|
I don't know Texas rules, but the general theory is that the bank has a legal action against the person on the loan (your dad), and your dad in turn has a right against the kid. Obviously this theory breaks down where the person at the end of the chain (the kid) doesn't have any money, leaving the person in the middle (your dad) holding the bag. So your dad has legal rights here, but they aren't really meaningful. I agree with the above poster, your dad is pretty hosed. Before co-signing a loan, always evaluate the risk that your co-signer represents: how likely is it that this person will skip out on you, and what will the financial impact be for you?
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
notwhoyouknowiam posted:My question is, under Texas law, is there a way to get my dad's name removed from this loan considering we have lost control over this vehicle? Or are we better off reporting the vehicle as stolen? Your dad is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 15:22
|
|
|
chuchumeister posted:Unfortunately, I'm a big dumb stupidface who didn't understand the implications at the time and our lease does have a waiver for the notice to vacate as well as that clause about being able to recover court costs. Either way, he gave the 5 days to us, so I'm sticking to it. I mean, this is so stupid because we're moving out in less than a month! I just don't want to get kicked out before we can actually MOVE out! Eviction proceedings take a lot longer than two weeks. Just state that you will be moving out on a specific date, and no sooner. If they try and take you to court, they can, but you'll be out of there before the court date and it doesn't seem like they will sue you for money damages. (You should still go to court if they do take it there, just to say that you have moved out.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 16:27
|
|
|
chuchumeister posted:Unfortunately, I'm a big dumb stupidface who didn't understand the implications at the time and our lease does have a waiver for the notice to vacate as well as that clause about being able to recover court costs. Either way, he gave the 5 days to us, so I'm sticking to it. I mean, this is so stupid because we're moving out in less than a month! I just don't want to get kicked out before we can actually MOVE out! Just because something is in a lease doesn't mean it's valid in your state. Lookup a landlord/tenant attorney and get a cheap/free consultation with them to look over your lease and to tell them what's going on. You're going to be much better off having a real lawyer look at everything and advise you on what can/can't be done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
chemosh6969 posted:Just because something is in a lease doesn't mean it's valid in your state. Lookup a landlord/tenant attorney and get a cheap/free consultation with them to look over your lease and to tell them what's going on. You're going to be much better off having a real lawyer look at everything and advise you on what can/can't be done. Yeah, but google and I can help out here, and save the fee. Since they want to move anyway, why invest the time and money to fight it? Waive the 5 day notice: http://legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=112073 Collection of fees: A little more difficult, but basically it's not on the list of prohibited practices, so it is allowed. The relevant law starts here: http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=104025 Here is a larger .pdf with legal precedents cited http://americanlandlords.org/landlord_tenant/Louisiana.pdf It is a really gripping read. Basically, in this state, unless you qualify for free legal care, or you are in a situation where you have paid rent in advance and stand to lose a lot, or if you are getting a really, Really !!!AWESOME!!! deal on your apartment, it is almost always going to be cheaper to move than to fight it, even when you factor in your time packing and moving. Attorney's fees add up really quickly, and unless your landlord does something really bad (and has the gall to brag to you in writing about it, like emailing you that he won't rent to you because you are black), the tenant here is never awarded legal fees. The "acting in good faith" shield goes very far for landlords. You will spend money that you will never get back. You are probably used to legal proceedings in other states, where things are actually meant to be fair. Just realize that Louisiana doesn't work that way. Try contacting some local lawyers if you don't believe me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2012 23:32
|
|
|
Hey everyone, I live in New York and I'm kind of screwed right now and I don't know if I have any legal recourse. So for the past 7 months I have been working full time at job A. However, I wanted something higher paying, so I submitted my resume to a temp/hiring agency and about 3 weeks ago I get a call from the agency about a job at a local bank which was looking to hire on a few new people in a temp-to-perm role. The pay was extremely good and the woman at the agency assured me that many people had already been hired by the bank through their agency and had all become permanent employees after 3 months. I gave the agency the go-ahead to submit my resume to the bank job, and about 2 days later I get a call back from the agency saying the bank wants to hire me on the spot. So on April 2nd I accept the position, fill out the necessary paper work at the agency and I was also given signed documents about my hourly rate and the position I will be doing at the bank. I put in my 1 week notice at job A, have a little farewell party and everything is looking good. My start date is April 9th. On April 6th I get a call from the agency that the start date for the position has been pushed back to April 16th. Then on April 13th I get another call, saying the start date has been pushed back again and they don't know what the new date will be. I called the woman today to find out more information about whats going on and she says that for various reasons the job that I've been hired on for is now on hold with no timeframe on when it will actually start, it could be 3 weeks from now or 3 months from now. So now I'm screwed, have no income because I quit my old job for a job which is now in an indefinite limbo. I don't know if I can collect unemployment or have any recourse for loss wages.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 00:58
