|
Thurlow posted:As a grad student with no prior legal problems, how likely am I to get a public intoxication charge dismissed? Should I definitely get an attorney or is it possible to get this done by myself at my hearing? Also, does anyone have an idea how much hiring an attorney in a case like this would cost me? I'm not really in a position to deny the charges, I was caught throwing up while walking home, just hoping to avoid a conviction here. This is my first offense of any time, and public intox was the only charge. Most jurisdictions have a program that allows you to behave for a certain period of time in order to avoid a conviction. In my jurisdiction it's called a "suspended imposition of sentence" and basically requires you to not be charged with a similar offense for one year. You go to court and plead guilty, but the judge continues the case for 1 year without accepting your guilty plea. At the end of 1 year, you go back to court. If the judge sees you haven't been charged with anything, he officially rejects your guilty plea and dismisses the charge against you. In exchange for this, you usually need to go to the alcohol class and maybe do a few hours community service. I recommend you spend a few bucks and talk to an attorney for an hour to discuss how to get one of these pleas. I have no idea how much attorneys charge for these types of things. Chances are you can find an attorney near your University that deals a lot with students' problems like this. As a grad student, you also probably qualify for a public defender. Call your local PD's office and see what their qualifications are. If you don't get an attorney, use the power of google to find out what your jurisdiction's program is called. For a charge luck public intox, chances are you can show up to your arraignment and ask the prosecutor "hey can I get an SIS" and he'll say "sure" because this is such a minor offense and he just wants to get the file off his desk.
|
#
?
May 17, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
I am in Texas, and I am been offered a partnership in a pretty small trucking company. We mostly do business around Texas, but sometimes, we truck between Texas and Mexico also. My question is, if while trucking stuff between Mexico and Texas, if one of my drivers gets caught with illegals or whatever, am I going to be hosed, even if I have no knowledge and no criminal past or any red flags of any kind?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
Thurlow posted:As a grad student with no prior legal problems, how likely am I to get a public intoxication charge dismissed? Should I definitely get an attorney or is it possible to get this done by myself at my hearing? Also, does anyone have an idea how much hiring an attorney in a case like this would cost me? I'm not really in a position to deny the charges, I was caught throwing up while walking home, just hoping to avoid a conviction here. This is my first offense of any time, and public intox was the only charge. Get a lawyer. At least in California, the burden for public intox is extremely high. You may qualify for a public defender.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
ChubbyEmoBabe posted:http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/FileStores/Web/Statutes/FS09/CH0772/Section_0772.11.HTM LOVELY. Just lovely.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2011 23:43
|
|
|
I understand the burden is lower for civil suits versus criminal charges, but wouldn't the retailers have to demonstrate some sort of loss in order to collect damages? I can understand if you see someone stick something in their purse or their pocket, but if someone forgets something on the bottom of their cart or something similar, shouldn't the retailer have to show some sort of intent if the person brings it right back when it's brought to their attention? All this talk about trying to make would-be thieves pay for the cost of their security measures sounds like bull crap considering the vast majority of retail theft is done by employees and the other greatest retail loss consists of time clock abuse.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 05:43
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I understand the burden is lower for civil suits versus criminal charges, but wouldn't the retailers have to demonstrate some sort of loss in order to collect damages? I can understand if you see someone stick something in their purse or their pocket, but if someone forgets something on the bottom of their cart or something similar, shouldn't the retailer have to show some sort of intent if the person brings it right back when it's brought to their attention? If you carve out an exception for the bottom-of-the-cart excuse, you're going to have a ton of people using that as a shield, despite their intentions. And while employees do huge amounts of retail theft, that doesn't justify any change in punishment to shoplifters. Look at the 'secrets of your job' thread, most stores have policies where they're not allowed to even touch someone who's shoplifting, and they get hammered. On the other hand, these statutes disturb me because they're written as if what's being done is an alternative to prosecution, when instead they have no criminal protection written in. You could pay the civil request and then still be on the hook for retail theft, if the government has the resources to go after you. And the 'attorney's fees to be heaped on top in case of trial victory for plaintiff' without an equal section for the defendant is a green light for abuse of the process, which the WSJ article describes in detail. But of course, you don't get anyone opposing these bills, for fear of being labeled in favor of 'shoplifter's rights', so you get this heavy handed poo poo. There's a happy medium to be had, but this isn't it. Edit: Also this seems like something lawyers in my jurisdiction would fap to if they knew about it, it sounds like extremely easy billing.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 07:47
