• ChooseProgress.net (Criminal Site)
  • Ryan’s FB Fan Page

We Got This!

"I tell him I tried. I tried to keep memory alive; I tried to fight those who would forget. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. There is so much injustice & suffering crying out for our attention. We must take sides. We must interfere. -E.W.

  • Home
  • Give
    • Donate
    • Wish List
      • Wish List Items Needed
      • Wish List Orders Received
  • The Story
  • Blog
    • Main Blog
    • Guest Articles
  • News
  • Photos
    • Photos
    • Video
  • About
    • Contact Me
    • About Ryan
    • Keep Ryan Relevant
    • About Me
    • About RyansRally.org
  • Legal
    • Website Disclaimer
    • Civil Lawsuit Complaint
  • Commonly Asked
You are here: Home / News / Federal Court Rules on Vantrease Donor Information Request

Federal Court Rules on Vantrease Donor Information Request

October 25, 2012 by Ryan's Rally LLC 41 Comments

The Federal Court ruled on the request made by Austin Vantrease. I will get into that ruling where Vantrease was requesting names, addresses, and amounts given by donors soon enough. Before this, I will give the background, with  a few things to say of my own. 

I’m actually writing this the night before this announcement is made (meaning last night, Wednesday) and will finish when it is announced. Please consider what I write as my opinion. By now, most should know I am forthright and honest with the website’s readers. People say I’m “real and raw” and I like this characterization. I tell you (almost) everything in due time; and hold the sugar-coating, please. Thank you for allowing me to be so open. More precisely, thank you for putting up with me.

To follow is my recap. Anyone who wishes can look this case up on their own. I would guess there is a fee. Here is the information, if you’re so inclined:

  • Case: 1:11-cv-00149-IMK-JSK
  • Document: 174
  • Filed: 10/24/2012
  • Initial Filing: Civil Lawsuit Complaint (2.5 pages)

 

Undisputed Facts:

The following facts are undisputed. Plaintiff Ken Diviney and others have engaged in fund raising to help pay for Ryan Diviney’s medical costs and other expenses. Such efforts include solicitation of donations through a website, “Ryan’s Rally,” and fund raising events such as road races and dinners. Plaintiffs have received charitable contributions from a wide variety of individuals and organizations to help defray Ryan Diviney’s medical costs and other expenses. [1]

Vantrease Motion and Contentions:

The names and addresses of all individuals, business organizations, charitable organizations, educational institutions, public or private agencies, or other persons or entities, with the exception of private health insurance companies insuring Ryan Diviney or his parents, who or which have contributed any funds and/or tangible items for the care and support of Ryan Diviney since November 7, 2009. [1]

Copies of any documents recording the dates and amounts of financial donations and/or tangible donations made by the persons or entities identified above. [1]

My Legal Objection:

Plaintiff’s objected to both the interrogatory and request for production on the ground that the information requested was irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. [1]

Plaintiffs objected to Request for Production on the basis the request was “overly broad, unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated… [1]

Vantrease’s Claim for Wanting Donor Information:

Defendant Vantrease first argues the information regarding the identities of persons or corporations who or which have donated funds or items for the care and support of Ryan Diviney is relevant and discoverable because it may prove or disprove bias on the part of the witness or juror. [1]

Defendant further argues that an exception to the “collateral source rule” may apply… [1]

 

Allow Me to Summarize:

Okay, did you get all that? No problem if you didn’t because I’ll break it down… as I understand it.

Austin Vantrease wants everything about everybody related to donations. He claims this is necessary to: 1) ensure fair witnesses and jury selection, and 2) reduce his overall potential financial obligation (this is the “collateral source rule” mentioned earlier).

I strongly disagree. Not only that but his attorney’s argument seems incredibly weak. Almost non-existent, I would suggest.

First, witnesses are thoroughly deposed and jurors go through an extensive selection process. There are many, many opportunities for attorney’s to find (and remove) witnesses and people from the jury pool. Even still, I offered to give a donation list to the court (and not Vantrease) to cross-reference jury candidates and witnesses. Problem solved, as I see it. This way a violent felon isn’t running around a maximum-security prison with the names and addresses of good people who were only wanting to help my son.

Second, on offsetting his likely financial troubles, I am outraged; To me, Austin Vantrease has no claim to decent people’s goodwill! How dare he! Really, what kind of cad would even think of this, let alone ask? Let’s look at this in real terms. In effect, a generous person who donated, say a pillow for Ryan to rest his head on at night, would have it ripped out and “re-gifted” from Vantrease. Tell me, am I not thinking about this right?

