Well, truck me: Padgett and friends' Main Street lawsuit finds its way to history's dust bin.

Irony alert: Many of us feel that the city of New Albany definitely is at fault concerning the beautification-oriented redesign of East Main Street ... just not in the exact way alleged by the plaintiffs in a plainly frivolous lawsuit.

First, some background from the fall of 2015.

Conservatives to Padgett: "The heaviest road users are the ones who get the biggest subsidies."

Zurschmiede swings and misses as Padgett and pals sue the city of New Albany.

New Albany's new slogan: "Truck Through City" ... Part 86: Bored of Works to approve Arch de Capitulation on 5th St., facing Padgett.

Tort claim notice offers preview of Padgett's lawsuit against modernity.

Next, the most recent update.

Judge rules in New Albany's favor, by Chris Morris (Gahan Gets a Free Pass Digest)

NEW ALBANY — It took more than two years, but a judge ruled the city of New Albany was not at fault concerning the redesign of East Main Street.

On Nov. 6, Judge Daniel Donahue ruled in the city’s favor and against the plaintiffs which included Padgett, Inc., Tiger Truck Lines, J&J Pallet Corporation, Kaiser Wholesale, Inc., E.M. Cummings Veneers, Inc., Maximum Fleet Service, LLC, Mr. “P” Express, Inc. and W-M Lumber & Wood Products, Inc.

The eight local manufacturers, service and trucking companies filed suit in 2015 alleging that the redesign of East Main Street negatively affected their right to safely access the “Heavy Haul” route. James Gray, the attorney who represented the business owners, said when the lawsuit was filed the companies were not consulted prior to the redesign, which included building a decorative median down Main Street from Vincennes Street to East Fifth Street. Gray said there were safety concerns as well following the redesign.

City attorney Shane Gibson called the lawsuit at the time “absolutely ridiculous” and feels the same two years later after the judge ruled in New Albany’s favor.

“The timing of when this was filed was totally politically motivated,” Gibson said.

He said there were public meetings to discuss the plans and there were no safety concerns. In fact, he said last week the redesign made Main Street safer because it slowed traffic ...

Yes, the lawsuit was absolutely ridiculous. No doubt about it.

Yes, city attorney and current interim redevelopment commission slush fund maintainer Gibson is perfectly correct in saying so.

Pot/kettle alert: Of course, Gibson remains the best remunerated and most prominent cog in an administration that digests matters of "politically motivated" timing along with its Lucky Charms.

However, the plaintiffs’ point about an unfavorably altered roadway base might well be a potentially interesting topic, given the frequency of repairs during the past three years.

It's a question for redevelopment, isn't it?