Found Deceased WY - Gabrielle ‘Gabby’ Petito, 22, Grand Teton National Park, 25 Aug 2021 #84

[Wallendo]

Pretty sure that NY Laundrie isn't CL's son but his brother's son. This is the only link I can find right now.

PHOTO Joseph Laundrie Sr Who Owns Juice Company And Is Brother Of Christopher With His Son Joseph Jr In A Foreign Country

No MSM article that I know of has ever suggested Brian and Cassie have a brother. I do remember it was discussed here though.

I don't have a link. From what I remember, the site on which I read that was not a real news site and may have not bothered to check their facts. (or I may have simply misread it).

 

[NCWatcher]

There’s simply no cause of action - that’s why no other attorney took the case IMO.

Obviously I have no way to know the intent of the attorney writing the Complaint. But it almost seems when one can detect some elements that might relate to the purported cause of action (Negligence), those are mixed with elements of a different cause of action they aren't claiming. A sort of "mix and match" approach. I think we've seen the effects of that duality in some reactions to the document here on WS.

It may be that the Complaint can't be laid out to show the elements of Negligence because that would have to start with showing the L's had a legal duty to the P's. And the Complaint doesn't say they are claiming Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, perhaps because not answering the phone or even blocking someone's phone number and/or blocking someone on Facebook isn't legally outrageous. But the words used such as outrageous, distress, malice, extreme, mental anguish, intolerable, & shocking don't really fit with Negligence as much as with IIED. At least that seems to be the case to me from a layperson's perspective.

JMO

 

[CaffienatedOwl]

ClerkNet 3.0

That is where you can find the docket and see those documents that have been filed. I use the general public link, type in "Laundrie" and then I'm able to see it.

Thank you - Does anyone know what the other filing from 12/8/21 is about? - 2021 CP 006188 SC
All docs are private.

 

[Mike in WNY]

There’s simply no cause of action - that’s why no other attorney took the case IMO.

Sure seems - on the surface - that the subject filing can be considered "peculiar." Any speculation on why a seemingly seasoned attorney would issue this in this manner?

I've opined repeatedly, that every single person in this whole affair has displayed (to one degree or another) poor judgement. It's my opinion that this filing continues that pattern. Obviously, there could be some unrevealed objective that could make the filing stellar, I suppose. But I see this as an enormous gamble with an enormous burden of proof that (as typical) rests squarely on the shoulders of the plaintiff.

There are probably very few that do not recognize the emotional pain in this environment. I'm not convinced filing a suit based what appears to me to be 99%+/- emotion and maybe a void of intellectual support is in anyone's long term best interest.

Notwithstanding the above, I support bringing this to the courts.

 

[Wallendo]

Thank you - Does anyone know what the other filing from 12/8/21 is about? - 2021 CP 006188 SC
All docs are private.

I believe this is the case where the Laundrie's were seeking $20,000 from Brian's Estate. This has been discussed earlier. If you click on the case number for that case you will see all activity from that. It appears that Nicole Schmidt has filed a claim against Brian's Estate, possibly representing Gabby's Estate.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

Thank you - Does anyone know what the other filing from 12/8/21 is about? - 2021 CP 006188 SC
All docs are private.

Seem's like it's a Probate Summary Administration - probably for their son:

Summary Administration - Probate Small Estates - Florida Probate Lawyer - FortLauderdaleAttorney.com

 

[acutename]

If Gabby's parents win this lawsuit will that end any anger they may have? It wont bring Gabby back. The families loss will still be there.

What if the lawsuit is dismissed or they lose? Will that not increase their anger and make their suffering worse?

I'm not sure if this lawsuit is the answer or remedy to the families pain. JMO.

law suits are tedious and full of procedure. they are repetitive and cause you to re-examine and rehash your claims and losses. if you are not somewhat angry and really aggrieved, you will give up- withdraw or settle. the law is a civilized substitute for combat and as such, it can wear you down if that is what needs to be done, IMO.
at the end you should have, as they say "exhausted" your appeals (if you have not won) and be ready to stop fighting. all IMO.

 

[JusticeWaits]

If I were them I’d want to know.

Has the money that BL stole from Gabby been repaid? Have her belongings been returned <modsnip>?

I would guess the money and the belongings have been returned, since there was zero mention of these items in the complaint. MOO

 

[NCWatcher]

I would guess the money and the belongings have been returned, since there was zero mention of these items in the complaint. MOO

Maybe, maybe not. Steve B said in January they had reached an agreement on the property. His statement was not refuted that I can see.

Gabby Petito & Brian Laundrie's families reach agreement on belongings

Yet there is a line in the locked estate case file that seems to suggest NS (as the administrator of an estate, presumably GP's) filed a statement of claim on 3/10, the day before the negligence claim was filed. Another claim had been filed in Dec but maybe that was taken care of by the Jan agreement. So who knows.

I can't imagine the L's want GP's "stuff." Why in the world would they? But I'm also not at all sure how much stuff there would be and some articles have said GP's family doesn't have any idea either. But both parents and step-parents talked about GP not being into possessions and not wanting material stuff. G&B went to NY before they started the trip west. Someone from the North Port police said they moved there. I'm doubt that but GP could have left stuff there if they considered moving there. And she never seemed to wear the same clothes twice in trip photos so she probably took alot of her clothes with her. Beyond the van impounded by LE and whatever was in it, a computer, cameras, and a phone (that's probably long gone) I'm not sure how much more stuff a 22-yr old who planned to sink all her money into traveling would have. There was some suggestion though a fight was brewing over the notebook found with BL's remains.
JMO

 

[KBlackRabbit]

There was some suggestion though a fight was brewing over the notebook found with BL's remains.

