Christina Sajous Suing Cabbie

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/9/15 at 9:56pm

I just saw this article here on BWW. I am not sure what to make of it honestly. Sad to say, that in this day and age I wouldn't put it past a cabbie to say what was said. Just wanted to see other people's take on the situation. Frankly based upon my own personal experiences with a cabbie in a similar situation I have the gut feeling that the cabbie was in the wrong. https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/SPIDER-MANs-Christina-Sajous-Actor-Ethan-Paulini-Suing-Cabbie-For-Racist-Homophobic-Remarks-and-Having-Them-Wrongfully-Arrested-20150909

 

 

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/9/15 at 11:47pm

That sounds horrible. 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 12:19am

If they were arrested because the driver lied about being paid they should be suing.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 6:24am

CATS, I don't know if you read the full article, the one that was linked from the BWW one to the Daily News one. But, in any event, they were not only arrested but charged with not paying the fare and resisting arrest. Hell, the only thing that was even sort of semi wrong was that when the guy was reaching into his pockets he wasn't clear with what he was taking out. He should have said what he was taking out only because that way the cops would know he wasn't reaching fora gun or anything like that. 

I've been in situations with cabbies where they were clearly in the wrong. Not that any cops got involved but still. I was in Queens the past new years, celebrating it with my brother and high school and college friends of his. When  a couple of us were getting in a cab to take us to the nearby Long Island Railroad station, I discovered during the ride that the cop was riding with the meter off. When it was time to pay my half of what should have been a ten dollar fare (bumped up to close to thirty) I refused. There was a cop nearby and the cabbie threatened to call him over. And, I kindly mentioned to him that he had no proof of what the fare was because the meter was off, and that what he was doing was illegal.

In any event, it may have been that the actor with Christina just wanted to be on their merry way, but to be arrested after paying double what they should've is nuts. 

[LarryD2]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 7:57am

Disgusting behavior from the driver and the cops. I hope Sajous and Paulini take them for all they can. (I'd say I hope the cops are removed from the force but I won't hold my breath).

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 9:09am

The Daily News article is much better than the stub that BWW wrote- absolutely insane that this kind of stuff is happening in 2015 (or 2014 when this happened), and that the cops took the cabbie's word for it that they didn't pay the fare? I hope they win a significant amount in damages.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 10:12am

I wonder why they filed a year after the incident.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 11:24am

Mister Matt said: "I wonder why they filed a year after the incident.

 

I know that filing charges and going to court and all that move at a snails pace. It could very well be that they got the ball rolling soon after the situation happened, but they weren't officially considered filed until recently. 

 

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 11:41am

Islander_fan said: "Mister Matt said: "I wonder why they filed a year after the incident.

 

 

 

I know that filing charges and going to court and all that move at a snails pace. It could very well be that they got the ball rolling soon after the situation happened, but they weren't officially considered filed until recently. 

 

 

I don't think that's it. It's a lawsuit and lawsuits can be filed in a day. It doesn't take a year. It may take time to work its way through once it's filed but it appears all they've done so far is announce that they filed. I'd also be interested to understand why it's being done a year later.

 

 

 

 

 

Updated On: 9/10/15 at 11:41 AM

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 1:46pm

I was speaking about this to my lawyer brother. He said that while filing charges doesn't take long in and of Itself, there could be things that resulted in them filing when they did. 

He told me that there is a three to five year (depending upon the nature of the incident in question) statute of limitations that one may press charges. He also informed me that it can be harder to press charges against some parties than others. The assumption that we both had is that it may be harder to file charges against two city agencies than it would if it were your average Joe. I mean for all we know they tried different avenues that took time and were pressing charges as a last resort. Just because they are pressing charges now doesn't mean anything fishy. There could easily be more to what's going on than stated in the daily news article.

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 2:36pm

Islander_fan said: "I was speaking about this to my lawyer brother. He said that while filing charges doesn't take long in and of Itself, there could be things that resulted in them filing when they did. 

 

He told me that there is a three to five year (depending upon the nature of the incident in question) statute of limitations that one may press charges. He also informed me that it can be harder to press charges against some parties than others. The assumption that we both had is that it may be harder to file charges against two city agencies than it would if it were your average Joe. I mean for all we know they tried different avenues that took time and were pressing charges as a last resort. Just because they are pressing charges now doesn't mean anything fishy. There could easily be more to what's going on than stated in the daily news article.

