Bernard Baran

What kind of a man would possess the indifference to send an innocent human being to jail for 22 years to further his own career? Since James LaMountain’s press release about his encounter with “Judge” Daniel Ford in Superior Court, I did a lot of reading about the atrocity perpetrated against Bernard Baran in which “Judge” Daniel A. Ford was instrumental as a prosecutor at that time. I wish that a lot of people would take the time and read about the Baran case and show their support for Bernard
Bernard-Baran-44-years-old. Bernard-Baran-19-years-old. Baran. It is also important that as many individuals as possible manifest their outrage about the fact that this sinister individual Daniel Ford is still a judge, a judge that was appointed by Michael Dukakis back in April of 1989. Thank you Mr. Dukakis!

On the left, picture of Bernard Baran before he met prosecutor Daniel Ford; on the right after he spent 22 years as an innocent man in jail.
Peter Frei

Posted on 26 Oct 2009, 22:09 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


James LaMountain PRESS RELEASE

The Holland Blog received a Press Release about a trial that ended today in Superior Court, read more»

Posted on 22 Oct 2009, 22:21 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Insanity

Karen Raymond, abutter of the hillside property owned by North East Concepsts Inc. and farmed by James LaMountain. seems to be the only individual catering to chairman of the Board of Selectmen James Wettlaufer's personal vendetta towards James LaMountain. To read about the latest chapter in the ongoing insanity financed by the taxpayer, click here»

Posted on 8 Oct 2009, 00:01 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


TO: UNKNOWN

Unknown- You tried to send me a fax shortly after noon time today. I do not have a fax. Please send me an e-mail. Snail mail is not helpful if you have time sensitive material. I do not need to know who you are and I do not share your identity with anyone even if it comes through on e-mail. You are welcome to drop something at my house in person. I will not ask for your name. -Peter Frei

Posted on 3 Sep 2009, 12:28 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Judge scolds Selectboard and DEP officials.

Officers-are-trying-to-capture-the-three-wild-turkeys.

Yesterday morning, officers of the Environmental Police assisted by the State Police arrested James LaMountain.

The arrest came on the heels of another embarrassing defeat for our Board of Selectmen and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in court.
Read more»


Posted on 2 Sep 2009, 01:36 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


When will the selectboard inform the public?

Today, one year ago, the Superior Court issued a new judgment, the judgment was in Peter Frei’s favor after the Appeal’s Court of the Commonwealth ruled to vacate the erroneous Superior Court judgment that had been issued (erroneously) in favor of the Planning Board of Holland. This is proof that the Town of Holland, specifically the Planning Board, denied Peter Frei his rights!
aerial-view-of-Frei’s-peninsula

Peter Frei filed his complaint back in October of 2002 after Earl Johnson, as the dominating member of the Planning Board, refused to endorse Frei’s Approval Not Required (ANR) plan for the second time, despite Frei’s entitlement to the endorsement; (ANR's simply require a signature, there is nothing to debate, there is nothing to deny, there is nothing to actually even “approve” hence the name ANR--APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED!) to view this finding and read the rescript issued by the Appeals Court, click here.
Frei’s ANR plan divides his peninsula off of Maybrook Road into three buildable lots. Doing this falls under ANR guidelines because Mr. Frei has both the acreage, AND the frontage to allow the ANR division.
The selectboard repeatedly claimed during televised selectboard meetings between October 2002 and August 2008 that Frei’s suit was frivolous and without merit.
An Appeals Court does not grant an appeal if the case has no merit!
The selectboard has yet to inform the public of Holland that they lost the Appeal.
Why? Don't you want the residents of Holland to know that Mr. Frei’s lawsuit WAS NOT frivolous?
Wettlaufer does not have a problem pointing out that the town of Holland spent in excess of $100,000 in legal fees defending against this and other lawsuits filed by Frei. In fact, Wettlaufer did just that the last time he had an interview on this topic with the Southbridge Evening News published on February 4, 2009. Still, Wettlaufer failed to take responsibility for the wasteful expenditure of taxpayer’s money (all caused by trying to deny Frei his legal rights.) To this day, Wettlaufer has never admitted publicly that the town LOST, for the 3rd time, a completely legitimate lawsuit filed by Peter K. Frei. As a matter of fact, the town has yet to win a case!

Dana Manning

Other posts on this subject:
Planning Board of Holland denied resident right to divide his property.

Posted on 27 Aug 2009, 24:01 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Our County’s Law Library has a Newsletter.

Fighting and exposing the corruption at our town hall, I made countless trips to the Hampden Law Library at 50 State Street in Springfield. Not only is everybody as friendly as can be there, they are helpful beyond their duty. Besides updated books and treatises covering the fast spectrum of law, it is a place that offers free “Lexis” and “Westlaw” access to do research.
Lexis and Westlaw are corporate organizations which do collect published as well as unpublished opinions for their huge online databases. Subscribers to their services utilize these huge databases to find cases they use to support their legal argument. Powerful search engines provided by Lexis and Westlaw are helpful to find that case to the point needed to win an argument.
Law firms pay thousands of dollars every month for their subscriptions. Whether their attorneys practice in state, federal, or Supreme Court, the service is imperative to write complaints, motions, briefs, or prepare oral arguments.
If you do want to be taken serious, you can’t do without, believe me! At the Hampden Law Library you get this service for free... To make the best use of the time at the library, cases of interest can be e-mailed to your home to be read in the privacy of your home at your convenience.
What ever your legal needs are; you may want to fight an unjustified citation, you are going through divorce, you want to file a patent for your million dollar idea, or you have an issue with your landlord; you will be amazed what you can do if you just believe in yourself. The folks at the law library will help you along the jorney. The latest service the Hampden Law Library offers is a free online newsletter. Click here to read the first edition, to subscribe to the newsletter, click on the link included in their newsletter.
Peter Frei

Posted on 30 Jul 2009, 07:15 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Who is counting?

