Harassment Update & Questions

[StacyInCalif]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

In April/May of 2009 I tried to get a reciprocal restraining order against someone who gained one against me on fraudulent grounds. I posted a thread at that time about my request being denied because I apparently did not give enough notice for the ex parte hearing (based on erroneous information from the court clerk) and I essentially gave up, hoping eventually these people would get bored and leave me alone. No such luck.

Last Summer these folks filed a contempt charge against me claiming I was violating their restraining order by answering questions on the internet posed to me by friends of theirs, which I later found out was entirely orchestrated in an attempt at making such a claim. We've been to court numerous times with the judge continuing each hearing as a "settlement conference". Their harassment has been ongoing for more than a year now (closer to a year and a half) and every time we have been to court since December (three times now) they have failed to show up, and their lawyer doesn't even bother to show up.

My attorney has filed a motion to terminate their RO because it was gained on fraudulent grounds, and we have that hearing next week. Some very interesting (and at times VERY disturbing) things have happened within the past few weeks and months ~ such as these people getting my now-former landlord to evict us (see my thread from a couple months ago on that topic ~ now updated ~ in the Landlord/Tenant law section here), vile rumors and lies posted about me on our local Craigslist and so forth. Rumblings in the community (which is very small) based on the lies of these insane people just trying to destroy our lives.

Questions (and I am not sure where I should post this, so here goes):

I think I have a landmark libel/slander/defamation case. My attorney agrees, though I cannot afford to hire him to prosecute it. What are my chances of going it alone? Should I forget it, even though they have cost me thousands of dollars in lost business as well as untold trauma and grief? From what I understand, these types of cases are difficult to prosecute and win. Or should I try to find a lawyer who will take the case on a contingency basis (all potential defendants have money and assets, that is not at issue)?

Thanks in advance.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Rexlan]

If you have a "landmark libel/slander/defamation case" and you attorney agrees, why won't your attorney take it on a contingency basis ?????

I think you have the answer.

 

[dlw99]

What are my chances of going it alone? Should I forget it,

Answers: Slim & None - closer to none, since you have a credibility problem.
YES. You should forget it.

Concentrate on getting the RO vacated, and stop letting these people rent space in your head.

 

[StacyInCalif]

If you have a "landmark libel/slander/defamation case" and you attorney agrees, why won't your attorney take it on a contingency basis ?????

I think you have the answer.

Good attorneys generally want to be paid, and I cannot ask an outstanding attorney who has already comped a lot for my sake in this case to take on a whole other aspect without the compensation they deserve. Besides, they specialize in areas other than civil litigation.

In the meanwhile I have been pointed to some excellent legal advice and potential counsel. Not from this forum, I might add..

Answers: Slim & None - closer to none, since you have a credibility problem.
YES. You should forget it.

Concentrate on getting the RO vacated, and stop letting these people rent space in your head.

Credibility problem? LOL No, those few who have been doing the stalking and harassing have the lack of credibility. Mine is entirely intact, my reputation is stellar and I am lucky to count among my friends some very influential people in both my industry and my community. Jumping to conclusions is an interesting manner of discussion on a legal forum.

Yes, what we are doing is concentrating at the moment on the motion for termination and the likelihood of that being granted looks better each day.

And as I mentioned above, we are now getting some outstanding legal advice on how we intend to proceed. But thanks anyhow.

 

[dlw99]

Someone has had a restraining order in effect against you for over a year, and you don't think you'll have a credibility problem going after them in court?

You admit you've been to court with the plaintiffs several times, and now you want to go back - again. Don't you think that in your small community people see you, the one who is restrained from harassing other people, as the problem?

You come here to ask for legal advice, and then state that you are already receiving outstanding legal advice.

We recently obtained four restraining orders against a gang of bullys. The hearing was 2 1/12 hours. The judge ruled that the defendents were not credible, and guaranteed them that our witnesses were not lying.

Unless you have slam dunk video tape showing the harassment, these type of hearings come down to a battle of credibility. You had your chance to demonstrate your stellar reputation, and the judge didn't buy it. Like it or not, you have a credibility problem.

 

[cosine]

Someone has had a restraining order in effect against you for over a year, and you don't think you'll have a credibility problem going after them in court?

How is that relevant, especially if the RO was gained on fraudulent grounds as the OP asserts?

You admit you've been to court with the plaintiffs several times, and now you want to go back - again. Don't you think that in your small community people see you, the one who is restrained from harassing other people, as the problem?

Ever heard of "dirty tricks" by lawyers? Happens quite frequently in court.

You come here to ask for legal advice, and then state that you are already receiving outstanding legal advice.

Oh, good, you found something relevant.

We recently obtained four restraining orders against a gang of bullys. The hearing was 2 1/12 hours. The judge ruled that the defendents were not credible, and guaranteed them that our witnesses were not lying.

Whatever. As long as everything you provided to the court was truthful, factual, and complete, sounds like good ROs.

Unless you have slam dunk video tape showing the harassment, these type of hearings come down to a battle of credibility. You had your chance to demonstrate your stellar reputation, and the judge didn't buy it. Like it or not, you have a credibility problem.

Maybe the original RO was founded entirely on lies. If that is so, everything is reversed. Trouble is, once a judge takes one party's side a face value, it is very hard to undo. You almost always have to get the matter in front of a new judge who will hear it entirely from both parties.

 

[StacyInCalif]

Someone has had a restraining order in effect against you for over a year, and you don't think you'll have a credibility problem going after them in court?

Your reading comprehension could use some brushing up. That and you should drop the jumping to conclusions without knowledge of which you speak. Obviously not a lawyer, are you?

Said restraining order was gained under fraudulent grounds. Not only that, but I was unable to attend the hearing during which the order was issued due to an emergency situation ~ the judge did his job and issued the order based on my lack of defense at that time.

Evidence is overwhelming that I should be the individual who has an order protecting me, not the other way around.

You admit you've been to court with the plaintiffs several times, and now you want to go back - again. Don't you think that in your small community people see you, the one who is restrained from harassing other people, as the problem?

I "admit" that we have had a number of hearings in the same case wherein the judge has been trying, without success, to get the other party into court to attempt a settlement (that's why those hearings were called "settlement conferences", I'd wager). They have been failing to show up for the hearings for more than six months now.

Most people in our community see *them* as the problem, not myself ~ for the record.

You come here to ask for legal advice, and then state that you are already receiving outstanding legal advice.

No. I came here seeking suggestions, and received the outstanding legal advice from elsewhere after I posted my original message in this thread.

We recently obtained four restraining orders against a gang of bullys. The hearing was 2 1/12 hours. The judge ruled that the defendents were not credible, and guaranteed them that our witnesses were not lying.

Good for you.

Unless you have slam dunk video tape showing the harassment, these type of hearings come down to a battle of credibility. You had your chance to demonstrate your stellar reputation, and the judge didn't buy it. Like it or not, you have a credibility problem.

Really now? And you know this how? In the courtroom here in California, were you?

Harassment takes on MANY forms. I have what essentially amounts to "video tape" of this harassment, as it's been perpetrated mainly on the internet. Yes, proof of what has been done.

My chance hasn't been had yet. However, it will be next week when our motion is heard. That, by the way, has nothing to do with the questions I posed in this thread.

Now if you don't mind, please refrain from posting in my thread, particularly since you haven't anything of value to add, nor have you addressed the question itself.

 

[StacyInCalif]

Ever heard of "dirty tricks" by lawyers? Happens quite frequently in court.

Exactly. Their lawyer has quite the reputation and bar association disciplinary record, too.

Not only that, but there was not one shred of truth in any statement made by the parties seeking a restraining order in this case. I cannot blame the judge for issuing the order when I could not attend the follow-up hearing (we were at the ex parte, he issued a TRO at that time pending a full hearing) to defend myself and prove that they were lying.

Maybe the original RO was founded entirely on lies. If that is so, everything is reversed. Trouble is, once a judge takes one party's side a face value, it is very hard to undo. You almost always have to get the matter in front of a new judge who will hear it entirely from both parties.

