From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Date: 22 Jan 1993 15:29:53 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1993Jan20.211059.8912@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
>It need not cost the coordinator anything more than his personal time
>and effort.  There is no requirement that the coordinator hire an attorney.
>If it were me, I'd represent myself.  What's the worst outcome, the
>frequency(ies) at issue get coordinated in some other manner.

As others have noted, there's a lot of truth in the old maxim that "an
attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client". A non-attorney who
represents himself is most likely even more foolish. I do computers for a
living, and have expertise in several other areas, none of which are the law.
I wouldn't even consider representing myself in court, as I know I'd get
clobbered.

What's the worst outcome? How about having to pay the other guy damages for
loss of reputation, emotional distress, and anything else they can load into
it, as well as attorney fees and court costs, which can easily run into the
several thousands of dollars? How often do you see appeals for some ham or
other's legal defense fund, especially in cases where he's as much in the
right as you claim coordinators should be?

>You mention a lawsuit involving Karl Pagel, a few questions come
>to mind:  (1) What was the issue? (2) In what court (federal, state, etc.)
>was the case decided? (3) Is the case written up anywhere to review?

Here's as much as I know: Karl Pagel, N6BVU, who was at the time the
coordinator for the 220 Spectrum Management Association in southern
California, was holding several frequencies in reserve so that Mexican hams
would have some places to put repeaters. When the other frequencies were
exhausted, some hams who were told that there were no more available formed
their own coordination council, coordinated themselves on the reserved pairs,
and then got a letter from John Johnston at the FCC stating that the FCC would
recognize any coordinator which had any evidence of amateur support. Armed
with that, they demanded that 220SMA recognize their coordinations, and sued
when Karl refused. Karl settled the suit rather than face the certainty of
large attorney's fees and the possibility of major damages.

Those are all the details as I know them; the story was widely known among
frequency coordinators at the time, about 5 years or so ago. (Corrections and
additions are welcome.) I don't know where the suit was filed, but there would
have been no decision rendered, since it was settled.

>As above, if the coordinator's decision is within the framework of whatever
>FCC regulations apply, I fail to see why a coordinator couldn't just 
>make that argument him/herself to the judge where the case is being
>handled.  Also, it should be obvious to any court that any case
>like that should not be argued in anything other than the appropriate
>federal court.

That still doesn't mean that the suit couldn't be filed in a state court, or
that a coordinator would be able to force that transfer to a federal court on
his own, or that the court would see it that way, or that he wouldn't get his
case blown away in federal court...

>Maybe changing it will, maybe not, time will ultimately tell.

I'll repeat my question once again: Are you willing to pay for the defense of
lawsuits that come up under your proposed policies?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    "I don't want to read poor Microsoft bashing. I want to read good
Microsoft bashing." -- Douglas A. Bell, in comp.os.os2.advocacy (Me too!)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy