Themis armed with sword and balance scales

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims found last week that Rosemary Barbour's company, Jackson, Miss.,-based Alcatec LLC, had engaged in a fraudulent billing scheme as part of a $100 million, five-year maintenance contract with FEMA.

She was ordered to pay more than $350,000 in penalties and damages. In often colorful language, the judge described the testimony of Rosemary Barbour during an eight-day trial in May in Jackson as "exasperating" and “'bumble-headed."

Now there is something in the law that is entitled: Joint and Several Liability.

Assume the driver who hit and murdered your son in a crosswalk was drunk at the time of the accident.

The drunk is liable, most probably 100% for all of your damages.

But assume further that there were severe brake problems inherent in the manufacture of the drunk's Toyota.

So you might be lucky and pick up $100,000 from the drunk's insurer but you might tack on another million or so from Toyota.

Under joint and several liability or all sums, a claimant may pursue an obligation against any one party as if they were jointly liable and it becomes the responsibility of the defendants to sort out their respective proportions of liability and payment. This means that if the claimant pursues one defendant and receives payment, that defendant must then pursue the other obligors for a contribution to their share of the liability.

Joint and several liability is most relevant in tort claims, whereby a plaintiff may recover all the damages from any of the defendants regardless of their individual share of the liability. The rule is often applied in negligence cases, though it is sometimes invoked in other areas of law.

In the United States, 46 of the 50 states have a rule of joint and several liability, although in response to "tort reform" efforts, some have limited the applicability of the rule.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_and_several_liability

Why in God's name Barbour's cousin was not ordered to pay $100,000,000 is beyond me.

This $350,000 judgement is bullshite!

If I am the driver for a crew of bank robbers; I am responsible criminally and civilly for the entire mayhem that ensues.

That has been the law for a thousand years.

And getaway drivers are sitting in our prisons right now and are civilly responsible for all the loss by murdered and injured innocents as well as the amount of money taken from the bank plus interest.

RICO expanded this liabilty so that drug dealers lost and lose their boats and cars and real estate and bank accounts.

I am enraged by this type of silly tapping on the thumbs of felons by courts when they have been found to have contributed to the loss of $100,000,000 of taxpayer monies.

I admit I have not read the entire file on this Barbour but that money that was stolen is sitting somewheres and we need some collectors to make this system work.

QUOTE:

Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), an ignominious [the writer's word] right-wing freshman, loves to talk about the importance of fiscal responsibility and meeting one’s financial obligations. He’s equally fond of incorporating his own family into his talking points, saying things like, “I won’t place one more dollar of debt upon the backs of my kids and grandkids unless we structurally reform the way this town spends money!”

http://www.americasdebate.com/forums/simple/index.php/t21006.html

 

Personal responsibility is the cornerstone of repub thinking. That is for sure.

A judge in Chicago issued a preliminary ruling Wednesday against U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) in the Tea Party favorite’s child-support dispute with his ex-wife, ordering Walsh to explain why he appears to be $100,000 behind on his child-support payments.

Cook County Circuit Judge Raul Vega also wanted to know why Walsh wasn’t in court for the hearing — the McHenry Republican’s ex-wife, Laura Walsh was — and said he expects him to show up at the next hearing, in November.

Walsh’s new attorney, Janet Boyle, asked Vega “for what purpose” he wanted the congressman in court.

Vega gave her a puzzled look.

To which Boyle responded: “Mr. Walsh is a U.S. congressman.”

“Well, he’s no different than anyone else,” the judge said...

The effect of that ruling is that, instead of Laura Walsh having to prove that the congressman owes the money, now the burden shifts to the congressman to prove that he doesn’t owe money, according to attorneys for both Walshes.

Laura Walsh said her husband started making half-payments years ago and then making no payments at all, claiming he had no money.

Last year, when she saw he had made a $35,000 contribution to his own congressional campaign, Laura Walsh said she became suspicious about his “no money” claims and had her attorney file the motion that Judge Vega granted on Wednesday.

http://www.suntimes.com/7656284-417/judge-scolds-rep-joe-walsh-orders-him-to-prove-he-doesnt-owe-back-child-support.html

House Republican Joe Walsh, a Tea Party favorite from Illinois, will not be attending President Barack Obama's Sept. 8 jobs speech, the Chicago Tribune reports.

“I don’t see the point of being a prop for another of the president’s speeches asking for more failed stimulus spending and more subsidies for his pet projects," he said in a statement issued Thursday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/joe-walsh-barack-obama_n_946377.html

Representative Joe Walsh rants and rails about being responsible with money. In the past, he's slammed President Obama, who, in Walsh's words, has "bankrupted this country!"

A hero of the Tea Party, Walsh has spent a lot of time in recent weeks speaking in front of TV cameras. His goal? To sell the line that Democrats have ruined the economy, arguing against any debt solution that involves raising taxes on the wealthy.

The irony? Joe Walsh owes his ex-wife, Laura Walsh, and three children over $100,000 in back child support.
 

Here is a nice video on Joe Walsh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29Ur3Hquiz4&feature=fvst

Joe represents the racist, hypocritical repub Christian Right that hates the poor, despises the lower middle class who are sick of $7 bucks an hour....etc. etc. etc.

And yet, he denies his own children support. Oh but the amount is inflated. Over 9 years?

Basically, Walsh screwed his kids out of more than ten thousand bucks a year since his divorce.

Personal responsibility is the cry of every repub from that fucking Ron Paul to Rick Perry.

The lie is so blatant that I fear I cannot confront it anymore.

Barbour should be in prison with everything confiscated; from her cohorts to her children.

Joe Walsh should be in jail for intentionally failing to pay his court ordered child support and all of his assets should be confiscated tomorrow to pay all past child support as well as court costs and attorney fees.

I HATE THESE PEOPLE.