• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Lawsuit filed for illegal open carry stop of forum member RCall

Brian D.

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
914
Location
Cincy area, Ohio, USA
When this was all fresh in our collective minds a big ol' OC walk through town would have been easy* for us to organize and carry out. Now I'm no sure there would be much point in doing one, sad to say.

*Relatively speaking of course, it ain't usually that easy to get a good turnout, some folks are too afraid of something going sideways. Funny thing is, when you get a group up into the triple digits, the police pretty much just watch through binoculars and have very little to no direct contact with the participants.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,903
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
When this was all fresh in our collective minds a big ol' OC walk through town would have been easy* for us to organize and carry out. Now I'm no sure there would be much point in doing one, sad to say.

*Relatively speaking of course, it ain't usually that easy to get a good turnout, some folks are too afraid of something going sideways. Funny thing is, when you get a group up into the triple digits, the police pretty much just watch through binoculars and have very little to no direct contact with the participants.
I think if this is in fact settled and we have evidence of the same, a walk of 10 or 15 people open carrying would send a message.
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
942
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
There's not a settlement until it's filed in court. The agenda of the meeting indicates a) no responsibility is being accepted by the city, and b) no training is required.

What B.S.

On the other hand, I have full confidence that Mr. Call did the best he could considering the circumstances - that being you can't trust courts to deliver justice.
Actually; you can't depend on government to protect you from government.
 

smellslikemichigan

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,321
Location
Troy, Michigan, USA
When this was all fresh in our collective minds a big ol' OC walk through town would have been easy* for us to organize and carry out. Now I'm no sure there would be much point in doing one, sad to say.

*Relatively speaking of course, it ain't usually that easy to get a good turnout, some folks are too afraid of something going sideways. Funny thing is, when you get a group up into the triple digits, the police pretty much just watch through binoculars and have very little to no direct contact with the participants.
is the OC climate really still that bad in ohio that people fear the police messing with them during demonstrations?
 

Werz

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
301
Location
Northeast Ohio
Is there a settlement?????
View attachment 11784
There's not a settlement until it's filed in court. The agenda of the meeting indicates a) no responsibility is being accepted by the city, and b) no training is required.

What B.S.

On the other hand, I have full confidence that Mr. Call did the best he could considering the circumstances - that being you can't trust courts to deliver justice.
Courtroom drama is expensive, and it doesn't always receive the standing ovation you were expecting.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
5K, with 30% to his lawyer. The city likely spends more than that mowing the grass every year. "Nickle and dime" change to make this go away.
Losing litigates are normally responsible for all attorney fee's in a U.S.C. A. 42 section 1983 litigation. See Fee's Award Act of 1976 ( now codified as the paragraph (b) of 42 U.S.C.A. section 1988... It appears they have a loser pays rule for a host of section 1983 suits.

See Hensley v Eckerhart ( 1983)

In my opinion Mr. Call could still exercise his right to bring suit against the individual violators of his Constitutional rights.
Hopefully there is more litigation and more cash in Mr. Call's future.

My .02

Regards

CCJ
 
Last edited:

JediSkipdogg

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
139
Location
Batavia
In my opinion Mr. Call could still exercise his right to bring suit against the individual violators of his Constitutional rights.
Hopefully there is more litigation and more cash in Mr. Call's future.
How? The police officers involved were named in the initial complaint (lawsuit) therefore double jeopardy would apply and he can't go after the officers individually now as they will surely be protected as part of the settlement.
 

MyWifeSaidYes

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
1,028
Location
Logan, OH
is the OC climate really still that bad in ohio that people fear the police messing with them during demonstrations?
I depends on the city. More frequent harassment in the northeastern quadrant of the state (Cleveland, Canton, Akron, Youngstown).

Here is a video from just last year in Akron: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4GMrweEmc8

The folks in Cincinnati FINALLY got that city to repeal their illegal firearms laws (having a new mayor helped...a lot), so cities in southwestern Ohio should start following suit. Having the Riverside settlement can only reinforce that idea.

The REAL question is: "Will this settlement enable RCall to have an open carry pizza party for his supporters?" :rolleyes:

I would suggest Fat Boyz in Troy, but I don't know if they are still in business.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
How? The police officers involved were named in the initial complaint (lawsuit) therefore double jeopardy would apply and he can't go after the officers individually now as they will surely be protected as part of the settlement.
Hi Jediskipdogg- Good question. I ll try to answer it with my opinion.
First the term " double jeopardy" applies to criminal cases, not civil.
The civil case doctrines you are thinking of are Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel.
I do not think that either Res Judicata or Collateral Estoppel would apply in this NON litigated case. That is the catch, the case was actually NOT litigated, it was a pre trial settlement, therefore the two doctrines would not apply, also a good attorney would reword the complaint and change the claim preclusion along with the very important "issue" preclusion. In my opinion the State would hear the case with the new claim and issue preclusion based on the merits. Tort claims are some what easier to argue then section 1983 claims. I will follow up with some case law to support my opinion tomorrow, its been a long day.
My.02
Regards
CCJ
 

