I’m generally a rights of defendants person. And more generally a you can have your day in court person. But even with those filters, this seems like a dumb lawsuit (Links to the TNT, so use your clicks accordingly).
Paula Henry’s husband was fatally shot by a family friend in Tacoma in 1995, and now 18 years later her husband’s killer is suing her and others from prison.
Larry Shandola alleges that Henry violated his privacy rights and intentionally inflicted emotional distress, in part by telling the state Department of Corrections that he shouldn’t be allowed to serve his sentence in his birth country of Canada.
…
Now Shandola is seeking $100,000 each from Paula Henry and other defendants, according to court records. He had Henry served with the lawsuit at her home, which prompted her to move because she was terrified that he knew where she lived, Ladenburg said.
Some of Henry’s friends and a victim’s advocate are also named in the suit and have had to pay thousands to defend themselves, Ladenburg said.
A motion to dismiss the lawsuit will be heard Friday, he said. Henry is requesting $10,000 in statutory damages, according to court documents.
I mean unless there’s something I’m missing here this is, on top of being cruel, just dumb.
The linked article says that while it’s too late to do something about this sort of thing in the legislature unless it’s attached to another bill. I don’t know how that would pass muster with the 2 items requirement, but if they can do that, great.
Larry Shandola should be glad he’s alive and not pushing up daisies.
I assume Shandola filed the suit pro se and doesn’t have a lawyer representing him. Otherwise, Henry (and the other defendants) could go after the lawyer for Civil Rule 11 sanctions, which basically authorizes judges to require a lawyer who files a meritless lawsuit to pay the defendant’s legal expenses, although such sanctions are at the judge’s discretion.
I think the legislation she’s proposing — requiring convicts to get a court’s permission before suing a victim (or witness) — is a great idea. It’s narrowly targeted and doesn’t impinge on a convict’s right to bring other lawsuits, for example, for personal injuries sustained while riding in a prison bus hit by a negligent driver.
It’s not unduly burdensome, and there is precedent for it, because we already have a law in Washington that requires a court’s permission to file a against a public employee based on a claim related to the employee’s work. (This law is targeted at so-called “sovereign citizens” and other abusive lien filers who seek to harass public officials with bogus liens and claims.) Violating this statute is a separate felony that can get a convict lien-filer add-on prison time.
If the convict has a valid claim against a victim (or witness), a judge can allow the lawsuit to go forward. The law would create a screening mechanism to weed out bogus claims.
This legislative proposal should be a “do pass.” And it’s not a partisan issue. It’s something both Republicans and Democrats can agree on and vote for.
# 2: I agree with the Rabbit. Expanding upon his first sentence, I would point out that the Constitution requires that prisoners have access to a law library so they can further their defense. Then you put a guy behind bars with nothing but time on his hand and a law library at his disposal, and this is the sort of thing he will eventually come up with.
Usually civil lawsuits are limited by the simple practical impediment of cost. A lawyer isn’t going to bring a civil lawsuit of this type without getting paid up front, and 99.5% of the population will look at the potential recovery, and decide it’s not worth the effort. But when someone is acting as a jailhouse lawyer with nothing else to do, then that “screen” is removed. Rabbit’s proposal provides a reasonable alternative – even though it will burden the courts a bit by having prisoners innundate it with requests to file lawsuits.
correction @2 in 3rd paragraph: “that requires a court’s permission to file a lien against a public employee based on a claim”
@3 “Then you put a guy behind bars with nothing but time on his hand and a law library at his disposal, and this is the sort of thing he will eventually come up with.”
And once every 100 years or so, we get a Clarence Gideon, in whose hands the prison library law books become a trumpet blowing loud and clear.
The inmate still has to pay the filing fee for a civil action, $240 in King County (don’t know about Pierce), which is a hefty sum for most inmates and a deterrent to filing cases out of boredom.
People are hit with frivolous and dumb lawsuits all the time. Passing laws to deal with particular cases makes for good headlines but bad laws, often with unintended consequences. Limiting access to the courts in response to one inmate suit is a very poor idea.