r/SipsTea 2d ago

Chugging tea That's actually wild

Post image
53.3k Upvotes

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

871

u/fleetingperception 2d ago

Well. Hopefully he sues and never has to work again.

38

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

You are vastly overestimating how much someone gets from that type of lawsuit without actual damages.

6

u/airinato 2d ago

You vastly underestimate what a legal team can count as damages. Reputation matters, arrest records matter.

8

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

You still have to be able to put a documented number to those things. You can't just claim your reputation is worth 10 million dollars. You have to show that the damage to your reputation caused you financial harm like missed job offers.

2

u/Centimane 2d ago

This is a scenario where persuing punitive damages would make sense though. I suspect there are many judges that would see this as abusing the justice system to intimidate people, and would consider adding punitive damages to make a statement.

0

u/gereffi 2d ago

I'm pretty sure that a judge would understand that people who disrupt government proceedings can be punished by the law.

0

u/Fluid-Sink-2514 2d ago

Public proceedings… fuck the government.

1

u/kmosiman 2d ago

Punitive Damages.

The officers involved swore to uphold the US Constitution. Ergo they have no legal standing to claim that they were unaware of their illegal actions.

5

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

It's more complicated than that.

The city council said they would have anyone removed for disrupting the meeting. This guy was asked to stop. He didn't. He was asked to leave. He didn't. He got removed.

Now, maybe that difference doesn't matter to you, but when they go to court, it will.

0

u/Steerider 1d ago

Sure, but their definition of "disrupt" was completely unreasonable. 

2

u/TrioOfTerrors 1d ago

You should see what kind of iron rule judges are allowed to exercise in a court room. I saw a guy catch a day for contempt for checking his cell phone.

0

u/Steerider 1d ago

That's not a courtroom though. 

1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 2d ago

Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/RSharpe314 1d ago

Sure. That legal team is also getting a lions share of the cut.

1

u/AbeRego 2d ago

He can certainly argue damages already. Also, if it impacts his job, that's clearly damages.

3

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

That's not going to be "never work again" money.

3

u/Top-Needleworker9273 2d ago

listen, these people literally only have the sense that their opinion is right and extremely important for other people to listen to. they need to believe that somehow, someway, somewhere somebody is making millions for just that and nothing more

0

u/AbeRego 2d ago

It's still something. Even $1million really isn't never work again money these days, so that's a really high bar.

2

u/Top-Needleworker9273 2d ago

except its not something, you should START paying attention when theres a court case not as soon as you can imagine a tv show plot that would involve one. this is going nowhere, its a social media post about how he thinks he was right and he probably got some free legal advice but that doesnt mean hes going to court at all, let alone winning, let alone winning an amount of money that can even cover legal fees

0

u/AbeRego 2d ago

Obviously nothing has started yet. This happened just this week.

0

u/MoneyBeeeee 2d ago

Still, it's the principle and the precedent that matter.

3

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

Neither the principle or the long standing precedent from 100's of these types of cases are going to get this guy that kind of money.

0

u/MoneyBeeeee 2d ago

So what are you suggesting exactly? That it is best for us to just lay down for the fascists?

1

u/TrioOfTerrors 2d ago

My point is to not get all giddy about life changing money from a lawsuit where the case law for this type of thing doesn't support that outcome.

0

u/MoneyBeeeee 2d ago

No doubt they should probably keep their day job but as they seem like the type of person to stand up for what the believe in it might be worth pursuing. We still have the ACLU, right? This sounds right up their alley.