Can I sue everyone individually or as a group?

[Eekamouse]

You got robbed. Terrible but hardly devastating. Even if you were able to sue the individuals that did it and win, good luck getting them to pay you a penny. If they had pennies, they wouldn't have robbed you. Can't get blood out of a turnip.

 

[quincy]

I think they took a deal with the DA to get out of jail free. I never saw any money from it. In fact, police have ignored my FOIA request on more information on the incident. ...

People can be arrested but released from police custody pending charges or sentencing.

Although police reports can be accessed with a public records request, there are times when access by a government agency will be denied. One such time is when an investigation is ongoing. It is possible that the miscreants who tore up your home are still being investigated. Two links with additional information on open government records in Utah:

https://archives.utah.gov/opengovernment/What-Does-GRAMA-say-about-Police-Reports.pdf

https://secured.utah.gov/ut-archives/Forms/Page/ut-archives/orp/0

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

Of course. Far worse than rape, murder, kidnapping, treason, insurrection...

What insurrection are you referring to? The American revolution against England? So business should be victim of flash mob and theft of they hard-earned money because its not the other things you are saying? We live in a country where cops literally arrest people over things like loitering, J-walking, no seat belt, giving them the middle finger and will shoot at people who are handcuffed in a police car because a squirrel dropped an acorn on the roof of the car and startled. Perhaps shoot is an understatement, more like unload multiple clips with multiple cops from different angles.

So this mob theft is justified in your eyes as some kind of welfare program? The founders of this country were very concern with property rights being trampled on.

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

You cannot sue twice, once now under the $15,000 small claims limit and again in 2025 under the $20,000 small claims limit.

The time and effort you spent in cleaning up the mess left behind is not compensable. If you had to spend extra money for cleaning supplies or had to hire someone to clean up the mess for you, those expenses could/would be compensable (you should have invoices or receipts to support the expenditure). You did report the vandalism to your homeowners insurer to cover some of your losses, correct?

A claim for pain and suffering/emotional distress must be supported by evidence. Have you seen a mental health professional? Do you have bills for counseling and prescriptions? Do you have records of missed work?

Here is a link to Utah’s definition of emotional distress and the elements required for an action to be successful: https://legacy.utcourts.gov/utc/muj...ress-Jury-Instructions-CV-1501-1506-Final.pdf

If you have evidence to support $20,000 or more in damages, I recommend you speak to an attorney in your area to go over your legal options.

I don't indent to sue twice but I am asking if I can sue for $20,000 now even know the limit is $15,000. These cases usually take a lot longer than expected before they are concluded. If it last until 2025, then in 2025, it will be allowed to be awarded. Alternatively, I could sue for $15,000 now then amendment the lawsuit to be $20,000 in 2025?

As far as emotional distress, did the people who sued Alex Jones have medical and psychologist records to show they had 1.5 billion in emotional distress, or was it just assumed without evidence to be true? I'm not sure the judge followed the law in that case, and it seems like a purely political attack because I can't see any case where someone has been awarded 1.5 billion on floating a conspiracy theory they had no involvement in.

I think its self-evident that if your home or business was broken into, there would be emotional distress but I don't think you are required to seek treatment for it. It violates religious tenants, especially to people who are Scientologist who believe psychologist to be a bunch of money grubbing quacks. I think a reasonable person could make a conclusion, for example, that someone breaking into their home in the dead of night or someone facing down the barrel of a gun would have emotional distress.

Has it been established that emotional distress can only be claim if a psychologist claims it so or can a judge/jury be allowed to make that determination based on the reasonable person standard? What about the loss of " Good will" from customers who have had their cars broken into while visiting the establishment?

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

Not just you. Inanimate objects are replaceable. Living things aren’t.

Right, but if someone works for 10 years to save up to buy something, and then it's stolen from him. You effectively stole 10 years of that man's life. That is not cool either. Just like if you wrongfully imprison someone for 10 years, which has happened to people also.

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

When I was a kid, we had a dog poisoned. I consider that more heinous. Might just be me...

Who poisoned your dog and did you ever go after the person who did it in court?

It's not a contest who see which act is more heinous.

By the way, heinous just means wicked.

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

To expand on this just a bit. If you win against them all, then you can collect against any or all of them, up the amount of the judgment. So, for example, if 10 guys don't have two nickels to rub together, but the 11th guy has tons of money, you go after the guy with tons of money.
Or, if 9 have no money and two do, you go after the two that do.
Etc.

How do I find which one of them has the most money? Is there a tool or database which shows this kind of information, or just like stalk them on social media to look for assets they have?

