Rivers said he spent hundreds of hours researching, writing and asking for advice from friends with legal training.
Michael Rivers, of Springfield, leans on the parking meter which caused him so much trouble.SPRINGFIELD – After two years, $450 in legal fees and enough aggravation to last a lifetime, Michael D. Rivers has prevailed over a parking meter 1112 in Hampden Superior Court.
In a surprise ruling last week, Superior Court Judge Cornelius J. Moriarty II threw out a $25 parking ticket issued to Rivers in 2009, giving the retired School Department audio visual supervisor a victory in his battle against the Springfield Parking Authority and one of its 620 parking meters.
For Rivers, who represented himself in court, the ruling was a long-awaited vindication in a case involving multiple court dates, two judges, a city Law Department attorney, a hearing officer and a meter maid.
Still, he hardly sounded jubilant over his victory.
“I prosecuted the case without legal help – something I will never do again,” the Leyfred Terrace resident said. “It was painful, like doing my own dentistry.”
The parking authority’s executive director, Harold “Hal” King, was philosophical after the court’s decision.
“Mr. Rivers put together a very eloquent case, and the judge took it under review” before issuing his decision, said King. “That’s the way it goes sometimes.”
“If it’s one man against the big bad Parking Authority, (the judge could say) I feel for this guy; let’s give him the benefit of the doubt,” King added.
River’s legal odyssey began outside the Red Rose Pizzeria on Main Street in October 2009, when he pumped 50 cents into the meter for an hour of parking time. By his account, River returned 45 minutes later to find a ticket on his windshield.
A quick inspection suggested the meter was malfunctioning, according to Rivers, who said the glass window was clouded with “gunk” – a sign of battery leakage. As an audio visual supervisor, Rivers said he was familiar with battery leakage and the havoc it causes in electronic devices.
Before deciding to challenge the ticket, Rivers used his cellphone to snap pictures of meter 1112. By the time the appeal was filed, the meter was replaced as part of a South End revitalization project.
His first appeal was to the Parking Authority, which contracts out the city’s meter system to Republic Parking System, a national firm.
When the authority rejected his appeal, Rivers took his case to Superior Court, where he initially lost when Judge Bertha D. Josephson dismissed the case after Rivers failed to appear for a hearing.
The case was reinstated after Rivers argued that he was never notified; why, he asked, would somebody spend $300 in filing fees to appeal their case, then deliberately miss the hearing?
By the time the case reached Judge Moriarty, the city was tacking on late-payment fines to the original $25 ticket, and Rivers had filed a motion accusing the city of harassment. The late fines and harassment motions were dropped, clearing the way for Morarity’s ruling July 6.
“In retrospect, I should have won easily – it was an open and shut case; the meter suffered from deferred maintenance” Rivers said, noting that he spent hundreds of hours researching, writing and asking friends with legal training for advice.
“I could never have done it if I wasn't retired,” he added.
City Solicitor Edward M. Pikula said he had not seen the ruling, and could not comment on the case.
Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court handed down for parking tickets, despite a Greenfield man’s contention that the cost of the appeal effectively negated his rights under the state constitution.
Vincent Gillespie said the $319.90 cost of appealing his July 19, 2005, parking ticket in Hampshire Superior Court so far exceeded the $15 fine that it denied him his guaranteed access to the court system.
