Open Carry is carrying a firearm unconcealed in Ohio. OC does not require a concealed handgun license, but the practice requires intimate knowledge of the law since there are places and situations where OC is prohibited but carrying concealed would be permitted. OC is also likely to attract attention. This forum is for discussion of OC, not for debating the pro's and con's or coordinating any type of protest events.
Bearable wrote: ↑Wed Mar 15, 2023 7:16 pm
I made a whoops. I referred to the party twice as not signing the settlement as the defendant. Whoops - he is the plaintiff.
Thanks for the update.
Wow. Usually only the government is allowed to scr@w around - without effective consequence.
I sure hope the plaintiff has good reasons for delaying signing what appeared to be a mutual agreement.
Yes, I do believe in open carry. An openly armed man is clear in his intentions. Concealed carriers are sneaks and skulkers and elitist, boot licking, political contribution making, running dog lackies of The Man. <wink> (thx grumpycoconut - OpenCarry.org)
If I had to sue over over a wrongful arrest, I sure as heck wouldn't want to have to pay my attorney costs.
(Won't let me reply directly to the above post....)
Chances are the term "costs" refers to court costs, including filing fees, etc. If attorney fees weren't mentioned in the entry or the settlement document, then likely plaintiff paid his own attorney fees.
A hearing took place last Friday. There are issues the Plaintiff objects to. But the judge did not place a time frame to resolve the disputes. The attorney for the city optimistically believes they are close. He wants me to check back with him next week. The city attorney also said he would call me if the agreement is signed sooner. I won't hold my breath.
docachna wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:01 pm
Hope his release left the door open for a 1983 suit. I'm not much of a fan of them, but it seems clear in this case why he was arrested.
docachna wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 2:01 pm
Hope his release left the door open for a 1983 suit. I'm not much of a fan of them, but it seems clear in this case why he was arrested.
This is a settlement from a 1983 lawsuit.
I never read it, so my bad. Highly discounted cost-of-defense settlement.
Well, here you go. The attached agreement. Antoine Tolbert got $55 grand for his trouble. The police admit to no wrongdoing. No requirement to train officers, nothing.