Last year, prior to the follow-up hearings in my case, a judge in our jurisdiction (NOT the same judge, mind you) failed to issue a restraining order to protect a child in a custody case and awarded the father joint custody after the mother had gone to court requesting that he be denied access to the child as he'd threatened harm to the child. Days later that father shot and murdered the child as well as took his own life. That case has been all over the national news and the mother has appeared on programs such as "Dr Phil" about her son's death.

Judges here are now VERY wary and being exceptionally careful in restraining order cases, tending to go overboard in believing those requesting restraining orders to protect folks. Unfortunately for me, that is the case in this situation ~ though we are fully confident that our evidence will prevail next week.

Thank you.

I'll definitely report back on what transpires at the hearing next week. I believe it will be good news for us, and we will go from there to proceed against the libel/slander and defamation these people have perpetuated against us.

 

[Rexlan]

Now you're being a smart ass

Why don't you crawl back under your rock and go away.

Your reading comprehension could use some brushing up. That and you should drop the jumping to conclusions without knowledge of which you speak. Obviously not a lawyer, are you?

Said restraining order was gained under fraudulent grounds. Not only that, but I was unable to attend the hearing during which the order was issued due to an emergency situation ~ the judge did his job and issued the order based on my lack of defense at that time.

Evidence is overwhelming that I should be the individual who has an order protecting me, not the other way around.



I "admit" that we have had a number of hearings in the same case wherein the judge has been trying, without success, to get the other party into court to attempt a settlement (that's why those hearings were called "settlement conferences", I'd wager). They have been failing to show up for the hearings for more than six months now.

Most people in our community see *them* as the problem, not myself ~ for the record.



No. I came here seeking suggestions, and received the outstanding legal advice from elsewhere after I posted my original message in this thread.



Good for you.



Really now? And you know this how? In the courtroom here in California, were you?

Harassment takes on MANY forms. I have what essentially amounts to "video tape" of this harassment, as it's been perpetrated mainly on the internet. Yes, proof of what has been done.

My chance hasn't been had yet. However, it will be next week when our motion is heard. That, by the way, has nothing to do with the questions I posed in this thread.

Now if you don't mind, please refrain from posting in my thread, particularly since you haven't anything of value to add, nor have you addressed the question itself.

 

[dlw99]

For the record, I did answer your questions. You simply didn't like the answers.

Answers: Slim & None - closer to none, since you have a credibility problem.
YES. You should forget it.

Concentrate on getting the RO vacated, and stop letting these people rent space in your head.

 

[StacyInCalif]

Now you're being a smart ass

Why don't you crawl back under your rock and go away.

Expecting some level of professionalism and intelligence from contributors to a legal forum and having a reasonable expectation of intelligent discourse as opposed to folks jumping to erroneous conclusions is being a smart ass? Who knew.

So, from now on I'll simply consider the source when reading your replies.

For the record, I did answer your questions. You simply didn't like the answers.

I requested answers from folks with legal experience (i.e., civil litigation attorneys ~ which you are obviously not), I did not request answers from clueless busybodies who lack reading comprehension skills.

 

[quincy]

Stacy, I want to wish you good luck with your hearing next week.

Judges are often reluctant to rescind a restraining order if it appears that the problems that led to its original issuance still exist. If you have been found in contempt of the order once already, and there have been several return trips to the court over continuing problems with "these folks," I have a sneaking suspicion you will not walk away from the hearing with a smile of satisfaction on your face. It seems that a restraining order is still necessary. It is possible, however, that the judge could make the restraining order a mutual one, prohibiting any of you from causing harm to the other.

I see several problems with a defamation suit in your situation. You mention that you have a "stellar reputation" and that your credibility is "entirely intact" and that "most people in the community see [the people who obtained the order against you] as the problem." Defamation suits are based on reputational injury. If your reputation and credibility are still intact, and your community supports you, you have no defamation case worth the extremely high cost of pursuing.