 

 

Even after talking to your brother, you don't appear to understand the distinction between pressing criminal charges and filing a civil lawsuit suing for damages which is what this appears to be at least based on the information and wording in the article..  A reasonable question was asked wondering why they would have waited a year to file this. It doesn't mean it's anything fishy but it is curious. No one asked you to try to defend or explain why there might have been a delay but if you want to offer a possible explanation you should at least understand that this is a civil lawsuit not a criminal proceeding. If you are trying to press charges against someone, you file a complaint with the police or some other law enforcement agency, you don't sue them.  If the cops and the cabbie acted and said exactly what the case alleges, it is shameful and I hope they are awarded a lot of money. But so far, we've only heard one side of the story.

 

 

 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 3:41pm

No you're right there is a difference. But there's still a statute of limitations for a civil suit too. You're right, we are only getting one side of the story. But, at the same time, given the statute that they may have attempted other avenues with no success hence them filing now. And believe me I do know the difference thank you very much. I didn't specify only because when it comes to filing there's a lot in common in terms of how long one has the chance to file etc.

[loliveve]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 4:15pm

I believe there is a one-year statute of limitations on civil suits such as this (eta: I'm not familiar with NY law).  Many, if not most, lawyers will wait until the eve of the expiration of the limitations (literally 364 days in a one-year limitations period) to file the lawsuit, because they cannot just trot into court and file a complaint without doing their own investigation. If they do, and the suit is deemed frivolous, the lawyer may be sanctioned by the judge and  reported to the bar association for further sanctions.  Here, for example, the lawyer could have to determine whether to filing suit against the cab driver individually, or also the cab association, as well as whether to pursue claims against the officers in their individual and/or official capacities (which would require a showing of an unlawful policy and research into the city's polices)... and whether to file in the state court or federal court.  All that to say, it is really not uncommon to wait nearly a year after an even to file a lawsuit.

Updated On: 9/10/15 at 04:15 PM

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 4:17pm

^ This, 100%. Well said loliveve.

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 4:22pm

@Islanderfan If they were going to pursue other avenues first, they most likely would have filed a complaint with the Taxi and Limousine Commission but the article at the end made it sound like the TLC had never received a complaint and was waiting to be served. But whatever, we'll see how it ultimately turns out. Loliveve's explanation at least makes sense.

Updated On: 9/10/15 at 04:22 PM

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 5:41pm

FishermanBob said: "@Islanderfan If they were going to pursue other avenues first, they most likely would have filed a complaint with the Taxi and Limousine Commission but the article at the end made it sound like the TLC had never received a complaint and was waiting to be served. But whatever, we'll see how it ultimately turns out. Loliveve's explanation at least makes sense.

 

That's what I was saying regarding other avenues. Once again we are in a situation where you think I'm clueless about things when I'm clearly not. I would bring up the other example, but I feel that doing so would be in bad taste given what with current events being what they are.

 

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 7:39pm

@Islanderfan, by giving a lengthy explanation about all the reasons they might not have been able to press charges when this was clearly a civil case, I didn't say you were clueless, your responses portrayed you as not really understanding what action was actually being taken. In one concise, detailed and well written response, Loliveve gave a perfectly understandable explanation as to why they would have waited. Your explanations let's just say, were not as compelling.  If you've already decided the case cause you had a negative experience with a cabbie, that's your business. But if a question is raised, you should let someone who actually might know the reason, answer it instead of just throwing a bunch of explanations against the wall hoping you could get one to stick which is what it felt like you were doing.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 8:28pm

Fisherman Bob

 

You're assuming (wrongfully again might I add) that I'm making an argument about something that I have a personal vendetta against. I don't and I'm not. I will be more than happy to refresh your memory if you don't recall the last time you claimed I did that and I was right.

[FishermanBob]

Posted: 9/10/15 at 9:06pm

Again, I'm not assuming anything. I've stated what you said and why it was full of factual errors. You simply won't acknowledge you had no idea what you were talking about.

 

My experience with you is that you have an agenda and will make things up to support it hoping no one calls you on it. When they do, you either ignore their comments or try to change the subject or just keep accusing them of assuming things. You did this last time and you're doing it again here. If you really spoke to your brother the lawyer, he would have cleared up your confusion about civil versus criminal right away and wouldn't have been discussing this nonsense you stated about how hard it is to press charges against city agencies. I don't know what you think you were right about last time but I believe everyone is entitled to their fantasies. You can continue this discussion but you'll be doing it with yourself.  I'm out.

 

 

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 9/12/15 at 3:11pm

I can't imagine why anyone would be reticent about bringing a suit that involved the police!