Claim against IMPD gun policy dismissed

[LEaSH]

I've read and reread this stupid Star article and need some help clearing up this vagueness: Indy Star

U.S. District Court has dismissed a lawsuit challenging an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department policy that requires an owner to be fingerprinted and fill out a form in order to retrieve a confiscated firearm.Grady Scott, who filed the suit in November 2008, had his .38-caliber handgun and an SKS assault rifle seized during a search of his home by police. His attorney has said officers used a warrant that listed the wrong address, but city attorneys dispute it was a mistaken search. When Scott asked for his guns back, he refused to comply with IMPD's requirement that he be fingerprinted.

The dismissal of his lawsuit Monday resulted from an appeals court ruling in another case and a clerical error by Scott's attorney, Paul Ogden."The court will not rewrite the complaint merely because Plaintiff mistakenly inserted the wrong constitutional provision," Judge Larry J. McKinney wrote in his order.
Earlier this year, in unrelated lawsuits challenging handgun bans by the cities of Chicago and Oak Park, Ill., the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms applies only to actions by the federal government. That prevented Scott's lawsuit from relying on a Second Amendment claim.
Further, Ogden mislabeled a Fifth Amendment claim -- that IMPD's policy denied Scott due process -- as a Fourth Amendment claim, and McKinney ruled that Ogden tried to correct the lawsuit too late without a good reason.
The dismissal of the federal claims left only a claim under the Indiana Constitution's provision providing a right to bear arms, but McKinney's order says he cannot rule solely on a state claim.

[/QUOTE

]

 

[Robert Richardson]

Just a way to say "We will do what we want." Screw You!!!

 

[inxs]

I would think that a Judge would be able to read law all by himself.....

 

[dburkhead]

What a wonderful way to avoid dealing with the actual content of the suit.</sarcasm>

 

[mkbar80]

Did this guy have LTCH? If so aren't his prints already a matter of record at the department of issue and the ISP?

 

[DoctorJ32174]

Remember these judges are immune from suits themselves and have lifetime appointments. They do what they want, how they want, when they want and answer to nobody.

Although it seems strange HE would do this being a self-professed conservative living in Edinburgh.

 

[Hotdoger]

Earlier this year, in unrelated lawsuits challenging handgun bans by the cities of Chicago and Oak Park, Ill., the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms applies only to actions by the federal government. That prevented Scott's lawsuit from relying on a Second Amendment claim.
Why would the Star writer or editor even put that in the article?It had zero to do with the story

 

[MinuteManMike]

What a wonderful way to avoid dealing with the actual content of the suit.</sarcasm>

You mean like with the Obama birth certificate suits?

 

[CarmelHP]

Unfortunately, the plaintiff's attorney was unforgivably sloppy in a remarkably sophomoric way. Since the federal claims were botched irretrievably the judge was left with no federal question, only purely state law claims, and was, therefore, without jurisdiction. When states are involved, you always bring your claims under the 14th Amendment, 1L ConLaw and CivPro newbs know that and Ogden should have also. I'm really surprised it was so poorly handled.

 

[bigus_D]

Unfortunately, the plaintiff's attorney was unforgivably sloppy in a remarkably sophomoric way. Since the federal claims were botched irretrievably the judge was left with no federal question, only purely state law claims, and was, therefore, without jurisdiction. When states are involved, you always bring your claims under the 14th Amendment, 1L ConLaw and CivPro newbs know that and Ogden should have also. I'm really surprised it was so poorly handled.

Totally agree... If I ever need an attorney, Mr. Paul Ogden definitely won't be my first choice!

I wonder how much he still got paid, depite having completely dropped the ball.