Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Washington Post: "Obama's Odd Series of Exaggerated Gun Claims" | Main | A self-defense case that, strangely, was not covered by the media »

Some red faces on the other side

Posted by David Hardy · 13 March 2015 12:03 PM

Plaintiffs sue Harrisburg, PA, in state court, over its gun restrictions (I assume on preemption grounds). Harrisburg files a removal to Federal District Court (I assume some Federal legal issue was involved, don't know the details). But the removal motion omits one plaintiff, so plaintiffs' attorney Joshua Prince files for default judgment in state court, in the plaintiff's name, since the city never answered the complaint. He reportedly gives notice to Harrisburg (some rules require giving advance notice of an intent to take a default judgment) and the city ignores it. So he takes a default judgment for $20,000 plus.

Now the city wakes up and moves to set aside the default judgment. That's possible, but if the PA rules are like the federal ones, it's a heavy burden of proof. And the first question is going to be "he gave you written notice, well in advance, that he would take a default ... why didn't you object then, or move to add this plaintiff to your removal motion?"

Leave a comment