TexasCHLforum.com

jester wrote:

WildBill wrote:

KFP wrote: I have the utmost trust in Charles's professional opinion. You may also notice the dac weighed in on both of these threads, so I trust that he has some personal knowledge of the process through his friend.

This brings up another question. "What is civil liability"? Is it only monetary damages? Could you be sued for something other than "civil liability"?

I'm not sure what you're asking. You could for example be sued for divorce, or the plaintiff could seek an injunction (e.g. TRO, gag order) rather than money.

KFP wrote: I have the utmost trust in Charles's professional opinion. You may also notice the dac weighed in on both of these threads, so I trust that he has some personal knowledge of the process through his friend.

KFP wrote:viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30408

Charles L. Cotton wrote:There was a lot of misunderstanding about the civil liability protection afforded by the "Castle Doctrine" bill when it passed. Many people thought it prevents someone from being sued, but it does not. No law can be written denying people access to the courts; it would be unconstitutional. The "Castle Doctrine" grants immunity from civil liability, not immunity from suit. You can still be sued, but you will win and probably win early in the case. Chas