From the you-can’t-make-this-up file:
Two years ago, fugitive murder suspect Jesse Dimmick kidnapped newlyweds Jared and Lindsay Rowley after bursting into their home on a Saturday morning.
Now, he’s suing them for $235,000.
Dimmick contends in the breach of contract suit that after he entered the couple’s home in September 2009, they reached a legally binding, oral contract that they would hide him for an unspecified amount of money.
“Later, the Rowleys reneged on said oral contract, resulting in my being shot in the back by authorities.”
“District Judge Franklin Theis has yet to rule on their motion for dismissal.” /// So, what’s takin’ so long?
Maybe the judge is having some fun, letting Dimmick get his hopes up.
Wouldn’t that be great? Can’t think of any other justification.
On reading the whole story, it’s a pity that the police officer’s bullet didn’t discharge this guy from the planet. What a waste of space!
Maybe there is more to it that meets the eyes, maybe they were serious in hiding him, maybe the saw an opportunity to make some $$$ and then they changed their minds.
Keeshan filed an answer to Dimmick’s counterclaim on behalf of the Rowleys Oct. 27, then filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim Nov. 4.
Keeshan wrote in the latter document that if the Rowleys had agreed to an oral contract — which they deny — it wouldn’t have been legally binding because no specific dollar amount was given.
“In order for parties to form a binding contract, there must be a meeting of the minds on all essential terms, including and most specifically, an agreement on the price,” he wrote.
Keeshan added that if the Rowleys had agreed to the contract, that agreement wouldn’t have been legally binding because their consent would have been given under duress.
He wrote, “The Rowleys believed he had a gun and knew that he had a knife.”
Keeshan also wrote there could be no legal contract because the Rowleys were asked to hide a fugitive, which is illegal.
This sounds like a motion to dismiss on summary judgment.
The article is dated 11/28/2011 and is not up to date. The suit was dismissed a couple of days ago.
I have a simple solution. He can have as much money as he wants with two conditions.
Its all in pennies.
He has to eat each and every single penny until he decides he’s done.
The fact that this wasn’t rejected out of hand is proof our system is fucked up and totally dysfunctional.
A motion for summary judgment means the case is rejected out of hand.
In other words, the case is found to have no merit by the judge and the case is thrown out of court.
I’d like to know just when a prisoner – someone who may have been convicted for MURDER – was ever given any rights beyond certain human rights?! Perusing a civil case in an American court is not a human right! Therefore, why is any court even listening to this non-sense? This is such an open and shut case since any promises the Rowley’s ever made to Jesse Dimmick were obviously made under duress. But that’s not the issue. The issue is that prisoner’s like Jesse “The Asshole” Dimmick are allowed to do crap like this.
And sure. I agree that prisoners should be granted certain “human rights” like the right to not be tortured and possibly even a right to have cases involving their own incarceration heard or reviewed. But the way I see it, prisoners have no American rights like the right to free speech, or the right to a speedy trial, etc. because that’s what they give up when they are convicted. It’s called PUNISHMENT! You only get whatever American rights you ever had once you have served your sentence including completing parole even. End of story!
Why is this so hard to understand by some people?
Where do we send legal defense money for the Rowley’s?!
Anybody can bring a cause of action before the court.
Many frivolous lawsuits are dismissed by summary judgment once the initial pleadings are presented to the court.
This idiot never had a prayer to begin with, but the judge is required to determine the merits of a case before tossing it in the garbage.
That is how our wonderful legal system works.
The article indicates as much.
This lawsuit was handwritten in felt pen on TP, I think.
” the right to a speedy trial, etc. because that’s what they give up when they are convicted”
You are getting the cart before the horse. You have a speedy trial, get convicted, and then lose certain rights including your freedom, your vote, your privacy (except for communication with your lawyer). After completion of your sentence, some rights are restored, some curtailed (owning a firearm), and some are never restored unless granted a pardon.
Hey, this is the ‘States.
The most litigious country in the world.
You can sue anyone for anything.
But can you win?
I suspect he’s going to be swinging in the wind with the law book dangling from his ankles when they drop the idiot through the trap.
I lived in India for a while. Everybody sues everybody there.
It may be worse than America!
They blame the British, BTW, for the crazy legal system they left behind.
“gotta shoot em in da head”
and dont forget to double tap
You don’t understand. His father beat him as a child and his mother was a alcoholic that neglected him.
The bully down the street beat him up and the kids at school made fun of him.
It is not his fault that he is a criminal. The system failed him.
He is a victim the same as his victims.
Show some compassion for crying out loud.
Be glad this didn’t happen in Mississippi. Republican Governor Hailey Barbour might have already pardoned him.
Are attorneys and judges (and courts) so desperate for case work, that they willingly take the civil legal claims of such villains, seriously? Isn’t the system clogged up enough with nuisance claims of every sort. That convicted felons, should be the very last to get a hearing of breach of oral contract of their victims?!!!