• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Beaver County Obama rally open carrier trial takes place today

jrwalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
61
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
imported post

J.Gleason wrote:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001983----000-.html


--> TITLE 42
> CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > §1983
§1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.



I could be wrong, but seems to me that the guy who reported Noble could be liable for any lawyer/legal fees that make come from this case?



JW
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

jrwalker wrote:
J.Gleason wrote:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001983----000-.html


--> TITLE 42
> CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > §1983
§1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
I could be wrong, but seems to me that the guy who reported Noble could be liable for any lawyer/legal fees that make come from this case?

JW
I don't think so, at least not based on the 1983 ordinance, which specifies "under color", generally meaning acting under the authority of the government.

IANAL, but I've read a lot of stuff about 1983 on here before. :)

TFred
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

CONGRATS MTNJACK!!!!

If anyone on PAFOA starts posting transcripts or other details of the trail, can a regular over there please post a link to the thread in OCDO. I barely can get on OCDO much anymore let alone follow another forum that is so busy. Thanks in advance.
 
Top