|
SWATJester posted:The entire point behind the Colorado code, like most other state self defence codes, IS threats to one life. A homeowner should, under this view, not be required to make a snap judgment, perhaps while just being woken up and under great stress, as to the intentions of a burglar. It generally carries a presumption with it that a crime committed in someone else's home is highly likely to be a violent one, and so the difference between an attacker intending to rough you up a bit, versus killing you, is not one that a homeowner ought to be forced to guess at. Especially when the consequences of guessing wrong are either committing a homicide or being victim of a homicide. Oklahoma makes this more explicit: 21 O.S. 1289.25(link) posted:B. A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:37 |
|
|
mboger posted:I updated my original post to reflect my retardation. Sorry about my arm chair lawyerin'. All lawyerin' is arm chair.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 19:21
|
|
|
entris posted:All lawyerin' is arm chair. Then I'm sorry about my scrimmage line lawyerin'. (I'm not very good at this.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 19:28
|
|
|
MalConstant posted:Yeah, it was red when I went through it. I'm sure the real lawyers will correct me, but I don't think they would be looked at as a whole. Even though you broke a traffic law and should have gotten a ticket if a cop saw you, it doesn't mean that your action was a cause of the dangerous activities that took place afterwards. Example: I jaywalk and a car that I hadn't seen has to hit his brakes fairly quickly. He is angry so he parks his car somewhere and then pursues me and beats me up. Also: If that red light camera caught both of you, it totally supports your story that you feared for your life and should mostly vindicate you from what happened. If you couldn't safely get away from him by pulling into the nearest parking lot or something because he would probably have assaulted you, then you legitimately feared for your life/safety.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 21:26
|
|
|
Louisiana's is straight up wild west.La. Rev. Stat. §14:20 posted:Justifiable homicide All that and I still would let some idiot walk out of my house rather than kill him over my hurt wittle feelings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 21:32
|
|
|
PoOKiE! posted:Example: I jaywalk and a car that I hadn't seen has to hit his brakes fairly quickly. He is angry so he parks his car somewhere and then pursues me and beats me up. The defence of necessity in most jurisdictions is narrowly defined and difficult to satisfy, there's no "should mostly vindicate" about his story. He needs a lawyer and you really need to stop giving advice about stuff you don't even have a good layman's grasp of
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 21:33
|
|
|
PoOKiE! posted:Do you mean that it was a double yellow or that you drove on the shoulder to pass on a one-way road? Please stop posting advice for other people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2010 21:44
|
|
|
entris posted:Please stop posting advice for other people. I dunno, I'm sort of enjoying the process. I'm hoping that there's eventually a post along the lines of "Getting sued for unauthorized practice of law and representing myself" segueing into "You people don't know what you're talking about; I'll be GREAT!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 01:38
|
|
|
PoOKiE! posted:Do you mean that it was a double yellow or that you drove on the shoulder to pass on a one-way road? It was a one lane road with a bike path. I get that when I went around the guy he was probably pissed off, but yes, it doesn't mean he gets to chase me around town with his car. I really hope it does catch him on camera. I literally went off the road at one light to get away and he followed right behind me in sight of the camera. That's when I REALLY took off and then at the next light I had the accident. Also, I realize attorney fees vary depending on the area and on how serious the crime is, but in my case the attorney said it would be $750 to help me. I absolutely have no idea what's a good price or if I'm being charged out the rear end. Does anyone have an advice on this? I'm thinking of a public defender since I'm just a college student with a part time job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 03:07
|
|
|
MalConstant posted:Also, I realize attorney fees vary depending on the area and on how serious the crime is, but in my case the attorney said it would be $750 to help me. I absolutely have no idea what's a good price or if I'm being charged out the rear end. Does anyone have an advice on this? What is he/she going to do for $750? It sounds on the low side for investigating, preparing and presenting (but not including trial) a 'road rage driver was out to get me' defense. PD systems can be hit and miss. I believe Florida has a dedicated PD system (generally good) rather than a contract PD system (generally not as good)
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 04:13
|
|
|
MalConstant posted:I'm thinking of a public defender since I'm just a college student with a part time job. You still make too much for free representation (at least in my state) America is a cesspool. Try contacting a recent law school grad, you can probably pay in pop tarts or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 04:14
|
|
|