|
|
|
Have you tried asking for your old job back? It's embarrassing, but you'd be surprised how often things like this happen. A lot of companies would rather bring you back on than train someone new. On a side note, don't believe any temp-to-perm lingo. It's not a guarantee or an offer, it's a sales pitch. They want to keep as many people like you on the line as they can.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 02:42
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:Yeah, but google and I can help out here, and save the fee. Since they want to move anyway, why invest the time and money to fight it? As a former landlord, if they did wrong and are in a tenant friendly state, she can walk away with a large chunk of change and fees would be covered by the landlord. From the sound of it, it's not going to take up a whole lot of time to go over things with a lawyer familiar with the laws of the state.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
In general it is highly unlikely to get unemployment compensation if you quit. There are ways but it is unlikely. Each state's law is different. I agree you should call you old job. As long as it was a promotion and you left on good terms maybe they will give you some hours. This is why it is important to never burn bridges!
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
I am looking into the feasibility of a commercial web app that would need realtime baseball statistics. I've been reading about the MLB Advanced Media vs CDM case (described on Wikipedia), which ruled that fantasy sports leagues have a First Amendment right to use players' names and statistics for free. A Bloomberg article about the decision is here. MLB.com makes their realtime statistics data freely available on their web site (an example of a game xml file), but every file includes a line saying use of the data acknowledges their terms of use statement, which says: "The accounts, descriptions, data and presentation in the referring page (the "Materials") are proprietary content of MLB Advanced Media, L.P ("MLBAM"). Only individual, non-commercial, non-bulk use of the Materials is permitted and any other use of the Materials is prohibited without prior written authorization from MLBAM. Authorized users of the Materials are prohibited from using the Materials in any commercial manner other than as expressly authorized by MLBAM." So my question is, does the MLBAM vs CDM ruling mean I can disregard those terms and use their data for an app that would have advertising and a paid version?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
From my reading of the case, you should be okay, but there are a few things you should be aware of. First of all, this case is only controlling in the 8th circuit (AR, IA, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) so if you live anywhere else MLB can sue you and the court doesn't have to follow their precedent. This isn't a huge deal, and they probably won't bother with the expense since they are unlikely to win, but if they are assholes they may try it to put you out of business. Second, MLB has the right to deny you access to their servers. I would download the statistics once and put them on a server you control, then have the app get them from there. If you try and have the app get them directly from MLB's servers, they will probably block you if they notice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
Wouldn't using the proprietary format of those statistics be a problem?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
dogbox posted:In the UK there is a whole division of the courts system devoted to really, really hard, technical cases (the Chancery Division), as well as a specialist Technology and Construction Court for good measure. They will have specialist judges and slightly specialised procedures. (Of course, in the UK almost all civil cases are tried without a jury) A couple years ago, before I graduated from law school, we visited the UK and met with members of the Queen's Bench and discussed the possibility of complex financial frauds cases going to trial without a jury. Interesting to see where that has gone. Practicing lawyer in NY now, and I wrote a paper on comparative jury trial rights from what I learned in the UK that summer. Great place to visit. The beer really is warm in most places though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:From my reading of the case, you should be okay, but there are a few things you should be aware of. First of all, this case is only controlling in the 8th circuit (AR, IA, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) so if you live anywhere else MLB can sue you and the court doesn't have to follow their precedent. This isn't a huge deal, and they probably won't bother with the expense since they are unlikely to win, but if they are assholes they may try it to put you out of business. Second, MLB has the right to deny you access to their servers. I would download the statistics once and put them on a server you control, then have the app get them from there. If you try and have the app get them directly from MLB's servers, they will probably block you if they notice. If I were MLB's lawyers, I'd argue that even if the statistics themselves are public domain, taking the statistics from MLB's servers is a derivative work of the particular presentation made by the MLB, and