Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie

«‹›1198 »

ChubbyEmoBabe: Sep 6, 2003; -=|NMN|=-

shovelbum posted:

Hypothetically if someone is trying to force me into a psychiatric care situation against my will, yet I am actually perfectly sane, do I have the right to an attorney in that situation?

Yes. Summary from arizona (for adults):

http://www.acdl.com/New%20Logo%20Guides/MH1%20New%20Logo.pdf

# ? Jul 27, 2011 17:54

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 16:24

shovelbum: Oct 21, 2010; Fun Shoe

ChubbyEmoBabe posted:

Yes. Summary from arizona (for adults):

http://www.acdl.com/New%20Logo%20Guides/MH1%20New%20Logo.pdf

Sweet, I probably watch too many movies because who would spend the money to lock up a sane dude in this day and age but it's always been a fear, like a shark attack or something.

# ? Jul 27, 2011 17:58

Books On Tape: Dec 26, 2003; Future of the franchise

Is anyone here familiar with laws regarding estates and wills and such?

Long story short, we were in the process of purchasing a home from a friend of our family. Unfortunately, before the sale could go through, the seller passed away from cancer and her estate, including the home went into probate. The sale was delayed due to the appointment of an administrator to the seller's estate.

After a few months, the administrator of her estate decided to uphold our purchase offer and we were ready to go through with the home sale, when the seller's ex-husband suddenly presented a will claiming that he had a claim to her estate. This of course, put the sale of the home on hold again while the courts determined the validity of the will. This is where it stands now.

Now, from my understanding (from googling extensively), wills between a husband and wife become void upon divorce, right? It should be noted that the seller's ex-husband was a collosal douchebag to her for many reasons, and there is NO WAY that the seller would've signed a will after the divorce leaving the estate to her ex. So, I'm wondering why he would even come forward with this supposed will that would've had to have been from before the divorce, which should now be invalid?

Does this guy actually have a valid claim to his ex-wife's estate?

# ? Jul 27, 2011 18:13

lazer_chicken: May 14, 2009; PEW PEW ZAP ZAP

Germ Wrangler posted:

Fired for not doin' her boss

I would definitely talk to an attorney. Sounds like a pretty clear case of wrongful termination. Make sure you save ANYTHING that could be evidence. Text messages, facebook posts, handwritten notes on napkins, whatever. The hard part is proving this stuff in court, especially when so much of it is verbal (he stares at my boobs, he acts creepy, he asks me out all the time, and so on)

not a lawyer, etc.

# ? Jul 27, 2011 18:57

and the claw won!: Jul 10, 2008

jerkstore77 posted:

Now, from my understanding (from googling extensively), wills between a husband and wife become void upon divorce, right?

This is true in most states. In a few states it is true as long as there was a property settlement at divorce.

# ? Jul 27, 2011 18:58

entris: Oct 22, 2008; by Y Kant Ozma Post

jerkstore77 posted:

Is anyone here familiar with laws regarding estates and wills and such?

Long story short, we were in the process of purchasing a home from a friend of our family. Unfortunately, before the sale could go through, the seller passed away from cancer and her estate, including the home went into probate. The sale was delayed due to the appointment of an administrator to the seller's estate.

After a few months, the administrator of her estate decided to uphold our purchase offer and we were ready to go through with the home sale, when the seller's ex-husband suddenly presented a will claiming that he had a claim to her estate. This of course, put the sale of the home on hold again while the courts determined the validity of the will. This is where it stands now.

Now, from my understanding (from googling extensively), wills between a husband and wife become void upon divorce, right? It should be noted that the seller's ex-husband was a collosal douchebag to her for many reasons, and there is NO WAY that the seller would've signed a will after the divorce leaving the estate to her ex. So, I'm wondering why he would even come forward with this supposed will that would've had to have been from before the divorce, which should now be invalid?

Does this guy actually have a valid claim to his ex-wife's estate?