e: this probably shouldn't be here considering the parties involved are paranoid as gently caress
JimmyBiskit fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Aug 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 04:32
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:The defence of necessity in most jurisdictions is narrowly defined and difficult to satisfy, there's no "should mostly vindicate" about his story. He needs a lawyer and you really need to stop giving advice about stuff you don't even have a good layman's grasp of Well that's why I prefaced "should mostly" because obviously his lawyer would be the one to determine how much can be proven from it. I'm aware the defense is difficult, but video would definitely help regardless unless he finds other witnesses. It doesn't mean he'd "get off" with a slap on the wrist, but it could only help in whatever he and his lawyer decide to do. The only advice I was giving him was to look into getting that footage because otherwise it's his elaborate story with no proof if the footage gets destroyed, deleted, etc. He acted like he was going to throw in the towel because he messed up by illegally passing a guy and was just going to take all the charges that are thrown at him instead of simply finding out if there's video to back him up. Since nobody was saying anything, I told him what I had experience with(i.e.Redlight cams) and that they do indeed shoot video most the time. I realize I shouldn't give him legal advice and as far as I can tell I essentially told him to see if he can get any video since it will hopefully help to show he's not making up some crazy excuse. What's so wrong with that? The other thing I said I prefaced with "the real lawyers will correct me" but instead of clarifying the situation I was talking about or saying what was wrong with the example I gave, I just get the standard "He needs a lawyer" and "Stop posting" comments instead of actually clarifying it so he can have a better idea of what I was getting at....although I thought it was pretty clear? Anyways, I think he gets it now so I'll stop talking to him about it then. Alaemon posted:I dunno, I'm sort of enjoying the process. I'm hoping that there's eventually a post along the lines of "Getting sued for unauthorized practice of law and representing myself" segueing into "You people don't know what you're talking about; I'll be GREAT!" Well I don't think telling someone how a redlight camera works or saying "You broke the law, but that doesn't mean the guy is entitled to chase you through the streets" constitutes legal advice more than most other conversations we all have throughout the day. Either way, I wouldn't do what you said, although it probably would be as funny as you describe. I actually was doing fine on my own but I recently found a very competent lawyer who actually took the time to look at everything I had and said I had plenty grounds to vacate and agreed to help me out. So now I'm paying a little bit more simply to speed up the process and take some weight off my shoulders for a little while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 04:35
|
|
|
PoOKiE! posted:Do you mean that it was a double yellow or that you drove on the shoulder to pass on a one-way road? You don't know anything. All the advice you give other people is wrong. All the things you try to do to help yourself in legal matters are done poorly. Get out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 04:57
|
|
|
Help! My ex-roommate is holding my poo poo hostage! Details below! First of all guys, thanks for creating this thread and making yourselves available. I always saw this thread while scanning other threads and having a place to ask for some neutral advice this late at night is great, it's going to help me sleep. This is going to sound childish, the dollar amounts we're working with here are probably a lot lower than most legal issues. About 6 months or so I moved out of this apartment I was renting a room in, we'll call the girl that rents her rooms out "Cat." There is also another renter (who is my friend rented the other room as well, he'll be "Dog".) He still lives there, and has tried to act as a moderator. After I moved in (January 2007) I was using Cat's computer chair that she wasn't using and she gave full consent. After a while it ended up breaking and I took full responsibility for it and I told her I would pay for it whenever I moved out. During the 2 years I lived there I acquired a rear projection TV and a leather dual recliner sofa from my uncle as he upgraded his own furniture. Fast forward to me moving out. I had no place to put my TV and Sofa at my new pad and I still needed to pay for the chair. I would leave my stuff there until I could find a spot for it and I told her I would pay for the chair when I had the money. There was talk of trading the chair and some money for my sofa, but NO AGREEMENT WAS REACHED. Skip to current events. I am moving again, and I want my TV and sofa, but Cat thinks that we agreed to trade straight up the computer chair for my sofa. She won't let me take EITHER Item unless I pay her 250 dollars. Here's our texts in full: Me: Hey Cat, are you going to be around tomorrow? I'm moving again and I need to get my couch and tv, only got a truck for Friday. Sorry I couldn't give you more of a headsup, I've been working my rear end off and keep forgetting to call you or Dog.. Her: U gave me the couch in exchange for breaking my computer chair.. I won't be here