carry permit suspended

[Guest carter]

i have a friend that just recieved his HCP and about 2.5 weeks later got it suspended.... here is some of the story...

He had a few charges stemming from October 2005, went to court for them on March 2, 2006...a review date was set for Feburary 22, 2007. he went to his review date... paid court cost and got one charge expundged... and the other charge was dismissed...on March 22, 2007 there was a warrant issued for failure to appear... so on September 24, 2012 i went to the court house for him being he had a warrant out for him to help handle this situation... i paid 3 dollars for 3 days of court audio cd's... got a copy of the court order for his review date...and some other computer print out showing the warrant...

audio cd's purchased for 1 dollar each...

-March 2, 2006---original charge date and first appearance

-Feburary 22, 2007--review date

-March 22, 2007-- failure to appear warrant issued

we listened to all the cd's... March 2, 2006 the judge established a review date for Feburary 22, 2007... on the Feb 22, 2007 cd... the judge dismissed the cases and told him to go next door to pay court cost... the court documents show where he payed and so forth... on the March 22, 2007 cd the judge was calling a few repeats that got put in the stack for that day... and his name was called... they even had a discussion about why there where repeat cases in the stack...so they call his name and he wasn't there so they issued a warrant for failure to appear...

i go up to the court house on September 26, 2012 and give them the times on the cd and so forth...they where about to listen to them... and the assistant clerk stepped in and just went over to get the charge docket piece of paper ( that triple folded paper with red writeing on it) he came back in and said...so when does he want to come in...i was confused as to why...he said there is no disposition on the paper and has to come back to court...the clerk said he was resending the warrant and setting a new court date...set for October 1, 2012...today...

he went to court this morning , got the charge dismissed for the second time...

now he just needs to get his HCP back cause the Rutherford county court screwed him

[bvarnell]

Ain't the court system wonderful.

[Guest carter]

this is a weird situation... i would say its double jeopardy.... it's the same case same docket number being heard in court for a second time... so the gavel has been struck for this 2 times...i mean there was a slight chance that he could have gone to jail or the case not dismissed... but the judge dismissed it for a second time...

Edited October 1, 2012 by carter

[RobertNashville]

I guess I'm trying to figure out what the point of the story is...the court clerk/system screwed up..messed up his HCP and the citizen has to jump through hoops to get the mess they caused straightened out.

I'd say that's pretty much the norm.

I just can't wait to get that government health care we all have to have.

[Guest carter]

yes seems that way to me... after explaining all this to judge Lowery's assistant clerk... he comes out with proof of he was there because he paid the court cost... he rescended the the warrant for failure to appear and set him a court date... why not just listen to the tape i paid for to prove what im saying is correct... and handle it that way...but nooooooo he wants to have him go to court for a charge thats already been heard and the gavel slammed....

[DaveTN]

You are lucky they dealt with you. Most places would have told you that you have no involvement; tell him to come in himself. They must have been nice people.

[Dolomite_supafly]

You are lucky they dealt with you. Most places would have told you that you have no involvement; tell him to come in himself. They must have been nice people.

+1

Almost every time they will not deal with a thrird party unless it is an attorney. Speaking of attorneys, might be time to retain one because things can go south. It would be really bad to go from having a suspended HCP to having to spend a few months, or longer, in jail.

Dolomite

[Guest carter]

oh he went to court on monday...the judge said a review from 2005? and the court was like ohhhhhhhhhhh lol then he just asked if he's been lawful and he said yes and he smacked the gavel again and dismissed the case... he didnt have to pay any court cost cause he paid it already on Feb 22, 2007... the disposition was jsut never entered ... hopefully they dont screw up this time and enter it lol ...this court is a damn joke ... but he spent more money to have certified copies of everything...then had to send that to the department of safety to get his HCP back... it wasnt the charge that got his permit suspended...it was the fdailure to appear warrant... which was wrongfully issued

[JayC]

oh he went to court on monday...the judge said a review from 2005? and the court was like ohhhhhhhhhhh lol then he just asked if he's been lawful and he said yes and he smacked the gavel again and dismissed the case... he didnt have to pay any court cost cause he paid it already on Feb 22, 2007... the disposition was jsut never entered ... hopefully they dont screw up this time and enter it lol ...this court is a damn joke ... but he spent more money to have certified copies of everything...then had to send that to the department of safety to get his HCP back... it wasnt the charge that got his permit suspended...it was the fdailure to appear warrant... which was wrongfully issued

And this is a perfect example of why we should remove immunity from the court system employees. Mess up somebodies life, face civil liabilities like everybody else...

[DaveTN]

And this is a perfect example of why we should remove immunity from the court system employees. Mess up somebodies life, face civil liabilities like everybody else...

Might as well just go ahead and do away with the legal system, and let all the criminals out. People make mistakes. There are innocent people in prison, and there will be innocent people executed for crimes they did not commit (yet we still have the death penalty).

Who would take a job knowing that if they make a mistake they will be sued personally?

Don’t be a criminal and chances are you won’t have to deal with mistakes made by the court.

[JayC]

Might as well just go ahead and do away with the legal system, and let all the criminals out. People make mistakes. There are innocent people in prison, and there will be innocent people executed for crimes they did not commit (yet we still have the death penalty).

Who would take a job knowing that if they make a mistake they will be sued personally?

Don’t be a criminal and chances are you won’t have to deal with mistakes made by the court.

Umm who would take a job where they can be sued personally? Virtually everybody who doesn't work for the government!

