"The laws of California are the laws of California... and that's where we find ourselves," is the quote used on the Ch. 3 News.
Today's Eureka Reporter says...
At a news conference Friday, District Attorney Paul Gallegos adamantly defended his decision to pursue a fraud lawsuit against Pacific Lumber Co. that was dismissed twice because the court found it had no legal merit.
“I think it was right to file the case,” Gallegos said.
He acknowledged that a considerable amount of time and effort went into the legal battle that has spanned four years and the county was at risk to pay the legal fees and possibly PALCO’s attorney costs.
Gallegos hasn’t ruled out an appeal of the ruling to the California Supreme Court, but said he wanted to consult with his colleagues before deciding.
According to its Web site, the Supreme Court must have an appeal served and filed within 10 days after the appeal court’s decision is final. Read the rest - Gallegos responds to appeal court ruling on fraud suit
The Times Standard says Gallegos is largely resigned to accept his defeat, and says, He said it was worth the cost, but did not have a figure on how much money or how many hours were spent pursuing the case.
Before considering a petition to the California Supreme Court, he said would consult with colleagues about it. But Gallegos said the issue may be something the Legislature should consider taking up.
Palco Vice President Frank Bacik said in a phone interview that the Supreme Court reviews only a small portion of significant or novel cases, and said the appellate court cited long-standing precedents in making its ruling.
”One would not expect them to be interested in reviewing this case,” Bacik said. Read the rest - DA largely resigned to Palco ruling
Which colleagues is Gallegos planning to "consult" with? Would that be all the other DA's, who he begged for help a few days before his appeal brief was due? Or would that be Richard Salzman, Ken Miller, Michael Shellenberger? I'm betting on the latter.