Shakespeare had a point....

J

Jedi Oomodo

New member
Heard something on a radio news segment that could be the poster child for our screwed up legal system- particularly the civil courts. It's depresseing that I heard something this despicable, yet it didn't surprise me.

Seems this guy paid someone to kill his wife. Hitman takes the money, but then reneges and doesn't do the deed. The bacteria-turd who wanted his wife offed is SUING the hitman for breach of contract!

The worst part, IMO, is...? That there was a lawyer out there who thought this case had merit, and took the time to file the necessary court papers. This is not to disparage any of you fine ladies and gentlemen who are in that profession, who have a sense of honor ad decency. I say it's long past time we did something about all the trial lawyers that have brought our civil 'justice' system to the point where something like this happens.

Move to Mars? Forget that- I'm packing my family up and moving to ENDOR!

------------------
Lady Justice has been raped, truth assassin;
Rolls of red tape seal your lips, now you're done in;
Their money tips her scales again, make your deal;
Just what is truth? I cannot tell, cannot feel.

The ultimate in vanity
Exploiting their supremacy
I can't believe the things you say
I can't believe, I can't believe the price we pay- nothing can save us
Justice is lost, Justice is raped, Justice is gone
Pulling your strings,Justice is done...
Seeking no truth, winning is all,
Find it so grim, so true, so real....

If it isna Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!
 
Holy #@@$#&, something's screwy. Is this confirmed?
The worst part is, I don't really disbelieve it--just asking out of habit.
:(

------------------
Don

"Its not criminals that go into schools and shoot children"
--Ann Pearston, British Gun Control apologist and moron
 
I can't confirm it, but I find it quite believable when you consider all the other BS civil suits.

The coffee is too hot and it burned me...despite the fact that I had between my legs while driving...cha-ching! $5 million

Or the BG who sue homeowners because the homeowner hurt them while preventing robbery or worse.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
A defense to an action for breach of contract is the illegality of subject matter of the contract. Here, the murder of an individual would not be an enforceable contract action under a Court of Equity. It is hardly within the Court's power to compel via its powers of "specific performance" the breaching party to commit an illegal act. The only remedy is restitution where any advance money be returned.

However, a Criminal Court would be very interested in a conspiracy action against the parties of the contract.

As a sidenote, the bozo who wanted his wife killed better sleep with one eye open and I hope she has the sense to call the law on him.

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
Gary got it pretty close to right. Testimony in a civil case that admits criminal conspiracy is not overlooked or protected by the court. The plaintiff would probably leave the courtroom in cuffs and his attorney might be held accountable also. The only poetic justice would be the fact that the reluctant hitman's salary +10% would go to his defense attorney regardless. Hmm...yep, kill all the lawyers!
 
The plaintiff's lawyer surely sees no chance of winning. He's just taking his client for a ride in order to get a paycheck for legal services rendered. Easy money...just diddle around with the paper-work until the judge dismisses the case. Probably took him almost a whole coffee break to prepare the papers.
 
You're waaaay off base. It's not the lawyers, it's the laws! YOU are the ones who elect the legislators who make the laws. Lawyers don't make the laws. Lawyers only represent people who wish to pursue their rights conferred upon them under laws passed by legislatures. It so happens that the facts as you relate them lead to no liability/no case, because one cannot enforce an illegal contract. This is true in all 50 states. There are either other facts of which you are not aware establishing some sort of arguable claim, OR this guy was pro se, OR if the lawyer actually did pursue a TOTALLY non-meritorious claim, which is quite rare, then there are serious penalties to the lawyer - monetary and other sanctions issued by the court (not to mention the case will be thrown out quite quickly). It's not the court system, folks, it's the political system. The legislators make our laws, modifying the common law. This whole perception of litigious people and lawyers bilking the court system for money is nothing but a huge fraud fabricated by big business/big money. The courts system is stacked very heavily in favor of defendants. Your perception is totally askew, I'm sorry to inform you. You watch these suits against the gun industry. IF (and that's a big IF) a defense is put on, then the gun companies will win big-time, because there's no merit to the nuisance or defective products theories. Guns are highly distinguishable from tobacco. Ask me how if you want more clarification. The court system works very well 99.99% of the time. The ONLY major problem is that many truly meritorious claims cannot be pursued by plaintiffs because they are economically infeasible or at least impractical to pursue (i.e. the plaintiffs cannot afford the attorney's fees). The solution to our problems is NOT bashing lawyers. It is YOU convincing your liberal neighbor to quit voting for politicians who make the stupid laws and tax us to death.
 
