Patterico's Pontifications

11/29/2011

The Most Frivolous Lawsuit Ever?

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:20 pm

Almost:

In a bizarre case, a Colorado man is suing the newlywed couple he kidnapped for breach of contract, claiming they agreed to hide him for money after he crashed a stolen vehicle into their yard, then held them at knifepoint.


Above: what a maroon.

Really? Really.

In his lawsuit, 25-year-old Jessie Dimmick of Aurora, contends that after breaking into Jared and Lindsay Rowley’s Topeka-area home while fleeing police, he and the couple reached a legally binding, oral contract that they would hide him for an unspecified amount of money. Dimmick, who is representing himself, is seeking $235,000.

He complains that he ended up getting shot by police as a result.

I can only think of one lawsuit more frivolous than this in recent memory.

Oh — and I plan to have a lot more to say about that one.

My hint to you: at least Dimmick didn’t perjure himself.

Hat tip to . . . you know who you are.

52 Responses to “The Most Frivolous Lawsuit Ever?”

  1. My question is, who is the lawyer who helped file that suit? shouldn’t he be disbarred for it?

    Steven Den Beste (99cfa1)

  2. I’m not even a lawyer and I know the answer to this: any contract completed under duress isn’t legally binding.

    Steven Den Beste (99cfa1)

  3. You’d make a much better lawyer than this fellow, SDB. He represented himself:

    Dimmick personally — in longhand — wrote the document, which was filed Oct. 21 in Shawnee County District Court.

    He wrote: “As a result of the plaintiffs breech (sic) of contract, I, the defendant suffered a gunshot to my back, which almost killed me. The hospital bills alone are in excess of $160,000, which I have no way to pay.”

    The Rowleys sought this month to have the suit dismissed, saying they never accepted Dimmick’s offer of money and — if they had — their consent would have been given under duress. District Judge Franklin Theis has yet to rule on their motion for dismissal.
    ***
    Dimmick’s response said he was representing himself “without the aid of proffessional (sic) legal counsel.”

    He wrote that after he entered the Rowleys’ home, “I told them that I was being pursuid (sic) by a person, or persons, who appeared to be police officers, who were trying to kill me.”

    He added: “I, the defendant, asked the Rowleys to hide me because I feared for my life. I offered the Rowleys an unspecified amount of money which they agreed upon, therefore forging a legally binding oral contract.”

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  4. Is Dimmick a Democrat? He may still have a chance….

    ras (be1e0d)

  5. These guys who abuse the legal system often get so much power over the lives of innocent people.

    What cost will there be to this man for harassing his victims again? There are so many serial litigants, and so many more thugs who just make legal threats, and it’s hard to think of a good solution. Loser pays sounds great, but Dimmick is, undoubtedly, judgment proof.

    And Brett Kimberlin doesn’t even pay his judgments, if I’m informed correctly, so what can you do?

    Only the law abiding good guys seem to be be vulnerable in this game.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  6. :roll: this is the most insanely idiotic thing.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  7. Only the law abiding good guys seem to be be vulnerable in this game.

    Seems that way, often. But things might could be different, as they say in Corntucky, if you have perjury, on tape, by the bad guy.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  8. District Judge Franklin Theis has yet to rule on their motion for dismissal.

    This is not a good sign.

    AZ Bob (6f1e2b)

  9. I think the Judge took the motion under advisement to give himself the time necessary to write a memorable opinion excoriating the plaintiff.

    Well, I hope that’s what he is doing.

    Mike (db21a0)

  10. _______________________________________________

    I can only think of one lawsuit more frivolous than this in recent memory.

    I bet a percentage of liberals, including those sitting on the bench, will scrutinize this case, pause, scratch their head, pause again, mull things over, feel pangs of do-gooderism tugging at their heartstrings, and — at best — remark, “well, on second thought, it is somewhat ridiculous,” or — at worse — proclaim, “the guy deserves our sympathy. The court system should happily accommodate him!”

    Mark (411533)

  11. My question is, who is the lawyer who helped file that suit?

    — Kman

    Icy (1c8316)

  12. My question is, who is the lawyer who helped file that suit?

    That was epwj’s impersonation of kmart.

    JD (318f81)

  13. Maybe Dimmick should have been more specific about from whom he was to be hidden.

    Karl (9bf4af)

  14. I think I may give this complaint to my business law students as a final exam …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  15. he looks so familiar I think he has a very generic moron face

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  16. Not a familiar resemblance, happyfeet?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  17. no not really but I was adopted

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  18. He’s not dead so you can’t give him a Darwin Award.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  19. He’s aptly named.

    Cynic (3e4c20)

  20. Is h is last name spelled “Dimmick” or, perchance and more correctly “Dimwit”?

    Comanche Voter (0e06a9)

  21. Sure, it looks simple to you guys, but a “good” defense lawyer could easily generate 10 billable hours, at $350.00/hour, just “researching” all the possible defenses. And that’s not including the coverage demand/action under the homeowners policy.

    nk (cd8f6b)

  22. DRJ,

    OT

    I finally got a valid email and signed in with it in this comment. It’s also at my profile at my blog. I lost yours, and all my other contacts, when my previous email account was hacked.

    nk (cd8f6b)

  23. “I lost yours, and all my other contacts, when my previous email account was hacked.”

    nk – Same thing happened to Anthony Weiner. Have not seen your photos yet, though.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  24. Is that guy in the jumpsuit EricPW?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  25. Perhaps he can discuss legal strategy with his future cellmate, the Silky Pony.

    Icy (4c3508)

  26. Here you go, daleyrocks. Second row, third from the right. SFW in most countries. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BPfMsBhpr6o/SyzHXhciX9I/AAAAAAAAAXY/qL3Cm5TKp8w/s1600-h/schoolplay2.jpg

    nk (cd8f6b)

  27. Rocket Surgeon.

    mojo (8096f2)

  28. There was a Judge Judy like this, on a lower scale. Two guys accost an acquaintance with a fake gun, get him in their car, then tell him they are taking him into the woods with the implication they are going to kill him.

    Acquaintance begs for his life for a while until – ha ha! the gun is fake and we’re not really going to kill you. They pull the car over at acquaintance’s behest, the cops get called and acquaintance angrily puts a couple of small dents in the kidnappers’ car (and I think he breaks some other small piece of property.) Kidnapper – who is not prosecuted – sues.

    It did not go well for him.

    Editorial comment: The idea that liberals would think this is a meritorious lawsuit is false. I think this sort of broad-brush, good-vs.-evil painting of The Other Side is unproductive tribalism.

    –JRM

    JRM (cd0a37)

  29. Editorial comment: The idea that liberals would think this is a meritorious lawsuit is false. I think this sort of broad-brush, good-vs.-evil painting of The Other Side is unproductive tribalism.

    I agree. However, I think it is a valid point that Democrats tend to oppose reforms that would make it easier to toss and punish frivolous suits like this.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  30. Pat

    Volumes could be written on this attempt by liberals to circumvent the pursuit of happiness by allowing prisoners to for years conduct scams from prison and actually in the case of Louisiana – sue in case of non-payment for nominal services.

    EricPWJohnson (d84fb0)

  31. I’m not convinced he exits. He’s 25 and doesn’t have a facebook account.

    koam @wittier (3156c4)

  32. By the way, Patterico, do you support some of the commentary by our friend EPWJ?

    I’m just asking. He is accusing people of many things here, and when called on it, runs away.

    How is that not trollish?

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  33. I’m more concerned about his actions toward elissa, not his calling Herman Cain a sexual predator. Or even when he accused me of calling him a terrorist.

    I think he is just a silly troll. But others may differ.

    I do think he is stinking up the joint. But that is my opinion only.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  34. Eric so a guy weakened by Chemotherapy had the stamina to have an affair?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  35. And if the accusations are true than Mr.Cain has bad taste in women.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  36. My first recollection of this type of abuse (or outright rape) of the legal process, was the burglar who fell through a hole he cut into the roof of a market/dept. store, suffering severe injury when he landed some 20 feet below, and then proceeded to sue the store and collected.
    Judges who allow these types of suit to proceed beyond a preliminary hearing, where they should be literally laughed out of court, should be forced to resign, and be disbarred.

    AD-RtR/OS! (45946a)

  37. Well, consider this some very constructive criticism of Patrick’s post.

    You can read alot more about it, here: http://cjonline.com/news/2011-11-28/dimmick-sues-couple-he-kidnapped#.TtZmFvQg_UB

    The cheetos bit is hilarious, imho.

    But one fact to stress is that this guy has already been convicted of the kidnapping. So the court can take that kidnapping into consideration as a fact, not just as an allegation by the defendants. i think that should have been stressed in the post to make things clear to us lawyer types, because i wondered about that myself. that is important because if there was a dispute about the facts, then sadly this idiot case would go to at least discovery, if not a full blown trial. but on the other hand, because he has been found guilty of kidnapping them, this might give the judge enough room to knock it down.

    The deeper problem, i think, is we need to do something about prison legal reform. i think we need to put severe limitations on the ability of a criminal to sue. I know that is a tough step to take but anyone looking through lexis or discussing these things with prison guards knows what a complete pain in the hiney these “jailhouse lawyers” can be.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  38. Annoyinglittenazi-Your sheeple mind defends Herman Cain because your personality cult mind allows it.

    Project much?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  39. This case reminds me of the $100k settlement for a motorized bike rider on an icy trail. As for Patterico’s post, Aaron, bloggers and commenters have different styles. All of the information you want is accessible in his link, or a link at his link, and IMO shorter posts encourage more discussion as readers explore the facts and discuss the topic.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  40. Also, I think Patterico’s main point has more to do with Kimberlin than with Dimmick.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  41. DRJ

    well, you’re right about people having different styles and he can do his own thing. its his blog, not mine, after all. and you are right that patrick seems to be stalking greater prey right now, but i am not sure it is kimberlin.

    btw, am i the only person amused that this perp’s last name has the word “dim” in it?

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  42. Stipulate for a moment that there was no kidnapping, no hostage taking, no home invasion, no duress.

    Can a person enter a contract with a couple to “not tell the police” something that the person did?

    koam @wittier (3156c4)

  43. koam:

    Can a person enter a contract with a couple to “not tell the police” something that the person did?

    You can enter into that agreement but it’s probably not enforceable. In general, contract law provides that agreements that violate law or public policy are void or voidable. Agreeing not to report a crime may be against the law in some jurisdictions and it could also be a crime (conspiracy, obstruction, hindering, etc.). Such agreements would also be against public policy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  44. There are several other reasons why this contract might be unenforceable listed in the link at #44. That’s probably why SPQR said it would be a good test for his students. I think it would be a good test question, too.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  45. It will be interesting to see what happens to this and how much this couple ends up having to pay a lawyer to yell “BS”!!

    I know many of you out there are good lawyers who fight to make the legal system work as well as possible…

    but

    I have a friend who is still dealing with a SLAPP suit, essentially accusing her of claiming things that were public knowledge (including in the plaintiff’s own publications) and after having tampered with evidence (as in made up documents and back-dated letters never sent).

    Having “one’s day in court guaranteed” is a great thing, but when it is BS it should not be allowed to put someone else in distress to defend against it.

    MD in Philly (83d172)

  46. DRJ

    > I think it would be a good test question, too.

    Well, only if you add about 15 other criminal acts and civil torts to it. at least that is what is necessary on my law school exams.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  47. I wonder where Professor Obama would come down on this one? Of course the perp is white so that might complicate his usual proclivity.

    kansas (be7e69)

  48. Pat,

    I hope you will follow-up on this one once the judge makes his decision.

    Bill M (883e2f)

  49. Well, only if you add about 15 other criminal acts and civil torts to it. at least that is what is necessary on my law school exams.

    Our tests focused on identifying the relevant facts, stating the applicable laws and potential claims, applying the law to the claims, and reaching a conclusion with reasons for that conclusion. Thus, if this were a test question, students would be expected to analyze the facts in light of all the elements and requirements of successful contract formation, as well as any defenses and exceptions. A competent answer would require a the ability to grasp detail and identify all applicable laws, along with the ability to reach a conclusion supported by reason and facts.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  50. I hope you will follow-up on this one once the judge makes his decision.

    Funny you should ask that.

    Following up on frivolous lawsuits once the judge has made his decision is what I do best!

    Patterico (f724ca)

  51. Also, I think Patterico’s main point has more to do with Kimberlin than with Dimmick.

    DRJ is very good at discerning what my main point is in a post. First she nailed the proper take on the Weird Al post. Now this.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  52. test
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    peedoffamerican (ee1de0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7877 secs.