- Joined
- Jul 5, 2021
- Messages
- 322
- Thread Author
- #1
- Client Name: xxTigOlBittiesxx and LTSlade
- Counsel Name: The Lovely Law Firm
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff
- Reason for the Appeal: (1) The judge in the Federal Court case granted a motion to dismiss, without even giving us (the plaintiffs) a chance to respond to the motion to dismiss. In fact, within less than 12 hours of the motion to dismiss being posted, the judge granted that motion without even asking us (plaintiffs) if we wanted to respond. This is a brazen violation of court procedure. (2) The judge in the Federal Court dismissed our case using faulty reasoning from the defendant. The judge agreed with the defendant's wrongly narrowed police misconduct definition and agreed with the wrongly narrowed definition of when the DoJ is liable for police misconduct. I had wanted to point this out in response to the motion to dismiss, but since the judge dismissed the case without giving me a chance to say this (among other things), I'll say it now. I point out the precedent of nnmc v. Department of Justice in showing that police misconduct is a broadly defined crime, as written by Congress, that penalizes both wrongful over-punishment and also wrongful under-punishment and letting criminals go free. That same precedent also shows that the DoJ is liable for the fines that are issued as punishment for police misconduct, which makes sense since the DoJ is supposed to be defendant held liable in any case against the police as per the rules of the court. The defendant was trying to allege our case had inaccurate interpretations of the law and had frivolous prayers for relief, but this is simply not true. Prayers for relief can’t make a case frivolous since a judge can always grant a lesser prayer in the verdict. This case has no inaccuracies, rather, the inaccuracy is the defendant’s interpretation of the law of police misconduct. Therefore, this case should not have been dismissed.
- Additional Information: I am aware that the title of an appeal should be the case number, not the case name. However, the case I am appealing was never edited by a moderator and never given a case number. That's why I'm using a case name as the alternative.
- Counsel Name: The Lovely Law Firm
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff
- Reason for the Appeal: (1) The judge in the Federal Court case granted a motion to dismiss, without even giving us (the plaintiffs) a chance to respond to the motion to dismiss. In fact, within less than 12 hours of the motion to dismiss being posted, the judge granted that motion without even asking us (plaintiffs) if we wanted to respond. This is a brazen violation of court procedure. (2) The judge in the Federal Court dismissed our case using faulty reasoning from the defendant. The judge agreed with the defendant's wrongly narrowed police misconduct definition and agreed with the wrongly narrowed definition of when the DoJ is liable for police misconduct. I had wanted to point this out in response to the motion to dismiss, but since the judge dismissed the case without giving me a chance to say this (among other things), I'll say it now. I point out the precedent of nnmc v. Department of Justice in showing that police misconduct is a broadly defined crime, as written by Congress, that penalizes both wrongful over-punishment and also wrongful under-punishment and letting criminals go free. That same precedent also shows that the DoJ is liable for the fines that are issued as punishment for police misconduct, which makes sense since the DoJ is supposed to be defendant held liable in any case against the police as per the rules of the court. The defendant was trying to allege our case had inaccurate interpretations of the law and had frivolous prayers for relief, but this is simply not true. Prayers for relief can’t make a case frivolous since a judge can always grant a lesser prayer in the verdict. This case has no inaccuracies, rather, the inaccuracy is the defendant’s interpretation of the law of police misconduct. Therefore, this case should not have been dismissed.
- Additional Information: I am aware that the title of an appeal should be the case number, not the case name. However, the case I am appealing was never edited by a moderator and never given a case number. That's why I'm using a case name as the alternative.
Last edited:
