Small Claims ruling and Double Jeapordy

[DestinVol]

Our condo board of directors took us to SC court over a violation of the Pet Policy Amendment. We have two small Dachshunds and the Amendment says you can only have one. We had heard stories about the Amendment saying that it was railroaded through by a board president without regards to legality. We had a local lawyer peruse the documents and votes and he found numerous violations.
When we got to SC court I brought up these violations and the judge agreed ruling, "the plaintiff (board of directors) failed to establish that it had properly enacted an amendment to its bylaws under which it could properly impose a penalty against the defendants. Go hence without day." This was Oct 2012. Fast forward to today and the condo board is attempting to fine us on the SAME ISSUE. There has been no revote to the amendment or anything.
Is this not double jeopardy as we have a judge's ruling against our board?
Thank you.

 

[army judge]

Sorry, double jeopardy ONLY attaches for CRIMINAL PERSECUTIONS.
CRIMINAL PERSECUTIONS can only be initiated by the governmental authorities.
Your HOA behaves in that manner, but it is not governmental authority.
Double jeopardy, as do ALL of our protections and rights, are flow to people in this country from their governments, not each other.
Sorry, this snt double jeopardy, and it'll never be double jeopardy.
It could be malicious persecution, or misuse of the legal process.
But, my best advice is to move and never buy property where you live under the abusive, jack boots of private thugs behaving as if they're governmental thugs.

Isn't one abuser enough? It is for me. That's why I live in (and only own property) an unincorporated part of a county.

 

[army judge]

A better question to ask, OP, is how do the HOA STASI, get away with suing you in SC; when you reside in FL?

You may have allowed yourself to be sued illegally.

I'm betting it has something to do with the HOA enslavement agreement you've signed.

 

[DestinVol]

Thank you, army judge. I appreciate your reply, even though it is not what I wanted to hear. We just have a "Condo Commando" with a Napoleon complex. He is a former postman that was bit by a dog and now he thinks all dogs are Satan's own spawn. We beat him in court and he could not handle it!
Since then, he was voted out of the presidency and off the board all together. Now the new president is taking up his cause and fining us again.
Doesn't the judge's phrase "go hence without day" mean to not bring this matter again to this court?

 

[army judge]

Thank you, army judge. I appreciate your reply, even though it is not what I wanted to hear. We just have a "Condo Commando" with a Napoleon complex. He is a former postman that was bit by a dog and now he thinks all dogs are Satan's own spawn. We beat him in court and he could not handle it!
Since then, he was voted out of the presidency and off the board all together. Now the new president is taking up his cause and fining us again.
Doesn't the judge's phrase "go hence without day" mean to not bring this matter again to this court?

Yes, that matter.

But, another lawsuit is different matter!

You might want to discuss the lawsuit with a Florida lawyer.

I don't see how a SC corporation can sue a FL resident about an alleged action that occurred in FL in a SC court.

Somehow, I'd try and attack the ability of the SC corporation to serve you, and your inability to be served.

Discuss this with a FL lawyer.

 

[army judge]

Thank you, army judge. I appreciate your reply, even though it is not what I wanted to hear. We just have a "Condo Commando" with a Napoleon complex. He is a former postman that was bit by a dog and now he thinks all dogs are Satan's own spawn. We beat him in court and he could not handle it!
Since then, he was voted out of the presidency and off the board all together. Now the new president is taking up his cause and fining us again.
Doesn't the judge's phrase "go hence without day" mean to not bring this matter again to this court?

Yes, that matter.

But, another lawsuit is different matter!

You might want to discuss the lawsuit with a Florida lawyer.

I don't see how a SC corporation can sue a FL resident about an alleged action that occurred in FL in a SC court.

Somehow, I'd try and attack the ability of the SC corporation to serve you, and your inability to be served.

Discuss this with a FL lawyer.

 

[disagreeable]

I suggest you research whether the HOA clarified their rule in the time since.

 

[mightymoose]

Perhaps the new person is not familiar with the previous ruling? Share it.

Also, their assessing a fine is different than suing you. Don't pay the fine and see what happens.

 

[DestinVol]

I suggest you research whether the HOA clarified their rule in the time since.

The HOA has done NOTHING since the judge's ruling...NOTHING. They are taking us back to SC court 1.5 years later.

 

[DestinVol]

Perhaps the new person is not familiar with the previous ruling? Share it.

Also, their assessing a fine is different than suing you. Don't pay the fine and see what happens.

The "new person" was the VP when the pet amendment did not pass! Go figure! Also, thank you for the clarification between suing/fining...good call. They took us to SC court after we refused to pay the fine the first time. It totaled $1,000 and the judge said they had no right to collect this fine and to "go hence without day."