I just got home from work and heard the tail end of a Judge Judy show.
Apparently, the guy bought some merchandise with bad checks. He was caught and went to court. I don’t know about the criminal penalties, and there were some, but he paid full restitution. So, is the merchandise now his to keep? Or, does the merchant get the merchandise back and the full sales price of the stuff?
Peace,
mangeorge
I believe he gets to keep whatever merchandise it is. IANAL but i think they would just repo the stuff you bought with the bad cheques if they really wanted to stuff back. Since he ended up paying anyway, he probably got to keep it. Or maybe the stuff he bought was in bad condition after he bought it so they probably dont even want it back.
Well, JJ made him give it back, whatever “it” was. Didn’t want him to “profit” from his wrongdoing. Like I said, I just caught the end of her spiel.
I’ve asked around, and apparently I don’t know anyone who’s had to pay restitution. Buncha clean living folks, eh.
FTR; this thread is not about Judge Judy. It is a question about paying back.
The party providing restitution might have been paying court costs, bounce check fees, and other costs related to collecting the debt.
There are a lot of different remedies a court can order, and they all have specific applications and definitions:
[ul]
[li]Compensatory Damages - defendant compensates the claimant for his loss[/li][li]**Disgorgement **- the forced giving up of profits obtained by illegal or unethical acts[/li][li]Incidental damages - damages related to compensatory damages (e.g. a buyer’s expenses reasonably incurred in caring for goods after a seller’s breach of contract)[/li][li]**Injunctive Relief **- a party is required to do, or to refrain from doing, certain acts[/li][li]Liquidated damages - damages whose amount the parties designate during the formation of a contract for the injured party to collect as compensation upon a specific breach[/li][li]Nominal damages - very small damages awarded to show that the loss or harm suffered was technical rather than actual[/li][li]Punitive damages - damages not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but to deter the defendant and others from repeating the action that damaged the plaintiff[/li][li]**Rescission **- the unwinding of a transaction to bring the parties, as far as possible, back to the position in which they were before they entered into a contract[/li][li]**Restitution **- defendant gives up his unjustly gotten gains to the claimant[/li][li]Specific performance - requires a party to perform a specific act, usually what is stated in a contract[/li][li]**Trover **- recovery of damages equal to the fair market value of the chattel at the time of conversion[/li][/ul]
He paid everything, including the face value of the checks.
Hmmm…unless there is a law that states that part of the damages is the face value of the check (possibly punitive damages), I don’t see a reason why the transaction shouldn’t go through as planned.