So, tonight I wait for the court’s decision. You will know quickly after I do. This can go two ways:

  1. We Lose. I consider even a partial favorable/unfavorable ruling as losing. This means I go down the extensive and expensive road of appealing. It puts my plan of a class action suit and injunction in play. It means I potentially find myself in jail before too long for being in contempt of court. I promise you, I will only give your personal information to a violent felon as a last resort. I will protect those people who helped Ryan to the greatest extent possible (and this is where it would be harmful to Ryan, not me). You can bet your house on that. It’s a simple principle… you have Ryan’s back and I will, in turn, have yours. Fair enough?
  2. We Win. In this case, I do my best to recover from the chilling effect of people uncomfortable donating over the past few months. Hey, I don’t blame anyone one iota for being hesitant. I haven’t actually analyzed it, but it seems contributions have declined sharply. Vantrease continues to harm Ryan, even from within the walls of Huttonsville Prison.

 

The Judgement:

DENIED! We won, hands-down. The court found all claims moot (i.e., presenting no real controversy). It was a huge victory for Team Diviney.

Turns out, the court didn’t even take us up on our offer to provide the donor list to it. It is just fine with traditional jury selection and witness verification. What’s more, the ruling says “There is not a shred of evidence to suggest the four (4) rationales applied in Anderson [collateral source rule] for admission are present in the instant case.” This, to me, would be a crushing defeat if I were on the other side of this lawsuit.

I see this as the United States Federal Court protecting good and caring people who voluntarily make donations from undue fear.

Okay, back to the decline in donations that this inane action has potentially caused. This ruling should not only alleviate any earlier donor fears, but give confidence that you will not be bullied by anyone going forward. Please, if you were holding off to see the outcome of this case, it’s now safe to go ahead with your donations (easily done by using the link above the Blue Moon Ad to the upper-right).

 

What I Anticipate Next:

I’m guessing this ruling will not sit well with Vantrease. I predict he will be asking for the Anti-Parole Petition list. Sour grapes! Not sure what it will help him to have a publicly signed document that will go to the State of West Virginia anyhow (other than to try and wear me down… which will NEVER happen). People who signed this really don’t care what he thinks. Still, I believe I might object on the same grounds as the donor list.

I’ll let you know if he does.

###

Disclaimer: This post is my opinion (in general) and my take on the court’s ruling (specifically). Further, It’s speculation on Vantrease’s (to include his legal counsel’s) thoughts and actions. Only he knows with 100% certainty why he does what he does. I make no claim to the accuracy of anything and invite other opinions to comment (below)!

[1] Case: 1:11-cv-00149-IMK-JSK

Please! Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: News Tagged With: Austin Vantrease, collateral source, donor, Federal Court, Jonathan May, Ryan Diviney, Vantrease

Comments

  1. Jo Hobbs via Facebook says

    October 27, 2012 at 9:32 AM

    Happy, happy, happy! Joy, joy joy! If you’re happy and you know it, clap your hands!

    Reply
  2. Tony says

    October 26, 2012 at 9:17 PM

    Hooray! Glad this went in Team Diviney’s favor.

    Reply
  3. Jill in Morgantown says

    October 25, 2012 at 7:58 PM

    AMEN!!!!!! How do you eloquently say “suck it Vantrease!” :):):)

    Reply
    • DMounce says

      October 25, 2012 at 9:41 PM

      Perfectly stated, Jill.

      Reply
  4. Will Nier says

    October 25, 2012 at 4:58 PM

    Very happy to read this.

    I have always wondered why Vantrease was given such a light sentence to begin with. I also wondered why he wasn’t charged with a much more sever crime. I seem to think he deserve’s at least 25 years to life. It just seems to defy reason why he got such a light sentence.

    My prayers continue for Ryan and his family.

    Reply
  5. Jenny Regalia says

    October 25, 2012 at 4:05 PM

    I agree that was a total waste of time in the court system. The Lawyer just making money for himself it seems. They will never wear Team Diviney down! Ken, Sue, Kari, and our Grand Ryan are on this mission, they must beware!!!!

    Reply
  6. Leah Cohen via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM

    AMEN RITA!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you Lord for this ruling & I continue to pray for Ryan’s TOTAL healing & mercy for this family!!! Keep it up Ken & family!!! Blessings from your biggest fan in Los Angeles!!! <3

    Reply
  7. Leah Cohen says

    October 25, 2012 at 3:48 PM

    PRAISE GOD!!!!!!!!!!!! I was about to throw an absolute FIT in reading what was going on. I was so upset I had to skip thru some of the information & get right to the decision!!! This world is sickening, to think that something like this could happen number one, but to think that the criminal that did this would want to “get off” ANY responsibility for the consequences of his actions is besides me. The world is lucky I’m a nice Christian gal!!! And Ken, I so enjoy your posts & don’t ever feel like you have to hold something back from us .. what you guys have gone thru is DISGUSTING at best & I think you are an amazing man & family for how you are handling things. I will continue to pray for your son’s TOTAL healing & lots of money for you guys!!! 😉 I also pray that we can forgive those who did this to Ryan & also that they would remain behind bars until Jesus comes to get us all from this crapy world. WINK Blessings & happy weekend. xo

    Reply
  8. Jenny Kuhn says

    October 25, 2012 at 3:46 PM

    Congratulations Team Ryan!!!!! That is an amazing defeat and shows justice will prevail! That Vantrese boy doesnt deserve the anything-even the very jail cell he sits in!!!!

