Civil immunity question

[Oldgringo]

and then there is this

PC §9.06. CIVIL REMEDIES UNAFFECTED. The fact that conduct is
justified under this chapter does not abolish or impair any remedy for
the conduct that is available in a civil suit.

...BUT because of this: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /CP.83.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; there is no remedy available in a civil suit, if it's found that it was a good shoot...

"...if it's found that it was a good shoot..."

How long and how many dollar$ does that take?

[speedsix]

...that's USUALLY determined by a Grand Jury...if they even submit it to one*...if I was worried about it...I guess I'd carry a keychain Mace instead of a .45...but that's the reason they passed the law...so a person justified in shooting wouldn't suffer undue financial hardship...
*...I'm finding more sources saying that all homicides are submitted to a Grand Jury in Texas...a coupla reasons: once no-billed by the GJ, you can't be charged for it by a prosecuting attorney in Texas, and once the Grand Jury rules that you are justified, the linked protection covers you against 9.06...


...I found this: " All felony cases in Texas
must be approved by a grand jury before going to the District Court for trial,
unless the accused and his attorney specifically waive grand jury action." within a booklet(PDF) published by Henry Garza, the District Attorney of Bell County in 2001...this is as close to finding it in the law as I've been able to come... http://www.bellcountytx.com/da/distattorney.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Oldgringo]

...that's USUALLY determined by a Grand Jury...if they even submit it to one*...if I was worried about it...I guess I'd carry a keychain Mace instead of a .45...but that's the reason they passed the law...so a person justified in shooting wouldn't suffer undue financial hardship...
*...I'm finding more sources saying that all homicides are submitted to a Grand Jury in Texas...a coupla reasons: once no-billed by the GJ, you can't be charged for it by a prosecuting attorney in Texas, and once the Grand Jury rules that you are justified, the linked protection covers you against 9.06...


...I found this: " All felony cases in Texas
must be approved by a grand jury before going to the District Court for trial,
unless the accused and his attorney specifically waive grand jury action." within a booklet(PDF) published by Henry Garza, the District Attorney of Bell County in 2001...this is as close to finding it in the law as I've been able to come...

Sounds like a plan! Let us know how it works out for the next time you shoot somebody.

[speedsix]

...so your answer to all the law carefully written to protect you should you have to shoot someone to defend yourself is simply to scorn it, or are you scorning me because I choose to rest in the protection that law affords me, should I have to do the same...or is that all you can come up with to answer facts???

[Oldgringo]

...so your answer to all the law carefully written to protect you should you have to shoot someone to defend yourself is simply to scorn it, or are you scorning me because I choose to rest in the protection that law affords me, should I have to do the same...or is that all you can come up with to answer facts???

I know that's right!

[srothstein]

I disagree on how long it will take to be determined to be a good shooting. This is the whole purpose of the civil lawsuit. There is nothing binding the civil suit to the grand jury indictment in a positive way (for the shooter). A grand jury may decline to indict because they feel it is a good shooting or because they just do not feel there is enough evidence to prove the case. A no bill return does not get explained and can be brought to another grand jury later if desired.

I am sure Charles can explain this much better than I can but, if you are involved in a shooting, you may be sued. If your lawyer files for a summary judgment and the plaintiff does not dispute the facts of the case, the judge MAY decide to dismiss. He may decide to let a jury decide if the shooting was justified. And if the plaintiff disputes any of the facts of the case, it is almost sure to end up in a trial. At least theoretically, you will win the trial based on the evidence, but that is also not guaranteed. Juries do all sorts of weird things.

I still think it will be hard to find a decent (as in quality and knows his law) attorney who will take the case in a good shoot (a doubtful shooting is a whole other story). Poor quality attorneys might take it and try (and may get lucky). WARNING: there are some quality attorneys who might be willing to take the case for political reasons.

[A-R]

WARNING: there are some quality attorneys who might be willing to take the case for political reasons.

Far as I'm concerned, any attorney willing to file a civil suit against the shooter in a "good shoot" for political reasons is NOT a quality attorney.

But that's just my humble hayseed ain't no lawyer opinion

[Oldgringo]

I disagree on how long it will take to be determined to be a good shooting. This is the whole purpose of the civil lawsuit. There is nothing binding the civil suit to the grand jury indictment in a positive way (for the shooter). A grand jury may decline to indict because they feel it is a good shooting or because they just do not feel there is enough evidence to prove the case. A no bill return does not get explained and can be brought to another grand jury later if desired.

