New York Litigation - Long Island - Page 3
Close

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 319
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: New York Litigation - Long Island

  1. #51
    General
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Erie
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,136

    Default

    Case is here


    I think this is the one being talked about...


    http://www.dark-storm.com/images/lif...einvNassau.pdf

  2. #52
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Easton, PA
    Posts
    155

    Default

    An update on Weinstein v. County of Nassau. Today after almost a year since his guns were confiscated and after suit was filed and Summons and Complaint served on the defendants, suddenly they completed their "investigation" and returned his pistol permit and handguns to him and indicate that the long guns will follow shortly. This will not end the case because the firearms should have never been taken to begin with, and if taken there should have been an immediate hearing to prove the confiscation was justified. Just because the thief returned the stolen property after he was caught does not mean there was no theft. The same also applies to the theft of constitutional rights.

  3. #53
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    troy
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Congratulations on getting his guns back. Thank you for fighting the good fight.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    NYFireArms.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #54
    Major Different Drummer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Somewhere on the edge
    Posts
    2,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    An update on Weinstein v. County of Nassau. Today after almost a year since his guns were confiscated and after suit was filed and Summons and Complaint served on the defendants, suddenly they completed their "investigation" and returned his pistol permit and handguns to him and indicate that the long guns will follow shortly. This will not end the case because the firearms should have never been taken to begin with, and if taken there should have been an immediate hearing to prove the confiscation was justified. Just because the thief returned the stolen property after he was caught does not mean there was no theft. The same also applies to the theft of constitutional rights.
    They probably think you will go away now, thus allowing this practice to continue with others.
    I hope your client can afford to stay the course.
    Thank you for fighting this issue.
    I'm the guy who could catch VD from a virgin.

    "If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away " Thoreau

  6. #55
    Colonel
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    3,068

    Default

    Nassau County deserves a good kick in the nuts for this. I hope you prevail. Good luck.

  7. #56
    Colonel Jmo371's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Skaneateles(Mottville)
    Posts
    2,531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    An update on Weinstein v. County of Nassau. Today after almost a year since his guns were confiscated and after suit was filed and Summons and Complaint served on the defendants, suddenly they completed their "investigation" and returned his pistol permit and handguns to him and indicate that the long guns will follow shortly. This will not end the case because the firearms should have never been taken to begin with, and if taken there should have been an immediate hearing to prove the confiscation was justified. Just because the thief returned the stolen property after he was caught does not mean there was no theft. The same also applies to the theft of constitutional rights.

    Congrats on the guns being returned...good luck with the pending suit!

  8. #57
    RTB
    RTB is offline
    Sergeant RTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    318

    Default

    Nassau County is facing a $71.6 million deficit by year's end. They better change their policy on unconstitutionally confiscating firearms or they will further go into debt.

  9. #58
    Major John Stark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Central NY
    Posts
    1,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    An update on Weinstein v. County of Nassau. Today after almost a year since his guns were confiscated and after suit was filed and Summons and Complaint served on the defendants, suddenly they completed their "investigation" and returned his pistol permit and handguns to him and indicate that the long guns will follow shortly. This will not end the case because the firearms should have never been taken to begin with, and if taken there should have been an immediate hearing to prove the confiscation was justified. Just because the thief returned the stolen property after he was caught does not mean there was no theft. The same also applies to the theft of constitutional rights.
    Very good news for Mr. Weinstein. Congratulations on making some progress with this case.

    If only we had a NY or Federal attorney general worth a damn, there would be follow up civil rights violation charges against the government jackboots that carried out this egregious miscarriage of justice.