    Reply
  9. Colleen Brunelle says

    October 25, 2012 at 3:11 PM

    I love our Justice System when it works. This thug and his slugs for family members should just grow up, take responsibility and start doing the right thing – oh never mind, this did start out behind a dumpster.

    Reply
  10. Pam GrahamGeorge says

    October 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

    Excellent decsion by the court! Indeed, it is the RIGHT decision!
    Continued praise to TEAM DIVINEY! You conintue to amaze me at all our accomplish and do when continuing to shamelessly be harrassed by one spoiled, selfish, self-entitled, BRAT — who himself is supported by a family of the same character. What shame at the highest possible level. There are no words. Hugs and a ton of love and continued support to Ryan and each of you. God Bless.

    Reply
  11. Rita Caporicci Hoop via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 1:10 PM

    What Austin intended for evil, God can use for good. Media attention to his outrageous legal maneuvering will only make Ryan more relevant, and hopefully bring your family even more support.

    Reply
  12. Gail Doyle says

    October 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

    Ken, Great news and know that felon will never wear you out ,but why the %^$$#@ doesn’t he just stop being such a fool and his lawyer too.
    He committed a brutal act and is paying for it with his time(hopefully full sentence+).NOW lets see him pay court ordered restitution with out thinking it can come from Ryan’s donations(completely insane)
    Team Diviney will always be here for Ryan and you all!!!!!
    love Gail

    Reply
  13. Ryan's Rally: We Got This via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 1:03 PM

    The media is now hearing of this. Getting unsolicited calls for interviews. I’ll post these as they become available.

    Reply
  14. Jen says

    October 25, 2012 at 1:02 PM

    AV is an idiot and the court simply confirmed it. I am realizing I am getting a bit snarkier in my comments regarding this thug the longer this goes on.

    Reply
  15. Rita Caporicci Hoop via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 12:40 PM

    Praise God!!

    Reply
  16. Sue Haviland says

    October 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM

    This is indeed great news.

    Reply
  17. Ann H Tearle says

    October 25, 2012 at 12:13 PM

    Legal fees and expenses–reimbursed to the Court. Just for clarification. A

    Reply
  18. Ann H Tearle says

    October 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM

    God bless you, Ken–I am so very sorry you have to deal with these morons in any further regard. They know what they are doing, i.e., interfering with Ryan’s care via donations. I could not have imagined the court allowing this perp to deduct from what he has been ordered to pay, the donations made on Ryan’s behalf. That’s just nuts. That would benefit the perp. So i figure they are just messing with you any way they can. Perhaps the court should ADD to the perp’s restitution obligation, any legal fees or expenses he is running up by doing these frivolous filings. SHSP NGA love to you all, Annie

    Reply
  19. Jan says

    October 25, 2012 at 12:01 PM

    Such great news!

    Reply
  20. Mary Condy Mitchell via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:56 AM

    Oh happy day for Team Diviney!

    Reply
  21. Zenda Stevens Foy via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

    just read your blog [/]. i have the answer to my wonderings … thanks.

    Reply
  22. zenda says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:52 AM

    what ~I~ can’t imagine is anyone being supportive of mr vantrease (well, besides his lawyer who is making money off of this and probably will be for some time to come; nice, steady income). i even doubt that his lawyer, aside from the income from representing this, feels any supportive feelings toward him. i don’t even think that were i his mother (whoo) i would be supportive of his requests. egad.

    Reply
  23. Zenda Stevens Foy via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM

    a VERY possible scenario. i’d be interested in what the court(s) determine to be his motive. ‘course, i haven’t read yours yet. will do that!

    Reply
  24. Ryan's Rally: We Got This via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

    Zenda, I think he’s trying to wear out my mental and financial resources by challenging him at every inane request. My vision will NEVER be clouded by these attempts.

    Reply
  25. Zenda Stevens Foy via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    i can’t think of any reason that he should need this information.

    Reply
  26. Anna says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    Paula, I like your wording, “Team Vantrease”!
    Anyway, they just don’t get it. Instead of paying restitution they are wasting the state of West Virginia’s time, money and resources on an attorney and court hearings that are getting them no where except bad press. They are also taking money away from the care for Ryan, which would only work against them in the long run.
    Team Vantrease… you did this to yourself and your families, get jobs and pay the price for the crime.
    Team Diviney will never leave Ryan’s side!

    Reply
  27. Sam says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM

    Does this mean his attorney won’t receive the “dog clean up” donation mentioned in a post on the initial blog? Well that part is a shame.

    Reply
  28. Gloria says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM

    Great news.

    Reply
  29. Ginger Henry via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM

    So happy to read this outcome of events….God Bless…:-)

    Reply
  30. Carla Liberty says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:13 AM

    SCORE! I had a good feeling about this! Still, this caused undue apprehension on many levels…..not the least of which is time spent away from your son responding to such nonsense. I’ll give Vantrease and his lawyers one thing: They had some some nerve (the kindest word I could think of) asking for this information. Further, I think you are right, Ken. They are definitely trying to wear you down. However, they don’t know the Ken Diviney we know. The Ken we know would NEVER walk away from helping his son. The Ken we know would give his last breath to help his son and his family. Glad this is behind you, my friend.

    Love,
    Carla & family

    Reply
  31. Stacie says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:05 AM

    Thank you Lord!

    Reply
  32. Andrew Polzin via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 11:00 AM

    Amazing!! What great news! At least the court sees this kid’s request for what it is: BS

    Reply
  33. Diane says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:51 AM

    Another win for Team Diviney! Too bad Austin and his family can’t see that the Diviney support system is unbreakable! I’m proud to say I signed the petition (would have signed it more than once if possible). If he wants to know who thinks he should be in jail for the rest of his life I am sure most of us are willing to raise our hands.

    Reply
  34. Paula says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:50 AM

    Hi Ken, I’m so thankful for this, because — if the court had ruled any other way, there would have been a huge protest from Team Diviney — and we would have had to expend precious energy on dealing with the audacity of VanTrease, rather than on helping the one who needs and deserves our energy — Ryan of course.

    Only a real cold hearted group would seek to add further distress to your life, Ken — as if the initial attack wasn’t enough. My gosh they are either blind or just plain don’t care (which, judging by their actions is painfully obvious.)

    Team Diviney will continue to back up your family and do whatever we can to help Ryan live the best quality of life possible.

    Too bad the perpetrators who caused Ryan and your family to suffer so much don’t feel the same.

    Yet another hurdle created by Team Van Trease now overcome. I thought they went the lowest they could when Ryan was so visciously assaulted — but it appears they are continuing to go even lower. How low can they go? I don’t know, but if there were awards for cruelty they would win.

    Sending you love, hugs, hopes and always my prayers. Your strength is an inspiration to us all.
    Paula

    Reply
  35. Meg says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM

    That is so great to hear, Ken! I could not imagine why on earth the Vantrease clan would think the courts would rule in their favor. Hopefully you will see an increase in donations to help Ryan!

    Reply
  36. Cathi Blackmon says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:44 AM

    So happy to read about the ruling on this!!!

    Reply
  37. Joe Kinsley via Facebook says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:42 AM

    Great news for Ryan and your entire family. Vantrease shouldn’t have any rights. Keep him in prison as long as possible.

    Reply
  38. John Maletta says

    October 25, 2012 at 10:39 AM

    Hot dang! Hey Austin, you can kiss Team Diviney’s collective butts!

    Reply

Leave a Comment. I read EVERY one! Cancel reply

Featured Articles

Just One More Time. Forever is Worth it.

Wife's Turn: Family. It's What We Do.

Ryan, I know What You're Thinking.

I Lost My Big Brother that Night.

Her Turn to Cry: I Want the Old Ryan Back.

I Lost My Hero.

Most Commented Articles

  • Austin Vantrease Father: “Wrong Place, Wrong Time” (155)
  • Ryan Does Something New (155)
  • Ryan has Potentially Life-Threatening Infection (146)
  • Ryan in ICU. Illness Identified. (131)
  • Five Years (131)
  • Kari Diviney: Victim Impact Statement. (125)
  • “Just Let God Have Him” (and Other Stupidity) (123)
  • Austin Vantrease Siblings Speak Out (101)
  • Austin Vantrease Parole Hearing Scheduled (2013) (97)
  • Skull Surgeries Necessary (95)

Log In

SSL Certified: We are Verified & Secure!

Get Email Alerts of New Posts!

Contact Information

Ryan's Rally, ℅ Ken Diviney
21092 Carthagena Ct.
Ashburn, VA 20147
kdiviney@ryansrally.org

Search Ryan’s Rally

Copyright © 2023 · Metro Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in