tmo, but I should be around Saturday if u wanna pick up the tv then Me: I'm going to pay you for the chair, because that's what we agreed to, I know we discussed the possibility of a trade, but I did not agree to that, I cannot come by any day other than Friday. I'm renting a truck to handle it. After this I had a conversation with Dog on the phone to see if he'd be home, but hes out camping and I got a number for the person who took my room after I left, out of town too. Cat talked to Dog as well, and he tried to convince her she's being outrageous and I'm not just going to let her keep my couch. It should also be noted that I never took the computer chair, Dog has been using it as a table since I left. I knew he was going to call her back so I told him to tell her I'd give her 100 dollars cash for the chair (oh it's like this but fabric http://www.officedepot.com/a/products/302062/Venn-High-Back-Vinyl-Chair-44/ one of the arms broke so i took the back off) Later: Her: I'm going to need 250 from u before u can pick up the tv and my couch.. that's for the chair with interest since u are going back on our agreement... I would not have let u get away with not paying me for so long, if I didn't think the couch was mine. I never paid her for the thing because she had my TV and couch the last 6 months, and she's never had a use for her chair so she never came after me to pay her back. I've been working and building up some money and am fully capable of paying her, which I plan to do, but no way in hell am I giving her 250 bux to get my own stuff, I'm already losing money on renting a truck again (this couch is huge, and weighs a ton). I'm going to call her tomorrow and I only see a few options: She takes my 100 dollars, I buy her another chair with that 100 dollars (I work at Office Depot so I could get her a better chair anyway), or I take her to small claims court and get my stuff and sue her for legal fees, the truck rental, and lost pay. I've never had to do anything like this so I'm a bit lost. She really thinks this couch belongs to her. I can prove it's mine with lots of testimony and family photos taken around it, in addition to my uncles testimony that it's mine. She has nothing that would hold up in court, except it is at her apartment. Final note: it's late and I tried to proof read this hunk of text as best I could, sorry for any horrible errors. I'll be moving my stuff tomorrow, but ill check the thread asap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 10:16
|
|
|
It's been two years since you broke her chair and you thought she might believe you had any intention of paying for it? Pay her and move on, even if you did have a legal solution to this it would be a huge dick move. Be glad she's not asking for storage fees.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 11:22
|
|
|
Nitramster posted:About 6 months or so I moved out of this apartment I was renting a room in, we'll call the girl that rents her rooms out "Cat." There is also another renter (who is my friend rented the other room as well, he'll be "Dog".) He still lives there, and has tried to act as a moderator. After I moved in (January 2007) I was using Cat's computer chair that she wasn't using and she gave full consent. After a while it ended up breaking and I took full responsibility for it and I told her I would pay for it whenever I moved out. During the 2 years I lived there I acquired a rear projection TV and a leather dual recliner sofa from my uncle as he upgraded his own furniture. Fast forward to me moving out. I had no place to put my TV and Sofa at my new pad and I still needed to pay for the chair. I would leave my stuff there until I could find a spot for it and I told her I would pay for the chair when I had the money. There was talk of trading the chair and some money for my sofa, but NO AGREEMENT WAS REACHED. Skip to current events. I am moving again, and I want my TV and sofa, but Cat thinks that we agreed to trade straight up the computer chair for my sofa. She won't let me take EITHER Item unless I pay her 250 dollars. Here's our texts in full: Ok, there are three versions of how you 'acquired' the chair: a) you paid for it before you left the house x b) you paid for it when you had the money x c) you swapped it with the sofa ! Here is what I (and a Judge) read from your story once we put it through the 'everything you have told me is to some extent biased towards you' filter: you are a colossal dick who broke someone else's property and then repeatedly lied about intending to pay for it either by a certain date or when you had the money (no I don't believe over the course of two moves over several years you could never scrape together $100) and only now, years later when the other party has some leverage over you are you actually considering settling up. Given that you admit there was discussion of swapping the chair for the sofa and that you have made no attempt to make a monetary payment on the damage, I find on balance of probabilities that it was far more likely that you agreed to make the swap when it was convenient for you and are now trying to renege on that deal. I make an order for damages to your ex-roomate of the cost of the chair, interest accruing on the standard rate from the date of the damage and a nominal sum for storage of your property. You owe her $250. Go back to her cash-in-hand and offer $150 along with an apology for being a dick (a decent apology costing nothing but usually worth a fair amount).
