Man, 47, on hunger strike in protest of 2 judges' rulings

By CHRIS POON
Journal Staff Writer

Copyright © 2000 The Providence Journal Company Produced by www.projo.com

3-24-2000 [South County Ed.] EXETER -- A man evicted from his trailer home more than two years ago says he's been on a two-week hunger strike to protest the rulings of two judges. Richard Wayne Garganta, 47, a former resident of Mobile Village, at 550 Victory Highway, says he's been drinking only water during his fast, which began March 10. On that day, Superior Court Judge Ronald R. Gagnon ruled that Mobile Village could dismantle the trailer that Garganta was evicted from in 1997 and remove it if Garganta does not move it in 30 days.

Garganta's legal saga started as a routine eviction case in District Court, but has since ballooned into a bizarre civil suit that has bounced between District Court, Superior Court and the state's Supreme Court, and has created a case file bulging with four inches of paperwork. Yesterday, he asked a friend to drive him to the Wakefield courthouse so he could file an appeal of Gagnon's ruling. After losing about 13 pounds on the fast, the now-138-pound, 5-foot-7 Garganta said he was too weak to drive. He says he's not trying to starve to death, nor has he even injured his good health.  A water-only diet, says the unemployed man who used to run stop-smoking clinics, can sustain a person for 20 to 30 days. ``I may go beyond it,'' he added. ``I'm not trying to impress anybody. I'm taking civil action to try to try to draw attention to the injustice of this case,'' he said.

He claims that District Court Judge Michael A. Higgins ignored a state law that allows tenants to withhold rent for legitimate reasons. Instead, Higgins sided with Mobile Village, which went to court to evict Garganta. Higgins, who is now sitting in Providence, easily recalled the case yesterday. The case was unusual because Garganta had rejected Higgins' advice to seek an appeal if he didn't like his ruling, and because Garganta had acted as his own attorney, Higgins said. Garganta eventually took his case to higher courts, but motions he filed there were rejected. As for the two-week fast, Higgins said he didn't know Garganta had started one. ``What could I do about it? My involvement in the case has been over for probably two years. ... I couldn't revisit it even if I wanted to. Once it's a year old, nothing can be done about it. I'm surprised it's still going on.'' Judge Gagnon declined to comment on Garganta's hunger strike, saying through a court clerk that he stood by his March 10 ruling.

Garganta unsuccessfully tried to argue that Gagnon should not have ruled on the case because Higgins' eviction order was good for only one year and had expired. Robert Senville, a lawyer who volunteered to act as a ``standby'' attorney while Garganta represented himself in court, said yesterday Garganta had a legitimate disagreement with Gagnon. ``The legal recourse is to appeal Judge Gagnon's decision, and I think he intends to do that. But this is where Richard and I kind of disagree: I'm very concerned about Richard's hunger strike, and I would like him to stop. I don't think it's the best method for him to seek redress on this issue.''

EMAIL Caught! right now!