If you are married, and execute a will leaving your estate your spouse, that bequest to your spouse will be invalidated when you are divorced. If you are divorced, and execute a will leaving your estate to your ex-spouse, that is perfectly acceptable - you can leave your poo poo to whoever you want, even your ex-spouse.

Sometimes, the settlement agreement that came out of the divorce will create certain property rights that the ex-spouse can use to get at your property, but that agreement doesn't take the place of a will, it's just another document with legal force that sometimes affects your property rights at death.

Assuming the ex-husband has come forward with this supposed will, the court is required to examine the will and decide if it is a valid, post-divorce will - if so, he might have a claim to the estate. If not, then not.

Will contests are really really annoying litigation, and many of them settle. Good luck.

# ? Jul 27, 2011 19:04

Germ Wrangler: Apr 20, 2009

nm posted:

What part of California are you in (SoCal or NorCal is fine). I may be able to recommend an attorney.
Yes, you should sue them.

I'm in Northern California. Any recommendation would be awesome. Thanks!

Germ Wrangler fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Jul 28, 2011

# ? Jul 27, 2011 21:31

Very Nice Eraser: May 28, 2011

entris posted:

If you are married, and execute a will leaving your estate your spouse, that bequest to your spouse will be invalidated when you are divorced. If you are divorced, and execute a will leaving your estate to your ex-spouse, that is perfectly acceptable - you can leave your poo poo to whoever you want, even your ex-spouse.

Here's a hypothetical. Suppose I make a will leaving my house to Mrs. Very Nice Eraser, by name, without saying "my wife." Then suppose we divorce and I promptly die. Very Nice Eraser Jr. claims the clause in the will is void because my wife and I divorced. Ex-Mrs. Very Nice Eraser claims the will was made to her as an individual and being a wife or ex-wife has nothing to do with it. By the letter of the law (before any litigation), who gets the house?

I can think of situations where you might want to leave something to a spouse, even if he/she isn't your spouse by the time you die.

# ? Jul 28, 2011 00:44

Pillowpants: Aug 5, 2006

I'm from Massachusetts and not involved in any lawsuits or court cases. I just have a general question.

If I were to want to help people sign up for mint.com and help them enter in their budgets before they provide the banking information to mint that would cause all sorts of crazy liability issues, and then tell them to change the password, is that legit at all?

# ? Jul 28, 2011 01:36

rivid: Jul 17, 2005; Matt 24:44

I am writing what I would like to eventually become a book that I will give away for free online. It's going to be about my personal experiences growing up in the American school system. I want to write about some terrible schools and the administration at these places. Can I use these names and places in the book without getting sued for libel and slander or defamation? Do I have anything else to worry about? I live in Massachusetts.

# ? Jul 28, 2011 03:10

Soylent Pudding: Jun 22, 2007; We've got people!

rivid posted:

I am writing what I would like to eventually become a book that I will give away for free online. It's going to be about my personal experiences growing up in the American school system. I want to write about some terrible schools and the administration at these places. Can I use these names and places in the book without getting sued for libel and slander or defamation? Do I have anything else to worry about? I live in Massachusetts.

Truth is an absolute defense. This doesn't stop people from filing these suits anyway in the hope of burying you in court costs defending against them. At least in America we presume truth. Obviously, this is not legal advice and you would be better off asking a real life lawyer who knows Massachusetts law.

Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Jul 28, 2011

# ? Jul 28, 2011 03:24

Alchenar: Apr 9, 2008

rivid posted:

I am writing what I would like to eventually become a book that I will give away for free online. It's going to be about my personal experiences growing up in the American school system. I want to write about some terrible schools and the administration at these places. Can I use these names and places in the book without getting sued for libel and slander or defamation? Do I have anything else to worry about? I live in Massachusetts.

Easiest way to deal with this issue is to not use names.

e: but short answer: yes if you write something libelous then you can be sued for libel. Don't write anything you can't back up as true.