    Thank you for posting this good news.
    "My soul is among lions; I must lie among those who breathe forth fire, even the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows and their tongue a sharp sword." Psalm 57:4

    "Live free or die. Death is not the worst of evils." -Major General John Stark

  10. #59
    Captain Rethin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Otsego
    Posts
    644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    An update on Weinstein v. County of Nassau. Today after almost a year since his guns were confiscated and after suit was filed and Summons and Complaint served on the defendants, suddenly they completed their "investigation" and returned his pistol permit and handguns to him and indicate that the long guns will follow shortly. This will not end the case because the firearms should have never been taken to begin with, and if taken there should have been an immediate hearing to prove the confiscation was justified. Just because the thief returned the stolen property after he was caught does not mean there was no theft. The same also applies to the theft of constitutional rights.
    Good for him. Sorry he had to go through so much trouble just to get his property returned.

    I'm glad to hear you are continuing the litigation. This law is grossly unconstitutional. I can't understand how they think they can get away with this.

  11. #60
    Colonel
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    3,999

    Default

    Now sue in State court too. He is a domestic violence "victim" as his rights under state law where also violated as a protected class

  12. #61
    Colonel JosERW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Nassau County
    Posts
    3,291

    Default

    You should attack the legality of the entire permitting system that allowed this to happen in the first place.
    * NRA ENDOWMENT LIFE * GOA LIFE * SAF LIFE * NYSRPA * SCOPE LIFE *

    Without a doubt NY is the most corrupt state in the country. We live in a cesspool. Unfortunately I think the only way to regain your freedom is to move out of this progressive hell hole. FUAC. FUNY.

  13. #62
    Private
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NASSAU
    Posts
    4

    Default

    This is the reason I joined NYF.

  14. #63
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Easton, PA
    Posts
    155

    Default

    A brief update, on February 11, their last day to respond, defendants filed their answer to the suit. Generally a denial of everything and other bs defenses. This was a surprise as I expected them to file the usual massive Motion to Dismiss attacking the pleadings. Such usually delays the case for months. The only reason I believe they did this was to avoid placing the constitutionality of Art. 400 in issue. There are things we can do to force the issue but I'm not getting into that online here.

    The first court appearance is before:

    Magistrate Judge Tomlinson
    March 11, 2015 at 3:30pm
    Courtroom 910
    United States Federal Courthouse
    100 Federal Plaza
    Central Islip, New York

    This is the Initial Conference which is generally for scheduling and setting the parameters of discovery. However, Judge Tomlinson usually request the lawyers to summarize their claims and defenses. This is where it might get interesting as the first opportunity to hear how the County will try to justify their actions. The hearing is open to the public. If you are in the area and have time you are invited to attend, but be mindful of going through security at the Courthouse. Like getting on the plane except they will take your cell phone. So leave it in the car.

  15. #64
    Colonel spat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Geneseo, ny
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmac00 View Post
    ya, what Im thinking is we have had other attorney's come on here and brag they were going to do all these wonderful things.........crickets, thats all I hear now is crickets

    when anyone sees some action, wake me up
    It's not the fault of the attorneys on our side that our legal system works at a snails pace when we are trying to defend our rights any more than it is their fault when cuomo et al can abuse them in the blink of an eye.
    We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
    Albert Einstein

  16. #65
    General jmac00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New Yorkistan: where freedom is a foreign word
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spat View Post
    It's not the fault of the attorneys on our side that our legal system works at a snails pace when we are trying to defend our rights any more than it is their fault when cuomo et al can abuse them in the blink of an eye.
    the point is, we have had attorney's come here and make a big ruckus that they were going to do great things for the citizens of NYS. They brag they are doing this pro-bono....blah,blah,blah....and they disappear? One i understand had family issues, I get that. But others came here and rattled their sabers and now they stopped communicating altogether. and I understand part of that to, don't give away your strategy. I would rather an attorney just stop bragging and just get to work.
    Stay low, Go fast
    kill first, die last
    One shot, one kill
    No Luck, all skill



  17. #66
    Captain Blackhorse15A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Dutchess Cty, NY
    Posts
    605

    Default

    The county's answer is in the dropbox at:
    http://nys-safeact.net/archived-casesfeedsfiles.html?m

