|
kinkster posted:I'm not trollan but it is funny to think how easy it would be to derail this thread and turn it into a lulzy (yes, lulzy) wall of overly serious.. you get the idea Probably because most grown up consider legal questions to be serious matter. Hence, serious thread with serious answers. At the very least, you will face some consequences at school for getting in a stupid loving fight over a girlfriend you would have dumped before going to college. Don't get in a loving fight, a shouting match will do. You'll read this thread in five years and facepalm.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
Serious answers which completely disregarded the fact that this was only going to happen with his consent. If you guys had just calmed down and asked for more detail instead of writing walls of text which don't apply to the situation.. well I don't know, you wouldn't have wasted your time? I thought I made it clear from the start that I was going to do this in an honest fashion, in front of mutual friends. Actually, I know I did. There's a reason I referred to him as a "friend" from the very beginning (yes I'm well aware that he isn't a very good one, but I'm not either so idgaf). I thought you all might gain from that, and the simple fact that I'm posting about it on SA, that I wasn't planning to cause him any real harm. poo poo, we're more likely to twist our fingers trying to punch each other then anything else. I'm not denying everything that's been said, or pretending that /some/ of it isn't good sound advice. It is, and part of me is glad that physical action is so strongly frowned upon. So thank you to those of you who were trying to help, I can see you were concerned, but it just really doesn't apply to a situation like this (as far as I can see). I think you all would be surprised to see what a level headed, decidedly non-sociopathic individual I am, but whatever. And equally surprised to see how my jurisdiction handles certain issues, haha.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 06:42
|
|
|
You just don't know when to quit digging, do you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 06:45
|
|
|
kinkster posted:I wasn't planning to cause him any real harm. Then why the gently caress are you fighting? This is what everyone's going nuts about. What the gently caress is your problem? Why are you fighting if you don't want to hurt him? What will be achieved by this? You do realise that legally, as soon as you jump someone, it will be assumed that you intended to cause harm? And "We agreed to fight!" will sure as gently caress not stand in front of the principal. (This will get back to the principal) As to wether such an agreement between minors would stand up in front of a court, heh, ask a lawyer. But there's still a chance his parents could sue you for knocking his teeths out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
"heh, ask a lawyer". That's kind of what a tried to do, dude. If you hadn't assumed the worst from the beginning and asked for some detail instead of ranting about "premeditated assault and battery" this thread wouldn't be filled with a full page of poo poo. And you can cause a little bit of pain without knocking someones teeth out, for god's sake. Why the concept of mutually agreeing to get even with a little fist fight is beyond you all I do not know. Your thread though, fill it with whatever you want. I'm out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 07:14
|
|
|
If these "details" are so important that no one can form a proper opinion without them, why didn't you post them in the first place? I hope you're better at fighting than you are at posting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 08:23
|
|
|
kinkster posted:Honestly I'm not going to read that huge wall of text. It's as simple as this: Nothing would happen unless he consented and was throwing punches himself, nothing would happen unless there are multiple witnesses to hear him consent, and obviously two skinny little kids in high school aren't going to go out and kill each other in front of their friends over something that happened months ago.... Caselaw is basically full of dudes consenting to a fistfight, falling down during the fight and hitting their head and later dying from it, and the survivor being charged with, and convicted of, manslaughter. Good luck with your consent defense, let us know how it goes
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 08:36
|
|
|
"Assuming the worst" is what we are trained, taught, and (in better economic climates than this) occasionally paid to do. Your failure to present relevant facts is your failure, not ours. Pretty much anyone on this side of law school has a stock speech for "this is based on what you told me and if you shared more facts with me, my analysis might change." No client ever asks for the best-case scenario. Because in the best-case scenario they don't need legal advice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 09:47
|
|
|
He's just a troll, guys. He's a high school kid who thought  "I'm gonna fool them lawyers!" Then he used a combination of withholding information and good old-fashioned belligerence to make himself feel smarter than a thread full of adults. He'll go tell his buddy that the Internet lawyers said they could fight all they want, which is what he wanted to hear in the first place, and the judge will laugh at him for it. Except he's an expert on the local DA and judges and knows precisely what they'll do, so whatever.All of the lawyers/well-wishers in here tried valiantly to get him to see what a moron he was. You can all take solace in the fact that when he's in for aggravated assault, it's despite your attempts to help and not because of them. Now let's return to our regularly-scheduled program; I'm sure most of us find that much more interesting.  Sonic Dude fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Apr 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 13:11
