An Attorney Question: After the shooting, has this ever been done?

[Vom Brunhaus K9]

In NJ all gun owners become defendants no matter the circumstances. Its called the state of "no self defense" with Dragon gun laws

 

[Harkrader]

I had an informal discussion with a Wisconsin firearms attorney about something similar, recently.

As so often happens, a dirtbag is shot and the baby momma and alleged "uncles" come out of the woodwork to proclaim what an innocent angel the dead dirtbag was, and that he never don nobahdy wrong and woulda nevah hurt nobahdy..

While we cannot rely upon the Milwacky Urinal to tell us these things, eventually the truth comes out that the dirtbag has a looong history of felony crimes.

Recently in Slinger WI, a homeowner who shot a youth on his front porch, and cleared of wrong-doing by the DA, is now being sued by the family of the alleged home invader.

My question was whether I could sue the baby momma and all those alleged uncles, all of whom were in court when the innocent dirtbag was arraigned for his felonies, for failing to perform due diligence in caring for and controlling said dirbag, thereby causing the deadly situation to which I had to respond with deadly force.

His comment was it would cost me a fortune either way, and would likely be cheaper to fight the charges.

No good deed goes unpunished . . ..

 

[RobertJ.]

Again, my thanks to everyone for their opinion. This is exactly why I asked it here!

Apparently, there were a LOT of factors I hadn't considered!

The feeling I've gotten so far, at least for myself, is:

Probably not a good idea!

If they do file a suit, then game on, but until then, just be thankful I survived!

 

[gunfighter48]

Washington State passed a law many years ago that if you shoot and kill, paralyze, or permanently disable someone in the commission of a class C felony which covers most violent crimes, they or their family cannot sue you for damages. As far as I can remember, I don't remember anyone being sued for a justified self defense shooting since that law was passed. But maybe someone else from Washington State knows differently,

 

[kbm6893]

Erich nailed it. Lawyers don't take cases where there is no hope of a monetary award. So there's no money in suing the family of the crack addict. Now, it Erich wanted to do it himelf, or a colleague offered to do it for free, I guess it could be done. But why bother?

Now, if you shoot some guy in your house, they could come after your home or other assets. I gotta think homeowners insurance might be used.

But I am sick of even thinking about this. There are cases in record where a burglar slipped on your icy steps while carrying out your TV and won. McDonald's gets sued because people get fat. Phillip Morris loses billion dollar cases because somebody smoked for 30 years.

It's a disgrace. If you are criminally cleared there should be no civil suit.

 

[RSanch111]

I'm sure it has been done as the likely response to any lawsuit. Thing is, people are NOT often sued as the result of justified self-defense shootings, contrary to what the gun rag writers may tell you.

 

[JohnSW]

I'm not an attorney, but doubt that the following procedure is recommended:

March 05, 2015

"FORT MYERS, Fla. – A southwest Florida man put his dead neighbor in the bed of his pickup truck and drove to his lawyer's office claiming he'd killed the man in self-defense."

Florida man brings neighbor's body to lawyers office claiming he killed him in self-defense | Fox News

 

[ISCS Yoda]

That is an interesting approach I've never heard of before.

On a positive note two of my co-workers have killed men in the line of duty and never got sued civilly after being cleared by the DA. So, there is the possibility the "impending" post-good-shoot-lawsuit will never happen.

That is far more common than most folks realize. As a general rule, if the DA or grand jury think you were justified a wrongful death lawsuit is an exercise in futility. The OJ case is a different matter - mostly because the verdict appeared to be so incorrect to so many people.

Remember - it's called "wrongful death" for a reason.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

I think most jurisdictions disallow criminals to profit from their criminal acts these days so being sued by a criminal's family is pretty much not going to happen. Never mind the tort reforms passed in so many places and the requirement to have mental anguish requires injury, etc.

Look, if you are attacked and you shoot the perpetrator, and he drops to the ground writhing in pain, and you walk over and shoot him again - you're going to jail AND getting sued. A coup de grace is legally impermissible. Period.

If you are attacked and you fire your entire 15 round magazine into a perp because of your panic - and it is clear you didn't fire a coup de grace , you're still justified.

Let's fill in some gaps:

Now, if you shoot some guy in your house, they could come after your home or other assets. I gotta think homeowners insurance might be used.

Not in Texas in re your home - 100% cannot happen. Other assets - if you have liquidated assets or valuable property/non-homestead assets, and they can actually prove a wrongful death case they might get to those. Other jurisdictions - I have no idea what's reachable.

There are cases in record where a burglar slipped on your icy steps while carrying out your TV and won

.

The legal theory there is that you are responsible for all acts on your property and you made the burglar your victim. Weird but true.....

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Not always true. if you live in a state where immunity from civil liability comes after a no bill, acquittal or ruling by the DA of justifiable homicide, this can't happen

.

Not every state has that but it is a GREAT rule!

 

[HayesGreener]

Frivolous lawsuits can occur, in some states more than others, but for the most part those "burglar tripped and sued homeowner" reports are nothing but urban legend. Every state in America permits justifiable use of force in self defense, some more broadly than others. Your problem arises when the justification is questionable or you acted illegally. If your state does not have immunity from prosecution or liability in justified self defense cases it is a cause to take to your state legislator. In any case anyone who keeps or carries firearms for self defense should seriously consider one of the firearms expert prepaid legal service plans. Even if you prevail in a use of force lawsuit you could be stuck with monumental legal bills by the time it's its over.

 

[Warren Sear]

In NJ all gun owners become defendants no matter the circumstances. Its called the state of "no self defense" with Dragon gun laws

You mean dragons can't have guns in NJ? That's terrible!

 

[2K7]

Anyone suffering from "mental trauma" in my state would have their carry permit voided on the spot never to be seen again along with the loss of their ability to own firearms.

Sometimes, you are just better off taking your "win" and walking away.

Another thing that always amazes me is that most people spent tons of time on their carry firearm research, best possible holster configuration, lock boxes for the vehicles, speed strips, tactical can openers, etc.... but never think of adding that $1 Million dollar insurance policy in the event you end up in one of these situations.

Friend of mine told me he was covered by his home owners policy and upon double checking, he is covered as long as he shoots someone on his property only. Most policies are normally written this way.

Protect yourself....

 

[lrrp]

In Wyoming, under W.S.S 61-204 " a person who uses force as reasonably necessary in defense of his person, property or abode or to prevent injury to another is immune from civil action for the use of the force."

 

[JeepinCO]

I don't know if it's been attempted or not but most of the criminals you may end up shooting probably wouldn't have much money anyway. It's also very doubtful that the family or parents could be held responsible unless the dead guy is a minor. I'd be more worried about one of his friends or family seeking revenge especially if you instigated a civil case.

In Wyoming, under W.S.S 61-204 " a person who uses force as reasonably necessary in defense of his person, property or abode or to prevent injury to another is immune from civil action for the use of the force."

These two guys nailed it.

The chances that the dead guy is going to have any kind of estate to sue is slim to none. Plus, some states now have laws that prohibit the dead guy's family from suing, so there would be no point to file a suit to fend off the family

 

[Donn]

Not always true. if you live in a state where immunity from civil liability comes after a no bill, acquittal or ruling by the DA of justifiable homicide, this can't happen.

Granted, but the likelihood of carrying on afterward like nothing happened is highly problematic. Mr. Bad Guy's family and friends are going to know you, your family and where you live. Do I have to spell it out any further?