Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Originally posted by ryan_618:Are you familiar with the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity?
Click to expand...
Doesn't that just mean that you can't sue the royal family? :D
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Basically, you cannot sue a government agency or employee acting in his official capacity unless it is specifically allowed for by statute.

generally, it is near impossible to even get a court to agree to hear a suit against such a body because they are basically exempt from lawsuits.

there are a few exceptions (such as suing for racial discrimination under state and or federal laws) but for this kind of stuff they are all but immune.
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

if that is so, I wonder why the counties pay so much for lawyers and settle so many cases out of court. They are sued all the time. Even though indemnified, for the most part, actions outside the normal scope of job duties, can bring lawsuits against inspectors personally. Inspectors are no different than sheriffs as county employees, and everyone hears about lawsuits against the police, and not just for discrimination.

paul
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

but a normal inspection is not outside the normal course of their duties.

if you look closely at most of the lawsuits brought against police agencies, it is almost always on civil rights grounds, which is one of the few things they can be sued for. even then, the individual employee is not typically financially responsible. t he agency is.
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

"normal" is a nice word. Normally, normal inspections conducted by normal inspectors on normal jobs produce normal results. Normally, no problem. Even abnormal inspections conducted in a range of conditions from normal to abnormal by either normal or not-so-normal individuals, will produce normal results, normally.

It is the out of normal that generate lawsuits. I do not think that a county can escape liability by merely never enacting stautes that allow them to be sued. I'll ask my sister, when I see her next, about that. But I do not think it is exactly so. There might be a % of validity, but I do not think it is so limited.

paul
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Originally posted by apauling:
"normal" is a nice word. Normally, normal inspections conducted by normal inspectors on normal jobs produce normal results. Normally, no problem. Even abnormal inspections conducted in a range of conditions from normal to abnormal by either normal or not-so-normal individuals, will produce normal results, normally.
Click to expand...
That is just not normal. ;)

I think we have to be clear if we are talking about suing the inspector personally or suing the entity that they work for.

My limited understanding is that you can not bring a suit against an inspector unless it can be proved they deliberately messed with you. They are protected by mistakes.

An example I can think of is that a friend of mine was stooped for running a stop sign in Mall parking lot. The cop ran his license and it came back suspended. Well it was not suspended, someone made a mistake at the registry.

My friend was arrested, missed work and had his truck impounded he lost about $800 in towing fees and lost wages.

He got an attorney and was told that he was out of luck, the state agency is immune to suits for mistakes, the only way he could win the suit would be to prove it was intentional. :p
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Originally posted by apauling:
I do not think that a county can escape liability by merely never enacting stautes that allow them to be sued.
paul
Click to expand...
I do not believe a county would have any authority to determine whether they can be sued or not. That type of things is usually defined in state law.

In our system of government, the states have whatever powers are not specifically granted to the federal government. Individual states are not created by the federal government rather the states created the federal governement and ceded certain powers to it. The states on the other hand are not created by the local units of government such as cities and counties. The states created those local units of government and as such have complete say in what powers they are granted (which are typically fairly limited).
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

well....!!!! my sister wants to thank you for a good laugh. She did a little george carlinesque routine about why the state would enact the law in the first place.

What in the world makes you think that a county is beyond the law, beyond culpability, or a city.

My sister says the normal avenue is to file a claim for damages and then sue when not paid.

She might still be laughing.

paul :cool:
 
Re: Side-Stepping Corrections for Inspections

Bob: It says in the beginning of almost all code books that lawsuits brought against inspectors shall be defended by the agency they work for. They didn't put it there because lawsuits aren't allowed.

I think this is one of those don't-try-it-because-it-won't-work assumptions. Traffic ticket disputes are the same. they are just not providing the venue for you to dispute the ticket. traffic tickets are just revenue and they need that revenue. You would have to file a claim for damages and then sue for non-payment.

the federal government won't file law suits against cities and counties for you. The feds will say that we can't sue them for some item that they will sue private individuals and companies for (like holding final checks at employee termination). that doesn't mean that I couldn't sue, it's just that the feds won't do it for me.

paul
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top