The note he left wasn’t made public; I wonder if there’s something in what he wrote that would support the Petitos’ lawsuit.

 

[Gemmie]

Stupid question alert ----> Would the P's be privy to knowing what's in BL's notebook?

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I did a quick G search and didn't come up with anything.

 

[JusticeWaits]

I have a question regarding lawyers and retainers. If the Ls knew BL had killed GP, called SB on Aug. 28, and then spoke with him off and on while BL was in WY, why did they not put the retainer down until Sept. 2 (according to the complaint)? Would SB give legal advice without the retainer? I know nothing about the legal world, so it's a legitimate question.

Another question along the same lines. In the Banfield interview, around the 2:26 mark, SB says he wasn't called regarding this matter until Sept. 11, at 11:30 pm. I know a lot of people will argue that he's scum and is lying, but I would like a serious answer to why he would lie, putting his reputation on the line. I don't know if him lying to the media would have any consequences for his clients in the event of a civil or criminal case, but I would imagine SB knew LE would have phone records, at the very least.

The complaint offered no proof that the Laundries knew BL killed GP and called the attorney on Aug. 28. This is an unsubstantiated claim. IF the attorney SB said he wasn't called until Sept. 11, I would tend to believe him. People arguing that SB is "scum", etc., have lost their perspective, overcome with emotionalism, in my opinion. SB seems to be a competent attorney doing his best for his clients. MOO

 

[JusticeWaits]

Stupid question alert ----> Would the P's be privy to knowing what's in BL's notebook?

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I did a quick G search and didn't come up with anything.

Not at all a stupid question, in my opinion. I would like to know the answer myself!

 

[NCWatcher]

The note he left wasn’t made public; I wonder if there’s something in what he wrote that would support the Petitos’ lawsuit.

Maybe so. It's certainly possible the P's think so. I'd thought maybe it was a notebook that GP had doodled in or one the P's think was originally GP's.

But no matter what BL wrote, I can't imagine it could have created a legal duty for the L's to talk to the P's. And without a duty to have breached, how can legal negligence exist? And whatever he wrote apparently didn't create criminal liability for the L's. (If it had I'd think something would have happened by now although I guess something still might happen.) It's also possible though something was written about GP that P's don't want shared. But the L's must have been told what their son wrote. So they could share it anyway, if they were inclined. I just don't know.
JMO

 

[Shamrock1]

The note he left wasn’t made public; I wonder if there’s something in what he wrote that would support the Petitos’ lawsuit.

No. The contents of the notebook wouldn’t impose a duty on his parents to communicate with her parents IMO.

 

[Shamrock1]

Stupid question alert ----> Would the P's be privy to knowing what's in BL's notebook?

I apologize if this has already been discussed. I did a quick G search and didn't come up with anything.

Putting aside the issues with the complaint, if the Ps demand things that are in Ls possession/control, my prediction is that the Ls would refuse and Ps would move to compel its production - the decision would be made by the court. Similarly, Ls would move to quash discovery requests directed to a non-party. JMO.

Not a stupid question, by the way.

 

[Fidobell]

I think this will entitle the Petitos to discovery so that they will be able to get communications between Laundrie and his parents, among other things. I suspect that the information is what they want.

Yes , totally agree. By applying this pressure to the Laundries, facts the Petitos arnt privy too may have to be revealed . The frustration at BL's death meant losing all info involving Gabby , has resulted in this suit . It could be the only avenue left now for P's .

 

[Kristin Esq.]

The complaint offered no proof that the Laundries knew BL killed GP and called the attorney on Aug. 28. This is an unsubstantiated claim. IF the attorney SB said he wasn't called until Sept. 11, I would tend to believe him. People arguing that SB is "scum", etc., have lost their perspective, overcome with emotionalism, in my opinion. SB seems to be a competent attorney doing his best for his clients. MOO

Complaints are just allegations, there doesn't need to be any proof in them; though, sometimes, plaintiffs will attach exhibits. But you don't need proof for the Complaint. A lot of times, evidence is gained during the discovery phase.

 

[Mike in WNY]

Complaints are just allegations, there doesn't need to be any proof in them; though, sometimes, plaintiffs will attach exhibits. But you don't need proof for the Complaint. A lot of times, evidence is gained during the discovery phase.

And, I think should those allegations not be proven, the "failed" (so-to-speak) suit could turn the defendants into quasi-victims and the plaintiffs into a quasi-lynch-mob in many an eye. Sure, the die hard "I've made up my mind and nothing will change my opinion" crowd will not be swayed... but the pendulum may swing for others.

It seems to me that the totality of this filing is anemic. Giving the filing attorney the benefit of the doubt for the time being, I will speculate that any voids are intentional/calculated/strategic. I think the plaintiffs are relying on the fact that the defendants can never 'prove' they didn't know something and have decided to take a legal gamble for an emotional hope. I also think there is an element of 'be careful what you wish for' hovering over this action.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

CMC Scheduled for June: CASE MANAGEMENT SET FOR 06/30/2022 AT 1:30 PM IN ZOOM , JDG: CARROLL, HUNTER W