As Congress considers the so-called "Clean Future Act," which would unfairly allow utilities to pass…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Electric Vehicle Irrationality

As Congress considers the so-called "Clean Future Act," which would unfairly allow utilities to pass the cost of electric vehicle charging stations that overwhelmingly benefit the rich to all utility customers, it's worth highlighting how even the New York Times acknowledges how impossible "Green New Deal" dreams for EVs really are:

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="501"] Impossible Electric Vehicle Dreams[/caption]

 …[more]

May 05, 2021 • 08:49 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Jester's Courtroom Felon Counter Sues Hostages for Breach of Contract
Felon Counter Sues Hostages for Breach of Contract Print
Wednesday, December 07 2011

From his cell at a detention center in Brighton, Colorado, convicted felon Jesse Dimmick has filed a counter suit in Shawnee County District Court alleging that the couple he held hostage breached an oral contract to hide him for money.

Dimmick, on the run from police officers for his purported connection with a Colorado slaying in 2009, abandoned his disabled vehicle and fled to a nearby home where he confronted the residents with a knife.  Over the c ourse of the encounter, the couple gained Dimmick's trust by eating and watching a movie with him.  Eventually, Dimmick fell asleep and the couple left the house and authorities moved in and took Dimmick into custody.

The couple sued Dimmick for damages in excess of $75,000, contending he was guilty of trespass, intrusion and negligent infliction of emotional distress.  Now, Dimmick is counter suing the couple for $235,000, contending they breached an oral contract to hide him in exchange for money.

In his lawsuit, Dimmick says he informed the couple he was being pursued by law enforcement officers and asked them to hide him in exchange for money. The couple agreed, he says, and thus formed a “legally binding oral contract.”

The couple's attorney, Robert E. Keeshan, has filed a motion for dismissal, stating that there was no binding contract because: no specific dollar amount was agreed upon; hiding a fugitive is illegal and can't be the basis for a legal contract, and if the couple did consent it was clearly under duress.

Dimmick is representing himself in the matter.

—Source: The Topeka Capital Journal (Kansas)

Quiz Question   
Based on the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data, which state lost the largest percentage of population in the last decade?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"Missouri's chief legal disciplinary officer accused St. Louis' top prosecutor of sweeping misconduct in the failed prosecution of former Gov. Eric Greitens, saying she lied to judges in court filings and testimony, withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense, misled her own prosecution team and violated the constitutional right to a fair trial.St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner, one of…[more]
 
 
—John Solomon, Just the News Editor in Chief
— John Solomon, Just the News Editor in Chief
 
Liberty Poll   

Are home prices in your immediate area rising, staying about the same or falling?