# ? Jul 28, 2011 11:02

lazer_chicken: May 14, 2009; PEW PEW ZAP ZAP

Soylent Pudding posted:

This doesn't stop people from filing these suits anyway in the hope of burying you in court costs defending against them.

This. IANAL and you should take this question to a real lawyer. However, if it were me I would be very hesitant to use real names, just because even if you are 100% in the right, a sufficiently motivated person can still make your life hell by making you spend tons of money defending yourself.

If the names are not important (i.e. the book is for entertainment) then I would definitely change them. If the point of the book is to call out these people or organizations, then you'll have to accept the risk that someone might sue you. That's just how it goes.

lazer_chicken fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Jul 28, 2011

# ? Jul 28, 2011 15:07

Soylent Pudding: Jun 22, 2007; We've got people!

Sadly most of the efforts to fix this problem have failed. I'll let someone more eloquent than me take it from here:

Marc Randazza posted:

Congressman Steve Cohen, D-TN is our First Amendment Bad rear end of the week.

Mr. Cohen introduced The Citizen Participation Act, a federal anti-slapp bill. The bill describes its purpose as follows:

To protect first amendment rights of petition and free speech by preventing States and the United States from allowing meritless lawsuits arising from acts in furtherance of those rights, commonly called ��SLAPPs��, and for other purposes.

It is about time.

SLAPP suits are all-too common and are a scourge on our legal landscape. Personally, they have been good for me, as I earn a significant income by defending these kinds of suits, but as much as I love money, I love free speech more (and I�m sure that I could sell that time elsewhere). A SLAPP suit is a �Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.� In other words, it is a lawsuit that some hosebag files against a critic � not because he hopes to win anything, but because the mere filing of the suit is punishment enough for the critic. Lawsuits are expensive, and when a rich douchebag has plenty of money to spend on attorneys�s fees, he can afford to sue a couple of critics, thus scaring the bejesus out of anyone else who might criticize him.

The Public Participation Project had this to say about SLAPPS:

Regardless of who is speaking and who is suing, everyone is losing when SLAPPs are allowed to continue. These meritless lawsuits clog the courts, waste resources and contribute to a general culture of litigousness. Instead of answering speech with speech, SLAPP filers answer speech with subpoenas and spurious claims.

SLAPPs frequently end in settlement, conditioned on silence, apology or retraction, so important ideas are excised from the debate, and critical information � about health, safety, economic security, civil rights and liberties, and government abuse � is withheld from the public. Would-be participants in public life see the devastating effects of lawsuits � on life savings, employment, reputation and even staying insured � and think twice before speaking out.

Judge Nicholas Colabella, Jr., famously said of SLAPPs that a greater threat to First Amendment rights can scarcely be imagined. SLAPPs chip away at the will and ability to speak out, person by person, group by group, issue by issue. James Madison cautioned that �there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations,� and his words ring true in the SLAPP context. (source)

About half of the states have some form of legislation against this, but only California and Oregon have anti-SLAPP statutes that are worth a drat. Flori-duh�s is so watered down that it may as well only apply when a Unicorn shits on the Defendant�s lawn. However, in California and Oregon, if a Plaintiff files a lawsuit that implicates the Defendant�s First Amendment rights, the Defendant can file a �special motion to strike.� Then, the Plaintiff will need to show that his suit is not just a baseless and harassing claim. If the Plaintiff can�t do that, then the case is dismissed and the Plaintiff has to pay the Defendant�s attorneys fees.

Congressman Cohen�s bill is very similar to the California law (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 425.16), and provides the right kind of remedies. One would think that the Republicans would line up behind this � as it provides much-needed �tort reform.� The Democrats� well, there was a time when the Democratic party seemed like the party that favored free speech. I am starting to doubt that, but Mr. Cohen should be able to marshall some of his Democratic colleagues to support this bill.

I can not stress how important a bill like this is. If you can, please write a letter to your Representative urging their support for HR 4364.

Copy this post, if you like. You don�t even need to attribute, if you don�t want to. (I hereby release the copyright in this post to the public domain). Distribute the news far and wide. If you ever use your First Amendment rights, then this bill matters to you.

