TexLawyer : Good evening. I'll be assisting you with your question.
TexLawyer : Based on what you've told me, your best legal theories are: negligence and a violation of your civil rights via excessive and unreasonable force.
TexLawyer : In order to prove a negligence claim, you have to show three things: (1) there was a legal duty owed to you, (2) that duty was breached; and (3) you were harmed as a result.
TexLawyer : In your case, the police have a duty to keep you safe, or at least not inflict unnecessary damage on you.
Customer: I am frustrated as it is blatant and obvious i was injured as a result of his failure/refusal to provide for my safety health and welfare once placed in handcuffs and they "knew" (admitted on recording) of the discompfort in this situation as well as it being an industry KNOWN issue with this vehicle (a ford explorer) but I guess I need to know what to say in the paragraph (in the amended claim) to make this fly
TexLawyer : Second, they breached that duty by the way they placed you in the car (you will have to fill in the facts regarding how you were treated). With this element, you need to show that their actions were negligent, that is, that they fell below the standard of what a reasonable person would do.
Customer: the case is a piece of cake as much documentation has been being gathered, and i will have a hay-day with this damn city if it goes to trial, BUT I just want the "THEORY" I's dotted & T's crossed so it will get past this crucial stage
TexLawyer : Third, you have to show (or, at least, allege) that them putting you in this position caused the injury to your back. While you don't need an expert at this point, at some point during the litigation, you will need an expert to testify to this point and quantify the damage.
Customer: have the most respected physician in the count :-)
Customer: they are just crying about what my "THEORY" is
TexLawyer : I understand. Your primary theory is negligence, and you should throw in a civil rights violation (the city will do whatever they can to avoid a finding that one of their police officers violated a person's civil rights, as that is a political nightmare.
Customer: civil rights as to?
Customer: As to Unreasonably failed/refused to providre for my safety?
Customer: this city is loved by "NO-ONE"
Customer: so in a paragraph, what/how would you state
TexLawyer : Police brutality is a violation of your civil rights. Arguably, they put you in a position they KNEW would cause you pain and potentially damage. It is basically an extension of negligence. Negligence is causing your injury, but not on purpose (through their own inattention). Police brutality is doing the same, but intentionally. You could argue that they knew what they were doing was harming you, so they were causing your injury on purpose, just the same as if they were striking you.
Customer: ok >>>
Customer: another thing thing
TexLawyer : You would state your theories in separate paragraphs: Cause of Action #1 - Negligence (then explain the elements as I've described them to you). Then the same for the civil rights violation.
Customer: if i pursue wilful act by the officer to injur me, will that spoil the responsibilty of the city ?
TexLawyer : No, they are still responsible since the officers were acting within the scope of their employment.
Customer: and after I am done with the city can i pursue the officer personly for willfully attampting to injur me ?
Customer: i do have both/all of those aspects
Customer: I just dont want the city to get off because he knowingly did it to me
TexLawyer : Also, on that point, you need to allege vicarious liability. Vicarious liability is what makes an employer responsible for the actions of their employees.
TexLawyer : Below is a link to more information on the doctrine of vicarious liability: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/vicarious-liability.php
TexLawyer : If you want to sue the police officers and the city together, you must do it at the same time.
TexLawyer : Once your claim is adjudicated, you can't go back and pursue other people or entities.
Customer: seperate paraghraphs/cause/theories?
TexLawyer : It is barred by collateral estoppel if you don't bring it all at the same time.
TexLawyer : Yes, separate paragraphs for each theory.
Customer: I cannot pursue him seperately for mailsciousness?
TexLawyer : No, since it all comes out of the same episode, you have to bring everything at once. You can pursue him for assault (intentional tort), but you have to do it all at the same time.
Customer: in oregon the statutes provide a maximum and he /the city are both named
Customer: I can puruse federaly after the state level ?
Customer: here for negligence x 2 or 3
Customer: then federal for VOCR
TexLawyer : If you win in state court, you cannot go to federal court and get another judgment. Essentially, you can't get a double recovery.
Customer: ignore the 2 or 3
Customer: too bad your not here
Customer: hard to find anyone who will contingent for a mere .5M$
TexLawyer : I know. It sounds like you have a good case.
TexLawyer : What happened to you sounds terrible.
Customer: Ok so lastly then could you do ma a favor and make a paraghraph like you would put as the theory??
TexLawyer : Once you told them of your problems, they were no notice.
