Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

An awful lot of interest in personal life of Judge Nottingham

This letter has not been edited

Mimi Ryun, Northglenn

Published March 19, 2008 at 6 p.m.

Text size  

I would like to know why the RMNews decided to report on a story about prostitutes being chauffeured around town to different clients and the only name printed was that of Judge Edward Nottingham’s and no others?

Since Joe Nacchio’s name was mentioned in the article one can’t help wonder if, along with the story of the Judge being in a strip club, isn’t an attempt to discredit the Judge so perhaps their conviction could be determined a mis-trial, could it? There seems an awful lot of interest in the personal life of Judge Nottingham.

Comments

  • March 19, 2008

    8:31 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Rocco3454 writes:

    I think it is a variety of the 'hypocrite syndrome' Mimi - similar to the media's - and the public's prurient interest in Governor Spitzer's downfall. When Nottingham was found to have frequented strip bars he bailed on his own 'human weaknesses and foibles' which is fine and dandy and true but 1) Judges are among those society holds to a higher standard and 2) He's probably tossed hundreds of men and women in jail even though they certainly would like to claim the same weaknesses in their defence. He's known to be a harsh judge with little give or sympathy and known for pompous holier-than-though sermons before sentencing.

  • March 20, 2008

    10:08 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    peteSmith writes:

    Yes, it's true that Kay, "regularly research[es] Judge Nottingham and related subjects on the InterNet." "Regularly" means not daily but *hourly* Apparently, Ms. Sieverding is unemployed and spends literally all day and much of the evening sitting on her duff looking for any forum or blog that might be in any way related to a legal topic, so that she can apostrophize endlessly about her numerous failed cases and perceived (or contrived) conspiracies. Moreover, she babbles on about such topics as finding "another Nottinghma document [that] definitely was not . . . Rule 52a and 54a compatible," as `though any of us would know (or care) what that might mean or what conclusion we should draw therefrom.

  • March 21, 2008

    2:27 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    peteSmith writes:

    Kay wrote: "If a person pled intentional tort, then the ECF computer shouldn't even process a motion to dismiss."

    Brilliant, Kay. Absolutely brilliant.

    This is what Nottingham meant when he described your motions as, "gibberish." This is also an example what opposing counsel meant when they called your motions "incoherent."

    I recommend that you buy a basic textbook on Civil Procedure at your local half-price book store there in Wisconsin.

  • March 22, 2008

    1:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    peteSmith writes:

    Kay Sieverding wrote, "I have no idea what Judge Nottingham meant when he said my motions were gibberish."

    I provided you with an idea (see prev. comment).

  • March 23, 2008

    12:18 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    peteSmith writes:

    New story just posted at http://knowYourCourts.com Apparently, Nottingham's womanizing can be traced all the way back to his first years on the federal bench:

    _________________
    "Early this afternoon, I tracked down one Colorado attorney, who has some interesting "history" with our jurist sensation, Edward Nottingham. Joe Losavio, now retired in Lenno on beautiful Lake Como in Italy, is currently visiting the States and consented to be quoted for this story.

    "Losavio reminisced about several experiences with Nottingham: On a Friday, April 26, 1991, the last day of a trial in Settle v. Centel Electric Corp., a stately tall blonde came into the courtroom. Nottingham stopped the proceedings, scribbled something on a Post-it note, handed the note to the bailiff with instructions to give it to Centel's attorney, Bill Mattoon. The note inquired as to who was the blonde. When Mattoon informed him that it was Losavio's wife, the disappointed judge resumed the proceedings.

    "In that same case, Losavio recalled that Nottingham refused to cause the clerk record the jury's $l72,465 verdict, a purely ministerial act. Losavio repeatedly followed-up with the clerk in an effort to get the judgment entered. Losavio's client, Don Settle, filed a judicial misconduct complaint (which, of course, was eventually dismissed). Nottingham issued a written response in which, Losavio claims, he accosted Losavio for his persistence.

    "I also spoke with Losavio's client, Don Settle. Settle, who witnessed the passing of the note, says that he lost approximately $50K as a result of Nottingham's refusal to enter the jury's judgment. Settle says Nottingham justified his usurpation of the jury's verdict because he didn't want to create that particular precedent in at-will employee discharge suits. As a result, the jury's verdict was never entered."