And� to really make the other congressmen stand up and take notice, if you can afford to, send Congressman Cohen a campaign contribution with a note stating that you only sent it because of his sponsorship of this bill. I sent him a hundred bucks today.

Also� if you want help writing your congressman, click here.

# ? Jul 28, 2011 22:58

Javid: Oct 21, 2004

Can anyone here recommend a good SSI/disability lawyer in the Portland, OR area?

# ? Jul 29, 2011 00:07

empiricus: Apr 27, 2011; by Ozmaugh

Does doctor-patient confidentiality apply between a therapist and a psychiatrist?

I live in NY. My psychiatrist and therapist are married. If I tell things to my therapist, can she tell them to my psychiatrist? She told me everything was confidential, but I don't know..

# ? Jul 29, 2011 15:24

fordham: Oct 5, 2002; Your argument is invalid.; Exciting Lemon

empiricus posted:

Does doctor-patient confidentiality apply between a therapist and a psychiatrist?

I live in NY. My psychiatrist and therapist are married. If I tell things to my therapist, can she tell them to my psychiatrist? She told me everything was confidential, but I don't know..

I'm pretty sure HIPAA requires that specific (patient names, identifying info, etc) information can only be shared between professionals that actually treat you.

Your therapist can still tell her spouse "I have a patient who is batshit loving crazy, he has all these symptoms blah blah blah..." without identifying who you are.

Anyway, not a lawyer, not wearing pants, and this just comes from growing up with and now married to medical professionals.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 15:34

vanessa: May 21, 2006; CAUTION: This pussy is ferocious.

empiricus posted:

Does doctor-patient confidentiality apply between a therapist and a psychiatrist?

I live in NY. My psychiatrist and therapist are married. If I tell things to my therapist, can she tell them to my psychiatrist? She told me everything was confidential, but I don't know..

Do they work out of the same practice or separate practices? If separate, then you have nothing to worry about.

Same practice? That's a bit more of a gray area, because there are feasibly situations in which they would need to share information between themselves, especially since it sounds like you are meeting with both of them. In such a situation, it would be a conversation that included you.

HIPAA restrictions do allow for information to be shared if needed for treatment, but do rest assured that information will not be shared unless necessary.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 17:01

Rohaq: Aug 11, 2006

Pillowpants posted:

I'm from Massachusetts and not involved in any lawsuits or court cases. I just have a general question.

If I were to want to help people sign up for mint.com and help them enter in their budgets before they provide the banking information to mint that would cause all sorts of crazy liability issues, and then tell them to change the password, is that legit at all?

Personally, I would avoid this situation like the goddamned plague. Why? Because you have access to a third party system to help them with their finances, which they later enter banking details into.

Say they're lazy as gently caress (likely), and don't bother changing their password: If anything happens to their account, they may suspect you, and then you'd end up having to prove in court that you did not do it.

Find a way to help them with their finances (Google Docs spreadsheet or something?) without taking any banking details that could be used in order to steal money or commit fraud, but really, I'd avoid using a third party system that may store their personal details.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 20:10

ianskate: Sep 22, 2002; Run away before you drown!

Quick (and probably very stupid) question for anyone who can advise on trademark law and fair use.

For example:

Say I'm working on a documentary about Toyota, and I'd like to use the word Toyota in the title... is this considered legal fair use, or by doing so, does it violate the Toyota trademark? Say it was called "My life in a Toyota."

Understanding the difference between reselling an actual product with a copied logo, or rebrand using the name Toyota makes sense, and could see it being in violation... but would using the name in a creative production such as a movie, be fair use?

Thanks in advance for any help.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 22:29

Schitzo: Mar 20, 2006; I can't hear it when you talk about John Druce

jerkstore77 posted:

Now, from my understanding (from googling extensively), wills between a husband and wife become void upon divorce, right?

