Convicted thief sues store he robbed
This is a discussion on Convicted thief sues store he robbed within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Zeilinski's lawyer says his client is asking in excess of $125,000 for pain and suffering and emotional distress.
... for being stopped as the criminal ...
September 3rd, 2009 11:02 AM
... for being stopped as the criminal he was, caught in the act?
Zeilinski's lawyer says his client is asking in excess of $125,000 for pain and suffering and emotional distress.
Judge: "Subtract the pain/suffering/distress his client caused the 20 customers in the store at the time, plus the caulking, gypsum board and paint to repair the walls x20, plus the lost wages of the people who had to jerk around with this case due to his sorry but being at any place at the wrong time, plus the judge's time, the clerks' time, the DA's time, the Grand Jury's time and the hoard of attorneys. To say nothing of the lifelong emotion distress of the person who defended against your sorry butt. Let's see, that comes to ..... kaching! ..... kaching! .... kaching! $2.8M actual damages, $10M suffering, $10M pain, and $1M distress ('cause the shooter's a tough cookie), plus your wages, couselor. Hmmm. That's some figure, there, counselor! Ahem. Bailiff?"
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
September 3rd, 2009 11:02 AM
September 3rd, 2009 11:17 AM
Same in TX. Once the shoot has been declared good by DA, no civil suit can be filed by bad guys. I'm not sure of the actual mechanism though. Like maybe they can try and file, but the judge just tosses it. The clerk that accepts the suit has no way of knowing.
Originally Posted by DM2
September 3rd, 2009 11:23 AM
Michigan has castle doctrine which makes the defender immune from civil liability - the law the person a few posts above me just qouted. I don't think the criminal has a chance.
September 3rd, 2009 11:53 AM
September 3rd, 2009 01:05 PM
If the business isn't covered, it's a loophole big enough to drive a Mac Truck through. It ought to have been anticipated by anyone familiar with the "deep pocket" rule. In that case, it would only eliminate the "several liability" issue, reducing the suit to a single defendant.
Originally Posted by luvmy40
Those who will not govern their own behavior are slaves waiting for a master; one will surely find them.
By dldeuce in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: January 21st, 2011, 10:11 AM
By Condition1 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: November 3rd, 2009, 10:15 PM
By filinoy-pi in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: September 3rd, 2008, 09:11 PM
By paramedic70002 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: September 4th, 2007, 08:56 PM
By Betty in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: May 24th, 2005, 01:48 PM
Search tags for this page
6 3 11 party store robbery clinton township mi
armed robber sues victims
convenient store robbed in clinton township mi
if a thief gets robbed can he sue
if a thief is injured while robbing a convenient store can he sue them?
nick's shortstop mi robber sues
thief clinton township michigan
thief sues and win
Click on a term to search for related topics.