|
Post by duff on Apr 28, 2023 19:52:10 GMT -5
Reads like the landowner feels they are losing since they dropped the monetary portion. Did I miss a decision? A Carbon County jury last year found the four not guilty of criminal trespass and trespassing to hunt in a separate case in state court. As Eshelman’s civil case advances in federal court, both sides have asked the judge to rule at least partly in their favor without a trial.
The hunters want the suit dismissed; Eshelman wants the judge to rule that the men trespassed and for a jury to decide only damages.Yeah, I want $1,000,000 and a new boat. So not criminal and still 2 parties wanting different results. The fact the landowner wants to drop the $7M lawsuit and just get a decision makes it feel like they realize they may not win.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Apr 28, 2023 20:01:57 GMT -5
A Carbon County jury last year found the four not guilty of criminal trespass and trespassing to hunt in a separate case in state court. As Eshelman’s civil case advances in federal court, both sides have asked the judge to rule at least partly in their favor without a trial.
The hunters want the suit dismissed; Eshelman wants the judge to rule that the men trespassed and for a jury to decide only damages.Yeah, I want $1,000,000 and a new boat. So not criminal and still 2 parties wanting different results. The fact the landowner wants to drop the $7M lawsuit and just get a decision makes it feel like they realize they may not win. I took it as landowner only wants the suit dropped if he wins Trespass decision without going to trial…….. The onx information is interesting!
|
|
|
Post by duff on Apr 28, 2023 20:52:43 GMT -5
Yeah, I want $1,000,000 and a new boat. So not criminal and still 2 parties wanting different results. The fact the landowner wants to drop the $7M lawsuit and just get a decision makes it feel like they realize they may not win. I took it as landowner only wants the suit dropped if he wins Trespass decision without going to trial…….. The onx information is interesting! I would say that was more important in the criminal case. It doesn't look to be at the corner so even if they prove they trespassed it won't answer the corner crossing delima.
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Apr 30, 2023 1:10:04 GMT -5
"Eshelman, a wealthy North Carolina resident, has claimed that if corner crossing were permitted, the resulting public access to public land would devalue his 22,045-acre ranch by some 25% to 30%. That would amount to between $7.75 million and $9.4 million, according to WyoFile calculations made from his civil complaint and associated documents."
"By using the onX GPS map and hunting app on cell phones, they located other checkerboard corner survey monuments and stepped over them. By that method, the men hunted some 3,000 acres of public land that could only be reached by corner crossing, trespassing or with Eshelman’s permission.
Until this week, Eshelman wanted Wyoming’s Chief U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl to declare the hunters trespassers, then send the matter to a jury that would only determine damages. Now he would be satisfied if the judge only rules that corner crossing is trespassing and “restrains further trespass.”
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Apr 30, 2023 1:15:33 GMT -5
I took it as landowner only wants the suit dropped if he wins Trespass decision without going to trial…….. The onx information is interesting! I would say that was more important in the criminal case. It doesn't look to be at the corner so even if they prove they trespassed it won't answer the corner crossing delima. "The new claim about hunter Smith states that he marked a place he stood in 2020 in the onX program on his cell phone. Eshelman’s team obtained data from onX and ran the coordinates through the onX program and another one, according to an affidavit. “Mr. Smith marked a waypoint at geographic coordinates that place him on real property, owned by [Eshelman’s] Iron Bar Holdings, LLC,” the affidavit states. The waypoint “proves he trespassed,” Eshelman’s latest filings state. Smith denied on Thursday that he ever set foot on Elk Mountain Ranch land, according to a court declaration. The hunters had at least two separate onX programs, according to court filings, including the one used by Smith. They used the program to mark several places they hunted and hiked, including spots near the common corners they crossed and places where they killed elk or deer." I have onX, and they say that it isn't accurate enough to legally determine the property boundary. So, if that is true, then can you believe the waypoint that is marked? I say no. I really, really want the judge to rule in the hunters favor. That will set a president to allow other corner crossing, which will open up a tremendous amount of public ground that is now considered landlocked. The only way to legally get to that ground is to hire a helicopter, and I believe there is some public ground that prohibits landing a helicopter on it? If that is the case then how is that ground accessible to the public? Hover and let the hunters climb down a rope ladder?
