CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar
tacticool
Senior Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:41 pm

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by tacticool »

switch wrote:EVERY lawyer I have discussed this with says the civil immunity is limited to self-defense cases.
How many have them tried a civil case since the law passed where it was a factor?
i.e. do they have some experience with this law or are they just guessing?
When in doubt
Vote them out!
switch
Senior Member
Posts: 528
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:06 am
Location: Venus, TX
Contact:

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by switch »

Their are not many civil suits after shootings in TX.

The Castle law was passed in 2007 (I think). So 6 years? Not much time.
User avatar
tacticool
Senior Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:41 pm

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by tacticool »

Not much to worry about then, is there? Seems like being killed by bees is more likely, so worry about that instead. :lol:
When in doubt
Vote them out!
TexasCajun
Senior Member
Posts: 1554
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:58 pm
Location: La Marque, TX

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by TexasCajun »

gringo pistolero wrote:Remind me again how many good guys get sued by the bad guy or his accomplices in Texas?
Since the immunity was added to the civil code, not many. And that was the point. Prior to this provision, a BG or their survivors would sue the homeowner/intended victim because it was cheaper to settle a civil suit than it was to fight it out. So the scum &/or their next of kin were able to profit from attempted criminal activity. The statute that we're discussing now makes it more of an uphill & less lucrative endeavor for these ilk.
Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.
NRA TSRA TFC CHL: 9/22/12, PSC Member: 10/2012
TexasCajun
Senior Member
Posts: 1554
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:58 pm
Location: La Marque, TX

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by TexasCajun »

And no matter how many "every lawyer I've ever talked to said...." The relevant statute says force/deadly force justified under Chapter 9, not justified under Chapter 9 section x subsection y. And no court case I've ever read references the statute title vs the actual statute. So as written, civil immunity would apply in defense of property.
Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.
NRA TSRA TFC CHL: 9/22/12, PSC Member: 10/2012
User avatar
sjfcontrol
Senior Member
Posts: 6267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Flint, TX

Re: CIVIL LAW SUITS AND THE CHL HOLDER......

Post by sjfcontrol »

I don't know if the law is interpreted this way or not, but I have seen contracts that state that the headings and titles are for information purposes only, and are not considered part of tha actual agreement.
Range Rule: "The front gate lock is not an acceptable target."
Never Forget. Image
Post Reply

Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”