that in order to provide such statistics, they must be gathered independently from MLB's own work trying to expand INS v. AP in some way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:If I were MLB's lawyers, I'd argue that even if the statistics themselves are public domain, taking the statistics from MLB's servers is a derivative work of the particular presentation made by the MLB, and that in order to provide such statistics, they must be gathered independently from MLB's own work trying to expand INS v. AP in some way. I assume he would take the statistics and format them in a specific way for his app. I don't see anything in that XML file that would be copyrightable under Feist v. Rural, despite MLB's claims to the contrary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I assume he would take the statistics and format them in a specific way for his app. I don't see anything in that XML file that would be copyrightable under Feist v. Rural, despite MLB's claims to the contrary. Yeah, forgot about that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 21:28
|
|
|
I read the OP and I understand the limitations of this thread. Still, I need some general feedback on what I'm going to do and when I should get a lawyer. I live in New York, NY and work for the university and am a grad student. The university is private. I was hired for a TA position that was supposed to be paid in a one time stipend payment of $6,000 in mid-February. In mid March when I had not received my payment, I contacted my department who informed me that they had "forgotten my name" on a list of people to hire. I went to the HR department and filled out the necessary paperwork. The HR manager told me my payment for the total amount would be sent out either on March 31st or on April 15th. I should mention that I examined the paperwork and they lied on it. They put the date of employment as March 22nd, 2012 when in fact I started employment in January. I have still not received payment and I sent an email on Monday and received no response. I have several big things to pay for coming up (rent, my final tuition payment, a prescription) and I just can't wait anymore. Here is what I am planning on doing step-by-step. 1. Going in-person to the HR department tomorrow with my paperwork and asking for immediate payment of the wages they owe me. 2. Calling the state Department of Labor helpline to see what my options are. 3. Depending on the outcomes of 1 and 2, retaining an attorney and filing a suit against the school. Does this make sense? Is there anything else I should consider?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
Just a small update... I sent a couple of cover-my-rear end emails to my LL and CA, and they both immediately backed off, pointing fingers at each other and claiming the other initiated/asked for the eviction without their knowledge. The CA was all, "We have a duty to investigate noise complaints!" but of course this is a strawman and not even remotely the issue at all -- I never denied their duty to do so, they just never actually investigated anything. My LL just kept telling me, "I'm totally out of the loop. I don't know what's going on. I'm out of town." Then he claimed that he was only trying to cover his bases and evict us so that if I was getting abused, he wouldn't be charged with negligence for allowing me to get beat up.  Anyway, I just got home from signing the lease on a new place in Capitol Heights, which is basically my and my boyfriend's ideal neighborhood to live in. It's only $100 more than our current place, an actual detached house (technically a garage apartment rezoned and redone) and is completely renovated and updated on the inside. Happy ending! Well. Maybe. There's still the issue of trying to get my security deposit back from my LL in a month...
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
Not an attorney, but work for a university with a breathtakingly lovely payroll department. They're not trying to stiff you (probably) but they are terribly lovely bureaucrats who don't really care whether or not you get your money. You need to make them care by making it easier to give you your money than to keep putting up with you. That said, trying to go above their heads is likely to antagonize the HR people, and you should avoid it because they can and will screw you arbitrarily. So before you start calling governments, go to HR yourself and be a physical presence. You said you sent an e-mail, so just show up and wait to talk to that person. Once you're inside it, a bureaucrat will say and do anything to get you out of his or her office, up to and including his or her job. When explaining the situation, keep it simple. What your department did is irrelevant. The situation is "I talked to Person X on date Y. S/he said I would be paid no later than April 15. I have not been paid. Pay me." If they get you to leave with an answer other than "here is a check," just keep calling. Just call over and over and over again until they're sick of your voice and it becomes easier to pay you than to keep putting you off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
chuchumeister posted:LL/T stuff. Take pictures (including at least one alongside a newspaper to confirm the date) when you move out. It won't guarantee your deposit back, but it's a helpful piece of evidence in a dispute. Another helpful option is to do a walk-through with your landlord a week or so before the move out. This gives you a chance to potentially find a cheaper fix to whatever problems the landlord has with the unit after you leave. Again, it can't guarantee anything, but it might help. If you do a walk-through, send your landlord confirmation in writing of what you discussed. ("As you said earlier today, this is the complete list of all the problems you saw in the apartment which might affect our security deposit. 1: ...") EDIT: I need to note that a) I am not an attorney, and b) I know nothing about landlord/tenant law or disputes in LA. These just seem like helpful common-sense things to do. Arcturas fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Apr 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
chuchumeister posted:Anyway, I just got home from signing the lease on a new place in Capitol Heights, which is basically my and my boyfriend's ideal neighborhood to live in. It's only $100 more than our current place, an actual detached house (technically a garage apartment rezoned and redone) and is completely renovated and updated on the inside. Congrats, sounds like a sweet deal. Did you get one of your friends to look over the lease for you? Way back when you first posted I mentioned some of the red flags to look for, but if you signed already... well, I don't want to think anything negative for you. Did you sign directly with a landlord, or through a management agency? Depending on the individual a landlord can be more informal, but with any agency you need to excessively document anything. For your new place, if you can, do a video walkthrough of your new place before you move in (even a cell phone camera is ok if you have at least SD resolution), point out everything that is not pristine, burn it to a CD (costs what, $0.25 or less now) and send a copy to your landlord or management agency. If you want to be really specific about documenting, sent it certified mail with signature confirmation. Obviously keep multiple copies for yourself. When I say everything, I mean to be completely anal - wear marks in carpet or other flooring, cracks in walls or along baseboards, stains in the tub or sink, cracks or stains in grout and caulking, any signs of past repaired damage (this especially, it sucks to be charged for a bad repair by a previous tenant that the LL just happens to not notice until after you move out), missing shelves in the fridge/freezer, leaking faucets, electric sockets with scorch marks, anything that could possibly be blamed on you, or anything that they could possibly say you should have told them about. I used to do the photograph method described above. I went to the point of putting the photos in a word document and labeling them ( legacy of when I used to do structural condition inspections for work). I switched to the video method for my last place, it saves so much time. While I'm thinking about it, I would recommend doing this to the place you are leaving. If you do end up in court fighting for your deposit, playing the video (shoot the newspaper at the beginning and end to verify the date) usually shuts up the LL. Especially if they claim the place was left filthy and you can see from the video that they are liars. I learned to do this because I got screwed out of most of my first security deposit; but since then I have gotten every one back unless I actually damaged something (my wife spilled fruit punch on cream carpet once, I had to pay for cleaning, that sort of thing). If they are a deposit grabbing type, this lets them know that you know how to play the game, and hopefully gets you on their "do not gently caress with" list, and saves trouble when you leave. If they are just a nice landlord, this makes them realize that you are extra-responsible, and gives them a list of things they might fix for you (I've had both since moving back to BR). Hopefully they already think well of you for requesting a copy of the lease, and seeing you read it before you accept the apartment, but this helps too. Good luck! Oh, and since everyone is posting this crap: 1) I'm not an attorney 2) I'm not your attorney 3) I have been involved in landlord tenant disputes first hand in both Florida and Louisiana, everything I post related to this is based on practical experience and not actual legal research, other than reading the relevant laws.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Take pictures (including at least one alongside a newspaper to confirm the date) Kind of like proof of life in a kidnapping?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Kind of like proof of life in a kidnapping? Yes exactly. Otherwise the landlord will try to claim that you took those pictures when you moved in, and are claiming they are from when you moved out. Oh, one other thing I have heard of, but if you take still photos, you should consider buying a disposable camera that uses real film, and keeping the negatives. I heard from a friend in Florida that a landlord was challenging all digital photos, claiming that they could have been photoshopped, and got a judge to agree. Maybe take some establishing shots with the disposable, and the detail shots with the digital? If you have a whole video, I doubt they could claim that you digitally altered the video, unless you work for Weta digital or another special effects house.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:Yes exactly. Otherwise the landlord will try to claim that you took those pictures when you moved in, and are claiming they are from when you moved out. I was just thinking this given I have the skill set to do both photos and video.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
Illinois jurisdiction here. My family member is summoned for an order to cause for missing jury duty summons twice. We want to say we've sent in the re-schedule form but we didn't know it wasn't received until the Order to Cause form was sent. She is willing to do whatever jury duty is scheduled for her, but she's bringing a doctor's note on her weak health regardless. Can she get by with just a fine?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 04:27
|
|
|