|
|
|
Post by duff on Apr 30, 2023 2:53:56 GMT -5
I would say that was more important in the criminal case. It doesn't look to be at the corner so even if they prove they trespassed it won't answer the corner crossing delima. "The new claim about hunter Smith states that he marked a place he stood in 2020 in the onX program on his cell phone. Eshelman’s team obtained data from onX and ran the coordinates through the onX program and another one, according to an affidavit. “Mr. Smith marked a waypoint at geographic coordinates that place him on real property, owned by [Eshelman’s] Iron Bar Holdings, LLC,” the affidavit states. The waypoint “proves he trespassed,” Eshelman’s latest filings state. Smith denied on Thursday that he ever set foot on Elk Mountain Ranch land, according to a court declaration. The hunters had at least two separate onX programs, according to court filings, including the one used by Smith. They used the program to mark several places they hunted and hiked, including spots near the common corners they crossed and places where they killed elk or deer." I have onX, and they say that it isn't accurate enough to legally determine the property boundary. So, if that is true, then can you believe the waypoint that is marked? I say no. I really, really want the judge to rule in the hunters favor. That will set a president to allow other corner crossing, which will open up a tremendous amount of public ground that is now considered landlocked. The only way to legally get to that ground is to hire a helicopter, and I believe there is some public ground that prohibits landing a helicopter on it? If that is the case then how is that ground accessible to the public? Hover and let the hunters climb down a rope ladder? I agree. I have listened to a few meat eater pod casts on this topic. I find it interesting that many guys out west grew up believing it to be illegal to corner cross. Never been in that situation myself so I had not thought about it. Seems simple but nothing is ever simple.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Apr 30, 2023 7:29:18 GMT -5
I have used onX and the issue I found is it doesn’t have the property boundary.accurate it seems to have my location accurate but not the property boundarys
I agree public land should have access for public use but not sure what answer is for all parties……a lot of pros and cons IMO
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on Apr 30, 2023 8:23:27 GMT -5
I have found the same with onx. But it can also get you close enough to find markers. I can see where you could get in trouble if not careful. Toggling between onx and county GIS websites helps.
|
|
|
Post by jman46151 on Apr 30, 2023 8:43:52 GMT -5
I would say that was more important in the criminal case. It doesn't look to be at the corner so even if they prove they trespassed it won't answer the corner crossing delima. "The new claim about hunter Smith states that he marked a place he stood in 2020 in the onX program on his cell phone. Eshelman’s team obtained data from onX and ran the coordinates through the onX program and another one, according to an affidavit. “Mr. Smith marked a waypoint at geographic coordinates that place him on real property, owned by [Eshelman’s] Iron Bar Holdings, LLC,” the affidavit states. The waypoint “proves he trespassed,” Eshelman’s latest filings state. Smith denied on Thursday that he ever set foot on Elk Mountain Ranch land, according to a court declaration. The hunters had at least two separate onX programs, according to court filings, including the one used by Smith. They used the program to mark several places they hunted and hiked, including spots near the common corners they crossed and places where they killed elk or deer." I have onX, and they say that it isn't accurate enough to legally determine the property boundary. So, if that is true, then can you believe the waypoint that is marked? I say no. I really, really want the judge to rule in the hunters favor. That will set a president to allow other corner crossing, which will open up a tremendous amount of public ground that is now considered landlocked. The only way to legally get to that ground is to hire a helicopter, and I believe there is some public ground that prohibits landing a helicopter on it? If that is the case then how is that ground accessible to the public? Hover and let the hunters climb down a rope ladder? That's the thing. It's neither legal nor illegal to access those lands-at least by corner crossing. The other landlocked areas, that's another story. That's why this case is so important.
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on May 26, 2023 21:33:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2023 7:25:38 GMT -5
Interesting ladder……Yeah,even the judge expects an appeal. Long ways from being over…
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on May 27, 2023 8:41:20 GMT -5
My bet is it'll be the same result.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2023 9:04:03 GMT -5
My bet is it'll be the same result. Maybe so maybe not….but not all the claims have been dismissed at this point!
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on May 27, 2023 10:20:11 GMT -5
The waypoint issue is a weak case at best.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2023 11:28:44 GMT -5
The waypoint issue is a weak case at best. I agree it maybe weak but it also wasn’t dismissed at this point!
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on May 27, 2023 11:50:13 GMT -5
True
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2023 12:31:30 GMT -5
Got an opinion on why it wasn’t dismissed at this ruling?
|
|
|
Post by Ahawkeye on May 27, 2023 14:53:07 GMT -5
In my opinion, the ranch owner's lawyers made a stink over it because it's the last thread of hope they have and the ranch owner wants to put the hunters through as much hell as he can.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2023 15:37:14 GMT -5
In my opinion, the ranch owner's lawyers made a stink over it because it's the last thread of hope they have and the ranch owner wants to put the hunters through as much hell as he can. Yeah I don’t expect anyone to admit guilt at this point also… let the court decide and the drama play on!
|
|
|
Post by esshup on May 27, 2023 20:30:31 GMT -5
The waypoint issue is a weak case at best. Skavdahl has scheduled a trial in June where that now-separate Waypoint 6 trespass allegation could be resolved.
|
|