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 11:55
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Go back to her cash-in-hand and offer $150 along with an apology for being a dick (a decent apology costing nothing but usually worth a fair amount). And have the other hundred in another pocket if she wants to keep the $1000+ couch instead. Lucky to get out of this for her asking price.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 13:45
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:(no I don't believe over the course of two moves over several years you could never scrape together $100) He said it was six months ago. (Although I agree it was a dick move not to settle up when he moved out as agreed.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 16:08
|
|
|
Trillian posted:He said it was six months ago. (Although I agree it was a dick move not to settle up when he moved out as agreed.) He's still moved twice. I simply don't believe that he never had the money to pay up. He's chosen not to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2010 16:20
|
|
|
Anyone want to speculate on this lawsuit? http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/08/26/2010-08-26_family_sues_seaworld.html I'm curious (as a non-lawyer) because if you were able to sue someone because you were a witness to a tragedy completely unrelated to you, there would be a lot more lawsuits. Like suing an airline because you saw a plane crash from a distance or suing the drivers of a car crash you witnessed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 01:31
|
|
|
joat mon posted:What is he/she going to do for $750? It sounds on the low side for investigating, preparing and presenting (but not including trial) a 'road rage driver was out to get me' defense. Well I called another lawyer and he wanted to charge me $1750! This guy promised me that he could get the charges dropped because the case was bullshit and that I would be looking at some time in jail if I tried to defend myself.. I was told that for the $750, the lawyer would take care of everything and I wouldn't have to show up for my court date and there would be no additional fees unless there was a trial. Now all I have to do is come up with the money...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Ok, there are three versions of how you 'acquired' the chair: I haven't acquired the chair at all, it is still at her house, I've never took possession of it (unless you count me using it in my room in her apartment taking it). I haven't biased anything whatsoever, I have no reason to lie to internet people (I do realize though that all judges will assume I am, so I get where you're coming from.) Why would I have to pay for storage when she has been using my stuff everyday she's had it? I do agree that I have been a dick for not paying up, but I really have been running in the negatives for 2 years, and just this month got another job putting me in the green. I've only moved once, I didn't even end up doing the move I planned on today because the house ended up having fleas in it, so that's been delayed till sunday when I get another day of (to let the bombs air out) Also I got some advice to day that "possession is 9/10's of the law" in that since I've not lived there for 6 months and she has everything at her place a judge would say it is hers. Is that true even though I can get testimonials from others proving its mine (in addition to lots of pictures)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 05:14
|
|
|
Nitramster posted:Why would I have to pay for storage when she has been using my stuff everyday she's had it? You may not agree with it but that poster is right, she could be charging you storage for whatever you left in the apartment. Going to court over this would be pretty stupid just pay her the money she wants for the chair.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
Having everyone telling me to just pay up is making me actually want to pay up. I'm going to try to sit down with her, but she really is a psycho bitch and will probably start ranting and raving until I throw the money at her and have my friends blitzkrieg the furniture out. Anyway thanks for the advice, I'm taking it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 07:02
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:You don't know anything. All the advice you give other people is wrong. All the things you try to do to help yourself in legal matters are done poorly. And you know nothing about me besides what may or may not be interpreted correctly by text on the internet. Sure I speculated some early on, but only to get an accurate picture of what the truth was so I could make the best decisions. Anything I have said to other people has been my own experience with situations identical or similar to theirs and never as a definitive legal opinion. You are also dead wrong on things I have done to help myself. I have had all my motions in court heard so far and the judge agreed with me more than the prosecution and commented on how well I did compared to even the best pro se defendants she has seen over the years. If the things I have done were done poorly, I wouldn't have won my last traffic ticket, the two tickets in chicago for registration/city sticker that I wasn't required to have, the appeal of an unemployment claim from a previous employer, and my very experienced lawyer I just hired wouldn't have given me such a good rate and agreed to help even though he strictly works in a different county unless I had already done all the required research and presented many valid grounds for relief before the court. If the person I was responding to gave up and didn't look into any video evidence, he would be screwed later on. It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion is on what I said if he ends up getting video footage that helps him immensely in court because that was my only concern. Goons help other goons usually, so whatever. I hope he finds something useful when he looks into it early on and doesn't get in too much trouble because of his potentially bad decision. I respect all the general advice the goon lawyers have given and think it's great this thread exists, but I don't respect the instant condemnation given at times without any valid explanation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 07:43