I'm weighing in on Futo's side.

If we don't have a combative advocacy system, we are all dead meat and screwed blue.
You want to change the system? Note who you vote for; watch for political favoritism and contamination of judicial appointments.

Bottomline, we want and need hired sharks. We need and crave a combatative arena.


DC...who will be a lawyer when the kid gets older; heed ye and avoid my baleful glance

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Shakespeare (or Bacon, depending on which lawyer I talk to) never intended harm to the guys, but the line has perked the ears of common folk since opening night for a reason. I have been hauling my lawyer buddies out to the range and gun shows and yes they are pretty liberal. I make a little headway sometimes and learn a bit of the intricacy of the the system they work. My biggest obstacle is their almost limitless propensity to see the world in relative terms. I'm more in the immutable truths camp. I do try, but maybe I'm like those Elizabethan's with the cheap tickets who never got all the jokes, but managed to follow a good story. :)
 
Is it just me, or does DC have too many intellectual irons in the fire...? :)

Ethics should have precluded the attorney from taking the case, legal or not, moral or not.
 
DC has too many irons in the fire for a commoner.
DC is NOT a commoner. ;)

(The following to be said slowly with a strong Southern accent...)

"Tell y'all 'nother thang. When she says to avoid her baleful glance, she ain't jus' whistlin' Dixie!"
-----

Futo wisely notes, "The solution to our problems is NOT bashing lawyers. It is YOU convincing your liberal neighbor to quit voting for politicians who make the stupid laws and tax us to death."

I must add this.

And so long as we keep electing people who have the same political ideals and goals, our legislators will continue to give us more of what they always give us. Our rights as individuals will continue to be destroyed, restricted and infringed.

If you keep doing what you've always done,
You will continue to get what you've always gotten.

It's time for a change.

Stick it to 'em. RKBA!
 
A contract which calls for one party to commit any illegal act is not a valid contract.
Any idiot with enough $$ in his pocket to pay the court filing fee ($25-30) may file a lawsuit.
Joke to illustrate point: Joe tells Bob he's had to hire a lawyer to file a lawsuit on his behalf. Bob tells Joe, "You know, you could save yourself a bundle. Everything that lawyer knows is in lawbooks at the library."
Joe says, "Yeah, but he knows exactly which page of which book to look on."


------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center http://forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
 
One problem with Futo's response. Even though the Judicial system was originally created solely for interpreting the law, it has been twisted and abused to the point that many use it as a back door to make laws in a quick and dirty fashion. The liberals especially love to use that tactic.

And yeah, the "contract content" issue jumped out at me, too. I'm no lawyer, but I do remember from a business law course I took in High School that contracts involving unlawful activity are already invalid. So, the intended hitman can't be sued, and the lawyer, just for even considering to take the case, ought to be defrocked.

It's coming true, folks--Wicked men are getting more wicked...

jth

------------------
Exodus 22:2 -- Biblical precedent for home defense.
 
Ulfilas, you are correct! That is the big ideological dichotomy among judges. "Conservative" judges believe they are there only to interpret the law as the legislature (or common law) wrote it. This ideology stems from the "federalists". The opposing view is from "activist" judges, who believe that can supply the missing links and are entitled to create judge-made law (anti-federalists). They believe the Constitution is an outdated document whose meaning must change with the times. The Wm. Brennan Supreme Court of the 1960s exemplified this view in upholding many Johnson policies and in my view has been the single largest factor in screwing up our society. Again, that's why Pres elections are so incredibly important, because the Pres appoints ALL federal judges at all levels, and Repubs historically have appointed "conservative" judges, meaning more they interpret only, than meaning any particular bias on issues.

One huge problem is the arrogance of federal judges, which stems from them being appointed "during good behavior", which turns out to mean practically "for life". We want them insulated from public pressure, but not THAT insulated.

DC, I fear for the opposing counsels of this world when you become a lawyer. Please don't practice in my state. ;) You're like, smart or something.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited November 16, 1999).]
 
FWIW, please note that the original post has not been confirmed. If such a suit was filed, it has a case name and number and it is in a clerk's office in some court. None of this info is available.

I am a lawyer and consider myself as well versed as anyone on the range of idiocy in the bar. I do not believe any lawyer anywhere in this country would -- OR DID -- file this lawsuit.
 
Futo-You reafirmed my thinking completely. If anyone runs for public office who has a law degree, vote for his opponent and help both the legal system and the political system.
 
One thing we're overlooking on the Shakespeare quote, the character speaking is a drunkard, thief, and lowlife....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top