191–200 of 232 posts
It doesn't make any mention about the plantiff's ability to actually collect the damages. In Texas at least, it's extremely difficult to actually collect damages, which make small claims court somewhat meaningless.
Going to be a bit flippant here, but if I sold somebody a $40 used printer and they mugged me using the courts for $30,000, I would seriously consider murder to be a viable option towards resolution. Good on this guy for keeping his wits about him through all this. Guy probably needs a long, relaxing vacation.
Not flippant. People like this should be lit on fire in the public square to warn against others following their path.
Please don't comment like this here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know their exact involvement, but they were involved. Did they help carry it out? I don't have the play by play. It wasn't a court case and I didn't care. The guys who drove off with it it were staying at their place that night. I knew it was one of two groups of folks or all of them at the house that evening. So I knew damn well I had the right people who could get the situation resolved in an efficient mann…
Sound like you had no idea if these guys had been involved in taking your TV, you just knew they where involved with the group that did. If a bunch of guys broke into your place in similar circumstances, would you be ok with that? > For the record, they weren't harmed until they pulled a gun out It seems reasonable to pull a gun on a bunch of strangers invading your home.
When we 'blasted in' we didn't kick the door in. We knocked, started quizzing the guy who answered the door about the TV, one of them said to come on in and look around. Then we blasted in.
The gun could've gotten him killed. He pulled it out but clearly wasn't willing to use it, he waved it around as if we were going to be scared. I wasn't, he got it ripped from his hands then he was beaten to the ground his own gun. This kind of non-macho posturing is typical. Then we got that stupid gun out the door and settled it.
Anyway this wasn't that big of a deal, just a robbery resolved as cordially as you can in an efficient manner. It worked out for both parties. Especially well for them, considering they were involved with breaking, entering and theft. Not to mention whatever charge comes with pulling a gun out threatening to kill people. He did say he'd shoot us. I'd say they got off rather easy, other than bruised egos. They were my neighbors and I assure you, they didn't want anything to do with me again.
You seem touchy about it for some reason like you were on the receiving end of a similar situation. I personally don't like to be taken advantage of or have my home robbed? This was a relatively tame story I was willing to post publicly.
Zavodnik, has no idea what waits for him out there. It's not all fun and games when you play with peoples lives as he does. Wait till he finds someone intelligent, aggressive, willing to go to the edge or slightly over the rule of law and with a strong sense of justice. Street justice, not the courts. I could be that man for sure, but like most people reading this- I would only interrupt my life for someone who affected my family. Possibly a local child rapist or similar heinous criminal could face my wrath. It would take something like that to activate my mob violence gene.
That guy just needs some anonymous midnight beatings by some of the victims and their families and he'll stop. Yeah it's the "wrong answer!" even though our nation-state does much worse. He's just gotten off with zero retaliation so far so he's going to continue to stay within the rules but abuse our judicial system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dunno, man, as cathartic as that sounds, it reminds me of the old schoolyard bully tactic: pick on a kid until they punch you, then show the teacher your bloody nose.
When I was in high school, a big kid decided to use me as a verbal punching bag off and on for like two years. It didn't particularly bug me, he didn't do it often enough to cause me to want to retaliate, I'd endured worse in middle school, but it was annoying. Junior year I decided to teach him a lesson. We were making presentations for science class and you know how they have the steps of the scientific method? Wel…
After school, I got similar verbal harassment from the same guy while with his friends while walking home.
Long story short, I got sick of it and one day in History class, grabbed the sides of my chair and waited for him to push it as he walked by. When he did, I sprang up rapidly while holding my chair and pushed back, flipping him over the desk behind me. Huge disruption to the class, etc.
Teacher looked over, made no expression, and continued teaching the class. Never heard a peep from the guy after school the rest of the year, and that was the last time he touched my chair. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize that rules around this already exist, right? For example, in california: https://www.serve-now.com/resources/process-serving-laws/cal...
and here in california, my anecdote entails me learning via first class mail that there's about to be a judgement entered against me because I failed to respond to papers I never received, because the plaintiff had apparently served them to an old address of mine (probably intentionally by this shady lawyer filing the small claims suit against me).
[1] California Code of Civil Procedure §116.530 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&gr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just presenting something in court does not make it a fact, actual real evidence is required. It actually kinda does... If the other party does not challenge it. If I show up in court with a bill that shows you owe me a million dollars, I attest that we agreed to it, and you don't challenge that fact? That's the truth as far as the court is concerned. However, the overall point I believe still stands. Weigh the cas…
>If I show up in court with a bill that shows you owe me a million dollars, I attest that we agreed to it, and you don't challenge that fact? That's the truth as far as the court is concerned. // Absolutely not. A court shouldn't sit on "anything said that isn't challenged is 100% true", it should look in a tort case on the balance of probabilities. IMO courts should attempt to discover what is true and rule on that,…
But how do the courts do that when only one party is presenting the evidence? The only way that would work is if you filed a case, a neutral investigator from the court investigated your claim, and the judge ruled on what the investigator found.
Otherwise, the court has to base its decision on the evidence provided. If only half the evidence is provided, unfortunately the decision must be made off that evidence.
IMO, the default judgement is the best solution. It is fairly easy to get a default judgement overturned if you truly want to or believe that it is wrong. Otherwise, you are admitting you owe the amount with a default judgement. So in reality it would be like you showed up and the plaintiff proved you owed the debt. Either way you have to pay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Short of using something like cash...for buying something off Craigslist? What else would you use? Why do you make it sound so difficult to use the most easily accessible form of currency around? Joe Craigslist isn't going to have a debit/credit machine for me to pay on. I'm not writing him a personal cheque. Use a burner email, don't give names, meet in a public place..how would you track somebody down like that?
Because buying something online might mean the item has to be shipped? Since buyer and seller may not be able to meet up for some reason? Mailing cash seems like a terrible idea. Do you think we should find a cash escrow service too?