Customer: I did provide them notice accoringly to statute
Customer: I did file acocrding to statute
Customer: they are just whinning they dont understand what they are defending against
TexLawyer : Unfortunately, no. There are two reasons. First, I don't know all the facts. Second, we are not allowed to created an "attorney-client" relationship. Drafting part of your complaint would cross that line.
Customer: oh k
Customer: how does this look to you (an opinion) of course
TexLawyer : They are entitled to notice, so you just have to explain as best you can that you are suing for negligence, and explain how you believe they were negligent.
TexLawyer : It looks strong, based on what you've told me. That said, I always reserve judgment until I hear what the other side would argue.
Customer: "for want of theory by defendants, plaitiff cliams negligence and or Strict liability and or vicarious laibilty to the ends that the defendant was liable to provide for the plaitiff an environment free of likely or plausble injury to witch the defendant did injur the plaintiff and is therefore liable"
TexLawyer : You need to have a paragraph for each legal theory, and you need to explain how the facts apply to it. For example, if I was alleging negligence for a car wreck, it would go something like this:
TexLawyer : NEGLIGENCE:
TexLawyer : The elements of negligence are as follows: (1) that the defendants owed a duty to the plaintiff; (2) that the defendants breached that duty; and (3) that the plaintiff was damaged as a result.
Customer: wow S I M P L E !! i AM FLABERGHASTED THAT HE IS EVEN DEMANDING IT AS IT WAS ALL EXPLAINED IN MY NOTICE OPINTENT. ok your "great" man... the counsel for the defendant is NOT happy that he is going up against a citizen, and I think he suspects he will lose badly and he wont get to play allot of the games attorneys often play. IS THERE A WAY i CAN GET BACK TO you DIRECTLY in the furure?
TexLawyer : The plaintiffs owed a duty of care to the plaintiff because drivers owe a general duty of care to other drivers. The defendant breached this duty [explain how wreck happened]. The plaintiff was damaged as a result [explain harm}.
TexLawyer : Yes, you can get back to me directly by posting a question with "this question is for TexLawyer" in the title.
Customer: an officerr of the law has a duty to the detained and restrained to provide for their physical safety as a restrained person is without the abillity to provide it to himself>>?
TexLawyer : If you do that, I will see the question and respond. The other experts know that when a customer does that, others are not to answer.
Customer: Yes, you can get back to me directly by posting a question with "this question is for TexLawyer" in the title. ?????????????????
TexLawyer : What you posted looks good.
Customer: I am missing something ...
Customer: maybe my order number?
TexLawyer : Yes, you asked if there was a way to get back to me directly.
Customer: put this question is for JACUSTOMER-857b662r ????
Customer: oh jeeze
TexLawyer : No, if you want to get back to me, post a question with "this question is for TexLawyer" in the title. If you do that, I'll see it and get back to you.
Customer: do you have a link I can copy down?
TexLawyer : To get back to this question?
Customer: BACK TO YOU
Customer: I SAVED THE PAGE TO MY dt
Customer: WHAT IS YOUR NAME AGAIN SIR?
TexLawyer : Like I said, you just post a new question with "this question is for TexLawyer" in the title. Or, you can just post on the end of this question. After we are finished tonight, you can just continue to post on this question and we can continue later.
TexLawyer : We are not allowed to give out our real names.
Customer: HAHAHA OK "friend" I WILL CALL YOU FRIEND
TexLawyer : My name on here is TexLawyer.
Customer: CAN I ADD CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION TO MY STATE FILED AMENDED CLAIM AS OMNE OF THE THEORIEDS?
TexLawyer : Yes, you can.
Customer: thanks I love you... wich me luck.
Customer: John Blackburn
TexLawyer : Good luck!
Customer: *wish me luck and good night
TexLawyer : If there isn't anything else I can do for you, please remember to "rate" my answer. Good luck and have a great night!
Customer: peice of cake.:-)
TexLawyer : Can I do anything else for you?
TexLawyer : If not, please remember to "rate" my answer (that's how I get credit for my work). Have a great night.
after I have created the amended filing can I run it by you for a thumbs up ?
I gave you RAVES like you deserve ! ;-)also, can I some-way secure you as a consultant and pay you from proceeds of successful outcome?
fyi, I am a retired (not by choice) automotive master technician with over 30 years of experience so if you have ***ANY*** questions about cars/trucks/rv's/boats... I will 110% GLADLY provide "you" $ saving information from my massive knowledge bank for free. Hope you & yours are doing well & are happy. Thanks: John Henry Blackburn XXXXXXXXXX /p>