Reply to post: sewer service and default judgements

Bloke flogs $40 B&W printer on Craigslist, gets $12,000 legal bill

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

sewer service and default judgements

One of the first cases you get to read in law school is Penoyer v Neff, which introduces the concept of personal jurisdiction and the limits of constructive notice. Decided by the US Supreme Court in the 1870's, Penoyer was likely forgotten by legislators throughout the country over the next century who gleefully facilitated such travesties of justice as service by mail and notice by publication. Default judgments aren't considered a threat to justice because the law makes it easy to vacate them later -- except when it doesn't (and by "easy", I don't mean "cheap" unless you happen to be a lawyer yourself).

Starting around 30 years ago the courts, supported by their legislatures, began cracking down on frivolous suits. Fines and penalties were levied not only against litigants, but their lawyers as well. This happened after the common law cause of abuse of process failed to gain traction in a system that was awash in cases.

However pro se plaintiffs like the guy here always seem to get a pass. They run roughshod over the system because, well, *rights*. Defending a client against a pro se plaintiff can be a nightmare for many lawyers. Convincing a judge to impose sanctions a fantasy.

But what's the difference really between an active duty soldier and some knuckle dragging good ol' boy letting loose with a shotgun in a shopping mall? The mouth breather might not have 1000's of hours of training and experience of the soldier, or be getting paid a decent salary and benefits to go into combat, but he's just as able to cause as much damage to lives and property.

The pro se plaintiff in this case is a menace. He should be severely sanctioned by the courts (the going rate used to be up to $10k if memory serves), and be ordered to pay his victims attorneys fees and costs. Some pests can only be eradicated by squashing them, after all.

Oh yeah, and the trial judge who rendered that $30k judgement? He's the best argument I've ever seen for making judges stand for re-election every few years.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon