Mexicotte, Ann Arbor school board president, said the board asked the district's insurance company, Zurich Insurance, to underwrite the expenses, which is typical when the district faces a lawsuit.

On Monday, April 27, Michigan Gun Owners and Ann Arbor parent Ulysses Wong filed the suit against the district in Washtenaw County Circuit Court, claiming a new weapons policy violates state laws.

In April, the Ann Arbor school board passed three policies that effectively ban guns from school buildings and school property.

The policies create a "dangerous weapon and disruption-free zone" on all district-owned property, prohibiting the presence of guns, explosives and a variety of knives and other objects.

Mexicotte said the school board has broad liability insurance and a $10,000 deductible.

It appears costs associated with the lawsuit would be covered by the Zurich's Educators Legal Liability endorsement, said David Comsa, assistant superintendent for human resources and the district's general counsel.

The cost for the coverage is $99,277 annually, he said.

Mexicotte said she does not expect the insurance costs to rise because of the gun lawsuit.

"We face legal challenges on a fairly regular basis," she said.

One cost Ann Arbor schools may incur because of the lawsuit is staff time preparing documents, she said.

"This is an issue the board feels strongly about," Mexicotte said. "We believe it's the right course of action."

In a statement last week, Mexicotte said the board is prepared to meet the challenge of the lawsuit.

Never thought you could claim against a liability policy for the foreseeable consequences of a deliberate, illegal action. Does explain the enthusiasm of AAPS for violating Michigan law, however.

[jgillmanjr]

Ahh yes, moral hazard makes an appearance!

[partdeux]

Doug,

Why so redacted?

[AFMarco]

Donated. Very well may donate more in the future as cash flow permits. (Trying to buy your first house is quite costly)

I am grateful for the work you guys have put in on the "front lines."

[Shyster]

I just left a message for the reporter educating her on the limits and restrictions commonly contained in insurance policies.

[Ricebrnr]

Good hopefully she will respond to you better than me.

[Leader]

Doug,

Why so redacted?

Nothing that was redacted has any bearing on the point of the letter.

[TheQ]

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the outcome of the Clio suit will render all of this moot?

My guess is the the Clio suit and AAPS suit will be consolidated at the State Court of Appeals.

[Pepe Scarcella]

My guess is the the Clio suit and AAPS suit will be consolidated at the State Court of Appeals.

And, presuming it gets to that point - I think its highly likely - this suit, for all intents and purposes, will be effectively rendered moot.

More money down the rabbit hole.

[zigziggityzoo]

And, presuming it gets to that point - I think its highly likely - this suit, for all intents and purposes, will be effectively rendered moot.

More money down the rabbit hole.
Not necessarily. AAPS parents would otherwise have to wait 2 years for a decision at appeals before their rights are restored... suing directly could give relief faster.

Not only that, Clio may lose and choose not to appeal. Or One case might be stronger at appeal than the other...

[Pepe Scarcella]

Not necessarily. AAPS parents would otherwise have to wait 2 years for a decision at appeals before their rights are restored... suing directly could give relief faster.

Not only that, Clio may lose and choose not to appeal. Or One case might be stronger at appeal than the other...

All true. Like I said though, "highly likely... rendered moot."

[luckless]

Donation made. Give 'em hell!

[mikeb32]

Donation received, Thank You!