'Hybrid Motion'?

EDGAR CO. (ECWd) –
For months I raised the issue of constitutionality as it relates to the actions taken by the County Board, which at the time, included two resolutions stripping former Chairman Chris Patrick of certain mandated duties, and Mr. Patrick’s recusal letter.  In a nut shell, Patrick put his self interests ahead of the voters.  First coverage of that case can be found here.
Now, 7 months later, the Redwood Law firm has their response to Edgar County State’s Attorney Mark Isaf’s motion to dismiss the case brought forward by 9 Edgar County Citizens and it is quite a response.

“This ‘hybrid motion’ has been consistently criticized.  Reviewing courts have long disapproved of this slipshod practice as it causes unnecessary complication and confusion.”  (Text on page 4 of the Redwood Filing)

“As the State’s Attorney for the County of Edgar, it is the duty of Attorney Isaf to prosecute crimes, including Class A misdemeanors, such as the one alleged to have been committed by defendant Patrick in this complaint.” (Text on page 7 of the Redwood Filing)

Has a law firm now taken the State’s Attorney to task with the language contained in their response?  Two words come to my mind when I read their response: SPOT ON!
For all those interested in your government and seeing it in operation first hand please attend the oral argument on this motion January 16th at 1:30 before Judge Glenn in the Edgar County Court House.