It was a summary judgement in the lower court because there was no dispute in fact in the lower court. If there was a dispute in fact there would've been a trial. I agree that this was malicious, but I'm a registered nurse so I also have a protected title with similar ramifications to professional engineer and with similar restrictions on license renewal. Essentially if I did not have an active license, it would be illegal by my state law/BON regulations to tell you that I was a registered nurse in this comment. If I instead said "engineer" or "nurse", the courts will generally find that within free speech, like in Jarlstrom. I don't particularly think the courts were wrong here.
roguetrick
joined 2 years ago
The argument wasn't about a matter of fact, but a matter of law. He didn't argue against their matter of fact per the appeals court decision.
The ALJ heard arguments from both parties on their motions for summary
disposition. Marohn argued to the ALJ that the relevant statutes and regulations prevented
him from referring to himself as a professional engineer only while promoting or providing
engineering services. He also asserted that his conduct was protected by the First
Amendment. The complaint committee’s position was that Marohn had violated applicable
statutes and regulations by representing himself as a professional engineer during the time
his license was expired and by providing false information on his license applications. The
ALJ rejected Marohn’s statutory- and regulatory-interpretation arguments, declined to
consider Marohn’s constitutional arguments, and found that Marohn had violated Minn.
Stat. § 326.02, subds. 1, 3, by representing himself as a professional engineer while
unlicensed and Minn. R. 1805.0200, subps. 1(B), 2, 4(C), based on his statements in his
license applications. The ALJ therefore recommended summary disposition in favor of the
complaint committee.
He lost in state court because he signed an affidavit that said he hadn't referred to himself as a professional engineer when he didn't have a license, and the court found that he had done that and his federal lawsuit was dismissed about as soon as it was filed as not being significant enough to intervene in ongoing civil enforcement actions.
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctapun/2023/OPa221099-041023.pdf
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/minnesota/mndce/0:2021cv01241/194678/20/
For the people who are really placid, it's a straight personality trait. As in, they've been that way since they were babies. You can't learn it.
That's kind of the rule in Catholicism. They don't really believe in changing a perfect church. They just reinterpret what obviously already was sacred tradition.
Oh this has been cooking for much more than 5 years and really has been quite prevalent since the aughts. With deer's proclivity to scavenging the bodies and gut piles that hunters leave of other deer, as well as the fact that carrion birds that eat the corpses will let the prions spread right through their digestive system into the environment, its spread is inevitable.
It was sikh separatist slogans and wasn't written in English. I'm pretty sure the Christians aren't to blame on this one. That said, it's idiotic to deface a Hindu temple because you're pissed at Modi and Indian hindutva assholes. I don't know if I'd quite call it a hate crime, myself.
The saudis could not hold Yemen any more than the US could.
Iran is more than happy to have a proxy war with the US in the meat grinder of Yemen, considering there is zero end strategy there for the US.
So papal infallibility only applies when they're speaking ex cathedra (from the throne). The only time that's happened was in 1950. It's more that daughter churches need to maintain a "catholic" (universal) church within established rites.
57 year old guy has never seen the clock work? Jesus christ that thing must've been rusted to hell if it hasn't been maintained in 40 years. Hopefully somebody oils it now.
Not really what was said based on my reading of the court documents. They said he checked a box that he didn't present himself as a professional engineer, when he published articles that said he was. And based on other internet discussions with links to articles, that was exactly what happened and he doesn't really deny that.
The matter of law is "is it right to prosecute someone based on this form" and the appeals court decided it was as you could see in the decision.
Overall I find the court documents seem pretty comprehensive as to why and how it all went down, and they describe him refusing to sign things based on his belief that he wasn't lying.