Tae posted:Illinois jurisdiction here. Not quite following here. You missed a jury summons twice. You sent in a reschedule form for the first one or the second one? An order to show cause is exactly what it sounds like. The judge is effectively saying, "Show me why I shouldn't hold you in contempt?" If it happened to me, my answer would be my most truthful combination of 1) I'm sorry, 2) I tried to comply but messed up somehow, 3) I am willing to serve* *please accommodate my medical condition. Then I would be at the mercy of the court. Really, the most important part is to show up and tell the truth. Also, I'm not afraid to call the judge's chambers and explain it to the clerk. This is another one of those things that is totally at the judge's discretion, so calling might give you some insight into what the judge wants to hear. (If might also tip you off if the judge's penalties might be severe enough to make it worthwhile to hire a lawyer.) Not your lawyer. Not licensed in your jurisdiction. Not to be taken as Legal advice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 12:39
|
|
|
Folly posted:Not quite following here. You missed a jury summons twice. You sent in a reschedule form for the first one or the second one? I agree with this. The judge doesn't personally care whether you skip jury duty and doesn't have a dog in the fight. If you go to court and act contrite and genuinely apologetic, and offer to serve, you are likely to have the judge dismiss the contempt order and just order you to serve on a jury. In this context you can definitely bring up a medical condition and ask for accomodation, so long as you make it clear that you are more than willing to serve.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 15:01
|
|
|
Folly posted:Not your lawyer. Not licensed in your jurisdiction. Not to be taken as Legal advice. Hey law goons, what should we do about disclaimers like this in this thread? I've seen more people including these in the last few pages. On the one hand, I understand that each of us, individually, wants to cover our rear end and make it clear that we aren't establishing an attorney-client relationship. So we each have an incentive to put a disclaimer in our posts. On the other hand, if it becomes common practice to include disclaimers, then the failure to include one could be construed as an intention to create an attorney-client relationship. Maybe we should edit the OP to contain a blanket disclaimer that law goons participating in this thread are not providing legal advice, that no attorney-client relationships are established between any posters of the thread, that nothing in the thread is confidential, nothing in the thread should be relied upon as legal advice, and goons are encouraged to seek legal advice from an attorney in their jurisdiction. Or something similar, I dunno. If we do a blanket disclaimer in the first post we can preclude the necessity to disclaim each individual post, and that way the lack of a disclaimer is meaningless. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
entris posted:Hey law goons, what should we do about disclaimers like this in this thread? I've seen more people including these in the last few pages. I don't think enough people read the OP for a disclaimer buried there to have any effect. Some responses don't need a disclaimer (providing information, statute cites, contact information) In addition to CYA, disclaimers in a post help to reinforce to the asker that they need an attorney for the 'real' answer. Perhaps the CYAest way would be to put your blanket disclaimer in the OP with the addition of something like, "even if some posters use disclaimers and some don't you should consider every post to have a disclaimer. Do not construe the absence of a disclaimer as an intent to create an ACR." I'd like less scary language re: discussing criminal law in the OP so that people would post more crim law questions. I'd like to think people would use discretion in posting about such cases :pollyanna: Not licensed in your jurisdiction. Not your Bar Association's Ethics Counsel Frikkin' lawyers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 16:15
|
|
|
Went to the court, got a different date and said don't worry about the summons. Thanks, goons!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
entris posted:Hey law goons, what should we do about disclaimers like this in this thread? I've seen more people including these in the last few pages. I would just not give an answer which would reasonably require a disclaimer. I wish people would ask more general or hypothetical questions to make this easier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 16:37
|
|
|
joat mon posted:
That's a good point. Send a PM to AreYouIn with your suggested language, that's how the current OP post was put together.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 16:53
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I'd like less scary language re: discussing criminal law in the OP so that people would post more crim law questions. I'd like to think people would use discretion in posting about such cases :pollyanna: Enough people confess to DUI/drug posession/assault on this thread even after an OP that explicitly tells them not to. The only time criminal law should ever come up in this thread is people asking about abstract hypothetical issues and situations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
Here's something I'm just curious about (my friend Terry already took it to court and lost). California. Bob and Terry are married. Bob wants to do law school but has bad credit. Terry gets the student loans in her name. Bob becomes a successful lawyer. Bob and Terry get divorced. Years later, Bob is partner in a law firm. Terry gets a call from the student loan company telling her they haven't seen a payment in a long time and that she owes them 6 figures. Terry takes Bob to court (Terry's best-lawyer-I-can-afford vs Bob's not inconsiderable legal muscle). Bob successfully argues that the divorce agreement wasn't specific about the law school debt, and it's in her name so it isn't his responsibility. Like I said its over and done with and Terry has already resigned herself to spending the next couple decades paying this off. I'm just curious if this sounds normal (I know I didn't give a lot of specific detail to go on, sorry). It was obviously a stupid oversight not to get specific about this student loan in the divorce agreement, but given the ambiguity (the agreement doesn't say it's HERS either) is there not some way the court can take into account who used and profited off the loan? (For what it's worth, there were a lot of joint loans that WERE specifically covered in the divorce, and he has skipped out on his share of those as well, trashing her credit in the process. Bob is a douchebag.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 19:31
