Today saw closing arguments, followed by the judge instructing the jury on procedures and matters of law. The jury went out just after noon. As of about 3:30 there was no verdict. I asked to be notified, but may not know until it is posted on the courts Electronic Filing System, which can take a day or more.
Dave Ford told me this morning that the judge ruled in Wolfeboro’s favor on the motion to reject WPs comparative fault and betterment defenses. Nevertheless, Mr. Dennehey in his closing arguments treated the comparative fault issue qualitatively rather than quantitatively. That is to say he argued that it’s all Wolfeboro’s fault.
In her closing statements, Ms. Cull made a big deal out of the fact that only Mr. Brown testified for WP. After 3 weeks of trial, 2½ by Wolfeboro, I have to wonder if the Jury doesn’t actually appreciate not being subjected to a parade of do-overs. Maybe they’re thinking “nuff said”.
If you are one of the hundreds of people checking for news, you might try just subscribing to the blog. You will receive email notification when anything is posted. The policy of the blog is to keep the identity of all subscribers confidential. I do not disclose the specifics or even the number of followers.
My son is the young lawyer on WP team with the beard. He just became a lawyer last October. I just wanted you to know that I have enjoyed following your blog from South Georgia. I hope the people in Wolfeboro appreciate your efforts to keep them informed. I know some do, some don’t but as one anti-powerful to another I just wanted you to know that I think you do an honest job.
Thank you Mr. Smith, but you do not get the long distance award. There appears someone in Spain following regularly.
I have to wounder how you will de-compress after your 3 weeks of carefull observtions.
This AM I gleened a couple interesting remarks in Court at the closing, of which I know have
not gotten by you, but were pointed to me.
1) First up was Atty Dennehey he “did the math” in regards to the Towns loss, saying that the
Town is in this for a Windfall, and showed the jury itemized costs…seperating out such items as
the Grant of 2 Mill, the land 1Mill and noted that the Town will still own the land (which he stated
can still be used as NO one testified to any fact that showed it could not be used) and as stated by
Mr Brown to remidate will be 1 Mill to 1 and 1/2 Mill..but the Town is seeking a total loss.
His other statement that perked me up was that the flow rate chart(s ) were all over the place
and not until just before the hearings did W/P have access to new information which he discribed
why the fluxation happended….someone did not use the automatic flow pump system from the pond
and left the pumps running…..which led to the over load of the RIB. (as I understood him to say)
2) Atty Cull closed second and brought some counter remarks to the above…..This case is not about
a Windfall…..she said the site has to be ” Abandon” it is a total loss. She made a issue of W/P not
having a list of wittness….amoung lots of other items…to numerous to keep track of…Bet you did..
However, when the Judge gave the jury very specific detailed instructions…One that struck me
was…….Number of wittness does not have weight, quality of testomoney comes first.
The Judge listen closely to the closing remarks,, and his instructions reflected as much..
Well the Burden of Proof is with the Town of Wolfeboro on the 5 counts and the jury has to be
unanimous in the out come be it one charge or all 5…..and if they find against W/P on any or all
charges the jury proceeds to #7 and writes down an amount for damages which is handed
to the Judge…
Must admit this part was difficult to follow……..as he discribed in legal terms what each count was.
Do you think the court will have a written set of the Judges instructions that you could obtain and
post……your readers might find it of interest….and help understand the verdict.
Thank you for all your work on this……and I know that you will be following the out come and
solutions…what ever they may be…..
You can bet the local newspaper will not have the coverage you have provided …
If the court posts the judges instructions on the docket, I will make it available. As I said, Wolfeboro had called 4 WP witnesses. Wolfeboro expected to go back at them during defense and waste another week arguing about whether 600,000 gpd was an average. I bet the jury appreciates the mercy shown by Mr. Dennehey.
The multiple versions of the April flows were brought out, I believe during cross examination of Dave Ford.
When it comes to quality of witnesses, Wolfeboro did not produce a waste-water engineer. In fact, only one of their witnesses was a Professional Engineer. Mr. Bowden, who is not an engineer and has no waste-water experience was qualified as an expert to render the opinion that WP did not meet the standard of care for a prime waste-water engineer. The jury may conclude that he is not in the same league as Mr. Moore – a PE Waste-Water Engineer with 45 years experience.