Bloomberg being sued

Discussion in 'In the News' started by Gunstar1, Jul 20, 2006.

  1. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
  2. Taurus

    Taurus New Member

    310
    1
    0
    Yehhhaw!! I just saw that at 11alive....Bob Barr gets my full support and attention!!! :D

    Knock Bloomburgs buttt back into the NY hole it crawled out of and keep him there!
     

  3. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,356
    386
    83
    Venue?

    This might not go over as well in Weinberg's NY courtroom as it would in ND Ga.
     
  4. ber950

    ber950 Active Member

    3,562
    2
    38
    The act happened here. The venue should be here. I think that is why they didn't just file a countersuit in the NY case.
     
  5. EagleEye920

    EagleEye920 Member

    904
    0
    16
    "filed in Cobb County Superior Court" so it sounds like it'll be here

    http://11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=82250

    :shoot: Back Off Bloomberg
     
  6. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,356
    386
    83
  7. EagleEye920

    EagleEye920 Member

    904
    0
    16
    :?:

    enlighten us :) jurisdiction problems??
     
  8. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Removed= transferred from a state court to a federal court.

    A defendant that does not want to be sued in a state court has a right to remove a case to federal court if the federal court has jurisdiction. Without having seen the complaint, it's difficult to know if the federal court has jurisdiction. But, MP is correct, that Bloomberg would no doubt rather defend himself in federal court than Cobb County Superior Court, so he will look for federal jurisdiction.
     
  9. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (as opposed to state courts, which are courts of general jurisdiction). You can't just "make a federal case out of it" just because you feel like it.

    There are two ways for federal courts to have jurisdiction:

    1. Federal question (a federal statute or regulation or the U.S. Constitution, or some other federal right is at issue).
    2. Diversity of citizenship -- If the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and all the plaintiffs are citizens of different states from all the defendants.

    You have to look at the complaint to see if there is a federal question. But, it sounds like a suit for defamation, or something like that, which is not a federal question.

    The amount in controversy is $400M (according to the press report), so that's no problem. But, again, you have to look at the complaint to see who the parties are. The straw buyers must have been GA residents, or they would not have been able to make a purchase at all. If one or more of the straw buyers is a defendant, then there won't be diversity of citizenship.

    But, we'll just have to wait and see.
     
  10. legacy38

    legacy38 Active Member

    9,000
    9
    38
    Typically civil suits are tried in the location of the respondent; however, with the parties being in different states it may have to go federal.
     
  11. magnum62

    magnum62 New Member

    54
    0
    0
  12. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Don't confuse jurisdiction with venue. A case never has to be federal, unless a statute specifically confers exclusive jurisdiction on the federal courts, or unless a defendant rightfully removes the case to federal court. If Cobb County Superior Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter (which it almost certainly does, being a court of general jurisdiction), and if it has personal jurisdiction over Bloomberg (that one might be a little tricky, but it's possible), then it has jurisdiction over the whole case. GA's venue statute might indicate that a different superior court in GA should hear the case, if the defendant moves to change venue, but it does not matter that the defendant is a non-resident.
     
  13. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Here's a link to a short NY Post article about the case, in which Bloomberg claims to be "thrilled" he's being sued for $400M. :roll:

    NY Post
     
  14. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,356
    386
    83
  15. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,305
    110
    63
    Undercover Sting Transaction

    I don't know the details of who conducted the "undercover sting" straw purchase, but if it was done for the purpose of gathering evidence that the gun dealer was a willing participant to straw purchases, then to me it's legitimate. And I think the feds should look the other way if the undercover agents / investigators lied to the gun dealer or falsely filled out the #4473 form, if they did so as part of the sting operation, and disclosed the results of said sting to the proper authorities, and if they did not keep the gun they bought for any reason other than to use as evidence in an upcoming case.

    Setting aside the "legality" of private investigators (not cops) doing their own undercover stings, to gather evidence that may be used in a civil suit (instead of a criminal prosecution), MORALLY it's not a bad thing. If people are breaking the law by engaging in straw purchases, thus putting more guns on the black market and into the hands of unqualified "prohibited persons," it ought to be detected. Undercover agents with hidden cameras and microphones are an effective and useful way to find out which gun stores will sell to a straw purchaser and which ones will do the right thing, even if it costs them a sale.

    I mean, are we going to complain about all the undercover stings involving cops sending 15 year old girls into convenience stores to try to buy cigarettes? Not me. How about having state revenue agents sending 19 year old boys into liquor stores to try to buy some beer?

    It's the same thing-- a responsible dealer will ask the right questions and follow the right procedures and the sale will not take place, but the sloppy or greedy dealers will make the sale and get STUNG. I'm OK with that.
     
  16. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Did you also hear about how these unauthorized, illegal stings by Bloomberg destroyed several ATF investigations of straw purchasers?

    Thanks to the publicity, the straw purchasers (the real bad guys, not a clerk that got tricked) stayed away from those stores and so the ATF cases have been stalled or destroyed. That is why it is not ok for them to break federal laws, no matter what there intent was.

    The thing about taking the law into your own hands is that, A. you could be wrong, B. you could hinder or destroy Law enforcement efforts, C. you have to break the law to do it.
     
  17. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Gunsmoker, I more or less agree with your sentiment, but your premise of setting aside the legality of private sting operations raises some important issues.

    In many cases, there are no official exceptions to crimes of possession, sale, or purchase for the purpose of detecting crime. In other cases, there are official exceptions for LEOs, but not mere mortals.

    Both are a problem. If a vice officer offers a hooker $50 for the weekly special, isn't he soliciting prostitution? Why isn't he prosecuted? The same goes for undercover cops buying drugs, child porn, or Coca-cola secrets.

    Cops should not be able to break the law to enforce the law. If there is a "crime detection" exception, then it ought to apply to everyone. But it doesn't. If it did, the hooker would say she was undercover catching johns. The drug dealers, porn dealers, and Coke secret sellers all would say they were trying to catch bad guys.

    What's the solution? I don't know. But, I do know that I don't like exceptions in behavior for LEOs.
     
  18. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    GS1, you make excellent points.
     
  19. mzmtg

    mzmtg Active Member

    3,119
    0
    36
    From what I understand, Bloomberg used private investigators, not cops to do his dirty work. Throw the book at the lot of them.

    Second, his motivation behind these operations has never, for one minute been effective law enforcement. He's grandstanding. He's going way out of his way to blame his city's crime problems on other staes and this is how he intends to show it.

    F**k him.
     
  20. viper32cm

    viper32cm New Member

    760
    0
    0
    Can NY citizens even buy guns in the state of Georgia? I didn't look too closely at the red/green map last time I was in a gun store, but I think I remember that NY was red.

    The mayor's agents falsified a federal document (the 4473).

    They interferred with a federal investigation.

    God I hope this guy gets slammed.