TN Castle Laws!

[Fallguy]

I thankful for the immunity provided in 39-11-622 but the likelihood of being sued and being out time and money is still there.

Say the family of the BG sues you even though you is was a righteous shoot and you were never charged. You hire an attorney who files a motion for dismissal based on 39-11-622. Plaintiff's attorney answers the motion and contends that 39-11-622 does not apply in this case. The court sets a hearing on these motions. . . The case drags on for a while.

Even if the court ultimately finds in your favor, you have spent your time, your money, and had aggravation and stress throughout the process. The court orders the Plaintiffs to pay your expenses, but they don't have two nickels to rub together. They don't have jobs any more than their dearly beloved relative did when he was shot while trying to rob you.

Yeah but at least you are alive to go through all of this. Much better than being dead with a gun in your hand and that look on your face that you were still trying to decide if it was ok to shoot or not.

[DaveTN]

But isn't one of the provisions of TN's Castle Law that you're shielded from those lawsuits?

Absolutely not. Tennessee law gives you recourse, not protection. You may get a judgment for your attorney’s fees and associated costs.

A judgment against a dirtbag and fifty cents might get you a cup of coffee.

[Punisher84]

I thankful for the immunity provided in 39-11-622 but the likelihood of being sued and being out time and money is still there.

Say the family of the BG sues you even though you is was a righteous shoot and you were never charged. You hire an attorney who files a motion for dismissal based on 39-11-622. Plaintiff's attorney answers the motion and contends that 39-11-622 does not apply in this case. The court sets a hearing on these motions. . . The case drags on for a while.

Even if the court ultimately finds in your favor, you have spent your time, your money, and had aggravation and stress throughout the process. The court orders the Plaintiffs to pay your expenses, but they don't have two nickels to rub together. They don't have jobs any more than their dearly beloved relative did when he was shot while trying to rob you.

Much less likely of a scenario now, because you could actually counter-sue the attorney for taking the case.

[Guest Revelator]

Folks, it is extremely, I mean extremely, unlikely that a wounded perpetrator is going to be able to even get into court in a suit against you. Plaintiff's lawyers are not exactly out there looking for these kinds of cases. None of them would take one on a contingency fee; if any did they're probably not going to be in business for long enough to see the end of the case. They're going to want a hefty fee up front, and it's doubtful that the bad guy is going to have any money.

Quit worrying about stuff that's just about impossible. And if it happens, hey, kind of like Fallguy said, look at it as the cost of staying alive.

[E4 No More]

Personally, I'm protecting "me and my own", and let the chips fall where they may. If I get sued, then I get sued. I was just debating because it's the way I learn, and I want to know what to expect out of my actions before I pull the trigger.

I was a police officer in Missouri before such laws as this existed, but I know how laws are twisted by wording. I also know how legislators go back and forth at each other about the wording...sometimes with the attempt to appear to be on one side or the other.

This portion of the law clearly states that it is contingent on the findings of the court. A prosecutor will not waste taxpayer's money and his/her time taking a justifiable homicide case in front of a judge just to rule the way he/she expects the judge to rule just to spare you or me a civil trial. So if his judgement is, (as I expect), not considered a finding of the court, then this law just appears to protect you. I know dang well that it's also not going to protect you in a federal civil suit, but that's another debate.

So what I'd like to know is...in Tennessee, is the prosecutor's inaction the same as a finding of the court? I want to know for academic purposes.

Edit: For the giggles of it, I've sent an email to my state representative for an answer. I'll post if I get a reply.

Edited December 15, 2008 by SWJewellTN

[Guest jackdog]

Guess I'd worry about the law suit possibility after it was over. Second thoughts or hesitation might be the last damn thing you do.

[Guest Bronker]

Guess I'd worry about the law suit possibility after it was over. Second thoughts or hesitation might be the last damn thing you do.

I'm with you, Jack. I don't want to pre-condition my response to a threat to include perceived fear of litigation. If I'm afraid for myself or my family, I'm justified. The rest will just have to sort out. If I include "lawyer fear" as a segment of my reaction, that lawyer will probably be executing my estate after my funeral. I will not succomb to hesitation based on this. If I'm afraid, I'll shoot. I'm more concerned with God's final judgment, and His word says that I'm to take up my sword and defend myself just my, perhaps misguided and ill-informed $0.02.

[Guest Provence]

Personally, I'm protecting "me and my own", and let the chips fall where they may. If I get sued, then I get sued. I was just debating because it's the way I learn, and I want to know what to expect out of my actions before I pull the trigger. . .

Right. In a self defense situation, concern about civil litigation would not be a factor for me. My concern would be stopping the threat.

That does not keep me from being curious about the likelihood of being sued later on. It's an entirely separate issue for me.

I do appreciate Double After Split's info that a suit is extremely unlikely.

[Guest voigts]

You don't have to worry about a civil lawsuit if you're dead.

I think I'll shoot if necessary and take my chances with the lawsuit. I can live with a lawsuit. I would have a hard time living knowing my wife or daughter is dead because I hesitated for fear of a potential lawsuit.

I too agree with the fact that if you have to shoot, you shoot to kill, period. Dead men don't talk.

Its very reassuring to me however that TN law does provide protection from civil liability when found innocent criminally.

[Punisher84]

I too agree with the fact that if you have to shoot, you shoot to kill, period. Dead men don't talk.

.

Well just remember you shoot to NEUTRALIZE the threat, if they happen to die from that neutralization well that sucks for them.

[BigPoppa]

Well just remember you shoot to NEUTRALIZE the threat, if they happen to die from that neutralization well that sucks for them.

+ 1 (kind of)

I tell HCP classes.......you're only allowed to shoot to stop the threat.

How many will that take ? That's totally up to the BG.

1 to the toe might do the trick. OR it could take 10 to COM.