English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

parole officers immunity in state civil cases where negligence on their part caused a death

2007-03-07 13:59:21 · 2 answers · asked by Elizabeth M 1 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

2 answers

If you are seriously looking for precedence regarding civil liability of parole officers and whether they are immune from such action, you need a lawyer. Not Yahoo.

If you do not have the money, I would suggest that you contact one of the law schools in your area and ask if they have a clinical program to assist you pro bono (for free).

They can either directly help you with your case, or in the worst case, direct you to the state office which has department of corrections oversight.

In the alternative, make an appointment with an attorney in your area who specializes in federal actions against the government. Since you are already on the internet, they are not hard to find.

Since I am a prosecutor, please don't limit your options to my suggestions (as you may want to sue me in the future).

I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit of justice in the tragedy you suffered.

2007-03-07 17:53:41 · answer #1 · answered by snowdrift 3 · 1 0

The federal courtroom did no longer intervene with the state rules on prop 8. under the California shape, the final public can no longer legally get rid of the rights of a minority. on account that same intercourse marriage replaced into criminal whilst 8 replaced into voted on, it is precisely what they did. it may never have long previous to federal courtroom. It replaced into unlawful under constitutional regulation. The ideally suited courtroom did no longer rule on the state regulation, they only stated the persons who have been bringing the extra healthful don't have the the main suitable option to hold that extra healthful, in basic terms the government ought to help that extra healthful and that they chosen to no longer as quickly because it replaced into declared unconstitutional. The DOMA determination did no longer say what you think of it stated. They stated that the federal government has no foundation for discriminating against gay marriage. They did say that the feds could no longer tell states a thank you to attend to those who had gay marriage. Marriage isn't a church journey. it particularly is a central authority company with all varieties of criminal implications.

2016-11-23 14:28:40 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers