Texaspython

I’m not so sure. These are grand jury subs and they’re almost always secret. However, from what I understand Mazars is ready to deliver the docs immediately. Once Vance gets them he can write an indictment, submit to the gj and get it returned in almost no time at all. That indictment becomes a public record and then the DA can talk about their evidence public ally as much as they want. That’s typically not a good strategy for a successful prosecution but this is a unique situation. I’m not a NYV lawyer so this is speculation but I’m not so sure it’s a big win for Trump.

Yeah, 50-64 isn’t what I think of as gen X. It’s a mix of generations but someone in their 60’s sure as shit isn’t gen X.

I’m not aware of any governmental body carrying this type of coverage. The state of Texas barely lets you sue them when a governmental actor rear ends you. I doubt any legislation like this would ever become reality. I’d say the same thing if Dems dominated state guv. Who knows though, I’ve sure as shit been wrong before.

Depends, obviously it’s paramount I bring suit against the municipality which has a different set of problems we don’t need to get into. But typically I only bring suit if I feel reasonably confident I can keep the city in the litigation. Most municipalities do not pay money damages for their employees. The only one I know of is Dallas, they will pay damages on behalf of their police. There may be others.

Depends on which law you’re talking about. Procedurally bad cases only because of economic realities. Subject matter wise, good cases. Which is why these Judges are to blame. They created it out of whole cloth and it’s my opinion, they did this to kill this type of litigation. It doesn’t have to be this way, they can change it.

It has the effect of killing litigation, it isn’t just a “pain in the ass”. I turn down very good cases weekly.

Certainly but it has the effect of killing good cases and making slam dunk cases extremely difficult. I don’t think it’s a mistake that the 5th circuit takes years to decide issues which are on their face frivolous (hate using that word). I suppose that’s really what my ultimate point is. This “process” is implemented in a way to kill litigation. Making the appeal expedited might cure this but the 5th circuit sure as shit isn’t doing that.

It’s fairly obvious I’ve actually filed these types of cases and understand the procedural realities. Even people I practice against readily admit the unfairness. I pointed out those realities (see my post about timelines). Notice he didn’t respond. I’ll call out misinformation when it’s something I actually know about. Whatever man, I’ll be short with someone lecturing me about something they don’t understand, at all. I don’t take this stuff personally and if calling someone out for being full of shit is a problem, sorry. Thought that was allowed on surly.

I think, if you look, I don’t get personal unless I’ve been attacked but I know you won’t look because, who gives a shit. Honestly, the guy started a pointless fight which muddled the true issues. As for his viewpoint, as JimmyJsmes points out, he defended a flawed system which he doesn’t really understand then tried to have it both ways by saying “I don’t believe in QI”. Anyway, the dude gets shitty when called out, he needs to put the ego down and admit, maybe someone else knows a little more about the subject matter and differ. I sure as shit won’t claim to be an authority on Tax.

Don’t know why I’m wading back in here but Tort claims Act causes of action are based on negligence. Rarely are police charged with having committed neg but rather intentional torts. Respondent suoerior doesn’t apply to intentional torts. Essentially, you’d have to carve exceptions upon exceptions and Texas ain’t doing that. The Tort claims act really only applies to state actors who are negligent in auto collisions, that’s it. QI immunity needs to stripped of the onerous application Judges have designed. Make it easier and more efficient to get a trial date, lessens the standards on clearly defined constitutional right, custom and policy (to hold municipalities financially responsible) and get rid of the interlocutory appeal. You do that and the system will work well as is.

This is an area I have experience with. I’ll admit, he puts a lot of effort into his posts, but I’ve caught him talking out of his ass on two occasions, not just wrong but horribly wrong. Worse, he presents himself as some sort of authority on the subject. I won’t comment on an area of law I don’t really understand. Personally, I think the guy is full of shit and pretending to understand things he really doesn’t.

Wow, guess I’m going to have to dismiss some cases.

This is one of the more impressive episodes of stubbornness I’ve seen since dealing with my daughter this morning.

If what you’re saying is true, I’m not sure what point you were trying to make here. I expressed the opinion that the problem isn’t so much QI but the Judge made application of it and you been over backwards to defend the process. I laid out a real life scenario that illustrates why it’s so patently flawed and you run back to “I’m just trying to explain”. Lawyers disagree, don’t take it personally. Certainly don’t let hurt feelings back you into arguing for something you’re against.

Yes, but let’s not be ridiculous. Lots of racists sing that song.

Not a proper analogy. The song remains not the people.

I’m trying hard to figure out why he’s so respected. He spits out simple legal concepts as if lay people are too stupid to understand, then provides no practical information as to how that works in the real world. If you disagree, your opinion is “facile”. He’s the guy so far behind in the race he thinks he’s leading. Most legal concepts are pretty simple, it’s only pretentious lawyers who try to make them seem complicated.

How is that different than any other defense tI suit? Why does this immunity get special treatment? Let’s just lay this out. You can be murdered by a police officer in your own home. If your family finds a lawyer willing to go through the process we’re arguing about, your lawyer files suit. Police officer asserts QI. This stops down all litigation. No discovery, nothing. Your lawyer is completely denied any procedural weapons. The Federal Judge evaluates the issue, correctly denies the ridiculous claim of immunity. The police officer then appeals the denial of immunity. This stops down the process completely again. The fifth circuit takes 2 years deciding whether the ridiculous claim of immunity is correct. They eventually deny the ridiculous claim of immunity. Your family is now at least 3 years into litigation dealing with a completely frivolous claim. Only at this point is your lawyer allowed to engsgr in discovery, then a couple more years until you get your trial date. Although the police are able to assert QI, have their day in court, Twice thinks this process is necessary and fair. I do not.

You’re misrepresenting the process. The governmental actor can assert immunity at the court level. They can assert it and stop the litigation process almost completely. They don’t need/deserve a special, Judge made right of appeal. You’re completely misrepresenting that part of the process. That’s what lay people need to understand. I just do it in a less condescending way. It’s pretty sad you represent your opinions as some sort of non-biased legal analysis because it isn’t.

Man, you sure try hard to disagree with me. Sorry I’ve called out your legal analysis. I’m new here but your contributions are obviously some source of pride for you. It’s not personal, dude. It’s just hilarious. You went out of your way to “disagree” with me then admitted the process picks the rights of government actors over those of the plaintiff. The government actor gets to assert their immunity at the district court level. The Judge can throw the case out of court at the start, before you even do discovery. No reason to give them a special appeal.

So, you agree that I’m right. You could have just said that.

The devious aspect of QI is the process by which it’s decided. That was completely invented by Judges. The fact that government actors get an interlocutory appeal for their assertion of QI is devious and designed to kill litigation by victims. It needlessly delays litigation for years regardless of how ridiculous and frivolous the appeal. So yeah, that’s devious, shitty, asinine, devoid of legal authority, and wrong.

QI is really interesting because it was created by Judges. They decided it shouldn’t be so easy to sue government actors and decided to give them extra protection. Incredible and devious stuff.

Start appointing Judges

The real issue is giving Defendants the right to a jury trial on punishment. Until that happens it’s all bs.