Jump to content

Settlement For Gun Seizure


Jwg43

Recommended Posts

Thought you might find this interesting, saw it this morning on a legal news feed. Arlington Heights settles case for failure to return guns to the tune of $185,000.

 

http://wgil.com/v3/2015/07/22/illinois-village-reaches-185k-settlement-with-gun-collector/

 

And $175,000 of it goes to his attorney LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thought you might find this interesting, saw it this morning on a legal news feed. Arlington Heights settles case for failure to return guns to the tune of $185,000.

 

http://wgil.com/v3/2015/07/22/illinois-village-reaches-185k-settlement-with-gun-collector/

And $175,000 of it goes to his attorney LOL.

 

Yes. But hopefully it will make cities think twice about undertaking this type of illegal action in the future. They had to write a big check, and they probably would prefer not to do that again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say that he got the right lawyers considering he got a settlement. I'd say that the cost of a good attorney is insane though but I guess they paid for themselves.

 

Depending on the guns he lost, 15k might be enough to buy replacements.

 

But the article says he did get the firearms returned. "...A mental health assessment determined Lovi wasn’t a danger to himself or others, but the village’s police department didn’t return the weapons for another two months...."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought you might find this interesting, saw it this morning on a legal news feed. Arlington Heights settles case for failure to return guns to the tune of $185,000. $175,000 of it goes to his attorney LOL.Yes. But hopefully it will make cities think twice about undertaking this type of illegal action in the future. They had to write a big check, and they probably would prefer not to do that again.

Municipal leaders don't care. It's not money out of THEIR pockets. It's the taxpayers that will pay, in potentially higher taxes and fees.

 

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thought you might find this interesting, saw it this morning on a legal news feed. Arlington Heights settles case for failure to return guns to the tune of $185,000. $175,000 of it goes to his attorney LOL.Yes. But hopefully it will make cities think twice about undertaking this type of illegal action in the future. They had to write a big check, and they probably would prefer not to do that again.

Municipal leaders don't care. It's not money out of THEIR pockets. It's the taxpayers that will pay, in potentially higher taxes and fees.

 

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

Very true. Just ask Rham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thought you might find this interesting, saw it this morning on a legal news feed. Arlington Heights settles case for failure to return guns to the tune of $185,000.

 

http://wgil.com/v3/2015/07/22/illinois-village-reaches-185k-settlement-with-gun-collector/

 

And $175,000 of it goes to his attorney LOL.

 

And to think people wonder why I'm in law school. :D

 

And yes, to a city like Chicago, that would be a drop in the bucket so they would't miss it. But if a smaller village had to pay that, don't think there wouldn't be blow back if a village had to propose raising taxes/fees because they had to pay out a few of these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I read it, the judgment was entered against the officers themselves and not the Village. Three police officers have been found guilty (by a jury, no less) of blatantly infringing upon the constitutional rights of a private citizen as well as damaging his property after it had been illegally seized. The Village isn't on the hook for this, the officers are as they were sued for actions under individual capacity. Likely the Village, Chief of Police, etc were also named under official capacity and were dropped as defendants somewhere along the line. Bottom line, the officers are personally liable, they will be paying the plaintiff, not the Village.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I read it, the judgment was entered against the officers themselves and not the Village. Three police officers have been found guilty (by a jury, no less) of blatantly infringing upon the constitutional rights of a private citizen as well as damaging his property after it had been illegally seized. The Village isn't on the hook for this, the officers are as they were sued for actions under individual capacity. Likely the Village, Chief of Police, etc were also named under official capacity and were dropped as defendants somewhere along the line. Bottom line, the officers are personally liable, they will be paying the plaintiff, not the Village.

 

The Daily Herald article indicates most of the settlement will be paid by Arlington Heights' insurance, and the village will pay the remainder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the insurance co has to fork over the money guess what happens to the cities premiums for the next ??? years and the residents WILL see a big increase in their property taxes.

 

If that lawyer was so smart why didn't he include the same clause that Otis and his crew had?

 

Yes the city of Chiraq was responsible for ALL OF THEIR LEGAL FEES.

 

And yes it did cost OVER $1,6 million taxpayer dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...