Cavalry Arms Press Release - Page 12

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cavalry Arms Press Release (Page 12 of 15)

Posted: 6/18/2008 4:55:36 AM EDT

[#1]

Just read some good news on this whole situation in another forum. If CavArms prevails at the asset forfeiture hearing, .gov may be on the hook for their legal fees.

From David Harding's FOPA Historical and Legal Perspective:

4. Awards of Attorneys' Fees against the United States
The traditional "American rule" denying recovery of attorneys' (p.664)fees to a successful litigant[426] has been extensively eroded by recent legislation.[427] From the standpoint of federal agency action, the Equal Access to Justice Act clearly marks the greatest incursion.[428] The retention of attorneys' fees provisions in FOPA and its predecessor bills despite passage of the Equal Access to Justice Act might suggest that FOPA establishes a still broader standard. The suggestion would be accurate. While the Equal Access to Justice Act allows awards only if the agency act was "unsupported by substantial evidence" or "not substantially justified,"[429] it is surpassed by a bifurcated standard of impressive scope: a prevailing claimant in a forfeiture action shall be allowed a reasonable attorney's fee; a successful citizen in "any other action or proceeding under the provisions of this chapter" may receive such an award if he establishes that such action "was without foundation, or initiated vexatiously, frivolously, or in bad faith."[430] The former, mandatory provisions are relatively straightforward;[431] the latter, discretionary provisions, are in contrast, likely to generate considerable controversy as to their scope, grounds, and procedure.

Scope
The award of attorneys' fees at the close of trial to a successful criminal defendant would seem a radical innovation in criminal procedure. Yet, there can be no doubt that FOPA accomplishes exactly that. FOPA's general attorneys' fees provision applies to "any other action or proceeding (p.665)under the provisions of this chapter"; in other words, the Gun Control Act.[432] It might be suspected that this was merely the product of legislative oversight, a failure to realize that criminal cases are "actions or proceedings," too. But the legislative history makes it inescapably clear that Congress knew and intended that criminal actions be covered. The first Senate report states unequivocally:

If an individual has in fact been deprived of his property unjustly, and establishes such in court, these [sic] is little reason to put the burden of costs upon the just claimant rather than those who have unjustly taken his possessions. Such an award is likewise to be made in any other action, civil or criminal, under this chapter, where the court finds it was undertaken without foundation or from specified bad motives.[433]

The later Senate report grouped both categories into a single sentence:

If an individual has in fact been deprived of his property unjustly or has been unfairly forced to defend himself, and established such in court, there is little reason to put the burden of costs upon the just claimant rather than those who have unjustly taken his possessions or forced him to defend himself in an unreasonable action.[434]

On the House floor, Representative Hughes argued with even greater specificity that, if enacted, FOPA "would have us paying attorneys' fees for persons charged with illegally possessing weapons who successfully defend themselves, something we do not do for others that in fact avoid conviction in criminal offenses."[435] Accordingly, the extension of FOPA's general attorney's fees provisions to "all" proceedings under the Gun Control Act must be read to cover, and to have been intended to cover, criminal proceedings as well as civil.

Grounds
FOPA's general provision for attorneys' fees mandates (with the use of the word "shall") their award when the (p.666)court finds that the action "was without foundation, or was initiated vexatiously, frivolously, or in bad faith."[436] Although the legislative history is remarkably silent on the background of this test, its genesis appears to lie in Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC,[437] in which the United States Supreme Court authorized awards of attorneys' fees to successful civil defendants in EEOC litigation. The Court approved of the tests employed in two circuits, one allowing fees upon a finding that the government's action was "unfounded, meritless, frivolous or vexatiously brought," the other "where the action brought is found to be unreasonable, frivolous, meritless or vexatious."[438] The Court made it clear that either subjective bad faith or pursuit of an objectively groundless claim would suffice for an award.[439] Tracking this dictum, FOPA draws a demarcation between the objective "without foundation" and the subjective "vexatiously, frivolously, or in bad faith" bases for an award. A wide variety of conduct may meet these criteria, ranging from pleading factually unfounded or legally barred claims[440] to failure to make reasonable inquiry into the law or use of harassing, though not technically illegal, tactics[441] to outright perjury based on personal spite.[442] The availability of awards for defense against an unfounded part of an action[443] may militate against "overcharging" a defendant.[444](p.667)

Procedure
The courts have generally held that due process requires a hearing prior to assessment of fees against an unsuccessful civil plaintiff.[445] In a claim against the government, due process for the defending party is not a direct requirement. Moreover, where an objective standard ("without foundation") is the basis for the claim, the court will often be in a position to rule upon the existence or lack of a foundation at the close of the underlying action.[446] As a practical matter, handling of the claim (particularly when based upon the subjective grounds) will require some manner of hearing in most cases.

