Really? And just how far do you think such a suit would get before it was thrown out of court?
The clerk's desk? Think it would make it that far?
Immie
You're kidding, right? Crafty lawyers are constantly waiting in the wings for some new "cause" to concoct class action suits. And you must not know much about the legal process and the courts. Nothing is "thrown out" except by a judge and that's only AFTER a complaint and answer to the complaint are filed. As long as a person has the filing fee, you can file a complaint against your mother for force-feeding you macaroni and cheese that made you fat.
The irony of this particular back and forth is that if intentional ending of a person's life by the government were indeed part of the dark 'plan,' then the same government would be clamoring for tort reform which would have the effect of quashing such lawsuits (as you suggest they would).
You can sue your mother if you have the filing fee, but you can't sue the federal government unless it consents to being sued with only narrow exceptions.
The FTCA [Federal Tort Claims Act] provides a limited waiver of the federal government's sovereign immunity when its employees are negligent within the scope of their employment. Under the FTCA, the government can only be sued 'under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.' 28 U.S.C. S 1346(b). Thus, the FTCA does not apply to conduct that is uniquely governmental, that is, incapable of performance by a private individual.
Can you sue the federal government? - Yahoo! Answers
Which is precisely why in any lawsuit against the United States government wherein it is the prime defendant, there are numerous individuals named along with several Does (I, II, III, et al., just to cover all bases). That clause is meaningless. The best recent example was the lawsuit filed by the families of the victims of the attacks of 911. There was also another one (after that was settled by the compensation fund), alleging the US Government's non-response to the recommendations of the 911 Commission. Here is how it was filed:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ELLEN MARIANI, Individually, as )
Personal Representative of the Estate )
of LOUIS NEIL MARIANI, deceased, )
and others similarly situated[1],
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) Case No. 03-5273
GEORGE W. BUSH[2], President of ) Judge Eduardo C. Robreno
the United States, Officially and )
Individually, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
and )
RICHARD CHENEY, Vice President of )
The United States, Officially and )
Individually, )
and )
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of )
the United States (DOJ), Officially and )
Individually, )
and
DONALD H. RUMSFELD, Secretary of )
Defense (DOD), Officially and )
Individually, )
and )
GEORGE J. TENET, Director, Central )
Intelligence Agency (CIA), Officially and )
Individually, )
and
NORMAN Y. MINETA, Secretary, )
Department of Transportation (DOT), )
Officially and Individually, )
and
PETER G. PETERSON, Chairman of the )
Board, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN )
RELATIONS (CFR)[3], Officially and )
Individually, )
and
CONDOLEEZZA RICE, National )
Security Advisor, to Defendant Bush, )
Officially and Individually, )
and .......
Other unnamed past, present, officials, )
representatives, agents, and private )
consultants of THE UNITED STATES )
OF AMERICA, )
Defendants.[5] )
PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT[6]
NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Ellen Mariani, on information, belief and established facts, by and through her counsel of record, Philip J. Berg, Esquire, and for her causes of action against all named and unnamed Defendants states the following:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
1. Plaintiff commenced this civil action on September 12, 2003, by filing of Complaint with this Honorable Court. Since Plaintiff's initial filing and the 'firestorm" surrounding Defendant GWB's refusal to comply with the "911 Commission[7]," this Amended Complaint provides newly discovered substantial additional facts, evidence and voluntary support from former federal employees and other concerned American Citizens who all seek justice and the truth as to how and why the events of September 11, 2001, (hereinafter "911"), occurred. Plaintiff hereby asserts Defendants, officially and individually are exclusively liable to answer the Counts in this Complaint under the United States Constitution and provisions of the 18 U.S.C. § 1964(a) and (c), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (hereinafter "RICO Act") for "failing to act and prevent" .....
Ellen Mariani's RICO Suit against Bush et al.
However, hysterical? Yeah, you might say I have a problem with giving Uncle O, control of my health and well being. The thought of that freaks me out more than the thought of putting my head into the mouth of a starving lion.
