This is very helpful. I am fairly confident in the assertion that Sweetgrass Farms is the LLC that owned the farm, including the rental house where the shooting took place, and the barn at which Ruth Cox is alleged to have kept the gun used in the shooting.
When I first read the flurry of counterclaims over a year ago, I vaguely remember Sweetgrass Farms as suing Barisone, which I think struck a lot of us nonlawyers as strange at the time, since Barisone was (believed to be) a (part) owner of the LLC. So it looked like to some extent Barisone was suing himself.
I understand that when plaintiffs file civil suits, they name the big pocket players even if the big pocket player is only tangentially involved; in this case as owner of the farm. Especially if Sweetgrass Farms has a suit against Barisone personally or against his training business, I can see that the non-Barisone owners of the LLC would want to go after him for (allegedly) shooting someone on their property, or after Ruth Cox for having the weapon on their property. Did the farm sell for less than it otherwise would have, because a shooting took place there?Perhaps the basis of Kanarek’s claim against Sweetgrass is that as property owners, they were negligent in not preventing Ruth Cox from (illegally?) having a gun on the premises.
You answered the question (thanks) as to why they would ask Kanarek to provide the posts when they could obtain them possibly more reliably themselves (to check her results against theirs). I can now see better the logic of why Sweetgrass Farms would want to get these posts: to make their case that something really bad happened in their property, but that the responsible parties are Barisone and Cox, and maybe Kanarek herself, but not them. Or to make the case that as property owners, they too were damaged by the shooting.
I wish I could get the link to load! I believe it is the only televised proceeding that happened. My phone is cracked and moisture got into it-tried the rice bit. It freezes up sometimes.
It is helpful to have knowledgeable people explain the process.
It is! At first I was really hoping I wouldn’t be selected but the trial was interesting. This was a malpractice trial not a “real” criminal trial but still interesting. The Wagner/Rhoden case out of Ohio is of interest to me to as the defendants have a large horse farm. I think it is a death penalty case and I believe all or most waved their right to a speedy trial until later this year. I would hate to think of a murder case with death penalty being tried on Zoom! Maybe the “cat” lawyer could do it!
I think the information from @soloudinhere addressed this issue well - apparently in New Jersey if there is a successful indictment for a crime for which a life sentence is possible, such as attempted murder, the presumption is that the accused is detained, and the onus is on the accused to rebut that presumption.
I have not watched the clip since it was first posted, but my recollection is different from yours. As I remember it, the judge said there was sufficient evidence presented to deny release. It seemed not to be a difficult decision for the judge, but that is consistent with the statement by @soloudinhere to the effect that in NJ there is a strong presumption that in attempted murder cases the accused is not released. I vaguely remember the judge saying that there seemed to be ample evidence that Barisone was the one holding the gun when it went off. I interpret that as the judge saying there was more than enough evidence to deny release, but not prejudging the verdict in case.
Hopefully my link works! As I am NO expert in legal matters, the wording struck me as odd but perhaps the wording the judge used is normal. I wasn’t surprised he, MB was not released but again being that it was televised I thought the judge would have worded it differently. It will be interesting to get the Legal Eagles take on it!
An LLC as a corporate entity can sue one of its principals as an individual.
If you, an individual, commit a reckless or illegal act while in the course of executing business as that LLC, you can be held liable for that action and any damage it brings to the corporation.
I didn’t hear the judge do anything that seemed even close to the line of what is and is not appropriate. The judge stated the standard for deciding detention including the presumption under NJ law. The facts he’s reciting might be admitted or might be presumed purely for the sake of this hearing: maybe Barisone isn’t disputing that he shot the victim (that this is mistaken identity or something). I don’t know. Maybe he’s disputing why he did it but not that it occured. This isn’t a merits hearing (deciding whether or not Barisone committed the crime). It’s an assessment of whether, in light of the charges and the evidence to date, Barisone should be released. The judge isn’t deciding whether the jury will ultimately decide Barisone committed attempted homicide. He is asking whether there is sufficient evidence to justify release/detention without deciding the ultimate issue. He even explained that the case may not be as clear as the prosecution alleged. I would say he was pretty fair-handed.
Thank you. So it sounds like Barisone as an individual, Barisone in the guise of his training business, or Barisone as a principal of the LLC could all be sued.
It seems to me (as a non lawyer with access only to the public information) that Barisone in one of those forms probably did commit a reckless or illegal act that harmed the LLC.
I wonder if the timing of the news of the possible plea deal and the discovery demand are not coincidental. If Barisone pleads to some crime, then the LLC’s case against Barisone and its defense with respect to Kanarek are both strengthened.
Not necessarily. A guilty plea in a criminal proceeding is admissible in a civil case but the liability is not binding. The defendant would be allowed to address both why he pleaded guilty and potentially extenuating circumstances since the civil proceeding addresses compensatory damages for a civil injustice; the crime to which he admitted guilt may only be a part of those injustices.
In a similar vein, the federal rules of criminal procedure do not apply to civil proceedings and the standard for liability is different than for guilt in a criminal trial. There may be a great deal more that could be presented in a civil trial that would not be admissible in a criminal trial vis a vis why particular parties behaved as they did.
I certainly accept your point that a guilty plea would not automatically transfer to the civil case. While admitting the transfer is not automatic, a finding that Barisone pleaded guilty to a serious crime would certainly make it a lot easier, I would think, for the LLC to pursue its case that they were not primarily responsible.
When there is both a criminal and a civil case, isn’t it standard for the civil case to be sort of left pending until the criminal case is resolved? That is what I was getting at with the timing. Once there’s a development that suggests the criminal case may be resolved in 6 months, as opposed to two years, the lawyers in the civil case might wake up out of hibernation.
The FRE apply to civil trials in federal court. I think that was a typo and @soloudinhere you meant the federal rules of criminal procedure don’t apply in civil cases?
Yes, sorry, I was typing on my phone while talking to someone at the same time.
Nothing I post should be construed as legal advice.
As to the question of the civil case preceding the criminal one, that’s not by default either, but typically a judge will stay a civil proceeding that has a related criminal charge if only because it prevents the defendant from needing to invoke their 5th amendment right in proceedings relating to the civil case.
The lawyers requesting the CoTH posts for the last 6 years I just picture them around a table like…WTH is a Gold medal? Did she go to the Olympics? Then trying to understand all the acronyms and inside jokes