As already pointed out, that's not universally true. In Alberta, for example, divorce doesn't change a will. Remarriage will void an existing will, however.

Our law is actually being reformed on these points in the near future, but it's an example of how you can be surprised sometimes.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 00:09

ChubbyEmoBabe: Sep 6, 2003; -=|NMN|=-

ianskate posted:

Quick (and probably very stupid) question for anyone who can advise on trademark law and fair use.

For example:

Say I'm working on a documentary about Toyota, and I'd like to use the word Toyota in the title... is this considered legal fair use, or by doing so, does it violate the Toyota trademark? Say it was called "My life in a Toyota."

Understanding the difference between reselling an actual product with a copied logo, or rebrand using the name Toyota makes sense, and could see it being in violation... but would using the name in a creative production such as a movie, be fair use?

Thanks in advance for any help.

This doesn't really answer your question but I imagine if these guys can slam walmart for a couple hours and have their name in the title there's probably a way to do it without consent.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0473107/

# ? Jul 30, 2011 00:20

sixdeadpandas: Jan 15, 2011

Does anybody have experience with the bar association in Florida regarding character and fitness? They are really putting someone i know through the wringer, for what seems to be nothing. They are so powerful and unregulated, it's really a nightmare.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 03:19

prussian advisor: Jan 15, 2007; The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, its going to roll over my dead body.

sixdeadpandas posted:

Does anybody have experience with the bar association in Florida regarding character and fitness? They are really putting someone i know through the wringer, for what seems to be nothing. They are so powerful and unregulated, it's really a nightmare.

What for? The consensus among practitioners in the state does seem to be that they're very aggressive for a C&F board.

In terms of it seeming like nothing, if they suspect he lied about something on the bar application or otherwise intentionally misrepresented something, even something that's trivial on its own, I'm sure that would have severe repercussions. Most C&F boards are like this, where their primary purposes is essentially to screen applicants for dishonesty.

prussian advisor fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Jul 30, 2011

# ? Jul 30, 2011 04:58

sixdeadpandas: Jan 15, 2011

prussian advisor posted:

What for? The consensus among practitioners in the state does seem to be that they're very aggressive for a C&F board.

In terms of it seeming like nothing, if they suspect he lied about something on the bar application or otherwise intentionally misrepresented something, even something that's trivial on its own, I'm sure that would have severe repercussions. Most C&F boards are like this, where their primary purposes is essentially to screen applicants for dishonesty.

She was beyond honest when disclosing things to the board--we're talking hundreds of pages worth of filings s and amendments. The bar is nit picking about the lack of info on incidents from 15 years ago. She has hired representation and the attorney said that FL has the highest malpractice rate in the nation and that, on average, it takes a year to be licensed. Does that sound realistic?

sixdeadpandas fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Jul 30, 2011

# ? Jul 30, 2011 05:48

empiricus: Apr 27, 2011; by Ozmaugh

vanessa posted:

Do they work out of the same practice or separate practices? If separate, then you have nothing to worry about.

Same practice? That's a bit more of a gray area, because there are feasibly situations in which they would need to share information between themselves, especially since it sounds like you are meeting with both of them. In such a situation, it would be a conversation that included you.

HIPAA restrictions do allow for information to be shared if needed for treatment, but do rest assured that information will not be shared unless necessary.

They work in tandem, but not out of the same practice. I go to separate locations to see them one at a time, and they bill me separately. He (psychiatrist) was at the first appointment with her (therapist) for just a few minutes before leaving.

Basically, they represent themselves as different agencies even though I'm working with both of them. From your explanation, it seems that that would be sufficient for them to require me to sign a form for them to talk openly about me. Am I understanding your explanation correctly?

Thanks.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 06:04

BigHead: Jul 25, 2003; Huh?; Nap Ghost

Hey nm, and the rest of the PDs who are in this thread, two questions:

How enthusiastically do you fap for a THC DUI with no bad driving?

What offer do you normally expect for a lovely THC DUI? lovely for me, the DA, and good for you.

