Not really - I speak mostly of a single case I read wherein a Superior
Court split a favorable decision to a Plaintiff/Appellant who had been
forced to undergo religious programming in a gov't facility. He wasn't
awarded money, but he did gain relief in expungement of notes gov't
emplyees made in his file regarding his [First Amendment Right of]
defiance in participating in church. This proved im****tant [to him
and] to his future dealings with the state.
The officials were let off the hook re: punitive damages/denomination
because his costs were ameliorated by the expungements.
I say "mostly" because I gleaned this from a GINORMOUS database of
knowledge I found in the Matthew Bender / LEXIS CD-ROM's I had
tem****ary access to, at no expense, and which made sifting through
hundreds of years of Federal Cases feasible, tenable.
Pike Co. may be forced to turn over back-issues of LEXIS to our local
public library (if it is litigated so).
But this is not unlike mushroom farming. Pike County, Pennsylvania
voters are kept in the dark and fed plenty of bull**** by lawyers,
doctors, and news media. I've maintained that if this is the best the
county has to offer, understanding, caring individuals "should be
running the place in six months." [Famous last words - Col. George
Taylor, NASA, 1967/3527 AD,
20th Cent. FOX].
-Petre Moss
De minimus non curatlex
Ars longa, vita brevis
On Feb 25, 4:28=A0pm, David Friedman <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> In article
> <1fb90137-3188-498c-84ae-809c4a447...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
> =A0"Petre.Moss" <petem...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Their is invariably a higher power. Monetary damages are awarded to
> > plaintiffs - where the defendents knew what they were doing was wrong/
> > malicious - in contrast to defendants who were not penalized so,
> > because they were ignorant that what they did was in fact wrong.
>
> Are you confusing monetary damages with punitive damages? Under tort
> law, there is no requirement that the defendant knew he was doing
> anything wrong, nor that the act was deliberate. The plaintiff, if he
> wins, is still entitled to sufficient damages to make him whole--make up
> for the injury. It's only punitive damages--damages above that--which
> may require intent.
>
> --
> =A0http://www.daviddfriedman.com/http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
> =A0Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
> =A0Published by Baen, in bookstores now
|