|
|
|
Zero One posted:Anyone want to speculate on this lawsuit? Different states have different rules on this issue. In my state, in order to sue for negligent infliction of emotional distress, you have to be in the "zone of danger." If you were at risk from the horrible event, you can sue, but if you are merely a spectator, you can't. In other words, if a car splats a kid 3 feet in front of you, missing you by inches, you were in the zone of danger. Watching Shamu munch a trainer, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 08:48
|
|
|
Zero One posted:Anyone want to speculate on this lawsuit? Specific rules depend upon your judisdiction. There are two lines of thought in general: 1) Not letting people sue is a prejudicial and bigotted attitude towards people suffering from PTSD. 2) We require people to accept that bad things happen in the world and show a bit of moral fortitude. I waver between the two.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 09:25
|
|
|
This is the story of an enormous liar and possible scamster who took nearly $2k from me. My question is: what is my recourse? In late July, I responded to a Craigslist ad for an apartment share in Brooklyn. I met a kindly, sufficiently normal-seeming young adult who we’ll call Carl. I decided to move in with him, so he drew up a pretty basic rental agreement, we both signed it, and I gave him a security deposit (by check). A couple weeks later, he told me he’d be away the day I moved in and possibly a couple weeks after, and because of that I agreed to pay him a half-month rent in advance (also by check). One week before I was slated to move in, I got an e-mail to the effect of: "I’m having some personal issues and have decided to break my lease and move across the country. Sorry, Actie! Give me your mailing address and I’ll send you a cashier check." That was three weeks ago, and since then, Carl has lied about just about everything—mailing a check (multiple times), remitting by PayPal, sending a wire transfer, and a ton of other stuff. I'm happy to go into more detail, but didn’t want to burden this post with a description of the dozens of machinations. So, distilling the last few weeks into three main points: Carl has been unrelentingly dishonest; I still don’t have my money; at one point I did get a check (a business check, not a cashier check), which bounced. We’re now well past the check stage of Carl’s operation, but I think it’s really important that that happened, because I believe that in the state of NY it is illegal to write a check without having sufficient funds to cover it (but please set me straight, legal masterminds). I feel like I've been a victim of fraud, but do recognize that my "feelings" probably have little to do with fraud and its legal definition. (FWIW: I bank in CT. He banks in NY. Don’t know if that figures. The so-to-speak transactions in this situation took place in NYC.) I have all Carl's e-mails, most of his text messages, the rental agreement, the bounced check, and a couple of other supporting documents. This guy may be a bona fide con artist, an entry-level swindler, or even just a total flake. I’m betting on category two. I'll file a police report on Monday (maybe Carl's got a big rap sheet?). Beyond that, it's been suggested I try to take him to small claims court (Carl has about $1900 of my money). Anything I should know going into this? I've got absolutely zero knowledge or experience here. How do I make it most likely that I'll recover my money?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 13:57
|
|
|
Actie posted:Swindled. How much verifiable information do you have about this guy? Confirmed name, address, etc?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 18:49
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:How much verifiable information do you have about this guy? Confirmed name, address, etc? Unintentionally, I came to learn that the name with which he's registered to the apartment building he lived (lives?) in is different from the name he used with me. Same first name, different last name. So I think I know his name--the name he wrote the check in, for instance--but it may not be the only name he goes by. Address is tougher. He certainly lived in the apartment building when I met him; I visited him there a few times over a two-week period. According to him, of course, he moved out due to those unspecified personal issues. The leasing office (understandably) will not give me any information. He might live there, he might not. And if he doesn't, I have no idea if the building would have a forwarding address or anything. The check I have (which bounced) is a business check. The company has a generic name, and is registered to the address of the apartment. I have a few e-mail addresses and phone numbers for him. At least one of the phones was a prepaid, disposable kind. But I know he has a BlackBerry, and I'm pretty sure I have that phone number, too. And another generically named company, whose website was registered through GoDaddy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2010 22:29
|
|
|
Actie posted:Unintentionally, I came to learn that the name with which he's registered to the apartment building he lived (lives?) in is different from the name he used with me. Same first name, different last name. So I think I know his name--the name he wrote the check in, for instance--but it may not be the only name he goes by. Your money is long since spent. You might be able to track him down, but getting cash from him would be iffy at best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2010 02:42
