Suit alleges arrest hurt full Rush band

by-tor · Post by **by-tor** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:14 pm

<a href="http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2006/jan ... local_news" target="_new">http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2006/jan ... al_news</a>

By <a href="http://www.naplesnews.com/staff/chris_w_colby/" target="_new">Chris W. Colby</a> (<a href="http://www.naplesnews.com/staff/chris_w_colby/contact/" target="_new">Contact</a>)

Sunday, January 22, 2006

With all three members of the world-famous rock group Rush now suing members of the Collier County Sheriff?s Office and the hotel where their guitarist was hurt, the legal battle that began after a New Year?s Eve 2003 party continues.

Rush founder Alex Zivojinovich, known onstage as Alex Lifeson, his son Justin and daughter-in-law Michelle were given permission to add bandmates Neil Peart and Geddy Lee to their lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Fort Myers.

The multimillion-dollar lawsuit alleges the band suffered financial damages because of Alex Zivojinovich?s injuries, arrest and criminal case.

Zivojinovich?s nose was broken by one of the deputies, and he was zapped with a stun gun several times. After his arrest, state prosecutors charged him with two felony counts of battery on a law enforcement officer.

The altercation happened after his son, Justin, was asked to leave the Ritz-Carlton Hotel. Justin was reported by security agents as drunk, and he had jumped onstage to sing where the house band had just performed. He was asked to leave but resisted, and deputies were called to force his removal from the hotel.

A struggle followed, in which Justin also was battered, according to his lawsuit. His father was hurt after trying to intercede, according to court papers.

Alex Zivojinovich?s injuries and criminal charges cost the band a lot of time in the recording studio. It interrupted part of its 30th anniversary world tour. And the pending case hindered his international travel, even though he was out of jail on bond and was allowed to leave the country.

?Basically what we?re talking about is a very unique organization,? Naples attorney Michael McDonnell said of his clients, not only the band but its corporations. ?They?re up there with the Beatles and the Stones, and because it?s a unique organization you can?t just replace one of the members.?

After the lawsuit was amended to add the band members and the five companies associated with them, a defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.

Judith Mercier, an Orlando lawyer for Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co. and security chief Frank Barner, argued the plaintiffs can?t prove any injury to the other band members.

?A plaintiff who complains of harm flowing merely from the misfortunes visited upon a third person by the defendant?s acts is generally said to stand at too remote a distance to recover (monetary damages),? according to the motion.

Rush?s claim of a loss of business revenue is too remote and indirect to establish that all its members suffered damages, according to Mercier, who was unavailable for comment Thursday.

The attorney for the deputies has yet to file a response to the amended lawsuit. But the attorney has said he?s seen no evidence that the band lost any revenue.

Even so, the defendants have argued the three Zivojinoviches weren?t falsely arrested or battered by deputies. The filed court papers alleged Justin was drunk and resisted the deputies, who only were following the hotel?s request that he be escorted from the property because of his disorderly behavior.

When Alex Zivojinovich intervened, he shoved Deputy Amy Stanford down a stairwell and spit blood in Deputy Christopher Knott?s face, according to countersuits, which seek an unspecified amount of damages.

Prosecutors later dropped a misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest without violence against Michelle Zivojinovich. As their trials were set to begin, the father and son pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor, without a formal conviction on the charge. They received a year of probation.

McDonnell said Thursday he believes the plaintiffs? arguments about damages are sufficient.

?We?re prepared to show there were tens of thousands of dollars worth of damages. It?ll be up to a jury to determine how much to award,? McDonnell said.

schuette · Post by **schuette** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:58 am

if they can prove that there was a loss of money fair enough...if not I hope it doesnt do any damage to the case for Alex's getting battered...

Middle Kingdom · Post by **Middle Kingdom** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 9:52 am

I don't think it can be proven.
It can be argued, but it will be very tough to be proven.

I think Alex's legal team is trying to use the band
as leverage. We'll see where that leads.....

Soup4Rush · Post by **Soup4Rush** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:20 am

Middle Kingdom wrote:I don't think it can be proven.
It can be argued, but it will be very tough to be proven.

I think Alex's legal team is trying to use the band
as leverage. We'll see where that leads.....

bad bad idea, in my humble opinion. It's not like anyone is hurting for cash here, I understand its not the money its the point, but I don't see any good coming out of this. unless your one of the lawyers. I think they need to move on and accept it for what it was. As much as I love Alex, there was alchohol involved and we have all done things we regret while under the influence.

Middle Kingdom · Post by **Middle Kingdom** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:58 am

I don't see the need for it either.

I'm wondering if they think Naples will settle
now that they are up against a rock band.
Trying to persuade public opinion, and 'turning the people against
the town' type of thing?

I dunno.....

Kares4Rush · Post by **Kares4Rush** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:02 am

I think I agree with both of you. I can't see much good coming out of this tack.

I know I don't know the whole story but it just seems it is just a bad idea. No-one will win. Except, of course, the lawyers.

Grandpa Grizz · Post by **Grandpa Grizz** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:53 am

I know my opinion is unpopular with the group on this board from some posts I made when I first joined here, but here goes. ALEX WAS TASERED SIX TIMES! This was after he had his nose broken and was pushed down a flight of stairs. He was face down on the floor and could have been easily hand-cuffed. But no. Instead he was tasered SIX TIMES! I won't go on too much about this. If you want to know how I feel in greater detail, read my posts on CP. The thread is titled: ALEX WAS TASERED SIX TIMES!

Alex has every right to pursue justice in this matter. And I am very proud of Geddy and Neil for supporting their friend.

That's it in a nutshell.

Peace

Bill

Soup4Rush · Post by **Soup4Rush** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:07 pm

I agree with you there, but he should have fought that in the criminal case instead of a plea bargain to get a reduced sentence. If he was indeed fighting with the police than they had every right to use whatever means needed to subdue him and restore order to the scene. since alcohol was indeed a factor and his son was being threatened in his eyes, how pissed off was Alex? enough where maybe he was not acting like himself and he was in a rage, enough where the police had no choice and did what they did for their own safety. who knows, but I think that should have been fought in the criminal case. this civil trial makes Alex and Rush look like a bunch of money grubbers. Think how the casual person who has no interest in Rush perceives this; a bunch of spoiled, rich rockstars who think they are above the law.

Middle Kingdom · Post by **Middle Kingdom** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:41 pm

Hopefully it can be shown that
the band is not trying to be above the law.

I'm betting Neil and Geddy okayed this as a show of support.
That's what I read into it.
I think it's more for the leverage of making the police look
at fault, and settle things to get it out of the news.

Julie · Post by **Julie** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:58 pm

Soup4Rush wrote:I agree with you there, but he should have fought that in the criminal case instead of a plea bargain to get a reduced sentence. If he was indeed fighting with the police than they had every right to use whatever means needed to subdue him and restore order to the scene. since alcohol was indeed a factor and his son was being threatened in his eyes, how pissed off was Alex? enough where maybe he was not acting like himself and he was in a rage, enough where the police had no choice and did what they did for their own safety. who knows, but I think that should have been fought in the criminal case. this civil trial makes Alex and Rush look like a bunch of money grubbers. Think how the casual person who has no interest in Rush perceives this; a bunch of spoiled, rich rockstars who think they are above the law.

I agree. It's refreshing to read a thread where my views are in the majority.

Hi Grizz!

Grandpa Grizz · Post by **Grandpa Grizz** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:45 pm

Julie wrote: I agree. It's refreshing to read a thread where my views are in the majority.

Hi Grizz!

Julie · Post by **Julie** » Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:50 pm

Grandpa Grizz wrote:
Julie wrote: I agree. It's refreshing to read a thread where my views are in the majority.

Hi Grizz!

Walkinghairball · Post by **Walkinghairball** » Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:46 pm

And I still think Al should whoop a knot in Justins head for causing all this Bulls**t in the first place.

Peace.

awip2062 · Post by **awip2062** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:36 am

You buried the hatchet, but have ye sat down to a nice meal of fry bread with the man yet, Bro?

Walkinghairball · Post by **Walkinghairball** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:27 pm

Have you......................well with me yeah.

Hey, I would have fry bread or drinks any time with anyone here. You know that.