    
admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin
Post Number: 295
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 8 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 4:43 am: | 
|
1/18/05 TUESDAY: Consumer Protection lawsuit against Diebold now in play
DISCOVERY SCHEDULED TO COMMENCE Feb.4. Black Box Voting board member Jim March and Executive Director Bev Harris filed two lawsuits against Diebold in California. The first, a false claims ("Qui Tam") suit, is expected to settle shortly for a $2.6 million payout to the state of California by Diebold.
The California false claims case is the first successful consumer case against Diebold, and at a $2.6 million reimbursement to California taxpayers, will assign the largest penalty in any voting machine-related case so far.
California is expected to compensate Harris and March for their original research, which developed the case. The exact figure has not yet been determined by the courts, but the initial proposed settlement allocates around $76,000. Bev Harris’s compensation will go to Black Box Voting, as a restricted contribution which must be spent specifically on additional consumer litigation to protect election integrity.
March and Harris have been joined by three other Californians in a second lawsuit, alleging fraudulent business practices and unfair competition by Diebold. Papers were filed this week in Sacramento Superior Court reactivating this lawsuit, which will provide a vehicle for seeking discovery from Diebold about its business practices and voting systems.
Some of the Qui Tam money is tagged towards underwriting discovery in this case. Whereas in the Qui Tam case, the California Attorney General was able to assert control, this newly reactivated case allows the plaintiffs more direct control over discovery. Plaintiffs have requested four months to conduct discovery, and plan to provide written interrogatories and witness requests by Feb. 4, 2005. |
