is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:

Judge James A. Fabian in his final order issued September 29, 2009 places perjury as a new argument even though perjury was submitted in a one-hundred and twenty-one page document titled: NEW FINDING [PERJURY] May 12, 2008 and Judge Fabian had not taken this case under advisement until May 20, 2008 as both are listed on the docket ledger. This case started off with Judge Fabian stating that his mother’s house had asbestos and lead and she is eight-nine-years-old and then pressuring the Bourne’s with his ‘bias’ “Why not just sell the house and get it over with.” The Bourne’s had concerns over Rick Lubinski’s and Susan Gallas’ honesty addressing the hazardous asbestos and lead paint. In the end with this final order issued September 29, 2009 Judge Fabian has approved the sale of this home. He is allowing the perjured belief that the 400 square feet of asbestos flooring has been removed and the house is safe. He is making the Bourne’s pay all costs and attorney fees thus rewarding Rick Lubinski’s and Susan Gallas’ apparent perjury with a large money windfall from this now completed and finalized home sale. Thousands of Minnesotans have expressed outrage and anger over this Judge’s actions and are voicing strong opinions demanding the removal of Judge Fabian.Standtall
Lakeville, Minnesota, United States
Anonymous users (66)
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
- reply
Ken Potts (not verified)at 05:16 on October 7th, 2009
A federal rights violations seven figure lawsuit is the best answer for the Bourne's. Winona, MN Judge James A. Fabian obviously has not read the Bill of Rights.
- reply
Bonnie Blair (not verified)at 05:20 on October 7th, 2009
The Bournes should file a seven figure federal lawsuit for these extreme rights vioations. Has this Judge even read the U.S. Constituiton?
- reply
Susan Mills (not verified)at 10:28 on October 7th, 2009
The essence of a 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim is to authorize a court to grant relief when a party's federally protected rights have been violated by a state or local official or other person who acted under color of state law. See United States Supreme Court
- reply
Mary T. Moore (not verified)at 10:31 on October 7th, 2009
I think the Bournes may want to see a constitution law attorney. This Judge is disgusting!!
- reply
Susan Starr (not verified)at 11:32 on October 7th, 2009
This is the most disgusting act by any judge that I have EVER heard of!!!!