(Please note that there is no, "May" or "Can" in § 776.032(c); the statute specifically says: "The Court '*Shall*' award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1)."
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>wrote: > No speculation here Plain Ol;, it's Florida Law: > > > http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:22 PM, plainolamerican < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> they will be footing Zimmerman's legal fees and bills. >> --- >> speculation noted. >> >> the ACLU is often involved in litigation against governmental bodies, >> which are generally protected from adverse monetary judgments; a town, >> state or federal agency may be required to change its laws or behave >> differently, but not to pay monetary damages except by an explicit >> statutory waiver. In some cases, the law permits plaintiffs who >> successfully sue government agencies to collect money damages or other >> monetary relief. In particular, the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award >> Act of >> 1976<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Attorney%27s_Fees_Award_Act_of_1976>leaves >> the government liable in some civil rights cases. Fee awards under >> this civil rights statute are considered "equitable relief" rather than >> damages, and government entities are not immune from equitable relief.[22 >> ]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-22>Under >> laws such as this, the ACLU and its state affiliates sometimes share >> in monetary judgments against government agencies. In 2006, the Public >> Expressions of Religion Protection >> Act<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veterans%27_Memorials,_Boy_Scouts,_Public_Seals,_and_Other_Public_Expressions_of_Religion_Protection_Act_of_2006>sought >> to prevent monetary judgments in the particular case of violations >> of church-state >> separation.[23]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-23> >> >> The ACLU has received court awarded fees from opponents, for example, the >> Georgia affiliate was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county >> demanding the removal of a Ten >> Commandments<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments>display from its >> courthouse; >> [24]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-24>a >> second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to >> a $74,462 >> judgment.[25]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-25>The >> State >> of Tennessee <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Tennessee> was >> required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of >> Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments >> cases.[26]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-26> >> [27]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union#cite_note-27> >> >> On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 12:59:31 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote: >> >>> As the fact finder, the jury in a civil trial would be determining >>> whether there was in fact "justifiable use of force". I don't think the >>> Martin's will sue, because if they lose, under Florida law, they will be >>> footing Zimmerman's legal fees and bills. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, plainolamerican >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> http://winewomenpolitics.**blogspot.com/2013/07/crying-** >>>> again-he-did-not-get-his-way.**html<http://winewomenpolitics.blogspot.com/2013/07/crying-again-he-did-not-get-his-way.html> >>>> >>>> On Monday, July 15, 2013 2:39:51 PM UTC-5, Travis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> *When the defense of liberty becomes a crime, tyranny is already in >>>>> force. At that point, failure to defend liberty makes slavery a certainty. >>>>> * **** >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> Lots of talk of **civil suits* related to the Zimmerman case. >>>>> So, thanks to Steve for sending in this information that shuts that >>>>> avenue down. >>>>> I only see one problem in all of this - The present *court* system >>>>> ignores most all laws that don't agree with their agenda. And they have >>>>> been all too willing to MAKE UP THE LAW they want to use. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.leg.state.fl.us/**sta**tutes/index.cfm?App_mode=**Displ** >>>>> ay_Statute&Search_String=**&URL=**0700-0799/0776/Sections/**0776.** >>>>> 032.html<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html> >>>>> **** >>>>> The 2012 Florida Statutes**** >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> *Title XLVI >>>>> <http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Index&Title_Request=XLVI#TitleXLVI> >>>>> *CRIMES >>>>> *Chapter >>>>> 776<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776ContentsIndex.html> >>>>> *JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE >>>>> *View Entire >>>>> Chapter<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html> >>>>> ***** >>>>> >>>>> 776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for >>>>> justifiable use of force. >>>>> (1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. >>>>> 776.012<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html>, >>>>> s. >>>>> 776.013<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html>, >>>>> or s. >>>>> 776.031<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.031.html>is >>>>> justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution >>>>> and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom >>>>> force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. >>>>> 943.10<http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0900-0999/0943/Sections/0943.10.html>(14), >>>>> who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the >>>>> officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable >>>>> law >>>>> or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the >>>>> person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term >>>>> “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and >>>>> charging or prosecuting the defendant. >>>>> (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for >>>>> investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the >>>>> agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that >>>>> there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful. >>>>> (3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, >>>>> compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the >>>>> defendant >>>>> in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds >>>>> that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection >>>>> (1). >>>>> History. s. 4, ch. 2005-27.**** >>>>> >>>>> **** >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> __._, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> __,_._,___ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> -- >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> For options & help see >>>> http://groups.google.com/**group/PoliticalForum<http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum> >>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to politicalforu...@**googlegroups.com. >>>> >>>> For more options, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "PoliticalForum" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
