Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: ChatGPT takes on the governor’s verbal tics
Next Post: Pritzker: Tollway chair leaving after a year “to focus on her health challenges”
Posted in:
* Facebook video from Rep. Dan Caulkins (R-Decatur) a week ago…
Big announcement today. We’re going to sue in Macon Countyover this unconstitutional gun grab. If you want to be a part of our group, send your information to me, Dan at Dan caulkins.com. Now, there’s no charge for this, but we certainly would appreciate a donation from everybody to help defray our legal expenses. So, if you can help us out, we’d like to have a $200 donation. You can send it to me here at the office or you can take it down to the Bullet Trap. All funds will be used to pay for our legal expenses. Anything left over will be used to help defend our Second Amendment rights. So, we’re gonna file this on Thursday. So if you want to be a part of the Macon County lawsuit, now’s the time.
Rep. Caulkins allegedly asked people to send the money to his campaign account.
* Today’s press release from Tom DeVore…
Today we entered our appearance on behalf of several citizens of the State of Illinois in the firearms lawsuit filed by State Representative Dan Caulkins in Macon County, IL. The filing is attached to this press release and speaks for itself. My clients asked me to protect them from any risks now associated with being solicited by State Representative Dan Caulkins to join his lawsuit. While only one of them submitted a financial donation to Representative Caulkins political campaign account, at his direct request for alleged legal defense expenses, she is hopeful the transaction will not be finalized, and her money returned.
My clients were led to believe each would be allowed to join the lawsuit as party plaintiffs and none of them were aware that financial donations being solicited were not payments being made directly to an attorney, but actually being deposited into the political campaign account of Representative Caulkins. Without any knowledge or consent of my clients, Caulkins lawyers failed to join them as plaintiffs, as each was led to believe by Caulkins would be the case, and instead learned only after the case was filed that they were now going to be members of a nonexistent entity characterized as an association which none of them had ever heard of or ever agreed to become a member.
Sadly, whether intentional or otherwise, several hundred citizens of the State of Illinois, in their efforts to obtain individual legal representation for themselves, are likely going to be required to find other avenues to assert their rights. It is never appropriate for non-lawyer politicians to engage directly, or as intermediaries, in the solicitation of clients in need of legal representation to seemingly further their own political or pecuniary benefit. They should consider sticking with the legislative process and leave the judicial process to the legal professionals. I am confident that my client who did in fact initiate a financial contribution to Caulkins political campaign account will receive her funds back, and I am hopeful that anyone else who’s similarly situated does as well.
* From DeVore’s legal filing…
As a result of Caulkins Facebook video, Lyons requested to join the lawsuit on January 24, 2023.
On January 25, 2023 at 7:54 A.M., Caulkins responded to Lyons and affirmed she had joined the lawsuit and sought a financial donation to his political campaign account.
Lyons did in fact click the link [https://www.dancaulkins.com/donate] and make a contribution to Caulkins campaign in the amount of $50 but as of yet is has not cleared her bank account.
On January 23, 2023 at 3:46 P.M., Martz responded to Caulkins and provided his Name, Address and phone number.
After Martz continually tried to determine if he was accepted as a client, Caulkins replied to Martz to be patient as they were checking e-mails with the lawyers.
At this point, Martz has no ability to know if he has been added to this alleged list of members or not. […]
Caulkins has admitted payments received as a result of his solicitation of clients to join his lawsuit have all, or in part, been deposited into his political campaign account. […]
It is clear from reading Caulkins legal jargon that he, and other unknown persons, decided to arbitrarily create this fiction of an unincorporated association merely due to the fact that hundreds of citizens responded to his solicitation to “join a lawsuit” and the resources it takes to onboard all these clients was likely overwhelming which is evidenced by Caulkins statement that an updated list of alleged members is forthcoming after e-mails are sorted out.
There is no recognized jurisprudence which holds Movants who merely desired to join a lawsuit, after being solicited by Caulkins, were assenting to becoming members to the Law- Abiding Gun Owners of Macon County for which they had never heard about.
This associational fiction, which Caulkins only advised the Movants of after the lawsuit was filed, is nothing more than a poorly devised and otherwise unlawful legal strategy to get around having to provide proper and adequate legal representation to the Movants, and those similarly situated, which is what each was lad to believe they were going to be provided
There are no by-laws, no constitution, no applications for membership, no membership dues, nothing available to characterize such action of Movants as an assent on the part of any of them to become a member of any association.
The law does not allow this fiction which Caulkins attempts to present to the Court through his attorneys as such would be a workaround to joinder and class action jurisprudence under Illinois law.
This Court will assuredly, at what will be the request of the Defendants, dismiss this alleged association for failing in all aspect to have standing as a lawful entity, but Movants are merely asking this Court to enjoin Caulkins, and the attorneys of record, from adducing their names on any list as alleged members of this association and further enjoining Stocks and Eck from seeking payment for legal fees from them as alleged members of this association.
WHEREFORE, Movants, herein request that this court enter an Order: […]
Finding under the facts presented herein, Dan Caulkins, or the attorneys of record are enjoined from submitting any list of members of the alleged unincorporated association which list would include any of the movants;
Enter an injunction enjoining Dan Caulkins to return any payments made by Movants back
to them instanter;Enter an injunction enjoining the Stocks and Eck from seeking payment for services from Movants which may be incurred in counsels representation of the alleged association
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:35 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: ChatGPT takes on the governor’s verbal tics
Next Post: Pritzker: Tollway chair leaving after a year “to focus on her health challenges”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So many grifters, not enough rubes.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:38 am
Pot, meet kettle.