We all can be sued for our mistakes in day to day life, unless you have some form of immunity as a government employee.

If I'm an insurance agent, and you come in and sign up for a policy and pay your bill, and I forget to file the correct paperwork, and the insurance company refuses your claim because of my mistake? I'm for sure on the hook for your damages.

But, if a clerk in a court house forgets to file some paperwork, and their mistake costs you a lot of time and money, it's oh well too bad, you're out of luck...

People make mistakes.... but, most of us have to deal with those mistakes, unless you are employed by the government, then who cares you won't loose you house, you job, or your freedom like the rest of us.

So yes, we should remove immunity from the court system, and the rest of the government.

[DaveTN]

If I'm an insurance agent, and you come in and sign up for a policy and pay your bill, and I forget to file the correct paperwork, and the insurance company refuses your claim because of my mistake? I'm for sure on the hook for your damages.

No you aren’t; I want a payday not a judgment. You are acting as an agent for the insurance company; I’m going to sue them. Of course I’m not going to have to take it that far because the insurance company will pay because they understand it’s a clerical error and they would pay anyway.

So yes, we should remove immunity from the court system, and the rest of the government.

You can sue anyone if you have been wronged and can show a loss. I was sued as a Police Officer. The attorney for the guy suing me was ignorant beyond belief for filing the suit, and the case was dismissed and the guy was sent to prison; but he was allowed to file his suit. And had he won I would have been responsible for punitive damages.

Courts don’t have immunity if you can show the acts were extremely careless, reckless, or intentional. But if you want to start handing out judgments for clerical errors, the tax payers would be paying them and we aren’t going to do that.

[JayC]

No you aren’t; I want a payday not a judgment. You are acting as an agent for the insurance company; I’m going to sue them. Of course I’m not going to have to take it that far because the insurance company will pay because they understand it’s a clerical error and they would pay anyway.

Well, most insurance agents are independent, and not employees of an insurance company... so in this case you likely wouldn't have a case against the insurance company, but would against the independent agent.

But even if the insurance agent was an employee, you may choose not to sue them but you could, and the case would be allowed forward. If you could prove the insurance agent failed to do something, and that cost you damages, you would win and in theory the agent would have to pay damages. (again you make a great point about deep pockets, but at least then it would be your choice).

You can sue anyone if you have been wronged and can show a loss. I was sued as a Police Officer. The attorney for the guy suing me was ignorant beyond belief for filing the suit, and the case was dismissed and the guy was sent to prison; but he was allowed to file his suit. And had he won I would have been responsible for punitive damages.

Courts don’t have immunity if you can show the acts were extremely careless, reckless, or intentional. But if you want to start handing out judgments for clerical errors, the tax payers would be paying them and we aren’t going to do that.

Well, you can sue but there is a completely different standard for a government employee and the rest of us... I don't even have to show malice in a traditional civil suit, only that your actions or failure to action violated civil law... An insurance agent failing to file paperwork would be an example of that...

The reason I use this as an example, is because I'm very familiar with a certain case in this area... An independent insurance agent mailed out a cancellation notice, after the cancellation date there was a loss which the homeowner thought was covered... it turns out that while the agent could produce the letter, it was not dated and therefore the agent was ordered to pay the claim out of his legal umbrella policy... The insurance company in question, didn't pay a red cent, only the agent because he made a mistake and didn't properly date a cancellation letter.

That is a fairly minor mistake, I think we could all agree... But lets look at trying to sue the government...

If I try and sue say a court clerk for failing to file the proper paperwork, and that failure causes me to be arrested on a bogus warrant... I can't win a lawsuit because of qualified immunity... qualified immunity is a VERY high standard...

Even if I can show the clerk acted with malice, even if it was an unlawful act... qualified immunity protects the clerk from damages... currently there is a "reasonable person" standard... You must show that a reasonable person would have known that the action clearly violated established statutory or constitutional rights....

So basically a simple error, always covered under qualified immunity.

People who are public servants should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one... therefore we should completely remove qualified immunity for ALL government employees.

As for your claim that people will continue the sue the government instead of the clerk... that is simple, keep qualified immunity for the government (aka the tax payers), and place all of the risk on the part of the public servants who violate the law.

Edited October 7, 2012 by JayC

[JayC]

You can sue anyone if you have been wronged and can show a loss. I was sued as a Police Officer. The attorney for the guy suing me was ignorant beyond belief for filing the suit, and the case was dismissed and the guy was sent to prison; but he was allowed to file his suit. And had he won I would have been responsible for punitive damages.

Dave,

I'm missed this earlier... Why exactly was the case against you dismissed? Did it have anything to do with qualified immunity?

[DaveTN]

Dave,

I'm missed this earlier... Why exactly was the case against you dismissed? Did it have anything to do with qualified immunity?

Long story short.. A guy punched me in the face on a traffic stop while I was having him sign the ticket. I dropped him with one blow from a Mag-lite and he ended up in intensive care. He was out on bond on a burglary charge that had nothing to do with my stop. His attorney was in negotiations with the DA to keep him out of jail on the burglary charge (mandatory prison time upon conviction) and decided it would help his case if he filed against me on a brutality complaint. All that did was stop the negotiations on the burglary charge and now also had him charged with aggravated battery on a Police Officer. He negotiated his prison sentence, dropped the suit and off to prison he went.

No, cops don't have qualified immunity on brutality complaints, so that had nothing to do with it.