回复:回复:回复:a unpleasure event with the city of government

来源: apt 2007-09-10 09:39:18 [] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读: 0 次 (1488 bytes)
回答: 回复:a unpleasure event with the city of governmentapt2007-09-09 18:50:41
I am not familiar with Texas law. Legally, the immunity they mentioned in the letter only applies to the state. 11th Amendment in the Constitution says nobody can sue the state in federal court without its consent. Later cases extended this immunity to suing state in state courts as well. It's true you can not sue a state for damages. 11th Amendment, however, does not bar suit for injunctions and most importantly, does not bar suit against local entities under the state, such as cities or municipality. Maybe Texas Constitution grants immunity to cities as well. Even so, I would argue that putting up a traffic light is not a government action. Deciding where to put the light is a government action but the actual installation of the light is a corporate function that should not be barred by the 11th Amendment.

In your case, you should hold the contractor liable and he has no immunity. You can sue the contractor and the contractor can implead the city. However, this does not seem very judicially efficient because you may spend five times the $6000 easily to get into the court, not counting appeals, which you know the city will, just to recover the damage.

I don't know if congressman can do anything because of the federalism issues. Your best option is perhaps to get money from insurance and let the insurance company to deal with the city and the possible lawsuit. Although you have my sympathies, I just don't think it is worth the fight.
请您先登陆,再发跟帖!

发现Adblock插件

如要继续浏览
请支持本站 请务必在本站关闭/移除任何Adblock

关闭Adblock后 请点击

请参考如何关闭Adblock/Adblock plus

安装Adblock plus用户请点击浏览器图标
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安装Adblock用户请点击图标
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”