I have so many questions, all of which would probably show that all of my legal knowledge comes from television and James Patterson novels.
I’m not a criminal lawyer. I’m not familiar with US criminal law (or Canadian, for that matter). If anyone wants to talk about how to expropriate a property or how to appeal a land use decision made by city council, I’m your girl. But I don’t participate in discussions about the law unless I can add something to it.
EL or NN could attempt to get federal authorities to pursue criminal charges against people for a variety of things, but I have a hard time believing that many prosecutors would be moved by their arguments or pleas. Their remedies are purely civil, and I am quite certain that they will continue to pursue them, probably with increased vigor if they believe that it's in their financial interest to do that.
I'd probably be annoyed if someone started asking me a million questions about my area of expertise in my time off, too.
I guess that's more what I worry about. Not that they'd be successful with criminal charges, but that they'd financially ruin a lot of people via frivolous litigation.
As with the case of that Disney mayhem, that would end up as a civil case, not a criminal case. Could EL or NN come after the sellers for loss of profit and duping their research? Maybe, but they haven't really yet, so I would say they don't have a case or don't care enough.
They certainly have the financial resources to ruin plenty of people and businesses, but that comes at a cost to them, as well. The real goal is to frighten everyone and discourage people from doing things that will hurt them financially.
I mean despite the whole "we will bankrupt you in court costs" mantra shtick, you do actually need to have a legitimate case against someone to even start a civil suit.
I do not know, I could probably google, but I will just say I have literally never heard of anything like that ever. We have some stupid Citizen's Arrest bullshit, but that shit never actually holds up.
Private prosecutions under federal law are allowed under certain federal acts, but they are still rare. Many states have banned private prosecutions by law or through case law, but some states still allow some concept of private prosecution, which actually just means that a person can file a complaint, affidavit or other such document with a magistrate who can then decide whether it should proceed. Even then, a public prosecutor then takes over and can do whatever with the case, including tossing it. So, the simple answer is: Mostly no, not in a meaningful way and only in a few rare instances.
Good to know! Sort of similar here. They pretty much never went anywhere but I guess, at least here, someone could throw spaghetti at the wall and try a private prosecution related to glp1s (and likely fail lol).
Literally the worst. And I went up against pro se individuals all the time and I just absolutely dreaded it. So painful.
with a known criminal background.
That’s pretty embarrassing for the lawyer!
Good job. A friend of mine, a nonlawyer, defended himself in a civil case. He "lost" in that the plaintiff, represented by the biggest and most expensive law firm in town, managed to secure a verdict for a small amount in damages but a large amount in attorney fees. My friend then represented himself on appeal and managed to have the attorneys fees award overturned. It's rather embarrassing when the biggest law firm in town loses on appeal. In defense of the law firm that lost, I'll acknowledge that my friend was an unusually bright person in a great number of areas including law.
Pro se inmates are a PITA to litigate against, not because their claims have merit, but because they bring pure chaos by throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks -- and you still have to respond to it.
A lawyer representing themselves has a fool for a client, as they say.
