Fwd: Escondido fluoridation: Judge denies State's motion to eliminate jury

[Guest guest]

" luckypig "

Fri, 8 Aug 2003 12:33:11 -0400

Escondido fluoridation: Judge denies State's

motion to eliminate jury

 

Escondido fluoridation: Judge denies State's motion to

Jeff Green

Escondido fluoridation: Judge denies State's motion to eliminate jury

 

 

News Release Contact: Jeff Green

August 7, 2003 Citizens for Safe Drinking Water

(800) 728-3833

http://www.Keepers-of-the-Well.org

 

 

 

 

Judge denies State, and City of Escondido, motions to vacate jury trial on

Constitutional complaint concerning fluoridation

 

 

In a telephonic ruling on August 7, 2003, involving fluoridation of Escondido's

public water supplies, Judge Dana M. Sabraw denied motions made by the

California Department of Health Services and City of Escondido to vacate the

Judge's previous order for a jury trial scheduled to be heard on November 21,

2003, as well as their preferred order to Reset Trial Without Jury.

 

 

Judge Sabraw found in favor of the Plaintiff's argument, made by attorney Kyle

Nordrehaug, that asserted that the Plaintiffs in this case had a right to a

trial by a jury to make determinations on disputed issues of fact, and a judge

for matters of law, and that until full discovery is concluded there is not yet

an assessment of exactly what issues will be disputed.

 

 

This case of Macy et al., vs. City of Escondido and California Department of

Health Services began as a Constitutional complaint against the City of

Escondido for their selection of an untested, unapproved fluoridation chemical,

containing excessive contaminants, for which the Plaintiffs contend it can be

proven with a preponderance of evidence that there is a reasonable expectation

that consumers will be harmed.

 

 

In their earlier efforts to remove themselves from the case, the City of

Escondido claimed that they were being compelled by the State to fluoridate,

 

 

In the California Department of Health Services' earlier efforts to remove

themselves from the case, their attorneys claimed in their filings that the

Department does not have the authority to select, or force the City to use, any

particular fluoridation substance __ merely " permit " a selection made by the

City.

 

 

This statement by the California Department of Health Services may soon be

contrasted with their assertions as Defendant in a case brought by the City of

Watsonville that Watsonville must proceed with fluoridation even after citizens

enacted an ordinance that prohibits adding any substance to the water for

purposes of fulfilling a health claim that has not been specifically approved

for the health claim by the FDA, and restricts the level of contaminants in the

product to levels already established as Public Health Goals.

 

 

A case conference, at which Judge McAdams of Santa Cruz County Superior Court

is expected to rule on whether the California Dental Association and its

fluoridation funding agent can become a co-defendant and cross-complainant in

the Watsonville vs. California Dental Health Services lawsuit is scheduled for

Monday, August 11, at 8:30 a.m.

 

 

In a series of previous rulings, Judge Sabraw has denied specialized motions for

dismissal (demurrers) from both the CA Department of Health Services and the

City of Escondido, which have been the proverbial roadblock to previous cases

involving fluoridation from coming to trial on the merits.

 

 

On this Monday, August 4, 2003, all parties had the opportunity to identify

their expert witnesses, with a second expert designation opportunity on August

25, 2003.

 

 

The case schedule designates October 14, 2003 for the cut-off for discovery and

legal motions, after which time the Defendant City of Escondido and California

Department of Health Services could conceivably reintroduce their motion to rid

themselves of a jury trial on their claim that there are no disputes on issues

of fact at that time.

 

 

Any of the parties may request oral arguments on Judge Sabraw's decision within

the next two days, which in that event will be scheduled for Friday, August 15

at 1:30 p.m. in Department 27 of the North County San Diego Superior Court.

 

 

The electronic ruling by Judge Sabraw can be accessed up until 12:00 a.m.

Wednesday morning at:

http://www.sandiego.courts.ca.gov/superior/online/telerule.html

 

 

Case # GIN015280

 

 

Other rulings on the case can be accessed at http://www.Keepers-of-the-Well.org

 

 

-30-