Muscatine

If CLAM was not involved why did the account in the Muscatine Journal on April 3, 2013 state that they were involved?

That's a good question, why, when they arte not involved.   CLAM, I believe, has a entirely different law suit that is not a part of the Class action suit just dismissed.  Is there a possibility that the Muscatine Journal could have "bent" the truth a little, or do some of of the people here bend facts to fit what they want? ?

When the Journal had that woman running things over there, they sure did a lot of "bending" then.

So were both suits dismissed or not and once again who pays? Who is CLAM's attorney of record and what is the cause of action for their suit? Also what or who is arte?

The suit that was dismissed, from the Journal article I initially posted, makes reference to a direct quote by the leader of CLAM regarding "the court's decision". If there is more than one suit; this quote has to mean this case, since there have been no other decisions in suits.

Then, there is a quote by GPC that "with Smith's ruling..."...."no other individual lawsuits remain to be litigated".

That would be a pretty egregious mistake by the Journal if all this is wrong.

Again, on this suit, all had there hat handed to them.