And also I should mention the cop is possibly crazy and really likes cussing on audio tape. A lot.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 10:32

joat mon: Oct 15, 2009; I am the master of my lamp;
I am the captain of my tub.

BigHead posted:

Hey nm, and the rest of the PDs who are in this thread, two questions:
How enthusiastically do you fap for a THC DUI with no bad driving?

It depends on what the basis for the stop was. Once there's a good stop, it's still DUI if you're driving "while under the influence of any intoxicating substance other than alcohol which may render a person incapable of safely driving a motor vehicle." - so voir dire will be important.

BigHead posted:

What offer do you normally expect for a lovely THC DUI? lovely for me, the DA, and good for you.

first time, no wreck, no dead bodies? Standard is 1 year probation, DUI school, fines, and at the end, reduction to reckless driving. Adjust down/ modify for crappiness.

BigHead posted:

And also I should mention the cop is possibly crazy and really likes cussing on audio tape. A lot.

That's the fappable part.

DUI is one area in crim law where specialization can pay off big. If there are guys in your area who do just DUIs (and do them well) they're probably better than the PDs because they've got the money for gear and training and the experience of doing a whole lot of DUI work. Unfortunately, most PD DUI cases are "So, if I plead I get to go home?" (if you can bond out you don't get a PD) and "They're offering 4 in on your 5th DUI, but a jury can give you up to 20." (we have jury sentencing) So PDs here don't try a lot of DUIs.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 15:16

ianskate: Sep 22, 2002; Run away before you drown!

ChubbyEmoBabe posted:

This doesn't really answer your question but I imagine if these guys can slam walmart for a couple hours and have their name in the title there's probably a way to do it without consent.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0473107/

Interesting, I'll have to try digging for some info on it. It's surprising that one could use a name for something so negative. Maybe they did get sued anyway?

# ? Jul 30, 2011 17:35

prussian advisor: Jan 15, 2007; The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, its going to roll over my dead body.

sixdeadpandas posted:

She was beyond honest when disclosing things to the board--we're talking hundreds of pages worth of filings s and amendments. The bar is nit picking about the lack of info on incidents from 15 years ago. She has hired representation and the attorney said that FL has the highest malpractice rate in the nation and that, on average, it takes a year to be licensed. Does that sound realistic?

"Hundreds of pages worth of filings and amendments" sounds like she has a lot of potentially questionable history, since the FL bar application itself is maybe 40 pages long. But yeah, the handful of people I've known who have had serious FL C&F problems have hired attorneys who specialize in that type of representation, and most of them have wound up getting it ultimately resolved in their favor. Obviously this varies on a case by case basis.

As for it taking a year on average to be licensed as an attorney in Florida, I doubt it, although I guess it depends on what date he's counting it a year from. Most Florida law school grads I've spoken with who've sat the bar have their character and fitness clearance come through in 2-3 months, although 4-5 isn't unheard of. Most FL applicants graduate in May and send their bar app in by that time if they haven't already (FL incentivizes applying early in school anyway), sit for the FL bar in July, have their bar results released September and have their C&F clearance by the end of that month and are ready to be admitted.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 18:39

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

I almost went to UF Law, and I thought it was just common to submit your bar app your 1L year.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 19:02

prussian advisor: Jan 15, 2007; The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, its going to roll over my dead body.

Baruch Obamawitz posted:

I almost went to UF Law, and I thought it was just common to submit your bar app your 1L year.

I knew a lot of guys who submitted their applications early their 2L year so they could get Chapter 11 certification and participate in the prosecution/defense clinics as 3Ls. It also had the added bonus of being able to hammer out any C&F problems way ahead of time and being able to make court appearances before passing the bar, which is otherwise impossible. I'm sure there's people who did it first year, but most of the early submitters were 2Ls.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 19:06

ashgromnies: Jun 19, 2004

edit: nvm, spoke to a few attorneys in real life

ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Jul 30, 2011

# ? Jul 30, 2011 19:18

sixdeadpandas: Jan 15, 2011

prussian advisor posted:

"Hundreds of pages worth of filings and amendments" sounds like she has a lot of potentially questionable history, since the FL bar application itself is maybe 40 pages long. But yeah, the handful of people I've known who have had serious FL C&F problems have hired attorneys who specialize in that type of representation, and most of them have wound up getting it ultimately resolved in their favor. Obviously this varies on a case by case basis.

As for it taking a year on average to be licensed as an attorney in Florida, I doubt it, although I guess it depends on what date he's counting it a year from. Most Florida law school grads I've spoken with who've sat the bar have their character and fitness clearance come through in 2-3 months, although 4-5 isn't unheard of. Most FL applicants graduate in May and send their bar app in by that time if they haven't already (FL incentivizes applying early in school anyway), sit for the FL bar in July, have their bar results released September and have their C&F clearance by the end of that month and are ready to be admitted.

It's hundreds of pages because she was meticulous about every detail. To her, every tiny thing that she remembered warranted a notarized amendment. Because of the fact that she was so forthcoming in the first place, the bar sent an obscene number of requests over minutiae. She failed he first one last year, but killed it in february. They sent her to some psychological test site, and despite being fully cleared, they still requested a hearing for the end of the year.

I heard florida is prejudiced against non-locals. Add to that the fact that she is a minority and a female, and it seems to me things may just be stacked against her.

# ? Jul 30, 2011 21:34

nm: Jan 28, 2008; "I saw Minos the Space Judge holding a golden sceptre and passing sentence upon the Martians. There he presided, and around him the noble Space Prosecutors sought the firm justice of space law."

BigHead posted:

Hey nm, and the rest of the PDs who are in this thread, two questions:

How enthusiastically do you fap for a THC DUI with no bad driving?

What offer do you normally expect for a lovely THC DUI? lovely for me, the DA, and good for you.

And also I should mention the cop is possibly crazy and really likes cussing on audio tape. A lot.

Dry reckless.

I see very very few THC DUIs. Even fewer with no drive. The only one I've seen go to trial was a no bad drive that hung with a later dismissal.
With a small amount of THC (the level that would have good driving, no bad FSTS), the literature says that driving might actually improve (The same is true for meth, but it better be a very tiny amount). Paranoia is a bitch.
I'm assuming he passed or basically passed the FSTS? (Eye poo poo doesn't count)

----

I like DUIs. All the science is pretty interesting and gives a lot of wiggleroom. I love a .09.

joat mon posted:

Unfortunately, most PD DUI cases are "So, if I plead I get to go home?" (if you can bond out you don't get a PD) and "They're offering 4 in on your 5th DUI, but a jury can give you up to 20." (we have jury sentencing) So PDs here don't try a lot of DUIs.

Jesus, jury sentencing is a nightmare.
Where I was working until a few weeks ago, one of my favorite DAs only asked for his offer after trial. After a second DUI, at sentencing he said, "my offer was 10 days (mandatory min) before trial, none of the facts changed, so I think 10d is still appropriate." Lots of respect for that.

nm fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jul 31, 2011

# ? Jul 30, 2011 23:56

prussian advisor: Jan 15, 2007; The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, its going to roll over my dead body.

nm posted:

I like DUIs. All the science is pretty interesting and gives a lot of wiggleroom. I love a .09.

You should drop by synirc so we can talk about trial and DUI stuff. I've always heard that the thing that makes DUIs such a difficult case to convict on is that the odds are anyone in the jury is going to know someone they love or respect who has driven under the influence (either caught or uncaught,) and they're correspondingly reluctant to convict defendants because of that. Is that true in your experience?

# ? Jul 31, 2011 00:16

nm: Jan 28, 2008; "I saw Minos the Space Judge holding a golden sceptre and passing sentence upon the Martians. There he presided, and around him the noble Space Prosecutors sought the firm justice of space law."

prussian advisor posted:

You should drop by synirc so we can talk about trial and DUI stuff. I've always heard that the thing that makes DUIs such a difficult case to convict on is that the odds are anyone in the jury is going to know someone they love or respect who has driven under the influence (either caught or uncaught,) and they're correspondingly reluctant to convict defendants because of that. Is that true in your experience?