    Summary: county denies knowledge of everything, and denies every allegation.
    Not only does Nasau county deny knowledge sufficient to form a belief on the truthfullness of whether or not certain defendendents are in fact police ofgicers in the county PD-- but apparently the county isnt even sure who the county police commissioner or chief of police are. I mean, really? I hope that just pisses the judge off.
    Hell- their pictures and names are right on the county webpage- apparentlynthe it dept knows, just not the attorny?
    http://www.police.nassaucountyny.gov...o.aspx?bioof=9

    In denying any knowledge of truth about allegations of the actual event- i wonder if the county is protecting itself and sending the other defendents up the river (the county isnt responsable- if those officers did something wrong its on them).
    Last edited by Blackhorse15A; 02-13-2015 at 11:35 PM.
    The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.

  18. #67
    Captain Rethin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Otsego
    Posts
    644

    Default

    "62. The County of Nassau, its agencies, departments and/or employees at all applicable times herein enjoyed a full, partial or qualified immunity from civil suit.
    63. The alleged acts or omissions of the County Defendants were not the proximate cause of any injuries or damages incurred by Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s decedent. Any injuries or damages incurred by Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s decedent were the result of his own actions, the actions of others and/or the superseding intervention of causes outside the control of the County Defendants."

    So the county is saying they acted within the law at all times and are immune from any civil suit.

    I don't know enough about the law to say this is either
    1. Game over
    2. Laughable

    I guess I'll have to wait to see the judges response.

  19. #68
    Major Different Drummer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Somewhere on the edge
    Posts
    2,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethin View Post
    "62. The County of Nassau, its agencies, departments and/or employees at all applicable times herein enjoyed a full, partial or qualified immunity from civil suit.
    63. The alleged acts or omissions of the County Defendants were not the proximate cause of any injuries or damages incurred by Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s decedent. Any injuries or damages incurred by Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s decedent were the result of his own actions, the actions of others and/or the superseding intervention of causes outside the control of the County Defendants."

    So the county is saying they acted within the law at all times and are immune from any civil suit.

    I don't know enough about the law to say this is either
    1. Game over
    2. Laughable

    I guess I'll have to wait to see the judges response.
    I read this to indicate the use of the well recognized tactic that has been discussed in other "laws" titled threads.
    That being, a mistake was made in regards to the arrest and seizure of the firearms. There were no damages incurred by the plaintiff as a result of the action. No damages equals no case do legal action. Carry on until the next time LEO decide to make a mistake and wrongly arrest and seize your property.
    I'm the guy who could catch VD from a virgin.

    "If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away " Thoreau

  20. #69
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Easton, PA
    Posts
    155

    Default

    They are trying to rely on the case of Stanton v. Drendal, 134 S. Ct. 187 (2013):

    [1]
    [2][3] “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” *5Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)).

    Thus they are claiming the officers are protected by their own conscience ignorance of the law, the unconstitutional policy of Nassau Co. and faulty education provided to them by Nassau County, since no politician, judges or gov't agency in NY seem to have heard of Heller or McDonald. Will not kill this case.

    They will have a problem with this since the same judge already told them that their failure to provide post deprivation judicial procedures is a violation of due process. Also Heller and McDonald are clear re the 2nd Amendment rights at least in the home.

  21. #70
    General jmac00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New Yorkistan: where freedom is a foreign word
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Different Drummer View Post
    I read this to indicate the use of the well recognized tactic that has been discussed in other "laws" titled threads.
    That being, a mistake was made in regards to the arrest and seizure of the firearms. There were no damages incurred by the plaintiff as a result of the action. No damages equals no case do legal action. Carry on until the next time LEO decide to make a mistake and wrongly arrest and seize your property.
    didn't the false arrest cause financial harm. At the very least the county should pay for the defendants attorney and court costs/fees.
    Stay low, Go fast
    kill first, die last
    One shot, one kill
    No Luck, all skill



  22. #71
    Captain Rethin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Otsego
    Posts
    644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post

    They will have a problem with this since the same judge already told them that their failure to provide post deprivation judicial procedures is a violation of due process.
    Are you referring to the Razzano case?
    Last edited by Rethin; 02-14-2015 at 03:50 PM.

  23. #72
    Corporal Savage99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Brooklyn NY and Saylorsburg PA
    Posts
    236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    They are trying to rely on the case of Stanton v. Drendal, 134 S. Ct. 187 (2013):

    [1]
    [2][3] “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” *5Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)).

    Thus they are claiming the officers are protected by their own conscience ignorance of the law, the unconstitutional policy of Nassau Co. and faulty education provided to them by Nassau County, since no politician, judges or gov't agency in NY seem to have heard of Heller or McDonald. Will not kill this case.

    They will have a problem with this since the same judge already told them that their failure to provide post deprivation judicial procedures is a violation of due process. Also Heller and McDonald are clear re the 2nd Amendment rights at least in the home.
    A few federal laws to consider:

    42 U.S. Code § 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.



    18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

    If two or more persons conspire to injure,
    oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

    They shall be fined under this title or
    imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.


    18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
    Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

    Mike

    NRA Patron Member, SAF Member

    "When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty" - Thomas Jefferson

  24. #73
    RTB
    RTB is offline
    Sergeant RTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    They are trying to rely on the case of Stanton v. Drendal, 134 S. Ct. 187 (2013):

    [1]
    [2][3] “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” *5Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)).

    Thus they are claiming the officers are protected by their own conscience ignorance of the law, the unconstitutional policy of Nassau Co. and faulty education provided to them by Nassau County, since no politician, judges or gov't agency in NY seem to have heard of Heller or McDonald. Will not kill this case.

    They will have a problem with this since the same judge already told them that their failure to provide post deprivation judicial procedures is a violation of due process. Also Heller and McDonald are clear re the 2nd Amendment rights at least in the home.
    The police officers might be indemnified but this doesn't let county or police department off the hook if their policies were illegal. Am I correct with my assumption?

  25. #74
    Colonel JosERW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Nassau County
    Posts
    3,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBean View Post
    Thus they are claiming the officers are protected by their own conscience ignorance of the law, the unconstitutional policy of Nassau Co. and faulty education provided to them by Nassau County, since no politician, judges or gov't agency in NY seem to have heard of Heller or McDonald. Will not kill this case.

    They will have a problem with this since the same judge already told them that their failure to provide post deprivation judicial procedures is a violation of due process. Also Heller and McDonald are clear re the 2nd Amendment rights at least in the home.
    Right on. The cops might be protected from civil suit, but that doesn't mean that the law itself is unconstitutional. Heller is clear, any infringement on possession in the home is unconstitutional, ie: permit to possess.

    Thanks for the updates.
    * NRA ENDOWMENT LIFE * GOA LIFE * SAF LIFE * NYSRPA * SCOPE LIFE *

    Without a doubt NY is the most corrupt state in the country. We live in a cesspool. Unfortunately I think the only way to regain your freedom is to move out of this progressive hell hole. FUAC. FUNY.

  26. #75
    Gold Vendor DarkStorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    East Islip, NY
    Posts
    484

    Default

    Latest update on this case from the Attorney...




    Defendant has answered and plaintiff has filed a motion for preliminary injunction.




    Copies of the current set of documents...


    http://www.dark-storm.com/images/lif/WeinsteinMPI.pdf
    http://www.dark-storm.com/images/lif...einMemoMPI.pdf
    http://www.dark-storm.com/images/lif/WeinsteinCOS.pdf
    Ed
    Dark Storm Industries, LLC.
    Manufacturer of DS-15 NY SAFE Rifles
    www.dark-storm.com

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. hello from long island.
    By 40ozOf45 in forum Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-16-2014, 11:33 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-14-2013, 02:10 PM
  3. Hello from Long Island
    By golfmech in forum Introductions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-29-2013, 04:14 PM
  4. New guy from long Island
    By dsr racer in forum Introductions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-01-2013, 10:26 AM
  5. Long Island Says Hello
    By 45guru in forum Introductions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-13-2013, 05:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •