Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Family of slain NYC bodega attacker plans to sue store in Jose Alba case
NY Post ^

Posted on 09/24/2022 7:19:14 AM PDT by TigerClaws

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: TigerClaws

Show the video and this case should be kicked out of court, except in NewYork


41 posted on 09/24/2022 10:46:06 AM PDT by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

He didndu nuffin!

Always hustlin’ for a dollar.....


42 posted on 09/24/2022 10:57:02 AM PDT by Dawgreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

The family should bugger off. What a cheap, despicable way to try and make money. Alba acted in self-defense, period. They’ll need a jury of idiots to win, but then again it’s New York City.


43 posted on 09/24/2022 11:11:42 AM PDT by popdonnelly (All the enormous crimes in history have been committed by governments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinB

“Losing a lawsuit and filing a frivolous lawsuit are two different things. We don’t have loser pays. The theory is that would have a chilling effect on the ability or willingness of people to assert their rights in court. Most US jurisdictions do provide penalties for the filing of frivolous suits, though. Truly frivolous suits are typically resolved fairly quickly through dismissals or summary judgments.”

Problem is that frivolous lawsuits are still happening way too much. Trial Lawyers need to be reigned in. All their political contributions go to the Democrat party.


44 posted on 09/24/2022 11:29:38 AM PDT by willk (Local news media. Just as dangerous as national media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: joma89

Criminals claim their rights as the famous type of case in which the school system or the homeowner is supposedly responsible for the safety of the criminals.
One:

....March 1, 1982, to steal a floodlight from the roof of the Enterprise High School gymnasium. Ricky climbed the roof, removed the floodlight, lowered it to the ground to his friends, and, as he was walking across the roof (perhaps to steal a second floodlight), he fell through the skylight. Bodine suffered terrible injuries to be sure, though one questions the relevance: if the school is legally responsible for burglars’ safety, it doesn’t matter whether Bodine stubbed a toe or, as actually happened, became a spastic quadriplegic. But I fail to see what it is that reformers are supposedly misrepresenting. A burglar fell through a skylight, and sued the owner of the skylight for his injuries. Bodine sued for $8 million (in 1984 dollars, about $16 million today)////article was in 2006 so estimates of dollars are obsolete.
from overlawyered.com


45 posted on 09/24/2022 1:40:32 PM PDT by frank ballenger (You have summoned up a thundercloud. You're gonna hear from me. Anthem by Leonard Cohen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

Not NY but interesting:

https://www.justicepays.com/news/sometimes-a-trespasser-can-sue-a-homeowner

//////////////
It is true that every property owner has the right to prevent trespassers from coming into the property. In the case of homeowners with swimming pools, or treehouses, or other features attractive to children, it is even legally required to take steps to prevent children from easily trespassing.
However, there is no legal justification for booby traps, especially if those traps have been laid with the express purpose of harming, or even killing trespassers. So while putting up a fence to keep a child from sneaking into a swimming pool is legally approved—and even required—setting up a shotgun to shoot that same child once the child is on the property could result in a personal injury or even wrongful death lawsuit from the parents.

Using Deadly Force To Defend Property

Similar to the use of booby traps is the general legal sentiment that it is illegal for home or property owners to use deadly force to defend that property. Please note, this is an important distinction. The clear dividing line here is PROPERTY, not PERSON. Florida is a “stand your ground” state, so while the law recognizes the right of an individual to defend him or herself when threatened with violence, that does not apply to the property. So if a teenager is “threatening” your property with graffiti from a spray can, this is not the same as a stand your ground scenario, and you cannot open fire on the teenager.


46 posted on 09/24/2022 1:44:54 PM PDT by frank ballenger (You have summoned up a thundercloud. You're gonna hear from me. Anthem by Leonard Cohen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson