Curiosity Never Kills the Cat: Legal Questions for VERIFIED LAWYERS- ~No Discussion~

[AZlawyer]

If Jonah had knowledge that someone wanted to harm Becky, wouldn't that have been of interest to police investigating the death as a murder nearly two years ago? And especially to the ME who ruled the death a suicide? I'm not understanding the legal basis for a wrongful death lawsuit against Jonah that focuses on a security system. Rebecca also lived in the home and her body was found outside, not inside. I hope one of our legal experts can explain the legal basis because I'm just not seeing it.

The legal basis is easy--I think what you're not seeing is the factual basis. You're correct that, if there's no evidence that Jonah disarmed the security system with some inkling that Rebecca would be harmed thereby, then the suit wouldn't be successful.

 

[AZlawyer]

Regarding "elective" release of information contained in Max's medical records by his parents:

1. Can Dina request Max's complete records (which she presumably did for her experts to review) and release or publicly post anything herself, or must she have some kind of permission from Jonah, since they had joint custody?

2. Was Dina required to have Jonah's permission before posting and releasing Max's EMS record on her maxshacknai.com website? (I am very doubtful that she even had a conversation with him about it. It appears they only communicate thru lawyers at this point, if at all.)

3. Was Dina required to have Jonah's permission to request and provide Max's medical records to her experts Bove and Melinek?

1 - 3. Unless there is some court order to the contrary, Dina should be able to obtain and release Max's medical records without Jonah's permission.

 

[AZlawyer]

Could an expert opine on why an attorney would work pro bono on a wrongful death suit? I understand one reason could be for the fame and exposure. I also understand an attorney may anticipate receiving monies if the suit is won. What other reasons might an attorney take on a wrongful death suit pro bono? In your opinion...

Why does an attorney take on any pro bono case? Fame, public service, pro bono requirements of licensing agencies, feeling of religious obligation, trying to be a good role model to their kids or associates...there are lots of reasons.

If the attorney anticipates receiving money if the suit is won, then they are NOT acting pro bono. They are acting on a contingency fee.

 

[AZlawyer]

Not to get O/T, but wow, really? Amazing! That is seriously fascinating...why do you think that was? Do you think that is Florida in general or that case in specific?? Completely interesting either way! Of course, your whole experience with that is really interesting either way!

To bring it back around to Becky---I have no doubt in my mind that we would wish for stonewalling compared to what we would get with this one. :/

I have no idea. That's the only time I ever tried to get public records in Florida, so I don't know if my experience was unusual. I did tell the sheriff's office people that I was trying to prove that Jose Baez misrepresented the computer searches in his book, so maybe they just shared that goal lol.

 

[AZlawyer]

I'm not an expert, but from observations of legal cases, most wrongful death suits are contingency-fee based. The lawyer defers his fee until the case is resolved. Fee is based on a percentage of recovery (generally 20-50%) obtained by lawyer. If there is no recovery, the lawyer receives nothing.

I hope an expert does answer the question because I have a hard time believing any lawyer receives nothing at all if the case is lost. I would think wrongful death cases can take quite a chunk of time and there are administrative staff costs, filing fees and fees for expert witnesses that surely are expected to be paid by somebody before a case ever gets to trial.

Bourne is correct--most wrongful death cases are taken on contingency. In cases where lawyers are allowed to "advance" costs to clients on a contingency basis (including AZ), most lawyers pay those costs themselves as well. These cases are normally very very expensive as MyBelle points out, and no, you don't get paid anything unless and until you win. It's a big risk but potentially a big payoff as well.

 

[MyBelle]

Bourne is correct--most wrongful death cases are taken on contingency. In cases where lawyers are allowed to "advance" costs to clients on a contingency basis (including AZ), most lawyers pay those costs themselves as well. These cases are normally very very expensive as MyBelle points out, and no, you don't get paid anything unless and until you win. It's a big risk but potentially a big payoff as well.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm only familiar with cases where lawyers ask for "costs" either up front or as they accrue. I've never met a lawyer who is willing to front all out-of-pocket costs, such as court filing fees or record production with no guarantee of repayment.

JMO

 

[chinacat67]

Hi chinacat67! Thank you for all the information you've given all of us. It truly is selfless and wonderful of you to do so. I'm just curious as to what you'd think we'd get with this? What could be worse than the stonewalling? Flat out refusal?

Every time I've put a request in, federal or state, there has been pushback and an initial, flat out, no. But, sometimes they hold on to "no" longer than others and sometimes the pushback is just rote. They always say no as the first answer, because I think most people won't go any further or won't know how to go further. If they get a response to the denial, then they either dig in their heels or give it up fairly quickly. Just my personal experience at both fed and state level on criminal file requests.

The harder they fight, the more I think they are hiding things. Not a legal presumption for sure, just a human reaction.

And thanks---but not selfless, just incredibly nosy and opinionated!

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD

 

[inthedark14]

Every time I've put a request in, federal or state, there has been pushback and an initial, flat out, no. But, sometimes they hold on to "no" longer than others and sometimes the pushback is just rote. They always say no as the first answer, because I think most people won't go any further or won't know how to go further. If they get a response to the denial, then they either dig in their heels or give it up fairly quickly. Just my personal experience at both fed and state level on criminal file requests.

The harder they fight, the more I think they are hiding things. Not a legal presumption for sure, just a human reaction.

And thanks---but not selfless, just incredibly nosy and opinionated!

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD

Whatever it is, the thanks button is not enough. Anyone who has ever paid an attorney bill knows how valuable your time is, and I simply cannot thank you and AZLawyer enough. It's HUGE what you are doing, you should get some credit on your CE or something for this because it is for sure pro bono and SO MUCH appreciated by those of us here :blushing: who get lost in the "legal mumbo jumbo" :tyou:

 

[K_Z]

If no wrongful death civil suits are filed within the CA 2 year statute of limitations, are there any other options for filing civil suits for death related civil damages?

Are there any "loopholes" to extend the 2 year SOL to allow filing beyond 2 years?

 

[AZlawyer]

If no wrongful death civil suits are filed within the CA 2 year statute of limitations, are there any other options for filing civil suits for death related civil damages?

Are there any "loopholes" to extend the 2 year SOL to allow filing beyond 2 years?

I don't know California well enough to know all the potential "loopholes," but I seriously doubt there would be any applicable loopholes here.

 

[bourne]

I don't know California well enough to know all the potential "loopholes," but I seriously doubt there would be any applicable loopholes here.

Thanks AZlawyer! That means the Zahaus and Dina only have until mid-July of this year to file their wrongful death suits. I'm looking forward to the lawsuit

 

[Serpico]

AZ LAWYER.....If the 2 year limit was from July 13,2011 and July 13,2013 falls on a Saturday....does the plaintiff have until the NEXT business day to file which would be Monday (15th) or was Friday -July 12th the last day?

Thanks,

 

[*Lash*]

Hi AZ Lawyer - A civil suit was filed against San Diego and Sheriff Gore in May. In the suit the family is asking for Becky's personal items to be returned along with additional information not provided at the time the family received Rebecca's investigative file. Maybe a leap here, but does this suit protect the 2 year SOL? One more question, if the MOD is ever changed to murder, would this reset the 2 year SOL? TIA

Case Detail -
http://courtindex.sdcourt.ca.gov/CISPublic/casedetail?casenum=201300047752&casesite=SD&applcode=C

Register of Actions -
https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaptchaDisplay.xhtml

MSM -
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Coronado-Mansion-Death-Zahau-Family-to-Speak--206584951.html

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ LAWYER.....If the 2 year limit was from July 13,2011 and July 13,2013 falls on a Saturday....does the plaintiff have until the NEXT business day to file which would be Monday (15th) or was Friday -July 12th the last day?

Thanks,

They would have until Monday.

Hi AZ Lawyer - A civil suit was filed against San Diego and Sheriff Gore in May. In the suit the family is asking for Becky's personal items to be returned along with additional information not provided at the time the family received Rebecca's investigative file. Maybe a leap here, but does this suit protect the 2 year SOL? One more question, if the MOD is ever changed to murder, would this reset the 2 year SOL? TIA

Case Detail -
http://courtindex.sdcourt.ca.gov/CISPublic/casedetail?casenum=201300047752&casesite=SD&applcode=C

Register of Actions -
https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaptchaDisplay.xhtml

MSM -
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Coronado-Mansion-Death-Zahau-Family-to-Speak--206584951.html

The lawsuit filed in May would not toll the SOL--in other words, it would not extend the time for a wrongful death suit to be filed. The coroner's opinion being changed also would have no effect on the SOL.

If someone were actually convicted of criminally causing Rebecca's death, then the SOL would be extended until 1 year after the conviction, but it doesn't seem like that's going to happen.

 

[*Lash*]

Thank you AZlawyer!

Right after your post, Quester posted a link to a tort/personal injury case that was filed yesterday in San Diego!

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/casdce/3:2013cv01624/419200/

 

[Mrs. Holmes]

Thank you AZlawyer!

Right after your post, Quester posted a link to a tort/personal injury case that was filed yesterday in San Diego!

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/casdce/3:2013cv01624/419200/

WOW.... Zahau estate suing Adam & Dina Shacknai and Nina Romano !! Stunned but not Jonah???

 

[Mrs. Holmes]

AZ Lawyer,

With thus docket what is the "and 1 through 50 inclusive" about?
I am STUNNED this does not list JS by name but maybe this is a list of his holdings?

 

[Inparadise]

AZ Lawyer,

With thus docket what is the "and 1 through 50 inclusive" about?
I am STUNNED this does not list JS by name but maybe this is a list of his holdings?

This means that Does (as in Jane/John) 1 through 50, are included in the suit. With additional discovery, they can then be named by name and will be then named defendants in the suit. IMO, those that would/should be included are Jonah and Dr. Peterson.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ Lawyer,

With thus docket what is the "and 1 through 50 inclusive" about?
I am STUNNED this does not list JS by name but maybe this is a list of his holdings?

This means that Does (as in Jane/John) 1 through 50, are included in the suit. With additional discovery, they can then be named by name and will be then named defendants in the suit. IMO, those that would/should be included are Jonah and Dr. Peterson.

Yes, the "Does" are just stand-ins in case other defendants are named later. Many attorneys do this on all their cases, so it may mean nothing.

 

[IQuestion]

This means that Does (as in Jane/John) 1 through 50, are included in the suit. With additional discovery, they can then be named by name and will be then named defendants in the suit. IMO, those that would/should be included are Jonah and Dr. Peterson.

As usual (and much to my personal delight) Inparadise is correct! Many times when individuals are being evicted from a residential dwelling (apts, houses, condos etc) the documents are served on tenant, John Nopay and Does 1 thru 10....just in case the tenant has moved other people into the dwelling and were not listed on the lease. Frankly, I don't want to be right about
most things in these tragic chain of events....because it has been increasingly difficult to imagine anybody would orchestrate and commit the murder of another human being based on incomplete and incorrect information. But, alas.....