Down River – Dec. 31, 2014
Happy New Year:
Whoa!!
It’s been cajones grande all throughout the local courts and The Express this past week!
Apparently, contrary to believe in some quarters, Steve Poorman and Lee Roberts were not conjoined at the hip at birth.
We all need a scorecard to follow the fast and furious recent exchanges in the years’ old efforts to get a new CVS at Bellefonte Avenue and Commerce Street in Lock Haven.
There has been behind-the-scenes sparring for more than two years now and it all came to the surface last week when the differences among a local musician/entrepreneur/philanthropist, a Harrisburg area developer and a feisty Lock Haven attorney left us all in a collective gasp.
It went public when the developer went into Clinton County Court, charging Poorman (he’s the musician/entrepreneur/philanthropist) with reneging on behalf of his client Robert Rosemeier over a signed agreement to sell the Rosemeier holding along Bellefonte Avenue to the developer, the goal a nifty, boxlike drugstore (if you’re into aesthetics, check out the CVS monstrosity greeting folks driving into Jersey Shore off the Thompson Street extension; it’s not quite Frank Lloyd Wright-like in style or scale).
Anyway, that opening court salvo from the Camp Hill developer and its pricy, powerful legal firm out of Harrisburg got things rolling.
The legalese from McNees, Wallace and Nurick was relatively mild but made a point to say its client, J.C. Bar Development, wants a jury trial and wants damages in excess of $50,000 from Rosemeier and the musician/entrepreneur/philanthropist that holds his power of attorney.
And then Lee Roberts (he’s the feisty lawyer) jumped in with a zealousness not seen since his power forward days in the old Lock Haven YMCA slow break basketball league several decades or so ago.
Yep, it was about then when it hit the judicial/Express opinion page fan.
The feisty local attorney drew first blood in his court filing when he alleged that “Stephen P. Poorman has a history of preying on the weak and elderly. Robert J. Rosemeier is weak and elderly.” (Yes, this is the same Stephen P. Poorman seen on the front page of The Express seemingly every-other week extending his largess to some needy or deserving community organization).
The musician/entrepreneur/philanthropist (hereinafter referred to as “MEP”) answered back with a rejoinder, first in earlier comments to The Record and later an op-ed piece in The Express, defending Rosemeirer and claiming his client was not being “treated fairly” in the amount Rosemeirer had agreed to, this in light of new information about project cleanup costs.
MEP also appeared to be making another point, this relative to Rosemeier’s state; MEP seen in public with client Rosemeier not long after the CVS dispute became the talk of the town. In a recent joint sit-down at the counter at the Texas Restaurant, the two told Down River that Rosemeier is 74 years old, not “about the age of 77” and not “weak and elderly” as averred in Roberts’ court filing.
So now where do we go?
If nothing happens sooner, the next round could be in Clinton Common Pleas Court. Judge Michael Salisbury has set Feb. 3 for a hearing on Roberts’ injunction request to deny Poorman from further representing Rosemeier and allow a closing on the property to move forward. (Roberts’ son owns the abutting property and has a $600,000 sales agreement with the developer but can’t move forward unless Rosemeier also closes).
This one definitely has caught the public eye. Down River as a public service did a man-in-the-street interview as to who the public is rooting for in any feisty lawyer-MEP showdown. And the feisty lawyer overwhelmingly won in the court of public opinion.
But soon it will be in the court of Judge Michael Salisbury and your opinion won’t count (it will if and when the Bar suit goes to public trial, a jury requested to hear the developer’s case against Rosemeier and MEP).
The great unknown: will this much-ado-about-not-a-whole-lot-beyond-a-couple-hundred-thou get to beyond the name-calling stage and into the judicial arena? And will CVS, the developer and its pricey Harrisburg law firm get tired of this local personality and dollar-driven spectacle and move on?
Will somebody blink? Given the personalities involved, that might only happen in court in February when a plaintiff and/or defendant stick a finger into the eye of one of the other court participants.
If and when we go to court, we could very well see a vitriolic exchange reminiscent of the old “Point-Counterpoint” segments during the salad days of NBC’s Saturday Night Live (Who can ever forget the night Dan Akroyd started a response to Jane Curtin with “Jane, your ignorant slut…”?).
Meanwhile please contact court administrator Miles Kessinger and tell him to reserve Down River a front row seat Tuesday, Feb. 3 in “Courtroom Number 2 at 8:30 a.m.”
Don’t miss it; don’t ever be late.
Happy New Year.
