Exonerated 'stand your ground' defendant faces Hillsborough lawsuit

[Bold Lib]

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/civil/exonerated-stand-your-ground-defendant-faces-lawsuit-in-hillsborough-county/1071783

By Dan Sullivan, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Tuesday, February 9, 2010

TAMPA — The mother of a man whose death was ruled justified under Florida's "stand your ground" law filed a wrongful death lawsuit Friday against the man who shot her son.

A civil complaint in Hillsborough Circuit Court says that Charles Podany, 49, acted "with reckless disregard" when he shot 24-year-old Casey Landes on Feb. 29, 2008, in a neighborhood dispute.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Pop quiz: The mother (who has a history of being arrested 6 times) will

1) win lots of money in this lawsuit
2) loose lots of money in this lawsuit

[oneshooter]

1. 2 n/t

[burrfoot]

2. I'm going to look into this,

but is it possible that I recall correctly that FL is one of the states where if you're not charged criminally for a shooting, you then can't be charged civil-ly? (ha! as if charging someone could ever be civil :evilgrin:)

[X_Digger]

7. You can't deny her access to the courts..

.. but you can make the plaintiff immune from damages.

Motion to dismiss in 3..2..1.. *poof*

[bluestateguy]

3. OK, now THIS is a junk lawsuit

This woman's son was a waste of DNA and nobody is sorry he is dead.

[burrfoot]

4. Here it is-

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.--

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

So, here in FL, any reasonable judge should throw this shit right out.

[Bold Lib]

5. And for the final nail look a little further down on that statute. . .

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).



The mother is going to wind up paying the defense lawyer fees to boot.

[Euromutt]

6. Huh. I thoight part of the point of "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" laws was that...

... after you've been acquitted on grounds of justified self-defense, you can no longer be subjected to a civil "wrongful death" suit. Maybe that's just Castle Doctrine, though.

Though I have to say that I find the whole notion that you can be civilly sued in a self-defense shooting after being exonerated in criminal court to be rather reprehensible. Self-defense shootings differ from your standard criminal trial in that the facts are typically not in dispute: it's acknowledged that the defendant did shoot person X, and consequently, the onus is not on the prosecution to prove that the shooting occurred, but on the defendant to prove that the shooting was justified. That makes the burden of evidence significantly higher than merely having to foster a reasonable doubt in the jury. Once you're already successfully proved in a criminal trial that the shooting was not wrongful, why should you be expected to prove the exact same thing in a civil trial as well?

[X_Digger]

8. See post 7.

You can't strip their access to the courts, first amendment's 'redress of grievances', etc. What you can do provide civil immunity and make them pay court costs in such a lawsuit.

[Euromutt]

11. Well, let me qualify my previous post

I can see why the plaintiff shouldn't be hindered from filing a suit; what I object to is the idea that it could even come to trial, rather than a judge telling the plaintiff "forget it" before the defendant even needs to be informed.

[Bold Lib]

9. You are correct.

The mother has filed a lawsuit that will get kicked out before it gets started. PLUS, she will have to pay the defendants lawyer fees, court costs, lost wages, and any other expenses he may incur over this. The mother's lawyer is a real dumb-ass for doing this cause it is going to cost him and her a lot of $$$s.

[PavePusher]

14. Actually, unless the judge declares the lawyer liable...

It will probably only cost the woman.

Her lawyer is the Bar equivalent of a rapist. And I am quite sure s/he knows exactly what s/he is doing. Sick.

[GreenStormCloud]

16. The attorney is almost certainly doing it on contingency.

I completely agree that he knows exactly what he is doing. But the rape victim will be the condo management.

[GreenStormCloud]

15. Sorry, but lawyer and Mom will make money. See my post #13. N/T

[DonP]

10. I think they can "file" all the suits they want to

But based on the statute they will all be thrown out the door.

The best hope they have is finding a judge who disagrees with the statute, then makes his clerks spends their evenings and weekends finding a pretext to challenge/ignore the law to rule the way he/she wants to.

But doing all that work on a contingency fee is asking a lot of a small law firm. I'm sure the Brady group will offer Dennis Hennigan on loan for the suit maybe?

[Katya Mullethov]

12. reckless he he he he he

Hey there , penal code writing lawyer dude , is reckless disregard some kind of tautological inside joke ?

To reitterate , it's " RECKLESS ABANDON " !!

[GreenStormCloud]

13. Prediction: The Condo Association Will Pay Her A Settlement To Go Away.

Podany has civil immunity and may recover legal and court costs. The Condo association and its managing authority, Vanguard Management Group Inc. can't do that. They have to pay their own costs. She is suing them for not providing a safe enviornment by restricting Podany from having a gun. It will be cheaper for VMG to pay her a settlement than to go to court, even if they win.

My wife once knew a guy who actually made a living from being a plaintiff in junk lawsuits. He looked for excuses to sue large businesses. The corporations were usually willing to pay some money to him to "go away" rather than to go to the expense of defending.