What's the irc server and room?

My experience is that with >.08 DUIs, juries often just shut their ears and convict. They're terrified of being 'fooled" by the slick defense attorney. Also, my experience is that people don't like DUI in California.

If I have a defensible DUI (>=.10), I want a smart jury. They're much more likely to have an open mind and much less likely to be worried about being fooled.
The fact is that there is enough error in these machines to reasonably make a .10 becomes a .079, particularly if there is no breath temp sensor.

# ? Jul 31, 2011 00:35

prussian advisor: Jan 15, 2007; The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, its going to roll over my dead body.

nm posted:

What's the irc server and room?

My experience is that with >.08 DUIs, juries often just shut their ears and convict. They're terrified of being 'fooled" by the slick defense attorney. Also, my experience is that people don't like DUI in California.

If I have a defensible DUI (>=.10), I want a smart jury. They're much more likely to have an open mind and much less likely to be worried about being fooled.
The fact is that there is enough error in these machines to reasonably make a .10 becomes a .079, particularly if there is no breath temp sensor.

irc.synirc.net #lawgoons

# ? Jul 31, 2011 01:43

ChubbyEmoBabe: Sep 6, 2003; -=|NMN|=-

ianskate posted:

Interesting, I'll have to try digging for some info on it. It's surprising that one could use a name for something so negative. Maybe they did get sued anyway?

Again IANAL, but I am pretty sure if they sued and won the film would, at a minimum, have a different title.

# ? Jul 31, 2011 02:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 16:24

A.s.P.: Jun 29, 2006; They're just a bunch of shapes. Don't read too deeply into it.

I'm currently the Plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit in NY state/county.

I was injured at work (fell butt-first through a glass table :lol:

and had internal injuries) and my boss, "Reynaldo" was a witness. Reynaldo only does corporate securities legal work.

The firm's only litigators, "Juan" (partner) and "Pedro" (associate) are representing me on this matter. Though they were in the office when I got injured, they were not witnesses and will not be called in as witnesses on the stand. Only Reynaldo was a witness, but he is doing no work on my case.

Is there a problem with the firm representing me?

Juan, an experienced litigator, said "probably no." Pedro also said no, and here is his analysis of the court rules:

quote:

We should be fine, as long as Reynaldo doesn�t act before the court.

Rule 3.7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct deals with a lawyer as a witness. It provides that a lawyer shall not act as advocate before a tribunal in a matter in which the lawyer is likely to be a witness on a significant issue. There are exceptions, but they don�t apply to Reynaldo: 1) testimony relates to an uncontested issue; 2) testimony relates solely to nature and value of legal services rendered in the matter; 3) disqualification of the lawyer would work a substantial hardship on the client; 4) testimony relates solely to a matter of formality and there�s no reason to believe that substantial evidence will be offered in opposition, or 5) testimony is authorized by tribunal. So Reynaldo�s out.

As for myself and Juan, the rule provides that a lawyer may not act as an advocate before a tribunal in a matter if 1) another lawyer in the firm is likely to be called as a witness on a significant issue other than on behalf of the client, and it�s apparent that the testimony may be prejudicial to the client; or 2) the lawyer is precluded from doing so by Rule 1.7 (conflict with current client) or Rule 1.9 (deals with former clients).

Juan and Pedro are confident it won't be an issue that the firm is representing me, but I've heard from other lawyers (including one experienced personal injury lawyer) that there could be serious conflicts.

Any thoughts? Thanks, law-goons.

By the way, if anyone can recommend an excellent personal injury lawyer in New York City for me, I'll take you out for lunch/drinks. :wink:

# ? Aug 2, 2011 23:08

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie

«‹›1198 »