Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Constable Motion, Feb. 11, 2013

Constable Motion, Feb. 11, 2013

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,719|Likes:
Published by LVReviewJournal
Las Vegas Constable John Bonaventura files motion to keep constable's office on ballot.
Las Vegas Constable John Bonaventura files motion to keep constable's office on ballot.

More info:

Published by: LVReviewJournal on Feb 12, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/01/2014

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
JOHN BONAVENTURA, individually,and in his capacity as an elected officialLAS VEGAS TOWNSHIPCONSTABLE, Appellant,vs.BOARD OF COUNTYCOMMISSIONERS, CLARK COUNTY, a political subdivision of theState of Nevada, Respondent.
Docket No.63104
EDC Case:A-13-678359-WHon. Rob Bare, J., Dept. XXXII
Appeal
From the Eighth Judicial District CourtThe Honorable Rob Bare, District Court Judge
 APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR STAY{Non-Emergency Action Requested by March 3-14, 2014}
Plaintiff/Appellant, JOHN BONAVENTURA, individually, and in capacityas an elected official LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CONSTABLE (hereinafter,“Plaintiff”), by and through attorney, ROBERT B. POOL, ESQ., pursuant to NRAPRule 8(a)(2), respectfully submits this motion for Order: (1)To stay the year-in-advance premature enforcement of Clark CountyOrdinance 2.14.10 (not effective until January 4, 2015 and for which no authorityexists for premature enforcement), seeking to abolish the Office of the Las VegasTownship Constable (“Office”), which was enacted under authority of anunconstitutional statute, NRS 258.010(3), (3)(b), and in violation of Nevada OpenMeeting Law, Due Process and Equal Protection; and(2)As a practical extension of the stay, to direct Defendant and the ClarCounty Department of Election to allow the Plaintiff to file as a Candidate for  public office during the March 3-14, 2014 filing deadlines in the same manner asthe current remaining ten (10) Clark County Constables.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIESI. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is a timely appeal from the April 15, 2013 denial of temporary1
Electronically FiledFeb 05 2014 02:48 p.m.Tracie K. LindemanClerk of Supreme Court
Docket 63104 Document 2014-03829
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728restraining order and preliminary injunction in connection with County Ordinance2.14.10 seeking to abolish the Office of the Las Vegas Township Constable(“Office”), that was enacted under authority of an unconstitutional statute, NRS258.010(3), (3)(b), and in violation of Nevada Open Meeting Law, Due Processand Equal Protection. The case is currently in, and is expected to complete,screening, in anticipation of an order setting oral arguments.The Ordinance 2.14.10, as presently constructed, is not effective, nor  potentially enforceable, until “11:59 p.m. January 4, 2015.”
1
 
II.ARGUMENT SUMMARY & RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On March 18, 2013, by oral decision, the district court, despite the likelihoodof success on the merits, arbitrarily denied the request for TRO and preliminaryinjunction.
2
 The following day, on March 19, 2013, Defendant conducted ahearing on the proposed ordinance. The overall public hearing was in support of not abolishing the office. There was neither a finding of necessity presented nor any hard facts in support of abolition.
3
During the discussions, Commissioner Giunchiliani admitted to violating theOpen Meeting Law when she personally contacted and met with another publicofficer to discuss the abolition of the office (without Plaintiff), followed by a studytrip made to Washoe County, and presented the findings to the Defendant outsideof a public meeting.
4
 On this admission, the Sheriff appeared to clarify that it was a conversationthat started with Assistant Manager Wells at the request of the Commissioner. The
1
APP VII:411 (Certified Ordinance).
2
 APP VI:398:19-20.
3
 
APP VII:417-439 (public testimony); Public Record BCC 03/19/2013 #47 begin @ 00:51:41.
4
 
APP VII:448:26-End, 452-453; Public Record BCC 03/19/2013 #47 02:10:45-02:10:50,02:18:00-02:18:45. LV Review Journal, “Counting down constable's term,” Feb 17, 2013.
 Burgess v. Premier Corp
., 727 F.2d 826 (9
th
 Cir. 1984) (news media to supplement the record).
2
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728Sheriff stated the same job cannot be done by Metro under the present budget.
5
 After a statement by the Commissioners that making a finding was notsomething to “hang your hat on,”
6
 and that the Board “can do whatever it wants,”the motion was made with: “. . . . the Board . . . having made a finding . .” (but notseconded, although the later vote was unanimous), to abolish the Office.The Ordinance 2.14.10 was slated to become effective at “11:59 p.m. January 4, 2015.”
7
 On April 15, 2013, the district court entered the
Order 
8
 denying motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. On April 29, 2013, the
 Notice of Appeal 
,
 Designation of Record 
 and
 Association of Counsel 
9
 
were timelyfiled. On April 30, 2013, the district court case was stayed.
10
 On January 24, 2014, Plaintiff “pre-registered” online as a Candidate for theOffice of the Las Vegas Township Constable (Exhibit 1 attached).On February 3, 2014, Plaintiff was informed by the Clark County ElectionDepartment that the Department had been instructed on April 15, 2013 (date of Order from which appealed) not to list the office or allow the Plaintiff to appear ona ballot with the ten (10) current Constables in Clark County, despite the April 30,2013 stay order. Plaintiff was then provided the 2014 Candidate Guide datedJanuary 22, 2014, but not online until February 3, 2014 (Exh. 2,19-20, 41-42).
5
 
APP VII:453; Public Record BCC 03/19/2013 #47 02:20:00-02:22:00. See also BCC04/02/2013 #50 and the Report of the Sheriff that the Department is facing a $46.5 millionshortfall requiring the layoffs of more than 200 personnel.
6
APP VII:451 (necessity of a finding is not something to hang hat on), 455; Public Record BCC03/19/2013 #47 02:26:07
7
APP VII:411 (Certified Ordinance).
8
 APP V:000303-307 at 306:9-11, 308-314 at 313:9-11.
9
 Respectively, APP V:000325-326, 327-329, 330-331.
10
 
APP V:323-324, 332; VIII:469-474.
3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->