Ruling for the plaintiffs’ motion and again the defendant’s motion>br/>A file photo image

A Norfolk County Superior Court judge issued his findings on the motions filed by the litigants in a lawsuit initiated to halt Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch’s plans to install secretly ordered and already paid for statues of saints that surely but coincidentally are patron saints of the mayor’s Roman Catholic faith.

The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs request to impose a formal open-ended injunction to not allow the statues to be installed unless the suit might be decided in favor of the defendant given a trail, however, given a reasonable read of the judge’s ruling on the plaintiffs’ motion, the defendants should fold their tent and so stop wasting both the court’s time as well as waste taxpayers’ money on a losing case. 

Could someone explain this to me?

A Koch campaign flyer image

In particular, the judge found the mayor’s statements far from compelling as well-pointedly pointed out why in no uncertain terms and thus well-worth reading.

At the same time, the judge conversely as well as concurrently rejected the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case in also no uncertain terms also worth reading even if one is not an attorney as the judge’s ruling is readily understand —- at least as far as judges’ ruling go.

Further, a solid court ruling is typically a clear read even if in this case Quincy’s peerless mayor is yet again pushing back against a deserved ruling against his chronic disregard of the rule of law.