Collection
FOPA requires, as a precondition of governmental liability for attorneys' fees, that such be "provided in advance by appropriations Act."[447] This language was inserted at the request of House Budget Committee members, who maintained that otherwise the bill might have led to commitment of unappropriated funds and thus require referral to their Committee.[448] The practical significance is not too great. In 28 U.S.C. section 2414, payment of final judgments and compromises is authorized, upon settlement, by the General Accounting Office. These are payable out of the "Judgment Fund," a continuing appropriation created by 31 U.S.C. section 1304. The sole significance of FOPA's qualifier will likely lie in restrictions on awards toward the end of a given fiscal year, when the Judgment Fund may be low or exhausted. In such an event, the motion may have to be carried over until the arrival of a new fiscal year.[449](p.668)

FOPA's enforcement and administration provisions thus comprise a wide spectrum of innovations. Administrative inspections, seizures, forfeitures, revocations and penalties are all sharply limited; attorneys' fees are, in contrast, liberally provided.

Posted: 6/18/2008 5:24:39 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:
SNIP....
And the parting shot, the SP asked why would anyone want to buy a plastic lower, it'll only break after the first time he shoots it.

Question: What is the issue sidearm of the NJSP?

(i'm asking because i legitimately don't know, but i thought it was either a glock or a sig, so..... there's a ~~50%~~ 99% chance his statement was ironic)

EXACTLY!!!

Our SP's like almost all the .gov agencies carry an approved sidearm made by, SIG, Glock, XD's, you know the ones...Imagine that!!!

Bunch of tarts I tell ya.

I called them earlier in the week to see if a collaspable baton was considered a concealed weapon. They told me that they weren't sure and that I should consult an attorney. A big WTF on that one as well.

Posted: 6/18/2008 6:14:52 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
SNIP....
And the parting shot, the SP asked why would anyone want to buy a plastic lower, it'll only break after the first time he shoots it.

Question: What is the issue sidearm of the NJSP?

(i'm asking because i legitimately don't know, but i thought it was either a glock or a sig, so..... there's a ~~50%~~ 99% chance his statement was ironic)

EXACTLY!!!

Our SP's like almost all the .gov agencies carry an approved sidearm made by, SIG, Glock, XD's, you know the ones...Imagine that!!!

Bunch of tarts I tell ya.

I called them earlier in the week to see if a collaspable baton was considered a concealed weapon. They told me that they weren't sure and that I should consult an attorney. A big WTF on that one as well.

Ha. Interesting update, with Google as my friend: link

HK P7M8 --> SW99 --> SIG P228

Posted: 6/18/2008 7:16:47 AM EDT

[#4]

Nice detective work Wise_Jake.

Just proves the point of the (ahem) over-achievers they have at the helm.

Posted: 6/18/2008 1:18:41 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

For CA residents: AGP is now taking our orders for Cav Aid 2008 lowers with set-screw type fixed 10rd mags (C-Products 10 Round Aluminum Magazine, with Magpul Follower)

Cavalry Arms has absolutely nothing to do with this, what AGP (or any of our dealers) do with our products is solely their responsibility. We will not send any firearms to CA. A new law has just been enacted (effective July 1st) that requires registration with California DOJ to send firearms into CA (also requires approval of each order prior to shipping). So if you have any warranty issues, and the lower comes back to us, we will only send it to the address/FFL we originally sent it to, we WILL NOT ship any firearms to any CA address. The state of California has made it too difficult and risky to engage in commerce there.

Posted: 6/18/2008 1:32:34 PM EDT

[#6]

I won't even take phone calls from Cali anymore

Posted: 6/18/2008 1:49:47 PM EDT

[#7]

Order #884, lower #124 arrived this morning!

Posted: 6/19/2008 4:45:35 AM EDT

[#8]

DAY 114

Posted: 6/19/2008 4:53:27 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

Posted: 6/19/2008 5:02:28 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

Posted: 6/19/2008 5:05:03 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

Posted: 6/19/2008 5:37:57 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
I won't even take phone calls from Cali anymore

Who can blame you?

I mean, you guys are getting invaded from the South, now invaded from the West......

Posted: 6/19/2008 5:44:23 AM EDT

[#13]

I received my CavAid lower yesterday... and consequently spent the dwindling hours of last night shaving the flash and finger f#$%ing it. Thanks AGP & CavArms.

Posted: 6/20/2008 1:39:08 PM EDT

[#14]

I pick mine up tomorrow. I ordered this thing months ago, but I still have to wait 24hrs to take it home.

Posted: 6/20/2008 1:45:53 PM EDT

[#15]

DAY 115

Posted: 6/20/2008 1:52:21 PM EDT

[#16]

Well still don't know/have anything new to report (a good thing I guess), but we did make a video to help people with the trimming of the lowers....

www.fileden.com/files/2006/10/27/323821/videos/CavArms_receivertrimming.wmv

www.cavalryarms.com/vids/receivertrimming.wmv

Please only download once so our bandwidth doesn't get killed...

Posted: 6/20/2008 3:28:36 PM EDT

[#17]

Download it from us. We have tons of bandwidth.

www.lifelibertyetc.com/files/receivertrimming.wmv

Posted: 6/21/2008 9:44:50 AM EDT

[#18]

DAY 116

Posted: 6/21/2008 11:54:32 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

If anyone is banking on that, I'd only count Monday-Friday as "days".

Wes

Posted: 6/21/2008 12:08:24 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

If anyone is banking on that, I'd only count Monday-Friday as "days".

Wes

Ironic, ain't it? They can come in to "work" on "business" and take your guns on a Saturday or Sunday, but those ain't work or business days.

If it's not work or business, then it must be "play" or "pleasure."

Posted: 6/21/2008 2:45:55 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

If anyone is banking on that, I'd only count Monday-Friday as "days".

Wes

Ironic, ain't it? They can come in to "work" on "business" and take your guns on a Saturday or Sunday, but those ain't work or business days.

If it's not work or business, then it must be "play" or "pleasure."

It's based more on the days the court house is open than anything else.

Wes

Posted: 6/21/2008 3:14:11 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

If anyone is banking on that, I'd only count Monday-Friday as "days".

Wes

Ironic, ain't it? They can come in to "work" on "business" and take your guns on a Saturday or Sunday, but those ain't work or business days.

If it's not work or business, then it must be "play" or "pleasure."

It's based more on the days ~~the court house is open~~they can get away with than anything else.

Wes

Fixed.

Posted: 6/21/2008 3:30:35 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

If anyone is banking on that, I'd only count Monday-Friday as "days".

Wes

Ironic, ain't it? They can come in to "work" on "business" and take your guns on a Saturday or Sunday, but those ain't work or business days.

If it's not work or business, then it must be "play" or "pleasure."

It's based more on the days ~~the court house is open~~they can get away with than anything else.

Wes

Fixed.

Fair enough, but since the court is what is left the burden do decied the "reasonableness" of a situation of this matter....

Wes

Posted: 6/21/2008 4:43:23 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
DAY 114

Ed, wasn't it at once speculated that there's an implied upper time-limit on the action without charges?
I remember something like 120 days.

I think someone said that the only time limit is something like "a reasonable period of time" and no specific quantity of time.

I am no lawyer -nor do I want to be

- so I don't know

The specific deadlines that were discussed previously had to do with the Speedy Trial Act, which sets deadlines for bringing a person to trial, but this only applies AFTER an arrest has been made.

Posted: 6/21/2008 5:29:49 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:

<snip>

It's based more on the days the court house is open than anything else.

Wes

Yeah, I know. More than anything, I was just complaining in general.

Which always helps a great deal, I've heard.

Posted: 6/21/2008 5:34:48 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
The specific deadlines that were discussed previously had to do with the Speedy Trial Act, which sets deadlines for bringing a person to trial, but this only applies AFTER an arrest has been made.

Hasn't their stuff been arrested?

Or was it just seized? Would be cool if they'd outfitted one of the magwells with a recording device, and could operate it by remote.

Then, the "gun" could ask "Have I been arrested? Have I been seized or otherwise detained? Am I free to go?" and maybe we could get some answers around here.

Posted: 6/21/2008 5:52:14 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The specific deadlines that were discussed previously had to do with the Speedy Trial Act, which sets deadlines for bringing a person to trial, but this only applies AFTER an arrest has been made.

Hasn't their stuff been arrested?

Or was it just seized? Would be cool if they'd outfitted one of the magwells with a recording device, and could operate it by remote.

Then, the "gun" could ask "Have I been arrested? Have I been seized or otherwise detained? Am I free to go?" and maybe we could get some answers around here.

Then it could do a MASSIVE MAGAZINE DUMP and yell "DISENGAGE!" while blading at a 45 degree angle.

Posted: 6/22/2008 3:57:09 AM EDT

[#28]

DAY 117

Posted: 6/22/2008 7:05:31 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:]
DAY 117

And I thought this was getting long in the tooth at...
DAY 80

Posted: 6/23/2008 3:22:41 AM EDT

[#30]

DAY 118

Posted: 6/23/2008 5:04:50 AM EDT

[#31]

Has Cavalry filed anything in the Federal Courts yet??? There is a timeframe for things to get filed under the Assets Forfeiture Legislation passed some time ago....You gots to request it back when the Fed's steal it.

Posted: 6/23/2008 8:43:59 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Has Cavalry filed anything in the Federal Courts yet??? There is a timeframe for things to get filed under the Assets Forfeiture Legislation passed some time ago....You gots to request it back when the Fed's steal it.

Our attorneys are handling the situation.

Posted: 6/23/2008 8:52:18 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Has Cavalry filed anything in the Federal Courts yet??? There is a timeframe for things to get filed under the Assets Forfeiture Legislation passed some time ago....You gots to request it back when the Fed's steal it.

Our attorneys are handling the situation.

Has a date been set for the asset forfeiture hearing?

Posted: 6/23/2008 3:13:25 PM EDT

[#34]

Lower came, opted for the "rough" finish.

I think the amount of flashing left over from the molding is excessive.

Some sections on the seams were near a 1/16th from matching the other half, this required rough sanding and some Dremel work followed by a light sanding. The mag well seam required a massage as well.

Nothing I can't handle but just wondering out loud that some people may want to opt for a more finished version.

* Still supporting the cause, hoping the best for your company. *

Posted: 6/23/2008 3:22:03 PM EDT

[#35]

Here's the receiver trimming instructions for anyone that missed them earlier in the thread:

www.lifelibertyetc.com/files/receivertrimming.wmv

Posted: 6/23/2008 3:30:46 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Here's the receiver trimming instructions for anyone that missed them earlier in the thread:

www.lifelibertyetc.com/files/receivertrimming.wmv

Damn nice video!

Posted: 6/23/2008 3:47:43 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
DAY 118

As glad as I am to see these updates... It still makes me sick.

Stay strong Cav Arms.

Posted: 6/23/2008 5:35:23 PM EDT

[#38]

I picked up my pink lower last Friday directly from Cav. Thanks guys, I appreciate it and so will the lady who will be the eventual recipient of it. I'm going to try to get down to AGP later this week, or possibly next week, for another lower just to stash away. After a few weeks when my gun funds builds back up I'll order the pink hand guards as well.

Posted: 6/24/2008 3:16:05 AM EDT

[#39]

DAY 119

Posted: 6/24/2008 11:59:52 AM EDT

[#40]

I picked up CAV AID #230 today and just got done watching the trim video. I had to watch it three times before I could pay attention to what she was doing.

Posted: 6/24/2008 3:50:14 PM EDT

[#41]

Just noted that UPS delivered my AGP package to my FFL

So now I just have to drag my butt to my FFL to pick up my CavAid receivers..

Posted: 6/24/2008 3:58:11 PM EDT

[#42]

ETA: Fuck it. And the ATF.

Posted: 6/25/2008 4:19:03 AM EDT

[#43]

DAY 120

Posted: 6/25/2008 6:10:36 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Here's the receiver trimming instructions for anyone that missed them earlier in the thread:

www.lifelibertyetc.com/files/receivertrimming.wmv

Damn nice video!

Does she want to get married?

Posted: 6/25/2008 6:14:34 AM EDT

[#45]

(edited by EdSr) But since I'm in my 50's, I guess I'd just have to settle for bumping into her like a grocery carts in WalMart.

Account locked for 3 days by EdSr

Posted: 6/25/2008 6:44:30 AM EDT

[#46]

Entirely uncalled for.

Posted: 6/25/2008 6:46:40 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
snip

I predict your stay here at Arfcom will be nasty, brutish and short.

Posted: 6/25/2008 7:40:58 AM EDT

[#48]

There's a better than average chance that is someone's wife.

Posted: 6/25/2008 8:00:37 AM EDT

[#49]

i think the insider just became the outside.

that woman is drop dead gorgeous.

as if that needed to be said.

Posted: 6/25/2008 8:40:38 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
***Crazy Talk***

While Meg might like to try hair/nail colors that are unusual from time to time, there is nothing "Fake" about her. Not only is she a "Natural" beauty, she is one of the more genuine people I know. She's also more then capable of protecting her "Screen Door" from having creepy old dudes fiddle with the it

While we are proud of what we were able to teacher, she came to us with a pretty good understanding of firearms (her father is a SWAT commander in AZ). She's also smart enough to not date anyone from the shop, but please use a little couth when talking about one of my friends

Oh and by the way.... Day 120

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cavalry Arms Press Release (Page 12 of 15)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us