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

Unless the individuals can be identified as committing separate specific crimes (e.g., one was responsible for spray paint vandalism, another for theft), separate actions make little sense. The damages that can be collected cannot be inflated artificially by filing the same suit several times seeking the same damages against several different defendants.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title78A/Chapter8/C78A-8_1800010118000101.pdf

Where do you read that everyone has to be sued as a group and not individually?

If a flash mob were to ransack your store, would you have to sue every person as a group? Sort of like a reverse class action?

Flash mob for example is where a bunch of people decided they will all hit the exact same business at a exact day and time as to overwhelm a store in effort to stop shoplifting. So you might have like 100 people show up at some store on an exact time and date and everyone start stealing everything they can all at once.

 

[JimmyJohnsSubs]

You got robbed. Terrible but hardly devastating. Even if you were able to sue the individuals that did it and win, good luck getting them to pay you a penny. If they had pennies, they wouldn't have robbed you. Can't get blood out of a turnip.

In California where they have basically legalized shoplifting, there is beloved an In-and-out burger which had to be closed down, same for a Denny, Walmart, CVS and many other stores. These are big companies, I am just a single person so these things hurt me a lot more than they hurt a big company.

Secondly, these are not starving children stealing a loaf of bread to survive, but rather young adults looking for a thrill. There are many valley girl types who find this kind of thing fun and exciting, not out of necessary. There was even a female cop who, when they were off duty, would go in and sticker switch at multiple target stores. (a form of retail theft). There were a local woman who was caught shoplifting who was the wife of a millionaire and certainly not need it. I have seen, there was even a judge who was caught shoplifting at Walmart by using those self-checkout lanes. So a wife of a millionaire, a judge and a woman police officer are not people could not pay a judgment or are shoplifting to survive. We are supposed to be a country of laws and property rights.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I don't indent to sue twice but I am asking if I can sue for $20,000 now even know the limit is $15,000. These cases usually take a lot longer than expected before they are concluded. If it last until 2025, then in 2025, it will be allowed to be awarded. Alternatively, I could sue for $15,000 now then amendment the lawsuit to be $20,000 in 2025?

As I read the statute, the limitation increases are based on the date on which the small claims court action is filed. But the statute is not crystal clear; it could mean that the act that gave rise to the claim had occur within the time period stated. That's something the courts will have to sort out. But what is clear is that nothing in it suggests you may amend the complaint after filing it to seek more damageswhen the limit goes up. I don't know the pace of small claims court in your state, but in my state a small claims action filed today would be concluded well before the end of the year. Part of the purpose of small claims court is to provide a fairly quick and relatively inexpensive way to resolve disputes that involve relatively small amounts of damages — claims in which litigation in higher level courts may end up costing the plaintiff more in attorney's fees and costs than the plaintiff would win.

Emotional distress damages in most states are extremely hard to win when the act complained of only resulted in a loss of money or property, or damage to property. Emotional distress damages are much more common in personal injury cases. So while you may make that claim, don't peg real high hopes of the judge actually awarding you much, if anything, for emotional distress.

 

[quincy]

I don't indent to sue twice but I am asking if I can sue for $20,000 now even know the limit is $15,000. These cases usually take a lot longer than expected before they are concluded. If it last until 2025, then in 2025, it will be allowed to be awarded. Alternatively, I could sue for $15,000 now then amendment the lawsuit to be $20,000 in 2025?

As far as emotional distress, did the people who sued Alex Jones have medical and psychologist records to show they had 1.5 billion in emotional distress, or was it just assumed without evidence to be true? I'm not sure the judge followed the law in that case, and it seems like a purely political attack because I can't see any case where someone has been awarded 1.5 billion on floating a conspiracy theory they had no involvement in.

I think its self-evident that if your home or business was broken into, there would be emotional distress but I don't think you are required to seek treatment for it. It violates religious tenants, especially to people who are Scientologist who believe psychologist to be a bunch of money grubbing quacks. I think a reasonable person could make a conclusion, for example, that someone breaking into their home in the dead of night or someone facing down the barrel of a gun would have emotional distress.

Has it been established that emotional distress can only be claim if a psychologist claims it so or can a judge/jury be allowed to make that determination based on the reasonable person standard? What about the loss of " Good will" from customers who have had their cars broken into while visiting the establishment?

You can sue for $20,000 now - but not in small claims. The limit is $15,000 until 2025.

Please do not compare the theft and vandalism of your house to other cases that have absolutely nothing to do with theft and vandalism. You can be distressed over the theft and vandalism that occurred at your house - and that would be understandable - but, based on what you have said, you cannot support an emotional distress claim, which has elements that your particular described situation lack.

Speak to an attorney in your area. The attorney you see can tell you what your realistic options are.