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:"Assuming the worst" is what we are trained, taught, and (in better economic climates than this) occasionally paid to do. I'm moving to kinskter's area, and I'm going to open a new law firm that focuses on Alternative Dispute Resolution, where I arrange consensual duels, with fists, knives, guns, whatever, and I'm going to make a killing because apparently that's how they settle things where he's from. I'll probably watch The Lincoln Lawyer too because that looks like it combines violence and lawyers in a successful format.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 14:06
|
|
|
If you really want to, you can both get MMA licenses and fight in an amateur event. I doubt a promoter would want two kids who don't know martial arts on his card, but maybe you'll get lucky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 14:16
|
|
|
entris posted:I'm moving to kinskter's area, and I'm going to open a new law firm that focuses on Alternative Dispute Resolution, where I arrange consensual duels, with fists, knives, guns, whatever, and I'm going to make a killing because apparently that's how they settle things where he's from. I'll probably watch The Lincoln Lawyer too because that looks like it combines violence and lawyers in a successful format. Konstantin posted:If you really want to, you can both get MMA licenses and fight in an amateur event. I doubt a promoter would want two kids who don't know martial arts on his card, but maybe you'll get lucky. Combine both ideas, and offer a lucha libre based system of alternative conflict resolution. Sell tickets to show. It'd be like organizing wrestling matches, except the talent pays you by the hour and you don't need to manufacture drama - They supply it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 14:18
|
|
|
entris posted:I'm moving to kinskter's area, and I'm going to open a new law firm that focuses on Alternative Dispute Resolution, where I arrange consensual duels, with fists, knives, guns, whatever, and I'm going to make a killing because apparently that's how they settle things where he's from. I'll probably watch The Lincoln Lawyer too because that looks like it combines violence and lawyers in a successful format. I remember when I lived in Charleston there was this case of a fellow shooting another fellow in the back and he was charged with something regarding dueling. It was already interesting enough because I had no idea there were any laws about dueling but what topped that is he had just gotten out of prison after being convicted of injuring another person in a duel. I know kinkster is just trolling but here you go friend , you can't go around hurting people even with their consent
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 15:17
|
|
|
Robo Olga posted:I remember when I lived in Charleston there was this case of a fellow shooting another fellow in the back and he was charged with something regarding dueling. It was already interesting enough because I had no idea there were any laws about dueling but what topped that is he had just gotten out of prison after being convicted of injuring another person in a duel. Seems awfully risky for the prosecutor to charge under that very old statute when they could just charge under first degree murder. A good defense attorney could muddy the waters enough to put the outcome in doubt, especially since there probably isn't any precedent less than a century old.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 16:51
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Seems awfully risky for the prosecutor to charge under that very old statute when they could just charge under first degree murder. A good defense attorney could muddy the waters enough to put the outcome in doubt, especially since there probably isn't any precedent less than a century old. I wish I could find a follow up. The only other article I can find has a little bit more information but not much http://archives.postandcourier.com/archive/arch09/0909/arc09248610249.shtml
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
I don't know if it's kosher to request one, but it would be kind of awesome to impose a moderator challenge on kinkster, along the lines of requiring him to work this situation out like an adult rather than engaging in a playground fistfight, or be punished. Is this a possibility or are mod challenges unrequestable?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 03:18
|
|
|
Make him hire a goon lawyer on retainer specifically to handle future battery charges.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 04:51
|
|
|
He's banned already.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 05:00
|
|
|
place fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
wacky posted:You lawyerfags aren't gonna get in the way of my lulz That's it. Meet me at the jungle gym after school, I am kicking your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 11:08
|
|
but seriously will I get in trouble? Tell me I won't or I might remind you I'm in high school again
|
I did suggest to my judge that his Fridays would be more efficient if he did away with summary disposition hearings and instituted cage matches. So maybe our little reprobate is on to something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 13:22
|
|
|
beejay posted:He's banned already. This is why I should turn avatars back on, I didn't notice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
Can anyone help me with some legal research? I've been asked to find some case law. We're defending an investor who is accused of not conducting proper diligence in an investment into a regularly audited entity. I'm looking for support of the statement "well if the auditor didn't catch it it's not reasonable to expect us to do so in our diligence". edit: AZ jurisdiction. edit2: I found stuff from a lawsuit against JP Morgan regarding Worldcom, where the suit successfully charges that they did not detect red flags that a "reasonable investigation" would have turned up that would have given them the "obligation to inquire" despite the fact Worldcom's statements were audited. This is useful because we can just argue a reasonable investigation would have turned up no such red flags. Any other suggestions as to what constitutes "due diligence" and when reliance on audited financials is OK? Its Miller Time fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Apr 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
Hello legal goons I have a question regarding lease breaking in California. I am a no good jerk who not only incurred new expenses (Had baby with my fiance), but also lost my job which was paying the bills. I got an interim part-time job until I could find something else, but our sudden decrease in funds made it so we had to break our lease. We told the apartment we could no longer pay the rent, and gave them 30 days notice. Their response "Fine, but you will have to pay an additional $2500 as per our lease break agreement we will let you sign." This would be fine with me if the reason I was leaving wasn't I have no money. So here is my question, what is going to happen if I just leave and don't pay? I realize that it will go against my credit, but the question is, are they going to be able to squeeze money I don't have out of me? Can they take my fiance's student loans as compensation? Will they repo the only property we have which is all baby stuff? These people have no souls, so I expect them to do their worst. I just need to know what the worst they can do is, so I can plan my next move. (note: we have already secured another, more affordable place to live.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 00:45
|
|
|
Not a lawyer, but someone who had something similar almost happen to me once. They will put a lien on your car, checking account, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
Skywriter posted:Not a lawyer, but someone who had something similar almost happen to me once. So if I have a car that I don't want I should just let them take it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 03:25
|
|
|
50 pounds of bread posted:Skipping out on my lease. Ok, you know this is a punk move, so I won't belabor that point. You really don't want to just let it run to collections and liens. Have you seen if they'd work with you and let you pay them the money in installments?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
They will, we are talking about it tomorrow, but these guys are horrible jerks. This also isn't a punk move for a number of reasons, but I don't feel like explaining them all (one of the issues is that they didn't paint the bathtub properly and whenever we take a hot shower paint comes off, the other issues are similar.), and acknowledged the fact that it is generally a punk move so I wouldn't get gooned up on. I'd like to stick it to them for being terrible, but if it's not possible that they will end up eating the costs, then I want to know my best options for getting out of this without being completely and utterly hosed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 04:01
|
|
|
There are groups in CA that will help you if you are low income with lease issues and I would highly recommend you seek them out. Breaking a lease because you don't want to pay it is going to get you in trouble. But if you are saying you are breaking the lease because they didn't complete repairs that is a totally different thing. I wouldn't count on them taking some car you don't want anymore as payment, if you decide not to pay and they take you to court they will have options on how they want to collect, it won't be up to you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
Manwithastick posted:My wedding videographer wont give us the dvds we paid for and its been 5 months since we OKed the sample, I've never done anything legal related so where do I start? I have a contract which he hasnt delivered on and he's been BSing me for 3 months saying he's just had a baby and been too busy and "it will be next week" http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm Small Claims Court. Used for claims of less than GBP5,000 and you can do it yourself without a solicitor. Research it and get enough info so that you know how to go ahead with this. Send a registered letter to him, restating the facts of your dispute and give him 3 choices: 1) supply the final product within an agreed timeframe 2) refund your money and give you the raw footage or 3) see him in court.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 06:30
|
|
|
Hello lawgoons! Just to get this out of the way, I'm in San Mateo County in California. I'm likely about to be fired from my terrible job this Friday following an incident that happened last Friday. During the closing hour one of my managers, counting a till, discovered that I accidentally accepted the wrong tender. Specifically, I pressed the "$20 traveler's check" button when I should have pressed the "$20 whatever-they-actually-paid-with" button. I apologized and first asked if they could do a tender exchange (a previous job ran into this problem constantly and were always changing how money was tendered), but I got no response. I offered to reimburse the store from my paycheck, but got no response there either. Later, after the till had been counted, the counting manager shows the store manager the POS screen and says "so this is how much should be in the register" and then shows him a piece of paper and says "..and this is how much should be in the register." They never showed me the screen or the paper, so I have no idea what amounts she was talking