|
|
|
From what little I remember, I thought the model answer was that Terry had a property right in Bob's career.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:From what little I remember, I thought the model answer was that Terry had a property right in Bob's career. I would have thought that the model answer would be 'a gift given and accepted cannot be revoked' barring evidence of specific intention of a debt to exist between the parties.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:From what little I remember, I thought the model answer was that Terry had a property right in Bob's career. Alchenar posted:I would have thought that the model answer would be 'a gift given and accepted cannot be revoked' barring evidence of specific intention of a debt to exist between the parties. It looks like the parties contracted to Bob being responsible for other loans, and so contractual silence/ambiguity regarding the specific loans in question left the court ample opportunity to decide how it saw fit. I'm sure the reasoning went along the lines of, "Well, if the LS loans were important like the other, joint loans, the contract would have emphasized joint liability for the LS loans just like the joint loans!"  This makes a load of assumptions, of course, but nothing new in terms of contracts.I mean, I don't know
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
Hi, I have a confusing labor law question on behalf of a friend who lives (and is a citizen of) Germany. My friend has been employed at a company with an office in Germany, her home country, and was appointed Shop Steward for her union in 2002. Ever since then, she had been harassed and they attempt to fire her repeatedly. She feels like she is being targeted for her union involvement, as she did not have any of these issues before her appointment as Steward. This worker went to a lawyer in Germany who gave her an advice sheet type document, indicating that suing the company in the USA would be better, as they are based in Atlanta, GA. My question is, according to US labor law, is it possible for a German citizen, working for a German branch of a company, to sue the US-based mother company? If so, are there any sources anyone can link to with information about this process?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
Lovelyn posted:
This is a general question of civil procedure - it is not specific to labor law. The answer is yes - foreign citizens can sue US companies in US courts for breach of contract between the foreign citizen and the US company. However, with that said, the corporate relationship between the entity in Germany and the entity in the US may be structured so that your friend's claim is only against the German entity and not against the US entity. If your friend's employment is a contract with a German entity, even if the German entity is owned by a US entity, she probably can't sue here. Of course, the real issue is that suing in America is going to be prohibitively expensive for your friend. It is almost certainly not worth it for her to pay to sue here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
Something my spouse wanted me to ask about: I wanted to know some legal information about a female being topless in Seattle, Washington. In the same situations that men are (jogging, lounging in the sun, hanging out at home, walking outside, etc). I would bring a shirt along with me to put back on in case I have to enter a building or if I get cold after I finish jogging. Just like a guy. The law is very vague, if I am correct it seems to suggest that if I am not trying to alarm anyone, it is not illegal. Basically if I'm minding my own business and not in anyone's face or trying to harass someone, it seems to be legal. But I kind of doubt a police officer would ignore the action, even if it would be technically legal. But first of all, I need to know. What happens when you get arrested, but not prosecuted/charged? I imagine if someone does call the police or a police officer happened to see me, I would automatically get arrested. What are the consequences of this? What would happen exactly? Would there be any fines that I have to pay? Would they keep me in a cell? Would I have a permanent negative mark on my records? Would I have to go to court? What is the worst that could happen? I heard that no one ever seems to get prosecuted here for public nudity. But at the same time, I've never seen any woman do it. So I can't be sure. What is the worst charge I would receive and what amount of money would I have to pay? Do you think I would get charged? Also, what happens if I get arrested but keep going out topless after release? I think it is still technically not against the law, so even if they arrest me it would be a preventative measure and it wouldn't hold up in court. What happens when you are arrested over and over but not charged? If I can I want to do this all summer. I want to do it every summer for the rest of my life. But I need to know what is likely to happen if I do so. That way I can be ready for whatever happens. P.S - Also, what consequences would there be if I decided to walk/run around in pasties? Thanks ahead of time 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2012 23:04
|
|