If you decide to go ahead with a defamation suit anyway, have a hefty retainer on hand when you go in search of an attorney. I do not see any attorney who will take your "landmark case" on a contingency basis, based on what you have posted here.

 

[dlw99]

Exactly.
I'll definitely report back on what transpires at the hearing next week.

Good luck.

 

[Rexlan]

Expecting some level of professionalism and intelligence from contributors to a legal forum and having a reasonable expectation of intelligent discourse as opposed to folks jumping to erroneous conclusions is being a smart ass? Who knew.

So, from now on I'll simply consider the source when reading your replies.

Please add me to your ignore list if you have any slots left ...

 

[StacyInCalif]

Judges are often reluctant to rescind a restraining order if it appears that the problems that led to its original issuance still exist. If you have been found in contempt of the order once already, and there have been several return trips to the court over continuing problems with "these folks," I have a sneaking suspicion you will not walk away from the hearing with a smile of satisfaction on your face. It seems that a restraining order is still necessary. It is possible, however, that the judge could make the restraining order a mutual one, prohibiting any of you from causing harm to the other.

Let me see if I can explain a little bit better. For what it's worth, the restraining order was only issued because I failed to be able to attend the hearing and there was no defense from me against the false accusations in court at that time. Since then, the individuals who sought the RO have both continually stalked and harassed me; going so far as to have me followed to find out where I live, to befriend my now former landlord in an effort to have me evicted from my home, constantly showed up at my now former home to taunt me and even vandalized my property; they have also continued to post defamatory and libelous things about myself and my business, to slander myself and my business within the community and to make false reports to local law enforcement alleging that I have violated the RO over and over. Such alleged violations have yet to be proven in court, and obviously will not be as they are false.

There has been no finding of contempt whatsoever as yet ~ the contempt is alleged, however the judge has been trying to get both sides together to come to some sort of resolution and settlement. There has been no trial, no trial date set and not even a pre-trial hearing thus far. There have also not in any way, shape or form been "several return trips to court", these hearings have all been settlement conferences scheduled in the same case, continued repeatedly by the judge because my accusers consistently fail to show up for court dates. I merely want them to leave me alone and stop attempting to do further damage to my reputation.

Their restraining order against me was never necessary. I am the one who needs protection from them. This will be proven next week during the hearing on our motion to terminate. Making their order reciprocal would even be fine with me ~ however since I tried to do that very thing and they fought it tooth and nail, I have little doubt they would find that unsatisfactory. They wish to be able to stalk, harass and taunt me, with me having no ability to defend myself against them.

I see several problems with a defamation suit in your situation. You mention that you have a "stellar reputation" and that your credibility is "entirely intact" and that "most people in the community see [the people who obtained the order against you] as the problem." Defamation suits are based on reputational injury. If your reputation and credibility are still intact, and your community supports you, you have no defamation case worth the extremely high cost of pursuing.

By "stellar reputation" and my credibility being "entirely intact", I refer to the fact that a vast majority of individuals in the community do indeed see the truth of the matter. That does NOT, however, negate the fact that there has been real, true, provable, irreparable damage done to myself, my business and my reputation. Public statements and public internet postings of horrific slander and vicious libel seeking to destroy my reputation within the community is indeed actionable, it has caused a great deal of financial damage to myself, my family and my business.

If you decide to go ahead with a defamation suit anyway, have a hefty retainer on hand when you go in search of an attorney. I do not see any attorney who will take your "landmark case" on a contingency basis, based on what you have posted here.

A vast majority of the details of this case ~ in fact probably 99.9% of what the case involves ~ have not been posted here for good reason. Therefore, I understand the virtual impossibility of understanding the depth and complexity of the case by readers who aren't 'in the loop', so to speak. However, such does not mean that there is not far more than meets the eye. I assure you there is.

My (initial) question involved wondering if it would be worthwhile to pursue the case on my own without an attorney, or seeking a competent civil attorney to take the case. There was little doubt that it would be next to impossible to find an attorney who would take this case, or ANY similar case, on a contingency basis. I thought I would ask, however, figuring it couldn't hurt to do so.

Thank you for your well wishes. They are most appreciated.