about. I asked if there was a problem, but got no response other than from my store manager to clock out (it was about my time to leave, about 10 minutes short) and go home. I came in today to peruse the wares and noticed both managers were working today. After making a little small talk to the till-counting manager I casually asked if there were any problems from Friday and she responded with "no, no problems", but the store manager interjected that there WERE problems, and that he would "talk to [me] about it when I worked next." I already work there just 3-4 hours a week after having my hours cut down from an already pitiful 7 hours a week. I've gotten the distinct feeling that my store manager doesn't like me much personally; we have greatly different sales styles, work ethics and general ways we carry ourselves and he doesn't like it. In fact, he's rubbed practically every store employee and many of our regular customers the wrong way. He also works hours off the clock and I mentioned this to the till manager one night, but she brushed it off as "he'll get in trouble for it one day." So, am I about to get screwed over? If there IS a discrepancy in the till, will I be in legal trouble? And if there ISN'T a discrepancy, would I be in the right to fight against some wrongful termination? Should I just forget about this terrible job and move on with my life, taking a firing in stride? tl;dr - till came up short one night, don't know how much but is at least $20 that I can account for personally, boss already hates my guts, likely going to fire me, what can I do? Thanks in advance, folks. And sorry if I missed any pertinent information, it feels like a lot already!
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 09:26
|
|
|
place fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
paco650 posted:1) If there IS a discrepancy in the till, will I be in legal trouble? 1) No, not unless they want to accuse you of stealing from the till. It is not a crime to accidentally gently caress up at the register, and they certainly wouldn't bother suing you over $20 even if they had a civil case. You have no obligation to repay the $20 missing from the till. 2) Employers can generally fire employees for any reason other than race, gender, etc. You have no chance at winning a wrongful termination suit here. 3) Probably yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
wacky posted:Many many Their loss... Make sure you don't move to CA without a good job already lined up, it's expensive as gently caress to live out here. Thank god, no. On the other hand, you can't get away with not having a car here. VVV Choadmaster fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Apr 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 06:35
|
|
|
place fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
I have a question about Arizona repossession law, specifically as it pertains to vehicles. I was laid off a couple months ago and have very little money coming in. My car was repossessed because I wasn't able to make the payments. The vehicle still has my personal belongings in it. The repossession company wants to charge me a "processing" fee for me to obtain my personal belongings from the vehicle, and they will not release the belongings unless I pay this fee. I want to know if it is legal for them to hold my personal belongings that are not upgrades to the vehicle, nor included in the lien. I've tried contacting a couple lawyers but they want to charge a large amount of money, and even the local legal aid office's fees are too high for me to pay for a consult. So far I've left a message for the State AG's consumer protection bureau, but they haven't gotten back to me yet. I've also filed a complaint with the FTC's consumer protection agency, who believed it was improper for the company to hold my personal belongings. I also contacted the county sheriff's office who was unsure of the legality but would be willing to send a deputy with me to attempt to recover the property, however I don't know how much enforcement they will provide since they are unsure of the legality and the guy who owns the repossession company has told me he will turn away a sheriff's deputy if they come with me. Anyways, I'm looking for any advice, or specifically any statutes I can cite under Arizona law that will help me be able to get my stuff. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 18:33
|
|
|
I have a question about small claims in CA. We sued our exlandlords and won. It has now been 30 days since the decision was mailed and we haven't heard anything back from them. My question is, if they appealed which is what we assumed would happen, are they obligated to let us know they are appealing within the 30 days? Or will we not be informed until a court date is decided and we receive a summons?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
Arri posted:I've tried contacting a couple lawyers but they want to charge a large amount of money, and even the local legal aid office's fees are too high for me to pay for a consult. Depending on where you are and your money situation, you might qualify for assistance from Community Legal Services - it's free, and I know they have a division that deals specifically with consumer cases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
Arri posted:I have a question about Arizona repossession law, specifically as it pertains to vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:14 |
|
|
I have a question about landlord requirements. My dad owns an older home in Ohio, that still has the old fusebox (rather than a circuit-breaker) and old-style plugs (no ground wire). If he decides to rent this home out, is he required to re-wire the house? To be honest, I'm trying to talk him out of becoming a landlord, but any advice would be great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 23:22
|
|