One of James LaMountain’s attorneys is in the process of filing another lawsuit in connection with the hillside property off Mashapaug Road. I lost track and don’t know how many frivolous lawsuits the town filed against the owner’s of the hillside property and how many lawsuits the owners had to file against the town to protect their rights.
Brian Johnson denied James LaMountain a driveway permit even so LaMountain filed all the necessary documents and has a legitimate claim of entitlement in the permit. The denial of the driveway permit is part of the Johnson/Wettlaufer scheme to harass the owners of the hillside property, Northeast Concepts, Chad Brigham, Mike LaMountain and his father James LaMountain, with repeated litigation (paid for by the taxpayers).
The driveway issue is not the only matter that will be adjudicated; the complaint also accuses the town for dumping sediments onto their beachside property. This is an allegation that was originally brought up by the town against the owners of the hillside property.
James P. LaMountain’s attorney in this matter is Edward M. Pikula, Esqire. Attorney Pikula is not just another attorney, Mr. Pikula is the town solicitor of the town of Springfield, Massachusetts. Pikula argued the case Springfield v. Kibbe, 480 U.S. 257 (1987) before the Supreme Court of the United States. Certiorari was granted in this case to resolve the question whether, consistently with the decision in Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U. S. 658, a municipality can be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for inadequate training of its employees. The Supreme Court ruled against the town of Springfield in a five to four decision. To read the complaint Pikula is filing on behalf of James LaMountain, click here!
The complaint is in part based on an investigation conducted by Milone & MacBroom, Inc., a consulting firm providing services in Civil Engineering, Transportation Engineering, Water Resource Engineering & Environmental Planning, Landscape Architecture, and Surveying & Construction Management. A true copy of the Milone & MacBroom intestigative report is attached to the complaint as Exhibit F.
To read the report, click here! The report about the investigation conducted by Milone & MacBroom, Inc., proves that what the town accused the plaintiffs of doing (dumping sediments into the lake), is actually the town’s own doing! The pictures shown on page 25 and following pages in the report tell the story and prove the allegations made by the town officials as lies.
Peter Frei

Posted on 9 Jul 2009, 00:01 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Holland’s officials still wasting money?

What is a routine act on behalf of residents which do not criticize the Johnson family for their illegal activities is unavailable for residents which dare to. James LaMountain intends to build a farm house on the hill owned by Northeast Concepts, Inc. off of Mashapaug Road. In order to do so, he followed the rules and applied for a driveway permit needed to get the required building permit. Brian Johnson, the Highway Surveyor and an elected town official refused to issue the permit despite James LaMountian’s claim that he submitted all required documents. LaMountain: “It is just another attempt to harass me, or maybe another attempt to provoke me to build a driveway without a permit so they can go after me again.” LaMountain claims that he had no other choice than to file another unnecessary lawsuit the voters of the town of Holland have to foot the bill for. “I feel bad for the taxpayer’s, but they [Earl and Brian Johnson and other town officials] just don’t change, they may never will. By the way, I’m a taxpayer myself..”
Today, James LaMountain filed his latest lawsuit in Superior Court. To read the complaint, click here! The complaint will be served to the defendants’ tomorrow, to read the summons, click here, or on the word “summons” typed in bold italic. (Every word on this blog in bold italic is a link!)
Peter Frei

Posted on 25 Mar 2009, 20:42 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Johnson’s failed attempt to jail LaMountain

There is always more to a story than meets the eye. Brian Johnson is a good student of his father’s art to manipulate the public opinion and thereby divert attention away form the Johnson’s illegal activities. Unfortunately the Johnson’s are good at that. Not all is lost; we still have judges that are not “buying” everything what “innocent” town officials want them to believe. The table turned on Brian Johnson and wife Kristen as the judge learned of Brian’s dark side during a hearing in Palmer District Court this past Monday. Read court documents and more»

Posted on 25 Feb 2009, 15:12 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


The “Victory” claimed by Gleason & Wettlaufer comes at a hefty Price for the Taxpayer

Unlike in the Quinones lawsuit, the town and police Chief Kevin Gleason got away in the Bunn case without paying the victim any money in form of a “business decision” as they referred to the $50,000 settlement they paid to Stacy Quinones back in 2006.

Despite Judge Ponsor’s grant of the town’s motion for summary judgment in favor of the town, the taxpayer is still paying a hefty price for the Bunn incident. Chief Gleason, together with a SWAT team of 15 officers kicked in the door of a harmless family still asleep. The raid did not produce any evidence of wrongdoing by the Bunn family despite a sworn affidavit documenting controlled drug buys by an undercover informant out of the Bunn residence. The sworn affidavit was necessary for the judge to authorize the raid of the dwelling on Maybrook Road. Read more»

Posted on 6 Dec 2008, 14:22 - Category: Ongoing And Past Litigation
Comments - Edit - Delete


Pages: [1] [2] [3]