As predicted by this blog, the defendant filing basically states the "Second Amended Complaint" is a pointless "do over" lawsuit, and should be dismissed on that basis. But one interesting question highlighted by the defendants is this: Who is Frank Essien? And why was Frank Essien a plaintiff, and now Frank Essien is being dropped without explanation? The defendant response says plaintiffs should provide an explanation about Frank Essien's appearing and then disappearing from the lawsuit.
According to one of my sources, Frank Essien was...
...present at the chaotic JACC press conference in January of this year, which was held after the "New Majority" board officers under Kip Browne took the reigns of power at JACC, firing Jerry Moore. JACC has been fighting lawsuits ever since by the malcontent "Old Majority" faction, which still claims to be the true and legitimate JACC.
Movers and shakers in the Jordan Neighborhood hadn't known Frank Essien to be involved in neighborhood organization politics before, and he was heard to ask one person at the press conference, "What's going on, here?" Later, word was that "Old Majority" plaintiff Steve Jackson had asked Frank, "Can we use your name in support of something?" However, Frank had not agreed to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit.
Now plaintiffs are trying to drop Frank Essien from the messy "do over" lawsuit without explaining why.
Surprise, surprise, surprise.