Lady rescued from Kroger robbery now suing Kroger and rescuer.

[DougBarnes101]

And there is the problem with society. Let's not hold a convicted criminal, wanted for arrest on another crime, responsible. No. Lets blame the one who acted legally and helped you for your emotional trauma. Nice. Really nice.

Remember = Lawyers know that criminals don't have any money so there is nothing there for them to get. Krogers and the armed citizen usually have some type of insurance that they can get a piece of. Judges need to throw these BS lawsuits out and disbar the bottom feeding lawyer that brought it. Just my opinion and you know what they say about opinions.

 

[Sonney]

Free Money

She is just wanting a pay check this is a way of getting free money.

 

[Bushido Devil Dog]

Repped and quoted with my own extra added!

I would hope that the judge hearing these cases would address the plaintiffs accordingly.

For the mother of the bad guy:

"Ms. Atkinson I understand you feel that the defendants put your son in harms way. But Ms. Atkinson your son put himself in harms way when he entered into this place of business with intent to commit a serious crime. Therefore the harm that came to him during the commission of criminal activity was entirely his fault, and the defendant bears absolutely no liability in the matter whatsoever. While I have some sympathy for the loss of your son, I have none for flagrant and unconscionable abuse of the judicial process against a man who defended himself and others from a criminal attack. The court orders the plaintiff to pay all court costs and defendant's legal fees for wasting the court's time with a frivolous lawsuit against an innocent man. Case dismissed with prejudice!"

And for the security guard (sic):

"Ms. Nelson I understand you feel that the defendants and their actions have caused you emotional trauma by acting in saving your life. You were acting in the course of your employment by "x" security company as a security officer at the time of incident. You, Ms. Nelson, may have failed the parties named as defendants and others inside the store, your job site, at the time of this incident. Ms. Nelson you are alive today because of the actions taken by the defendants. You should be thankful for that in itself. But instead of a display of gratitude, you have the audacity to bring a lawsuit against the man who saved your life. I find this action to be utterly despicable and your claims of “extreme mental anguish and emotional distress” to be wholly without merit. The court awards you no damages, and instead orders you to pay Mr. Elliott $50,000 for the “extreme mental anguish and emotional distress” that you have inflicted upon him by bringing this suit. Furthermore, the court orders the plaintiff to pay all court costs and both defendant's legal fees for wasting the court's time with a frivolous lawsuit against an innocent man and a firm that has no fiduciary obligation to take extraordinary and unreasonable steps to prevent him from defending his life. Case dismissed with prejudice, and may God have mercy on your worthless soul!"

 

[golfinfool]

This is absolutely ridiculous, makes me think of this sign.

 

[Ted]

So the basis of the lawsuit is . . . bystander trauma?

That's a cause of action in Indiana now?

I must confess I fail too see this going anywhere.

Do you mean other than a SLAPP suit of sorts, to entice a settlement?

 

[Ted]

If stupidity were a crime, we couldn't build prisons fast enough.

If would be sufficient to pitch a row of tents, as what is being used to jail the inmates at the Maricopa County, Arizona jail.

 

[williamsburg]

Do you mean other than a SLAPP suit of sorts, to entice a settlement?

Sure sounds like [STRIKE]one[/STRIKE] two of them were filed in the case.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It's all about money. Someone probably told her that if she files suit it could be a big pay day for her. She's probably counting on Kroger just paying her off instead of actually going to court.

The manager obviously should have just let the BG do his thing and ignored her situation. That would have had a much better outcome for the sorry POS lady. People like her is why more people don't want to get involved and help each other out.

It's a shame he can't counter sue her for being an ungrateful, money grubbing B.

Maybe he should counter sue her for getting herself in such a situation that he had to use deadly force to save her sorry butt.

This was my thought too. It's just a shake down for fast, easy money.

 

[Benny]

So is she trying to say she would have preferred that the good samaritan would have ignored what was happening and let the guy rape/rob/kill her?

I wish he would have obliged.

This ***** makes me sick to my stomach.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Kroger, perhaps.

The guy who literally saves your bacon?

Might not want to list him as a co-defendant.

Gratitude: long dead and not much missed, apparently.

 

[Caleb]

karma will catch up with you Christine Nelson

 

[jve153]

this gentleman, in the highest form of the word, has to live the rest of his days with the fact that he took another human life (for good) eating at him. he has had to find another job, relocate, and still this c*** has the audacity to sue him. hell in a handbag.

 

[Walken]

I don't blame the people grabbing for easy money. I blame the legal system.

Tort reform is supposedly one of the new Governor's priorities. Let's see if he can get somethings passed.

 

[STEEL CORE]

Can you smell S#!+house lawyer, oxygen theif scumbag telling her she will get some $ and his firm won't charge her a thing or collect until she wins.

 

[Movealongmovealong]

The problem with the suit is it is based on "intentional afflication of emotional distress" which is a reasonable cause for a tort action.

However, there is absolutely zero evidence that Kroger, and especially the manager, did anything to intentionally afflict her with emotional distress. In fact, the evidence is that they did just the opposite. And that's why dismissal would be appropriate here.

 

[TheRude1]

What a Witch

 

[churchmouse]

The problem with the suit is it is based no "intentional afflication of emotional distress" which is a reasonable cause for a tort action.

However, there is absolutely zero evidence that Kroger, and especially the manager, did anything to intentionally afflict her with emotional distress. In fact, the evidence is that they did just the opposite. And that's why dismissal would be appropriate here.

Think with me here for a moment..."She" (Biatch in question) intentianaly signed on as a......wait for it.....Security guard. That is my understanding. Correct me if I am wrong please as I have missed a few lately.
If this is correct then how in hell did she think this was going to work out....show up, sit on A$$, collect check. When reason for job come to be she freaks and causes all of this.

Once again, if I am wrong on her position (other than Biatch) please correct me.

 

[TheGlockinator]

this woman could have possibly lost her life, and since she was fortunate enough not to do that, she would rather take her frustrations with "trauma" out on what we can all almost consider her savior. what a dumb broad.

 

[HoughMade]

I don't blame the people grabbing for easy money....

I do. Why shouldn't we? Basic decency would dictate that you don't demand money in this situation. No one is forcing her to bring the lawsuit. IT IS HER FAULT! No lawyer can file a suit without the client willing to go forward.

Lack of morals.

 

[Classic]

I wish this thread would just go away. I get madder every time I see it. What an ingrate this woman is. Makes one wonder how she faces her ugly reflection in the mirror every day. Hope to see the local news mention the dismissal real soon.