Comment by JoanP Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:48 am
Regular Trump and Trumpist practice with campaign fund accounts and PACs
Comment by walker Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:50 am
As a purely legal point, DeVore is also wrong that an unincorporated association cannot represent the legal interests of its members. There is a bevy of “recognized jurisprudence” addressing associational standing.
Comment by Back to the Mountains Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:52 am
Pay ME not thee.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:53 am
The court case of Grifter v Grifter. Pass the popcorn, please.
Comment by G'Kar Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:56 am
===So many grifters, not enough rubes.===
Doesn’t seem to be a shortage by any stretch.
Comment by Dance Band on the Titanic Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 10:59 am
==As a purely legal point, DeVore is also wrong==
You can’t expect him to actually read case law.
Comment by Big Dipper Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:01 am
==leave the judicial process to the legal professionals==
Sound advice… I advise TD to take it.
Comment by Vote Quimby Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:01 am
It has amazed me the people convinced they need to give DeVore money. Even after it’s pointed out the Federal suits will cover them and DeVores process claims are settled against him.
Someday he’ll go away right?
Comment by Mason born Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:05 am
How dare this politician try to horn in on my grift.
Comment by Gruntled University Employee Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:09 am
Where is circularfiringsquad when we need him?
Comment by Trap Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:13 am
One day last week, in a run-up to the latest grift he was running, Caulkins gloated on a local newscast about how people at a pancake breakfast over the previous weekend had swarmed all over him with money hanging out begging him to take it so they could join his suit. Hope he has a no refund, no exchange policy for these fools.
Comment by Consider This Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:14 am
Shorter DeVore: “Hey, that is my grift.”
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:17 am
My head is spinning. I wonder if these poor folks have given money to DeVore to get their money back from Caulkins…so far, DeVore hasn’t worked for free.
For anyone paying attention, this shows what is really behind these law suits - money for DeVore. He sees that as his money and woe be to anyone who stands between him and his grift. On the other side, we have someone who needs votes and campaign funds; stirring the fear pot generates both.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:20 am
When two people you think are both fighting for your perceived rights are actually fighting over who should get your money, that’s the first sign you’re the sucker.
Comment by Flying Elvis'-Utah Chapter Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:24 am
So many naive, gullible folks ready to toss money towards grifters.
Comment by Rudy’s teeth Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:25 am
“Unfortunately, we found out there was no discount given for losing.”
That line from the story last week just perfectly sums up the legal ‘expertise’ of those who keep paying for these lawsuits.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:27 am
Will we see a duel? AR-15’s at 30 paces.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:27 am
DeVore is what is wrong with the legal profession.
Greed plus hate equals something unworthy of our great state.
Comment by H-W Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:47 am
If only the folks who invest in AR-15s and lawsuits would invest those same dollars in dental work.
Comment by Rudy’s teeth Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 11:51 am
“If you grifters don’t stop fighting I’m going to stop the car.”
Comment by West Side the Best Side Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:07 pm
This would be a great case for the Judge Judy TV show.
Comment by Back to the Future Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:08 pm
these boys are fighting to protect/use this: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10528709/Weapons-manufacturer-unveils-AR-15-KIDS-called-JR-15.html babies….
Comment by Amalia Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:12 pm
*All donations are final.
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:15 pm
Hoping Devore doesn’t get scammed put of too much moola
Comment by ANNON'IN Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:17 pm
This will be interesting to watch. Mr. DeVore is going up against two experienced litigators in their home county. I haven’t practiced in Macon County in years, but when I did, “they didn’t want nobody that nobody sent.”
Comment by Facts Matter Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:27 pm
Seriously, is this “fighting” between DeVore and Caulkins or is this the usual clown car dysfunction we’ve come to expect from them?
Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:40 pm
Grifter fight…grifter fight
Man, I really wish that Rich would repeal his ban on exclamation points just for posts like this.
So much grift…so little time…too few suckers apparently.
Comment by New Day Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:40 pm
“Clowns are the pegs on which the circus is hung.”- P.T. Barnum
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 12:42 pm
Caulkins is a Republican? Hmm. This looked like a typical Democrats move in this situation.
Comment by Lurker Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 1:08 pm
“Caulkins is a Republican? Hmm. This looked like a typical Democrats move in this situation.”
This looks like a typical Republican attempt to (disingenuously) shift blame…no cigar.
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 1:16 pm
Lurker at 1:08- please explain. How is Caukins fleecing citizens for joining a lawsuit that likely won’t have any effect of the law’s outcome a “typically democrats move”?
Comment by Roadiepig Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 1:16 pm
This filing is further proof that DeVore thinks he stumbled on a “business model.” That’s non-proprietary; that’s actually not new; that carries a ton of legal obligations, which businesses hate. I think crowd-funded litigation is a problem, but there’s very little difference between crowd-funding and mommy/daddy paying your legal bills - the source of the money doesn’t matter as long as the named party has standing.
Comment by W.C. Fields Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 1:22 pm
Laywer vs. Politician…the cage match would generate record gate.
The public will pay to see either lose…plus a re-match.
Gonna shop the idea to Dana White.
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Jan 30, 23 @ 4:21 pm