I am sure Charles can explain this much better than I can but, if you are involved in a shooting, you may be sued. If your lawyer files for a summary judgment and the plaintiff does not dispute the facts of the case, the judge MAY decide to dismiss. He may decide to let a jury decide if the shooting was justified. And if the plaintiff disputes any of the facts of the case, it is almost sure to end up in a trial. At least theoretically, you will win the trial based on the evidence, but that is also not guaranteed. Juries do all sorts of weird things.

I still think it will be hard to find a decent (as in quality and knows his law) attorney who will take the case in a good shoot (a doubtful shooting is a whole other story). Poor quality attorneys might take it and try (and may get lucky). WARNING: there are some quality attorneys who might be willing to take the case for political reasons.

Thank you, Steve. The Oldgringo rests.

[speedsix]

...the civil lawsuit is usually about money damages...brought because there was wrongdoing on the part of , in this case, the shooter...if, as the County Prosecutor's handbook I linked to says, once no-billed by the Grand Jury... the Prosecutor can't charge you later...how can it be returned to another Grand Jury later??? who could bring it to another Grand Jury?if the Grand Jury having no-billed me has no value...then WHO decides that the shooting was justified??? it doesn't seem fair or logical...are there any cases in Texas where a Grand Jury found the shooting was justified and no-billed that a civil suit was allowed to ignore the new law and proceed to a jury? any where the jury found for the plaintiff??? this doesn't make sense to me...at some point, you have to be exhonorated or criminally charged...in order for the http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /CP.83.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; to kick in... because it specifies "...justified under Chapter 9 Penal Code..." which CAN'T be decided by a civil jury...only by a DA, Grand Jury, Coroner's Inquest, or criminal trial... Where's the Boss???

[Charles L. Cotton]

The so-called "loser pays" bill may apply to the type of suits being discussed. It will apply only to suits that involve less than $100,000 in controversy and only to suits that are dismissed on a newly-authorized "motion to dismiss." This new-to-Texas motion is not the same thing as a motion for summary judgment, so the reimbursement provisions of "loser pays" won't apply to a victory by way of a summary judgment. However, the court will have authority under Tex. Rule of Civil Procedure 215 to issue sanctions for a frivolous pleading.

Chas.

...would that then reflect against the attorney who filed the case, or cost him/his firm money?

I don't recall a provision in the "loser-pays" bill that would authorize/require an award against the attorney. It may be there and I just don't recall it.

Contrary to popular opinion, attorneys have no desire to file and pour money into cases they can't win. Also, there are very few frivolous cases filed, regardless of what my Republican Party claims.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

A "no bill" from a grand jury will be very strong evidence that a shooting was justified under Chp. 9 of the TPC. It should support a summary judgment.

Chas.

[speedsix]

...thank you...I'll sleep tonight, now...

[Charles L. Cotton]

I should have answered more thoroughly, but I was trying to talk on the phone and type.

The civil immunity in SB378 is unique in that it refers to "justification" in a criminal setting. For that reason, the outcome in the criminal system is stronger evidence than it would be in another setting. For example, O.J. was acquitted of murder, but lost the civil case because the standard of proof in civil court is easier to meet.

That said, I'd like to see the immunity provision clarified with something like "as evidenced by a no-bill from a grand jury, refusal to prosecute by the appropriate prosecuting attorney, or an acquittal at trial."

Chas.

[ELB]

Anybody know of a "good shoot" in Texas that resulted in the shooter being sued, successufully or not?

Edited to add: I just Googled to find out if anyone ever filed suit against Joe Horn, who I would think would be a candidate if anyone is going to be. All I found were some words about Qannell X "consulting with attorneys" but nothing that indicates a suit was ever filed. I would think that would have made the news somewhere if it had happened.

[srothstein]

Many police shootings are ruled as good shoots by the department and DA but then end up in lawsuits. Some are successful, some are settled, and some lose. And the same rules of force apply to police in general, with a few minor additions for while making an arrest. There are also restrictions under civil rights laws that apply to police and not citizens.

I think most police shootings end up in federal lawsuits for civil rights and may not apply to this discussion, but when I was involved in a shooting, I was warned to be prepared for federal and state prosecution and federal and state lawsuits.