|
|
|
I signed a lease on an apartment earlier this year with my girlfriend, let's call her Stacey, in January (the lease ends February 28, 2011). We are both on the lease. We split the $550 rent in half along with other fixed expenses*. I broke up with her recently and she is deciding to move out (just took everything of her's yesterday). She gave me rent for September, but stated that she's not going to pay October-February's rent. Sublets are prohibited as defined by the lease, but the leasing office tells me that they might be able to work something out if I can find someone to take over the lease (I do have someone in mind, but it might not be until the end of the year). If this other party can take over the lease, I'll sign the roommate addendum to take her off the lease, but I would still want back rent. I am entitled to this, correct? Would I have to wait until the lease is completed before suing for past due rent? I live in Michigan. *Not entirely 50/50. When I was layed off in March, she covered slightly more, but rent was always split in half.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2010 09:01
|
|
|
jasonn posted:I signed a lease on an apartment earlier this year with my girlfriend, let's call her Stacey, in January (the lease ends February 28, 2011). We are both on the lease. We split the $550 rent in half along with other fixed expenses*. I broke up with her recently and she is deciding to move out (just took everything of her's yesterday). She gave me rent for September, but stated that she's not going to pay October-February's rent. She is obligated the same as you for the duration of the lease. If you default on the lease, the leaser can sue which ever one of you he/she thinks has the most assets to recover the debt owed from the lease. If the leaser chooses to sue you for back rent and wins, then you can sue your ex for her portion. However, this still leaves you with a bad mark on your credit. Your good credit is worth more than a few months rent. Even if your ex won't cover what she owes, it's in your best interest to cover the rent to keep your credit good. That being said, most leases have a provision for breaking the lease early which entails a forfeit of the deposit and a certain monetary penalty. Going this route may be less costly than trying to carry the remainder of the lease on your own, and it doesn't affect your credit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2010 10:48
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Your money is long since spent. You might be able to track him down, but getting cash from him would be iffy at best. And I don't think I'll have so hard a time coming to terms with that, once I've exhausted all possibilities. But in the meantime, I still wonder: what is my (theoretical) legal recourse? Where do I go from here, what should I know, what should I expect?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2010 13:39
|
|
|
Actie posted:And I don't think I'll have so hard a time coming to terms with that, once I've exhausted all possibilities. But in the meantime, I still wonder: what is my (theoretical) legal recourse? Where do I go from here, what should I know, what should I expect? Until you have a confirmed real name and an address for this character, you really don't have any recourse in the civil courts. So start with the police - they may investigate and learn his real name and location. They have resources that civil lawyers don't have.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2010 15:11
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Until you have a confirmed real name and an address for this character, you really don't have any recourse in the civil courts. So start with the police - they may investigate and learn his real name and location. They have resources that civil lawyers don't have. Will do, tomorrow. And the good news is, I've managed to confirm his real name, and the fact that, at least until tomorrow, he'll be at the same address.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2010 01:17
|
|
|
dvgrhl posted:She is obligated the same as you for the duration of the lease. If you default on the lease, the leaser can sue which ever one of you he/she thinks has the most assets to recover the debt owed from the lease. If the leaser chooses to sue you for back rent and wins, then you can sue your ex for her portion. However, this still leaves you with a bad mark on your credit. I will be stretched thin financially if my ex doesn't cover, but I'll make it. I don't plan on defaulting. Thanks for the information.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2010 04:08
|
|
|
I have some questions about copyright/trademark laws. I do plan on talking to some paralegals/lawyers about this more in depth when the time comes but I want to see about getting some basic information as I continue to research it. I'm in the process of starting up an apparel company thats main market will be in the geeky/nerd culture. I'm confused about whats protected under trademark/copyright law for the use of non-company logos(For example, a logo for a faction in a video game, the logo of a superhero, or artwork based off of games, ect). I ask because I see many shirts out there based off of movies/games/tv shows and I'm wondering if they all have licensing agreements or if what they are using arent covered by the laws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2010 04:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:37 |
|
|
Actie posted:Will do, tomorrow. And the good news is, I've managed to confirm his real name, and the fact that, at least until tomorrow, he'll be at the same address. It sounds like you have a lot of his information already, but what about the check you wrote him? When the canceled check comes back to you in either paper or digital form it should have his bank account information or his ID written on the back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2010 14:37
|
|
