United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Summary

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. U.S. v. Kattar 840 F.2d 118 (1988…

Though litigation certainly is a lawful threat in response to a breach of contract, it is not obvious that every form of economic fear is equally legitimate, even where there is a "claim of right" to the property.
However, because we reject Kattar's claim that he had a "claim of right" to the $67,000, we need not reach the question of whether Kattar's threat to go to Flynn would itself have been "wrongful" even if he did have a legal right to the reward.
Source: Wikisource

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. U.S. v. Kattar 840 F.2d 118 (1988…

Kattar: He tells me they bomb guys. I said I'll blow the whole fuckin' Church up. I said I want these guys to take a look at you.
Reservitz: They bomb people?
Kattar: That's what he says.
Reservitz: Oh. I don't know that much about him.
Kattar: Who gives a fuck? All my life I've lived with those kind of people.
Reservitz: Well, I met these people. The people I met didn't seem like they could bomb themselves, never mind anybody else.
Source: Wikisource

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. U.S. v. Kattar 840 F.2d 118 (1988…

Kattar: He's the guy I's told "I'll break your fuckin' head." He's the one that got smart. These are not the words of a man who's running scared. And even if the jury had been persuaded that Kattar feared the Church, the evidence overwhelmingly indicated that his threats were not made as a response to that fear, but rather as a means of collecting the money.
More significantly, any testimony of Shervell that the Fair Game Policy was still in effect would have added nothing to Kattar's defense. That defense concerns Kattar's own state of mind.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature