|
Basic question, but I can't seem to find a straight answer and I'm obviously not going to trust my landlord on this one. I live in Fulton County, GA (urban Atlanta), and I'm on a one-year lease that ends in late August of this year. I am going to be working abroad this summer and have decided that I'd like to just quit my lease early, put my poo poo in storage, and get a new place when I come back. My lease says nothing about penalties for quitting early. I've researched it online, and I've found answers ranging from "you'll just lose your deposit" to "they can refuse to allow a sublet and can charge you all the remaining rent from your lease up front." Which is true? Does the lack of early exit clause in my lease make it default to one option or another? For the record, I plan to give 60 days' notice, and have no problem forfeiting the deposit.
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
KellyLama posted:Constructive Eviction. GA law student here. As I understand it GA law requires you to move out of the premises before you can claim constructive eviction. Your state may require the same as well. Also, I'm not even a lawyer yet, so this definitely is not legal advice and you should not rely on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Fascinator posted:Basic question, but I can't seem to find a straight answer and I'm obviously not going to trust my landlord on this one. This may be helpful: http://www.atlantalegalaid.org/tenrights.htm
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 20:04
|
|
|
Fascinator posted:Basic question, but I can't seem to find a straight answer and I'm obviously not going to trust my landlord on this one. The link that Soylent Pudding posted is a good, general source of advice. With any lease (especially in tenant-unfriendly Georgia), you need to take a really close look at the lease itself. It's a contract, and there's a lot of things that a landlord can put into a Georgia residential lease that are fairly enforceable. A lease is a contract, so it's specific terms are (in the vast majority of cases) going to control the relationship between you and your landlord. Most thorough leases (if your landlord is a professional property manager, they are probably using one of their association's leases, which are fairly complete) won't be silent about things such as subletting and abandonment. Does your lease have a subletting/subleasing provision? It can say things like, "Absolutely not," or "can with landlord's permission," etc. It could also have an "assignment" provision. The difference between subleasing and assignment is that, in a sublease, *you* are still responsible to the landlord, and your new tenant is responsible to *you* (and only you). In an assignment, you actually get out of the lease and the new tenant takes over. Most thorough leases that I've seen also have a prohibition against abandonment. That is, you can be in breach of the lease if you vacate the apartment, *even if you continue to pay your rent*. Under most leases, the landlord is entitled to collect the full value of the contract. So, if you're paying $1000/month in rent, and you want to terminate after paying for month 6, the remaining contract price is $6000. The landlord has an obligation to attempt to re-lease the apartment, and the remaining price is reduced by whatever rent the landlord can collect during your remaining rental period. A lot of leases avoid this by having a liquidated damages provision in the event of early termination by the tenant. For example, you have to pay 2 months' rent if you terminate early, don't provide sufficient notice (even if not terminating early), etc. My wife is an apartment manager, and their early termination provision has a "2-months rent" liquidated damages provision PLUS a requirement that you repay your "rent concessions." Rent concessions is where the apartment's monthly rental price is lowered, but the discount only applies if you go the full lease term. So, if the rental price says, "$1000 with a $200 monthly concession", you'd only pay $800 per month. But if you terminate early, you'd have to pay $2000 (2 months' rent), PLUS the $200 concession (discount) for each month you'd lived there under the current lease. The security deposit is a different thing altogether, but -- in some circumstances, it can apply towards the penalties. If you're in a managed apartment, there are some very specific laws regarding how the landlord has to handle deposit money. So... any more information? My office is in Midtown Atlanta, and will give you a goon discount if you want a quick review of your lease for advice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
My lease says that I may sublet with managerial permission, but the only thing it says in regards to terminating the lease is that they can keep my stuff if I leave it there after I move out/am evicted. There is also nothing about abandonment. Is there a legal default in this situations where no specific agreement is in the lease? If so, what is it? Also, you guys are probably going to rake me over the coals for this, but there was never a walk-through, and I was never charged a pet deposit despite the fact that I indicated that I have pets in writing and the lease has a provision for a pet deposit. I did photograph everything in the house before I moved anything into it, and have kept copies of the records indicating that I have pets. Can they tack on these charges/get me for damages if they never collected a pet deposit or did a walk-through if this stuff is in the lease? (About picking such a dodgy lease: in my defense, I found out I got my job in Atlanta 3 weeks before I was to move, and I was in Asia at the time and had to handle renting an apartment in a strange city from overseas, so I basically went with the first place that wasn't visibly on fire or something.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 21:40
|
|
|
Just a general "Do I have a case?" question here: I got a ticket for failure to stop at a red light (red light camera, no actual pull-over involved). My defense is that the weather was bad, I tried to stop when the light went yellow, hit a patch of ice and between that skid and how bad my work van is with winter driving, it was clear that I wouldn't make it and I'd wind up stopping in the middle of the intersection; as nobody was lined up at the intersection in any other direction, I felt it best to just keep going. Do I have any kind of valid case here?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 04:55
|
|
|
Isn't this a basic case of overdriving your/the car's limits for the conditions?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 05:18
|
|
|
For the most part the road was clear, there was just a bad patch a ways before the light.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 05:31
|
|
|
You yourself admitted the weather was bad and that the work van doesn't do as well in winter driving.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:Just a general "Do I have a case?" question here: Yeah, in Georgia it's called "too fast for conditions." Probably not a good defense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 14:19
|
|
|
Fascinator posted:My lease says that I may sublet with managerial permission, but the only thing it says in regards to terminating the lease is that they can keep my stuff if I leave it there after I move out/am evicted. There is also nothing about abandonment. Is there a legal default in this situations where no specific agreement is in the lease? If so, what is it? If there's nothing in there about abandonment, then you could probably let it sit vacant with no problem. Of course, you'd still be on the hook for the rent. If there's a "sublease with permission" clause, then that's what it is. Talk to the landlord, let them know that you want to do a sublease. They may withhold permission until you've got someone lined up (if they do stuff like background check/credit check/etc., that's likely to be the case). Otherwise, if you just terminate the lease, the "default" is what I said above: you're responsible for the rent through the entire term of the lease. The landlord is required to attempt to release the premises (to mitigate their damages), but you could be on the hook for all of the remaining rent. quote:Also, you guys are probably going to rake me over the coals for this, but there was never a walk-through, and I was never charged a pet deposit despite the fact that I indicated that I have pets in writing and the lease has a provision for a pet deposit. I did photograph everything in the house before I moved anything into it, and have kept copies of the records indicating that I have pets. Can they tack on these charges/get me for damages if they never collected a pet deposit or did a walk-through if this stuff is in the lease? Pet deposit: I don't think that you're in a bad situation on this, other than the landlord could try and make you pay the pet deposit at any time. Most of the time, landlords collect a pet deposit because they will need to pay more to get the apartment ready for the next renter. No walk-through: You're potentially screwed if there's some significant damage or repair that needs to be done that you didn't cause. The whole point of the walk through is to establish the base-line of what you're not responsible for. Depending on your landlord, your photos may or may not help. Generally, though, you need to have some written exchange *with the landlord at the time that you moved in* (i.e., "there's a cigarette burn in the living room carpet; there's a big gouge in the front of the refrigerator, etc."). If you move out and it is at all possible, schedule a time for the landlord to do your post-move-out inspection. However, if you sublease, the landlord isn't going to do an inspection until the end of the lease, and you'll still be responsible for any damage caused by your subtenant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 14:28
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:You yourself admitted the weather was bad and that the work van doesn't do as well in winter driving. KellyLama posted:Yeah, in Georgia it's called "too fast for conditions." Probably not a good defense. Yeah, I figured as much, I'm just broke right now and trying to weasel out of this $300 ticket. Oh well, thanks for the help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
Would you get in trouble calling a police station pretending to be from a law firm in order to question about an officer's vacation time so that you can avoid sending a subpoena on that date, just to get your traffic ticket date rescheduled to that officer's vacation time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:45
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:Would you get in trouble calling a police station pretending to be from a law firm in order to question about an officer's vacation time so that you can avoid sending a subpoena on that date, just to get your traffic ticket date rescheduled to that officer's vacation time? Good initiative, bad judgement. If they find out, there's a good chance they'll throw the kitchen sink at you - the new charges may not all hold up in court, but you'll still have to make bond on them and you'll still have to hire an attorney to knock down the charges. It will cost a lot more than your ticket in time, money and stress. And they're not going to give that information out to a law firm, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 13:29
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:Would you get in trouble calling a police station pretending to be from a law firm in order to question about an officer's vacation time so that you can avoid sending a subpoena on that date, just to get your traffic ticket date rescheduled to that officer's vacation time? There is absolutely nothing that could go wrong with this, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 17:14
|
|
|
Hi thread! I'm a lawyer asking a legal question that has stumped 3 attorneys and counting! Nothing can go wrong with this amirite? The background is that I'm self-employed and self-insured through Atlantis Health Plan, a regional company in NY. My wife gave birth to our child in July at a hospital that took Atlantis, we gave our insurance information, Atlantis covered the birth* and we were fine. *the plot thickens here Since that point, we have received several bills from the hospital for over $2,000. Each time, we duly called the hospital and failed to get a human being (heh), then called Atlantis, who told us everything was fine and the bill was paid. After the fourth letter - that said the debt was going to collections - I speed dialed the hospital for two hours and finally managed to get a response. The short version is that when my wife gave birth, Atlantis was nearly insolvent (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100830/PULSE/100829807) and is still having trouble paying claims. Since then, they've gotten a cash infusion, but all claims prior to September are being treated under some settlement that Atlantis claims they've reached with the hospital - for $7,000. The hospital's version of this is that Atlantis made them a $7,000 offer on $185,000 of debt, they laughed at it and are now proceeding to send the individual patients to collections, at which point (the hospital says) Atlantis has said they'd pay up. As far as the person answering the phones at Atlantis is concerned and told us, the hospital accepted the settlement, has written off the rest of the debt and everything is fine. Note that I believe this about as much as Iranian election results. So, aside from "do I need a new insurance company?" (lol), my questions are: 1)Does the hospital actually have a claim against the patients? <--- nobody that I've talked to knows this one for sure argh 2)Assuming they don't, chances are no amount of yelling at them on the phone is going to keep them from following through. Do I have any legal recourse for what (in this case) amounts to a fraudulent debt collection? Against whom? 3)If I pay the bill and sue Atlantis for the money in small claims, can I get a judgment enforced before they inevitably go bankrupt? (I'm guessing no? What's a small claims docket look like in NY?) 4)Assuming this gets to collections and I dispute it, I would like my credit rating to not die. Can I take any preventative measures other than disputing the debt to do this? 5)gently caress the American health care system and everything it stands for Thanks! Adar fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 03:11
|
|
|
I have an idea that I think has the potential to be a great product. I searched patent records and found that someone patented the exact idea already but they haven't used the patent at all as far as I can tell. There are no items like what I want to make for sale. Is there any rule saying you have to actually create/sell something you patent? If so, how long do they have before the patent is void and I can pursue this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:07
|
|
|
MrHyde posted:I have an idea that I think has the potential to be a great product. I searched patent records and found that someone patented the exact idea already but they haven't used the patent at all as far as I can tell. There are no items like what I want to make for sale. I'm just a law student, so I have not yet passed the bar, much less the patent bar. So far as I know, there is no rule requiring actual use to maintain patent validity. The patent will last for 20 years from the filing date of the earliest non-provisional U.S. application to which priority is claimed assuming a filling after June 8, 1995. I don't recall the rule for before that day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:40
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I'm just a law student, so I have not yet passed the bar, much less the patent bar. So far as I know, there is no rule requiring actual use to maintain patent validity. The patent will last for 20 years from the filing date of the earliest non-provisional U.S. application to which priority is claimed assuming a filling after June 8, 1995. I don't recall the rule for before that day. So basically (as far as you know) if I made and sold this thing, the person with the patent could sue me even if they have no intention of ever using the patent? MrHyde fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 05:09
|
|
|
MrHyde posted:So basically (as far as you know) if I made and sold this thing, the person with the patent could sue me even though they have no intention of ever using the patent? Yup* *Not a lawyer, just a paralegal Adar posted:Hi thread! I'm a lawyer asking a legal question that has stumped 3 attorneys and counting! Nothing can go wrong with this amirite? Wouldn't you have a killer bad faith claim against Atlantis? I mean, assuming they have any money worth taking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
MrHyde posted:So basically (as far as you know) if I made and sold this thing, the person with the patent could sue me even if they have no intention of ever using the patent? Yep. A patent is a limited monopoly in an idea. The theory is that by granting a temporary right we preserve the incentive to invent. Use in commerce is irrelevant under this theory and it is entirely possible the most economically productive use for the patent holder is to refrain from actually practicing the patent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 06:45
|
|
|
Adar posted:Hi thread! I'm a lawyer asking a legal question that has stumped 3 attorneys and counting! Nothing can go wrong with this amirite? This is the kind of thing I'd email old law professors about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
So, my girlfriend works at a daycare for toddlers in Oregon (run by a large daycare corporation that I'm not sure if I should mention in this post), and was accused of handling a child roughly by the child's parents. The mother of the child has apparently been frequently hostile/pissy towards her for no discernible reason, and the claim is crap on a couple different levels (described below). She is currently suspended from work and doesn't know whether she's going to be fired or not. I'm currently trying to find out if there is any possible legal recourse should she be fired, and whether or not pursuing it is realistic for this situation. From what she's told me it doesn't appear that employees have any recourse within the corporation for challenging claims or marks on their record. That is not altogether surprising. However, it does not appear that this corporation applies any meaningful standard of evidence to parent claims, to the point that marks are applied against employees' permanent records even in a situation where there is both the absence of evidence for the claim as well as the existence of reliable eyewitness testimony contradicting the accusation. I'm just going to copy-paste the summary of the situation that I submitted to some ask-a-lawyer site (are these sorts of sites "safe"?) I adopted an odd pseudo/lay person legalese manner of expression when I wrote this for some reason: ---------------------------------------------------------- My partner works in a day-care with toddlers. She was accused by a parent of "leaving marks" on a child due to rough handling. At the time when the alleged abuse occurred both the mother of the child and the manager of the day care were present. The manager did not notice any marks on the child at that time, nor did she notice anything wrong in either the handling of the child or the behavior of the accused. During this period of time the child did not cry, or at any point exhibit outward signs of discomfort. The accusation came as a complete surprise. The claim of abuse happened the following day when the father of the child appeared at the day care and stated that the child had "marks" on their body, ostensibly noticed at some point the previous night. He and his wife believe the marks were caused by the accused roughly handling the child during the period of time described in the previous paragraph above. The child was not scheduled to attend school that day, nor did the father bring the child with him to the day-care, so it was not possible for anyone at the day care to visually confirm the claim made by the father. There is no evidence, beyond a verbal accusation made by the father, to substantiate the accusation of abuse. In spite of the manager's eyewitness account contradicting this unsubstantiated claim, the accused was informed that the company had added a mark to her permanent record due to the parent's complaint. The accused already has one mark due to a prior claim of rough handling, which was also considered dubious at the time, but which was not challenged. As this is her second such mark, she has been suspended from work. She does not know as of yet whether she will be allowed to keep her job. All of her work experience is in child care. This area of employment has been her primary source of work for the past five years. If she is fired from this job, the parent's unverified claim and the permanent mark on her work record will most likely keep her from being able to find future work in this field. She has worked with the current day care company for three years, and is highly regarded by both her fellow employees and all the parents of the children she cares for (with the exception of the one mentioned above). --------------------------------------------------- I realize that how this would potentially work itself out should it become a legal issue will depend significantly on her employer's stated policies (which I don't have access to). While it seems clear to me that firing her in this situation would be unethical, I don't know if that necessarily translates to anything meaningful legally speaking. The one positive is that the eyewitness who contradicts the parent's claim is also the manager of the day care. She assured my girlfriend that she was going to "fight for her", but doesn't seem to feel very optimistic about the situation. I'm doing research for her on the legal angle, but I'm completely uninformed. Any thoughts on this situation, or suggestions on how I should go about my research / practical actions to take (whether it's worth the money to talk to a lawyer about this / the degree to which this is probably a lost cause), would be very appreciated! Orbis Tertius fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 10:47
|
|
|
Adar posted:Werds 1)Does the hospital actually have a claim against the patients? <--- nobody that I've talked to knows this one for sure argh Typically, among the forms you sign upon entry to the hospital is a form that acknowledges that you are principally responsible for the debt regardless of whether your insurer pays or not. So yes. 2)Assuming they don't, chances are no amount of yelling at them on the phone is going to keep them from following through. Do I have any legal recourse for what (in this case) amounts to a fraudulent debt collection? Against whom? No. 3)If I pay the bill and sue Atlantis for the money in small claims, can I get a judgment enforced before they inevitably go bankrupt? (I'm guessing no? What's a small claims docket look like in NY?) Yes. Employer provided health care is sheilded by ERISA, but since you bought your own policy, general contract law applies. Insurers don't go bankrupt, they go through state law insolvency, wherein the state insurance commissioner runs off the claims by liquidating assets, typically. 4)Assuming this gets to collections and I dispute it, I would like my credit rating to not die. Can I take any preventative measures other than disputing the debt to do this? Not that I am aware of. 5)gently caress the American health care system and everything it stands for Yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 11:57
|
|
|