Werz

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
301
Location
Northeast Ohio
How? The police officers involved were named in the initial complaint (lawsuit) therefore double jeopardy would apply and he can't go after the officers individually now as they will surely be protected as part of the settlement.
Not Double Jeopardy. Res judicata. A settlement agreement, executed by all the parties, specifying that it is in settlement of all issues between the parties, and coupled with a dismissal with prejudice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2), should accomplish that.
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,903
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Not Double Jeopardy. Res judicata. A settlement agreement, executed by all the parties, specifying that it is in settlement of all issues between the parties, and coupled with a dismissal with prejudice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2), should accomplish that.
Like most out of court settlements, this suit, more than likely, will be dismissed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
 

Brian D.

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
914
Location
Cincy area, Ohio, USA
is the OC climate really still that bad in ohio that people fear the police messing with them during demonstrations?
Let's just say that as someone who's been taking part in these shindigs for years, I am often a bit disappointed in the overall numbers we get. And I'm fairly certain that one reason for some folks is fear of arrest, unwise and unlawful as that action would be. To me that would go beyond the pale and open up the authorities to collective punitive action from ALL the gun rights folks present and arrested/detained/whatever. Not everybody else reads the tea leaves same as me, however.

I recall one time at the Statehouse, our Ohio Attorney General showed up to observe and actually seemed to enjoy what we were doing, even though he was a Democrat and not pro gun in his leanings. Couldn't help but chat him up and even thank him for being on the correct side of the issue at hand that day.

Another attendee, new to these open carry events, saw mounted police down the street and worriedly asked if it were possible for things to go sideways. I smiled and jokingly pointed to the AG while telling the other OC'er that I wasn't concerned since we had such a great hostage standing right there.
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,015
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Settlement reached

- Roy Call was paid $25,000

- City only had to pay $5,000, insurance paid the rest (http://tinyurl.com/n4w8wzl)

- Confidentiality agreement is part of the settlement

- As part of settlement, Riverside will establish a policy or policies concerning the rights secured by the Second Amendment, Section 4 of Ohio Constitution, and ORC 9.68

- Sgt. Harold Jones, who lied repeatedly in his police report, gets to keep his job (more on this later)

http://tinyurl.com/koaxn3q
 

BluesStringer

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
30
Location
Madison, AL
- Roy Call was paid $25,000

- City only had to pay $5,000, insurance paid the rest (http://tinyurl.com/n4w8wzl)

- Confidentiality agreement is part of the settlement

- As part of settlement, Riverside will establish a policy or policies concerning the rights secured by the Second Amendment, Section 4 of Ohio Constitution, and ORC 9.68

- Sgt. Harold Jones, who lied repeatedly in his police report, gets to keep his job (more on this later)

http://tinyurl.com/koaxn3q
Thanks for all the really good information you and others have provided about Mr. Call's case, BB62. I'm not an Ohioan, but caught wind of this case because of the unusually(?) high amount of the original suit and it got cyber-"ink" at every forum I frequent. So much of the forum-speak devoted to the case was inaccurate, critical of the asking amount (I know, right? what's up with that?) or just lacking credible info from which to critically analyze the case, that I started searching for the best info I could get and found this thread and the similar one at the OFCC forum, and really appreciated being able to just watch it and see where it was going after finding these two threads.

Congrats to RCall. It may not have been a huge settlement, but you fought the good fight, Brother, and there are far too few willing to do that to a positive conclusion of any sort. Good on ya.

Blues
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,903
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Thanks for all the really good information you and others have provided about Mr. Call's case, BB62. I'm not an Ohioan, but caught wind of this case because of the unusually(?) high amount of the original suit and it got cyber-"ink" at every forum I frequent. So much of the forum-speak devoted to the case was inaccurate, critical of the asking amount (I know, right? what's up with that?) or just lacking credible info from which to critically analyze the case, that I started searching for the best info I could get and found this thread and the similar one at the OFCC forum, and really appreciated being able to just watch it and see where it was going after finding these two threads.

Congrats to RCall. It may not have been a huge settlement, but you fought the good fight, Brother, and there are far too few willing to do that to a positive conclusion of any sort. Good on ya.

Blues
I know that Roy appreciated all the support.

You must understand that the amount asked for in the original complaint is usually window dressing. And the amount asked for and what is settled for truly have no correlation.

In the grand scheme of things this was a nice settlement, dollar and cent wise.

The point of this suit was to shine the bright light on Riverside's crooked cop(s). And to force them into a training program.

Now the crooked cop Jones will have to figure out how to harass other unsuspecting citizens without getting caught.

One of the problems for Riverside is they know that Jones is a liability, not an asset.

And one last thing. The attorney Roy chose has a number of successes in gun cases. I personally believe that picking the right attorney is 80% of the fight.
 
Top