Re: Bob L - contempt

Maybe he's figured the term loonies isn't just applied to Canadian Dollars?
Perhaps his legal mind has been tasked with something more significant, and
he his figured out something more entertaining to do on his lunch break
other than giving Jim a deadly dose of legal medicine? Maybe some bean
counter saw this all in a bad light? Maybe he has heard the murmurs of his
colleagues or even some in the industry? On the other hand, I saw a rattle
snake on the side of the road tonight. It had crawled there after being run
over by a car. It was still writhing when I shoved in into a bag and hauled
it off in the bed of my pick up. I'll wait until daybreak to reach in the
bag and cut off the rattles. Better to see that the snake is no longer a
menace in the light of day before trusting any body parts to such close
proximity to trouble. That caution might apply to courts and lawyers too?

"Jim Rojas" <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4736557E.4030508@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is odd. Sableman hasn't filed any motions in a couple of weeks now.
He is either on vacation or finally emptied Brinks attorney enrichment
fund. Sableman might be waiting until after the first of the new year,
when they allocated the new budget.

Jim Rojas



Nomen Nescio wrote:
So someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that
a
default judgment along with preliminary injunction and temporary
restraining
order had already been made, and I was further under the impression
that the
contempt hearing was for Jim allegedly ignoring the preliminary
injunction.

My knowledge of the law is very limited but I'm not sure how a civil
contempt motion could be made, if a judgment of some sort hadn't
already
been made against Jim.

A default has been recorded against Jim, meaning that he is no longer
able
to argue the merits of the case against him. All of the allegations
made
by Brink's are now considered to be true, because Jim didn't challenge
them
in the legally correct fashion at the appropriate time.

However, that is not a default judgment. Judgments are for specific
amounts of money. There has to be a hearing where Brink's proves its
damages. Jim can challenge the amount, if he likes. Then, the court
issues a judgment against Jim, ordering him to pay a specific amount to
Brink's.

Earlier in the case, Brink's obtained a temporary restraining order,
which
Jim did not oppose. That required Jiim not to disclose Brink's trade
secrets, post their manuals, post unlock codes, and so on. That TRO was
later converted into a preliminary injunction. That is an order from
the
court not to do something. It's called "preliminary" because there
hasn't
been a final judgment in the case, and theoretically, it could disappear
if
somehow Jim managed to win his case.

Brink's felt Jim had violated that preliminary injunction, so it went
back
to court asking that Jim be held in "civil contempt" for violating the
court's order. This has nothing to do with the final judgment; it's
about
whether he disobeyed a court order.

Contempt comes in two flavors, criminal and civil.

Criminal contempt's purpose is to vindicate the authority of the court.
It's a crime, and may be punished by a fine or by jail time. Flip off
the
judge in court, and you'll get thrown in a jail cell.

Civil contempt's purpose is to benefit one party in a civil case when
the
other party has disobeyed a court order. The purpose of civil contempt
is
either to compensate a party for damages he has suffered due to
disobedience of the court order, or to coerce future compliance with the
order.

Here, if Brink's wanted to be compensated, it would have to prove the
amount of damages it had suffered because Jim violated the preliminary
injunction, assuming he did so. Probably the only damages Brink's could
prove would be the attorney's fees related to the contempt motion. If
they
wanted to claim damages due to Jim allegedly disclosing lockout codes,
they'd have to prove the losses they had suffered as a result, not just
pull some number out of their ass. Jim could challenge the amount, if
they
ever filed such a claim.

That leaves coercive civil contempt, an enforcement system designed to
get
Jim to comply with the injunction in the future. This could start as a
fine of $xxx per day until he complies. However, this would require
proof
that Jim is continuing to violate the injunction (note: we're not
arguing
about whether the injunction is justified, just whether Jim is obeying
what
is currently the order of the court) and how we can determine when he
has
complied with the injunction, so that the fines will stop. Continued
disobedience of a court's order can be punished by jail time, but the
defendant holds the keys to his cell: since the purpose is to obtain
compliance with the court's order, compliance gets him out of jail.

The purpose of civil contempt is to compensate and coerce. Once the
purpose turns into punishment, it becomes criminal contempt, and the
protections of the Constitution and the criminal law apply.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bob L - contempt
    ... default judgment along with preliminary injunction and temporary restraining ... contempt hearing was for Jim allegedly ignoring the preliminary injunction. ...
    (alt.security.alarms)
  • Re: Bob L
    ... default judgment along with preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order had already been made, and I was further under the impression that the contempt hearing was for Jim allegedly ignoring the preliminary injunction. ...
    (alt.security.alarms)
  • The latest Brinkle in Jims life.
    ... Apparently the Texas court has seen fit to hold Jim formally in contempt. ... All of these disseminations clearly violate ... I can demonstrate just as clearly that Brinks panels are nothing more than rebadged GE and Honeywell units. ...
    (alt.security.alarms)
  • Re: Nation Tottering Close To Political Idolatry
    ... Jim making little pokes from the ... Rita was totally polite to you and spoke to you quite civilly. ... Sheila I don't get upset when someone supports what you say at all. ... Where in this thread did I come in to a civil ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT: Lets see if Ive got this right....
    ... up looking look like a dumbshit. ... No, Jim, I did that absolutely and positively on purpose - because I ... again purposely - and will continue to do so when referring to George. ...
    (rec.arts.marching.drumcorps)
Loading