Adar posted:[Health insurance/hospital insanity] In the absence of anything else, sure. Someone else has already said the basic answer, which is that the admissions forms (at least the ones that I've seen) say that the hospital agrees to bill your insurance first, but that you agree to be responsible for anything that the insurance doesn't pay. So, yeah, the can try to collect from you. Where it gets complicated is if Atlantis has told you anything that's true. Insurance companies and health care providers negotiate compromised settlements all of the time. If the hospital and Atlantis have reached an agreement on your account (or some bundle of charges in which your account was included), you're entitled to the benefit of that bargain. You said in your facts that the hospital has started sending patients to collections, "at which point (the hospital says) Atlantis has said they'd pay up." If that's the case, you may have a defense against a collection effort against the hospital, as they're probably required to collect from your insurance before they bill you. quote:2)Assuming they don't, chances are no amount of yelling at them on the phone is going to keep them from following through. Do I have any legal recourse for what (in this case) amounts to a fraudulent debt collection? Against whom? It's not fraudulent debt collection by the hospital. At worst, it's breach of contract by the hospital for not being persistent enough with your insurer. If the hospital has told you that Atlantis says it's paying, I'd try to get that in writing. If Atlantis has told you that it's settled its debt with the hospital, I'd get that (and a copy of the settlement) in writing. You've got a big, bad-faith breach of contract claim against Atlantis, but if they're teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, good luck getting anything out of it. quote:3)If I pay the bill and sue Atlantis for the money in small claims, can I get a judgment enforced before they inevitably go bankrupt? (I'm guessing no? What's a small claims docket look like in NY?) I have no idea what a small-claims docket looks like in NY. How much does the hospital say you owe? It may be outside of small claims' jurisdiction. (Here in Georgia, it's $15k, tops). You would be an unsecured creditor, so you'd be in the back of the line with all of the other paper-debt holders. quote:4)Assuming this gets to collections and I dispute it, I would like my credit rating to not die. Can I take any preventative measures other than disputing the debt to do this? *If* it looks like Atlantis isn't going to pay or settle this for you, you should try to settle it yourself with the hospital. If you settle the debt for "$X", you have a bad-faith breach of contract claim against Atlantis for $X. In Georgia, that means that you could also get your attorney fees (mandatory when it's an insurance company that didn't pay a valid claim), punitive damages, etc. quote:5)gently caress the American health care system and everything it stands for As much as I hate to agree with Justin Bieber, I totally concur. Thanks! [/quote]
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 14:56
|
|
|
Orbis Tertius posted:[words] They're roughly as safe as asking on here. Although there are probably more law students and other non-lawyers masquerading as lawyers and providing answers on those sites as here. (For anyone who's reading, I'm a real lawyer (licensed to practice in Georgia*). If you want my bona fides, send me a PM and I will tell you whatever you'd like to know to confirm that.) (*As my friend's mother likes to say, the only thing in Georgia that it's easier to become than a lawyer is pregnant.) quote:I realize that how this would potentially work itself out should it become a legal issue will depend significantly on her employer's stated policies (which I don't have access to). While it seems clear to me that firing her in this situation would be unethical, I don't know if that necessarily translates to anything meaningful legally speaking. So, again, Georgia lawyer here. Not familiar with Oregon's version of state employment laws, defamation, etc. So, take with a grain of salt and consider it a rough starting position if you actually talk to an Oregon attorney. If there's an employee handbook, it may have some rules regarding procedures that the company (or its managers) have to take in investigating an incident, disciplining an employee, or terminating an employee. If such a thing exists, it can be, in essence, a contract that is enforceable against the employer. However, in most states, if there isn't an actual employment contract that specifies guaranteed employment, grounds for termination, etc., then employment is "at will." That means that your employer can fire you because they had a bad weekend, etc. If a customer came in and said, "I don't like people whose names start with vowels. Fire them or lose my business!" your employer could do so. It would be stupid, but they could do so. The other issue you think you would have *if* she were terminated is damage to her professional reputation. In Georgia (and in most states), there is a privilege defense against defamation claims for former employers in making statements regarding the former employee. Where she *would possibly* have a claim is against the child's parent, but you would have to prove (in Georgia) that the statement was at least *negligently false*. That is, that the parent (at least) *should have known (but didn't)* that the statement(s) was false, but made it anyway. We have actually had a case almost identical to this here at my firm in Atlanta. It sucks to be the plaintiff, as the bottom-line in any sort of case like this is a "he said, she said" situation about whether the event actually happened the way that the parent said it did nor not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 15:13
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:1)Does the hospital actually have a claim against the patients? <--- nobody that I've talked to knows this one for sure argh Not necessarily the hospital. Many hospitals are actually more like venues, and the physicians, (or their medical association more likely) act as independent contractors with privilege and access rights in the hospital. Depending on the job the other employees can be similarly protected (nurse anesthetists, etc.) or potentially actual hospital employees (janitors, reception, paramedics). i have no idea where most nurses fit in. This means the hospital may not actually have the claim against the patient, the doctor's billing company will. Ask me about getting hosed on this before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 16:34
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Yep. A patent is a limited monopoly in an idea. The theory is that by granting a temporary right we preserve the incentive to invent. Use in commerce is irrelevant under this theory and it is entirely possible the most economically productive use for the patent holder is to refrain from actually practicing the patent. Yep. Note also, keen observers, that this principle is why patents have a shorter protection span than copyrights (around 5x as long) or trademarks (potentially limitless) due to the sheer strength of the protections (and that the other forms have far less onerous requirements to acquire and mantain that correlates inversely with their length -- patent, copyright, trademark.) KellyLama posted:They're roughly as safe as asking on here. Although there are probably more law students and other non-lawyers masquerading as lawyers and providing answers on those sites as here. (For anyone who's reading, I'm a real lawyer (licensed to practice in Georgia*). If you want my bona fides, send me a PM and I will tell you whatever you'd like to know to confirm that.) Probably much safer here than other sites. Many of us are known from law school connections to each other. That doesn't necessarily confirm we passed the bar and were admitted, but at least it gives potential inquirers a reference and place to look (assuming everyone is interested). Avvo.com is an exception. They apparently confirmed my bar admission date and tagged me as being admitted in Maryland on my account, and they only let admitted lawyers do certain things (like answer questions or post guides). It's pretty safe there, except their rating system is inscrutable. For instance, I'm a newly admitted attorney who happens to be a resume/achievement whore, and I rate the same score as a 20+ year specialized industry veteran. 6.7 - no instances of misconduct found. That's pretty ridiculous, both that we have the same score, and that his score is so low. It makes the rankings meaningless because the same score could be applied to a long term expert, or a brand new kid on the block. I have no idea how scores are assigned or how they increase, or why we were ranked the same, and Avvo.com doesn't tell anyone, it's proprietary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 16:53
|
|
|
KellyLama posted:They're roughly as safe as asking on here. Although there are probably more law students and other non-lawyers masquerading as lawyers and providing answers on those sites as here. (For anyone who's reading, I'm a real lawyer (licensed to practice in Georgia*). If you want my bona fides, send me a PM and I will tell you whatever you'd like to know to confirm that.) Oregon is an at-will state. They'll probably just let her go for a generic reason. I also look at it this way, if I was using a day care and found out that a person watching my kid was accused of abuse from another parent, I'd pull my kid out unless there was concrete proof the parent was wrong or lying. Of course the worker is going to deny it, even if they were doing it, they aren't going to admit to it. Plus it's the second mark against this worker for the same issue. That's not a good thing. I'm guessing the day care will side with the safety of the kids/word getting around with parents about abuse and pulling the kids out. chemosh6969 fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 17:51
|
|
|
I have a landlord/tenant dispute in Muscogee County, GA. I have contacted GA Legal Aid in my area and they referred me to an attorney where I could leave a message but I have not heard back. My landlord was out of the country and had a management company with whom I signed a one year lease. At the end of that lease it was supposed to go month-to-month but I hate that arrangement and signed a 2nd one year lease. When my landlord returned to the country, he went to court with the management company and ended up taking personal control of the property. I do not know the details of that case. He now says my lease is invalid and wants me to sign a new lease within the next 7 days. The new lease is 125$ less rent but includes utilities - for the whole building which includes 4 apartments, one of which is currently occupied! Obviously, I do not want to sign this new lease. It also expires 2 months earlier than the original lease. If I do not hear from an attorney before March 1, should I just send him the original rent amount based on my prior lease? What could happen? What options do I have?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 18:25
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:Not necessarily the hospital. Many hospitals are actually more like venues, and the physicians, (or their medical association more likely) act as independent contractors with privilege and access rights in the hospital. Depending on the job the other employees can be similarly protected (nurse anesthetists, etc.) or potentially actual hospital employees (janitors, reception, paramedics). i have no idea where most nurses fit in. Oh yeah good point, but he did specifically ask about a hospital bill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Oh yeah good point, but he did specifically ask about a hospital bill. Which is the part I'm not sure I follow the question -- typically the hospital bill is for beds, meds, and heads (support staff), and other small fees. Why wouldn't they be able to make a claim against the patient for nonpayment? Unless I'm not remembering something from the situation that makes this moot, I'm doing this from memory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 18:44
|
|
|
The bill is actually from the anesthesiology department at the hospital, so this is relevant and you're probably right. Either way, sounds like I'm going to court. Fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Hypothetical/curiosity question, interested to hear answers from any jurisdiction: I install a dashboard cam in my car, pointing straight ahead, overlayed with time, lat/long, and speed, with no sound. I get a speeding ticket, and the recorded speed at the time/location of the ticket was legal. 1. Since the camera can't hear or see the cop, do any of the "recording without permission" laws apply? 2. How likely are they/the city/county/whatever to try and claim they apply, regardless of the answer to 1? 3. Will the video be worth anything as evidence, should I choose to contest the ticket? I'm considering a dashcam type project - in case anything cool happens in front of me, not for the purpose of getting tickets and fighting them - and this occurred to me as an unlikely scenario that was worth asking about, if only for fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
Viriatha posted:I have a landlord/tenant dispute in Muscogee County, GA. I have contacted GA Legal Aid in my area and they referred me to an attorney where I could leave a message but I have not heard back. So, quick clarifying questions: So, during (or before) the first lease, your landlord hired a management company and that's who you dealt with through the end of the first lease? And you signed the second lease before the landlord returned? Before he had the dispute with the management company? quote:When my landlord returned to the country, he went to court with the management company and ended up taking personal control of the property. I do not know the details of that case. That's bizarre. My "gut" lawyer reaction is that your existing lease is probably valid, since the management company *was almost certainly* the landlord's agent/representative when it was signed. The real questions (and you have no real way to know this without asking one or both of them) are: (1) whether they had authority to offer/accept a second lease; and (2) whether the landlord ratified the second lease. I haven't done any research on this issue, but my general knowledge of principal and agent leans in your favor. If they exceeded their authority by entering into the second lease with you, that's a problem between them and the landlord (i.e., you had no way of knowing that entering into a new lease was beyond the scope of their authority). Where I suspect that this might get hazy is that this involves real property, so there may be some options for the landlord other than just suing the management company. Unless you had some information that let you know that the management company couldn't agree to the second lease, you've probably got a remedy against the landlord if he tries to evict you, etc. After the second lease was signed, did you ever pay rent *directly to the landlord*? That is, *after* he had his dispute with the management company, did he accept the rent on the 2nd lease from you? If so, that may be enough ratification to bind him into it. Does your lease give the landlord the option to terminate it early? If it's a lease for a specific period of time (e.g., "12 month lease"), he probably can't unilaterally terminate it. quote:If I do not hear from an attorney before March 1, should I just send him the original rent amount based on my prior lease? What could happen? What options do I have? If your current lease is valid and enforceable against the landlord (and that's the most important question), *and* you don't want the new lease, you should absolutely continue to pay rent on time to the landlord. Don't pay in cash. Pay via some method that leaves a written record (check or money order). If he accepts the money (e.g., cashes the check), the hole he's in will continue to deepen. If he doesn't cash a check, make sure that there's always enough in your account to cover it (i.e., you don't want to give him any excuse to claim breach).
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
Javid posted:Hypothetical/curiosity question, interested to hear answers from any jurisdiction: quote:1. Since the camera can't hear or see the cop, do any of the "recording without permission" laws apply? Is the camera in plain view on the dashboard? The laws you're thinking about usually apply when a recording is being made without the knowledge of one or more parties (that's why they're usually classified as "eavesdropping" laws). If the ongoing recording is obvious, it's probably not eavesdropping. quote:2. How likely are they/the city/county/whatever to try and claim they apply, regardless of the answer to 1? I think you're many times more likely to encounter a law enforcement officer who doesn't want to be recorded (even if you say that there's no sound and they're not in-frame on the video), and they will instruct you to turn it off. If you refuse, you can probably be cited for "refusing to follow instructions." It's the same ticket you can get (in most states) for, for example, refusing to turn your stereo off, take off your sunglasses, etc. quote:3. Will the video be worth anything as evidence, should I choose to contest the ticket? Maybe. That depends on factors such as the evidentiary standards in that jurisdiction, how opposed the prosecutor is, what mood the judge is in that day, etc. When law enforcement (in Georgia, at least) tries to introduce evidence of a vehicle's speed they can be forced to show all kinds of things -- e.g., that the officer was properly and recently trained on the device; that the device was certified by a qualified technician; that the device was tested per some schedule, etc. I imagine that a judge might be open to someone asking the same questions of your dashcam/speedometer/etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:31
