Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, that depends on the state's workmen's compensation laws which is the point, states and Congress can and do limit what kinds of lawsuits can be brought to trial
If/when the courts do not rule those circumstances unconstitutional.
If/when the courts do not rule those circumstances unconstitutional.
Ah, but Ralph a trial court isn't going to rule against a statute barring a law suit unless there is an previous precedent set by an appellant court. In order to do that one has to bring a separate action challenging the law itself. The point is, it isn't a violation of the separation of powers for a legislature or the Congress to dictate to the judicial branch what can and cannot be brought before the Court and that includes the Constitution since it is a creature of the legislative branch to begin with. But yes, the Court can overturn a legislative action if it contradicts other Constitutional guarantees, that should go without having to be stated.
An intruder breaks into a guys house, guy shoots intruder, intruder's mom sues.
I haven't looked it up, but I'll be my paycheck the intruder has a previous criminal record.
ANDERSON, S.C. — Two lawsuits have been filed by the mother of a man who was fatally shot by an Anderson homeowner who said someone was trying to break into his house. The Anderson Independent-Mail reports Jo Pickens, mother of Leandus Pickens, filed two lawsuits Tuesday against Anderson funeral home owner Marcus Brown.
The first lawsuit says Brown caused the wrongful death of Leandus Pickens last year by “negligently and recklessly discharging a firearm.” The second lawsuit says Brown “failed to exercise due care” before shooting Pickens.
Each lawsuit seeks $10 million in damages.
Brown says he was acting in self-defense when he shot an unknown intruder who climbed through a window of his home. Prosecutor Chrissy Adams announced Oct. 1 that no criminal charges would be filed against Brown
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpm1
States really need to pass laws protecting people defending themselves from these types of frivolous lawsuits. Pickens estate should pay for the homeowners defense.
The problem is that any person literally can file a suit, whether or not it has merit. Most people who file clearly frivilous actions are broke themselves so holding them liable for malicious prosecution serves little or no purpose.
I would propose a few things to ameliorate this mess:
Materially raise the fees for index numbers for all actions seeking in excess of $25,000; and
Setting the bar much lower for granting motions to dismiss actions at the outset.
Under current law obtaining dismissal at the outset is difficult. The Supreme Court has eased the standards under the famous Twombly and Iqbal decisions. Those decisions impose q requirement that the action be "plausible." That's a higher bar than that set previously which was that an action would survive dismissal if "any set of facts" would sustain the action.
There are several problems. One is that Twombly and Iqbal don't apply in state courts. The second is that "plausibility" is relatively easy to demonstrate. What I would like would be to provide for some kind of mini-trial so that a Plaintiff would have to show that he had some way of prevailing on the facts. Or at least be forced to outline who the likely witnesses would be and their likely testimony.
That way Plaintiffs would have to make some kind of threshold showing that their action had merit and it wasn't just filed to force a quick settlement.
That's ridiculous. Such a law would be blatantly unconstitutional (if anyone still cares about that), and there's already a law against filing frivolous lawsuits in the federal courts (Rule 11).
Moreover, what are you worried about? You live in Georgia, home of Yost and the possibly unique tort of "abusive litigation".
Rule 11 is a weak reed to lean on. Here's the way Rule 11 works. First you have to draft and serve (but not file) the motion and leave it unfiled for 21 days. If the offending document or lawsuit is not withdrawn you can then file the motion. At that point the award of sanctions is discretionary, and rare. Then, frivilous party needs to have money to actually pay the sanction. In short it's a lot of trouble and expense for very little deterrent effect.
This is good to know my wife & I are moving to Greenville with in the next two years. I was thinking they had it. I used to live in Columbia, Sc for 8 years & I asked a cop what were my rights for defending my home. I was told shoot them dead. If I am out & someone breaks into my home I want her to be able to use deadly force if needed.
Sounds like you are eager to shoot someone. People who go looking for trouble usually find it.
Maybe you should move to Florida. Or better yet, somewhere you won't be fearful for your life. There are a LOT of very safe communities in the USA.
Sounds like you are eager to shoot someone. People who go looking for trouble usually find it.
Maybe you should move to Florida. Or better yet, somewhere you won't be fearful for your life. There are a LOT of very safe communities in the USA.
Everyone has the right to defend themselves. Period. When someone breaks into your house, how is it that you figure that the home owner is looking for trouble? Any cop will tell you that if someone breaks into to your home, that you should shoot them dead. Why? Because they will sue you if you just wound them. There are hundreds of stories of people braking into someone's house & getting hurt by their own accord & sewing the home owners & winning the lawsuit. Nor will I let anyone hurt my wife or those I love who are under my roof.
Efforts to pass a federal law with penalties for filing frivolous suits have been blocked by Democrats for years.
But frivolous lawsuits can be blocked, though.
Back in the early 90s, Time magazine featured an article on Scientology. Scientology responded in their favorite way: lawsuits. Hundreds of them against Time. This was the result:
"In the years since its inception, the Church of Scientology's lawsuits filed against newspapers, magazines, government agencies (including the United States tax collecting unit, the IRS), and individuals have numbered in the thousands. In 1991, Time magazine estimated that the Church spends an average of about $20 million per year on various legal actions, and it is the exclusive client of several law firms. According to a U.S. District Court Memorandum of Decision in 1993, Scientologists "have abused the federal court system by using it, inter alia, to destroy their opponents, rather than to resolve an actual dispute over trademark law or any other legal matter. This constitutes 'extraordinary, malicious, wanton, and oppressive conduct.' ... It is abundantly clear that plaintiffs sought to harass the individual defendants and destroy the church defendants through massive over-litigation and other highly questionable litigation tactics. The Special Master has never seen a more glaring example of bad faith litigation than this." Rulings such as this have classified the Church of Scientology as a chronically vexatious litigant."
And the end result was that lawsuits brought against Time Magazine by the Church of Scientology would not be heard in court.
Yep. Anyone can sue for anything. Doesn't mean they will get far, and certainly does not mean they have any chance of winning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More laws are seldom the answer.