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I understand the burden is lower for civil suits versus criminal charges, but wouldn't the retailers have to demonstrate some sort of loss in order to collect damages? I can understand if you see someone stick something in their purse or their pocket, but if someone forgets something on the bottom of their cart or something similar, shouldn't the retailer have to show some sort of intent if the person brings it right back when it's brought to their attention? Think of that piece of paper you (the shoplifter) signed as a contract, not a fine. You agree to pay Target $200, and in exchange they won't file criminal charges. They just call the $200 a fine. The piece of paper can say anything. It's your signature if you don't like it you don't have to sign it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 17:46
|
|
|
That's one thing I am unclear about. Isn't it extortion if the business states "sign this agreement to pay us or we'll call the cops"? I know that's not what a civil recovery is or is supposed to be but that's what seems like happens in cases like that.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 17:56
|
|
|
ChubbyEmoBabe posted:That's one thing I am unclear about. Isn't it extortion if the business states "sign this agreement to pay us or we'll call the cops"? I know that's not what a civil recovery is or is supposed to be but that's what seems like happens in cases like that. I didn't know this concept was controversial. It's not extortion, you have a choice. Filing criminal charges is a huge pain in the rear end for you and a huge waste of time for them. You're just signing a mutually beneficial piece of paper making a promise in exchange for another promise. That's, like, the basis for 95% of our civil legal system. BigHead fucked around with this message at 18:16 on May 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 18:07
|
|
|
It's not a controversy I was asking a question. You have a choice with extortion too. I thought saying "pay me or I will press charges" is extortion. I don't think the mutual benefits or pain in the rear end level is a factor.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 18:47
|
|
|
BigHead posted:I didn't know this concept was controversial. It's not extortion, you have a choice. Filing criminal charges is a huge pain in the rear end for you and a huge waste of time for them. They don't say we won't prosecute you. They do this in parallel. They will imply that any probation or differed entry program will be revoked. I had a client who was put on pre-plea diversion. She had to do a theft class and pay a $120 fine and the case got dismissed in 6 months. She returned in 6 months and couldn't pay because she had paid the store $500 because she thought she was required to. The judge got pissed, dismissed the charges, and told her she's give her as much help getting her money back as possible. This letter was really nasty and essentially said that this was court ordered. These people are loving predators that prey on the naive and scared. If the system was pays us $300 and charges will never get filed, that is fine. This sin't that. Charges get filed, the case gets resolved, sometimes with a dismissal or even finding of factual innocence. Then the letter come out and says pay us or we call the cops.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 19:16
|
|
|
So "pay me or I'll call the cops" is or isn't legal? Or is it just a grey area when recovery laws are involved?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 19:25
|
|
|
BigHead posted:I didn't know this concept was controversial. It's not extortion, you have a choice. Filing criminal charges is a huge pain in the rear end for you and a huge waste of time for them. You're mixing a civil lawsuit with criminal charges. The store can go to the police and file a report, keeping evidence such as security camera footage on file. The state can, at their expense, file criminal charges against the shoplifter. This isn't a big pain for the store, all they have to do is provide evidence and send a witness if it goes to trial. In a completely separate proceeding, the store can file a civil lawsuit against the shoplifter at the store's expense. Paying money to settle the civil lawsuit is standard. Collecting hush money for not informing the state about the crime is unethical and possibly illegal.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
ChubbyEmoBabe posted:So "pay me or I'll call the cops" is or isn't legal? Or is it just a grey area when recovery laws are involved? In california, a civil compromise is specifically legal for shoplifting though there's a few more hoops to jump through.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
Howdy folks. Earlier today, I got served a summons to appear in small claims court against my old landlord. He is claiming that I have ~$1100 in back rent not paid. He is right to file this on me, since I do have some back rent I need to pay. During my time living as a tenant, I asked the landlord to fix my shower. It had a gaping hole in the floor and I am 99% sure that black mold was growing underneath the shower. It was almost a year and a half before he "fixed" the problem. There were also a time that one of the windows were busted out, letting cold air in. We approached the landlord with the issue and he said he would "get it fixed." About a month later, he came over (when we were NOT there) and put a board over it. (Pretty bad, right?) We also had a problem with our furnace. At one point, it stopped working. We told our landlord about this problem and he came over and tried to fix it. As he could not get it fixed, he told us to keep it off until he can get one to replace it. Keep in mind, this was in December and it was probably, on average, 15 degrees outside. When he did get it replaced, it was determined by the business replacing it that it was leaking carbon monoxide. The business told the landlord this and the landlord replied, "Keep it, as I will put it in another house." Sorry for the wall of text, but what can be done here? Is there anything I can counter-claim against this guy? We have pictures of all the "bad stuff" that we complained about. This is in Kansas also. Thanks in advance!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 01:42
|
|
|
I guess I was thinking of the shoplifting thing from the perspective of someone wrongly accused. Obviously if I found a store pulling the "pay us or we turn you in" business on me, I'd lawyer up if I hadn't done it (and probably if I had), but I'm curious about what strategy that lawyer might take to show their client doesn't owe the store anything. Wouldn't they have to produce a witness or video to show someone actually taking something off the shelf to prove it wasn't something they just brought in? It's just so hard to believe that a store can take you to court and just demand that you pay them. At least if they pressed charges, you could take it to trial and they'd have to provide more proof, right?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 02:11
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:At least if they pressed charges, you could take it to trial and they'd have to provide more proof, right? Somewhat more proof, but in a civil case, they'd only have to show that it was more likely than not that you shoplifted, a 'preponderance of the evidence'. This means over a 50/50 chance. Whereas in a criminal proceeding, the state has to show that you're guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, a much higher standard. I accept that torts like conversion or trespass to chattels have potential for punitive damages. To me, the over-the-line part is the state passing laws to greatly tip the balance in favor of the stores, especially with the attorney's fees provisions. It's creating a situation where people do the civil equivalent of Alford pleas, paying out the settlement because they're risk averse and the possibility of being on the hook for massive amounts of attorney's fees dissuades them from going for a fair trial.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 02:30
|
|
|
hellosirimjared posted:Howdy folks. Here are some resources: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/states/kansas/renting/tenantrights Pay particular attention to the Landlord/Tenant Act. I appears that you must counterclaim or you waive the right to do so. (58-2561.) Apparently in Kansas you can counterclaim for damages you have suffered due to his non-compliance with his duties, (58-2553,) so if you ended up out of money/wages/property because of no shower, heat, etc. you can counterclaim for that money. (which doesn't mean you'll get anything) On the other hand, just because he was a bad landlord does not excuse your duty to pay rent - all that bad stuff has no impact on whether you owe back rent (though whatever damages you can prove will be subtracted from what you owe.) Call up the legal and housing assistance organizations listed in the HUD link and try to get some help there. It'll probably cost more than $1100 to get an attorney to defend you. Although I am wearing pants, I am not licensed to practice law in Kansas.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 03:19
|
|
|
So I got a DUI last Thursday (gonna get a lawyer, obviously) and was taken to detox. A person on my facebook who works at a rehab facility that's a part of detox saw my name on their logbook and decided to ask me if I was in detox, and then lecture me about it. I'm wondering if there's any breach of privacy? If it helps, the group is a non profit. Because I'm pretty pissed and am going to bring this up to my lawyer, and even if there's nothing I can do, I'm going to be letting his supervisor know. Also, cross posted in the TCC legal advice thread.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
Effexxor posted:So I got a DUI last Thursday (gonna get a lawyer, obviously) and was taken to detox. A person on my facebook who works at a rehab facility that's a part of detox saw my name on their logbook and decided to ask me if I was in detox, and then lecture me about it. I'm wondering if there's any breach of privacy? If it helps, the group is a non profit. Because I'm pretty pissed and am going to bring this up to my lawyer, and even if there's nothing I can do, I'm going to be letting his supervisor know. Also, cross posted in the TCC legal advice thread. Aren't DUIs public knowledge? Check your local paper dude, you may be a star.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
If you were just detained until you sobered up, then you have no expectation of privacy. If you received medical treatment, the fact that you went into the facility and received treatment may be covered under HIPAA, and the facility may be liable if one of their employees discloses this to a third party without your authorization.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 06:38
|
|
|
dvgrhl posted:Aren't DUIs public knowledge? Check your local paper dude, you may be a star. It's one thing to have someone find out from the newspaper, but it's a whole other thing when someone finds out and then contacts me on facebook while working a job with some very tricky privacy issues. Especially someone that "ve been legally required to keep a secret for, and have kept. (long story) Konstantin posted:If you were just detained until you sobered up, then you have no expectation of privacy. If you received medical treatment, the fact that you went into the facility and received treatment may be covered under HIPAA, and the facility may be liable if one of their employees discloses this to a third party without your authorization. That's what I was wondering. I'll still bring it up to the lawyer, but I'll probably just report it to his supervisor instead and explain how incredibly immature and worrying it is.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 07:07
|
|
|
I just got a copy of a Subpoena from my cable company that they are going to release my IP address on June 17th as part of some copyright case involving Bit Torrent. Is there anything I can do to prevent them from doing this? If not, whats the next step in this?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
Hey guys I have questions over minimum wage part time overtime poo poo. I tried finding info on gov websites but didn't have much luck for my situation. I'm a Texas college student staying over summer. I got my first job ever back in the beginning of April as a pizza delivery guy. I'm paid 6.25 an hour plus delivery fee plus tips, which is fine. On Monday the only other delivery driver quit, and the owner asked me to fill in for his shifts until they find a replacement. Tuesday was supposed to be my day off but I had to work. Here was my "normal" schedule that was fine until Sunday 5/8 where poo poo got wacky. My official shift ends at 9PM but I have to stay until about 9:20 to 9:40 to clean every night I work (except Friday). Sunday - Day off Monday - 3:00pm - 9:20ish Tuesday - Day off / Pay day (every other Tuesday) Wednesday - 3:00pm - 9:20ish Thursday - 11:00am - 1:00pm, 2 hour break, 3:00pm - 9:20ish Friday - 3:00pm - 8:00 Saturday - 5:00pm - 10:20ish My hours for being paid our counted the Saturday night before that Tuesday. So my next paycheck covers 5/8 - 5/21. I usually get Sundays off but on 5/8 I covered the other driver's shift as a favor. He worked 11-9 with no break so I did as well that day. So with the other driver missing, I had to pick up his Tuesday 3:00pm - 9:20ish shift, stay an hour later tomorrow, then on Saturday come in 2 hours earlier. On Sunday I will have to work his shift again  , but it won't be on my Tuesday paycheck. I did the math and I'm going to have like 94 hours on that paycheck for two weeks of work. I'm part time, and that's more than full time people. Do I have any rights for extra pay on that paycheck such as overtime?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 20:42
|
|
|
I'm contributing to the development of governance handbooks for a pair of non-profit, 501(c)3 designated organizations in Kentucky. At the moment, I am compiling a list of primary sources of statutes and regulations that should be in front of these boards of directors as they update their conflict of interest policies. The state law that seems to govern conflicts of interest in Kentucky is KRS 273.219 [ http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/273-00/219.PDF ] which I find to be fairly accessible to the layperson, except for one term: "material financial interest." Here's the immediate context: quote:For purposes of this section, a director of a nonprofit corporation shall be considered to have an indirect interest in a transaction if: Can anyone here advise me on what resources I should consult to determine how to define material financial interest?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
Mark Kidd posted:I'm contributing to the development of governance handbooks for a pair of non-profit, 501(c)3 designated organizations in Kentucky. At the moment, I am compiling a list of primary sources of statutes and regulations that should be in front of these boards of directors as they update their conflict of interest policies. No offense to you, but if your board of directors is updating their conflict of interest policies, they should really hire a Kentucky lawyer who specializes in working with non-profits. They'll get great advice and have a solid set of policies after only a few hours of paid legal time. Otherwise, if you're looking for an explanation of the term "material financial interest", then you are looking for a case that interprets that phrase and explains what it means under Kentucky law. There are probably Kentucky nonprofit law treatises that discuss this and have references to cases. The best place to start would be the closest law library. But really, this is a process that should be done with a nonprofit lawyer on hand.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
Xinlum posted:Hey guys I have questions over minimum wage part time overtime poo poo. I tried finding info on gov websites but didn't have much luck for my situation. You should get time-and-a-half for all hours worked over 40 in a 7-day period. Employers get to pick on what day the week begins. It sounds like your start day is Sunday. So, in any given Sunday to Saturday week that you work more than 40 hours, you should get overtime for the hours over 40. http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime_pay.htm
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
entris posted:No offense to you, but if your board of directors is updating their conflict of interest policies, they should really hire a Kentucky lawyer who specializes in working with non-profits. They'll get great advice and have a solid set of policies after only a few hours of paid legal time. Agreed 100%, that is my personal preference and hopefully will be part of the process down the line. (Referrals welcome, by the way) In fairness, one of the organizations is all-volunteer operation with an annual budget of less than $20,000. It would be safe to assume that they would be traveling a couple of hours by car to reach the nearest non-profit attorney, which is another reason folks are interested in having some grounding before taking that step.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2011 22:03
|
|
|
I don't know if this is more of a police officer related question but here goes anyway. I own a home in California. I rent a room to a roommate who is on probation. On occasion his probation officer will stop by unannounced to ask questions and look around. If my probated roommate is not home, am I required to allow the probation officer to enter my home to look around?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 03:16
|
|
|
bEatmstrJ posted:I don't know if this is more of a police officer related question but here goes anyway. Particularly in light of Georgia v. Randolph, you are not required to allow the PO to enter, but in doing so you will probably be placing your roomate in violation of the terms of his probation. (So long as his terms and conditions of probation provide for visits 'at any time' or 'even when probationer is absent' or something like that.)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 04:29
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Particularly in light of Georgia v. Randolph, you are not required to allow the PO to enter, but in doing so you will probably be placing your roomate in violation of the terms of his probation. (So long as his terms and conditions of probation provide for visits 'at any time' or 'even when probationer is absent' or something like that.)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
Can a landlord legally force me to pay for his legal fees if he decides to sue me? It seems kind of weird, there's a line in my housing contract that I'm slightly concerned about.quote:21. ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS AND COST OF SUIT. In the event I do not leave the premises in a clean and in rental condition at the time I vacate, I agree to pay a reasonable cleaning expense. Further, I agree to pay You all bank charges for checks returned for any reason, all late charges, all costs for repairs, replacements redecorating and or refurbishing the premises for anything other than ordinary wear and tear.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 17:49
|
|
|
singe posted:Can a landlord legally force me to pay for his legal fees if he decides to sue me? It seems kind of weird, there's a line in my housing contract that I'm slightly concerned about. Really need to know what state. Different state laws may say different things. Where I live, leases may only provide for recovery of attorney fees if the both the landlord and the tenant may recover fees. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 22:42 on May 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 18:01
|
|
|
My advice would be to find another place to rent, or tell the landlord that you will only rent there if the provision is removed. They will probably say something like "That's something my lawyer said had to be in there." I've walked away from signing leases because I didn't like the contract, it's not worth the risk. If they insist that you sign something you're uncomfortable with, you don't want to be doing business with them.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 22:21
|
|
|
I'm in CT and I have and need help with employment law. Here is my contract: http://pastebin.com/JcZJe4HM In March I verbally accepted a job offer. I was in the process of moving so we agreed that I would work a few hours twice a week until I moved closer to the company, and in May and would begin full time. I just received my first paycheck for working a full 40 hour week and I noticed that there were no taxes deducted. All the paychecks I have received did have any tax deductions but I did not notice until today. Another employee says that I will be an independent contractor until I am salaried. This doesn't seem right because the independent contractor status was not mentioned in my contract or to me verbally. I currently work set hours (40 hours a week), use their computers in the company office, and receive training from employees. Does anyone know if I should be classified as an independent contractor?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
That's more of a tax question than it is employment law: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html It *sounds* like they're doing a no-no, I say sounds because it's the IRS there's always a way around something or a loophole.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
bEatmstrJ posted:I don't know if this is more of a police officer related question but here goes anyway. I think the answer is, you are well within your rights to slam the door in his face or not answer. He, however, is well within his rights the bust down the door and if you physically resist, you can be charged with resisting/delaying. Not legal advice
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 23:15
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Really need to know what state. Different state laws may say different things. Where I live, leases may only provide for recovery of attorney fees if the both the landlord and the tenant may recover fees. I'll be living in CT. I decided to alter it to only if he wins the suit.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2011 23:51
|
|
|
singe posted:I'll be living in CT. I decided to alter it to only if he wins the suit. Why would you do such a thing, unless (maybe) the landlord agreed to do the same? Anyway, the reason we wanted your state was this: "Connecticutt Landlord Tenant Act, Chapter 830 posted:Sec. 47a-4. Terms prohibited in rental agreement. (a) A rental agreement shall not provide that the tenant: ... (7) agrees to pay the landlord's attorney's fees in excess of fifteen per cent of any judgment against the tenant in any action in which money damages are awarded.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
I have a question about a neighbor who has two cars that have been parked in the same spot for nearly 5 years. This is in the Bronx, NY on a residential street. I normally wouldn't give a poo poo, but two new houses with driveways have gone up on the block and it is now impossible to find parking. I've called 311 and filed a complaint 4+ times in the past year, and the cops haven't done poo poo even though the report says 'investegated'. The law states that a car can only be parked in the same spot for a maximum of 7 days. It's been 5 years. They have current plates and registration, somehow. I don't know who owns the cars, so what is the next step to get these towed?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2011 00:56
|
|