|
|
|
KellyLama posted:So, quick clarifying questions: So, during (or before) the first lease, your landlord hired a management company and that's who you dealt with through the end of the first lease? I moved in, signed the first lease with the management company, lived here for 12 months, signed a second lease with the management company, a few months later the owner returned home and the dispute between him and the company began. KellyLama posted:The real questions (and you have no real way to know this without asking one or both of them) are: (1) whether they had authority to offer/accept a second lease; and (2) whether the landlord ratified the second lease. So far as I was aware of at the time, everything was business as usual. They accepted rent monies, did repairs, and in all ways acted as my actual landlord. KellyLama posted:After the second lease was signed, did you ever pay rent *directly to the landlord*? That is, *after* he had his dispute with the management company, did he accept the rent on the 2nd lease from you? If so, that may be enough ratification to bind him into it. Yes. I just did this last month - I paid the original amount specified by my original lease, which he accepted and cashed. He also accepted responsibility for the utilities and made repairs as needed (or arrangements to have repairs made). KellyLama posted:Does your lease give the landlord the option to terminate it early? If it's a lease for a specific period of time (e.g., "12 month lease"), he probably can't unilaterally terminate it. Section 25 "Early Termination By Landlord" specifies that I must be given 60 days written notice to vacate and that he must pay me an amount equal to a month's rent as compensation. KellyLama posted:If your current lease is valid and enforceable against the landlord (and that's the most important question), *and* you don't want the new lease, you should absolutely continue to pay rent on time to the landlord. Don't pay in cash. Pay via some method that leaves a written record (check or money order). I understand. Should I also insist that all further interactions between us be in writing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
Adar posted:The bill is actually from the anesthesiology department at the hospital, so this is relevant and you're probably right. Either way, sounds like I'm going to court. Fun. Further confusing the situation is the fact that in many hospitals, the physicians staffing anesthesia "departments" are actually provided by a contracting entity, rather than being hospital employees. For example, Bumblefuck Hospital may sign a contract with East Bumblefuck Anesthesiology Associates, a limited liability company, to provide anesthesiology staffing at the hospital. EBAA then hires the doctors and assigns a rotation to the Hospital. So then you get billed by the hospital for the anesthesia drug, and by EBAA for the anesthesiologist to administer the drug. Confused yet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 21:21
|
|
|
Viriatha posted:I moved in, signed the first lease with the management company, lived here for 12 months, signed a second lease with the management company, a few months later the owner returned home and the dispute between him and the company began. Wow, that's even better. Again, all I have is what you've written, but I think that it's safe to say that your landlord is either shady and/or an idiot. quote:Yes. I just did this last month - I paid the original amount specified by my original lease, which he accepted and cashed. He also accepted responsibility for the utilities and made repairs as needed (or arrangements to have repairs made). Yeah, sucks to be him. Unless there's something strange with your lease, etc. you've got a valid (and enforceable) lease. Have you been late on rent or other payments, etc.? Is there anything out of the ordinary that would give him a toehold to try and say you're in breach? quote:Section 25 "Early Termination By Landlord" specifies that I must be given 60 days written notice to vacate and that he must pay me an amount equal to a month's rent as compensation. Well, barring something that hasn't made it into your discussion thus far, there's your worst-case scenario there. quote:I understand. Should I also insist that all further interactions between us be in writing? Well, the statute of frauds applies to residential lease agreements in Georgia, so you (and the landlord) can't claim that something is part of the lease unless it's in writing (and "signed" by the party that needs to be bound). That's legalese for saying that any sort of verbal agreements or modifications to the current lease aren't worth the paper they're not written on. Since he's the one wanting a modification, I'd be more wary of him trying to get you to sign a modification or novation (which it sounds like he is already trying to do). If you pay rent by check (which it looks like you are), I'd continue to do that, and just be super-diligent about making sure he gets it on time, etc. so that he doesn't try a different strategy to change the terms on you (i.e., evict, etc.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
KellyLama posted:Yeah, sucks to be him. Unless there's something strange with your lease, etc. you've got a valid (and enforceable) lease. Have you been late on rent or other payments, etc.? Is there anything out of the ordinary that would give him a toehold to try and say you're in breach? We were late last month but he called and said if he didn't get it soon, he'd have to charge us a late fee. Since I'd already sent it registered mail, I assume he got it the next day. I have since heard nothing back about that and he's cashed the check. The only thing he has tried to contact me about is the new lease.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 21:55
|
|