|
Legal information in trade for pics! Revised Code of Washington 9.66.010 posted:Public nuisance. Revised Code of Washington 9.92.030 posted:Punishment of misdemeanor when not fixed by statute. It's pretty clearly illegal, whether pasties or not. (I'm not making a social argument or judgment, just saying that it would definitely be treated as illegal). It's a misdemeanor that would net you a ticket. Highly unlikely, but possible, to result in jailtime. You would probably have to appear in court. If you were arrested but not charged, it would increase your chances of getting charged exponentially if arrested again. If you're on private property and not seen, then you have no criminal problems. But if you're in a public space, it's highly likely for you to get arrested. Multiple arrests would very likely result in jailtime. Sorry, I don't make da rules :P
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
But my understanding (as a non-attorney) is that "women can't be topless" laws are problematic in certain political climates and if you're keen to start agitating, civil disobedience might get everything overturned. Here's a (terribly laid out) website on the subject: http://www.gotopless.org/news.php?item.3.1
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Yeah, there's a protest movement but it's in the early stages. Washington's law is broad enough so that it doesn't have to be socially indecent. Civil disobedience would likely come at the cost of multiple arrests and a criminal record. I'm not saying it's fair or anything, but that's often the price to pay for pushing the envelope. The poster needs to decide whether she's all-in for boob freedom. Relaxing jogs in the public park while topless aren't going to happen, unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 01:35
|
|
|
Non-sexualized nudity is a thing in Seattle. But it depends on the forbearance of the authorities. So far they have done so, but there's no guarantee they will tomorrow. So, technically an arrestable offense, but it is not enforced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Non-sexualized nudity is a thing in Seattle. As a male and a cyclist, bicycling without shorts sounds terribly uncomfortable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 00:26
|
|
|
My friend's wife was playing in a coed softball game. A guy crashed into her and broke her leg in three places. After insurance covers everything, her medical bills will be around $2K, plus she will be out of work for at least the next month...and extensive physical therapy through at least the end of the year. It was an accident, but it's still two grand. Would it be out of line for her to ask the guy to pay the bill? Would she have a legal leg to stand on (haha) in court?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 04:02
|
|
|
Skywriter posted:My friend's wife was playing in a coed softball game. A guy crashed into her and broke her leg. After insurance covers everything, her medical bills will be around $2K. It was an accident, but it's still two grand. Would it be out of line for her to ask the guy to pay the bill? Would she have a legal leg to stand on (haha) in court? In general, when you play a sport you accept the risk of injury. Unless he was doing something completely outside the rules of the game he isn't liable for the injury. If this was an organized league, she probably signed a release to the effect, but even without one it's clear she knew the risks of playing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:In general, when you play a sport you accept the risk of injury. Unless he was doing something completely outside the rules of the game he isn't liable for the injury. If this was an organized league, she probably signed a release to the effect, but even without one it's clear she knew the risks of playing. Would there be any downside to asking him nicely to help cover the cost? Even if she doesn't have a legal right, she might be able to guilt him into covering at least a small part of the fees, particularly if he was doing something either against the rules or in a grey area.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 04:14
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Would there be any downside to asking him nicely to help cover the cost? Even if she doesn't have a legal right, she might be able to guilt him into covering at least a small part of the fees, particularly if he was doing something either against the rules or in a grey area. I don't think there'd by a downside except for maybe a social issue if he gets offended - but then, he broke her leg so... Personally, I'd ask but I wouldn't expect to get anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 15:16
|
|
|
I'd ask him if he has any personal liability insurance to help pay for the bills and wage loss. I think most renter's and homeowner's have sizable personal liability cover.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 20:15
|
|
|
One other thought, if the softball game was through a league of some sort, or using a municipal field, they may have already taken out an insurance policy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Would there be any downside to asking him nicely to help cover the cost? Even if she doesn't have a legal right, she might be able to guilt him into covering at least a small part of the fees, particularly if he was doing something either against the rules or in a grey area. From a non legal point of view, it doesn't seem like a can of worms worth opening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:02
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:In general, when you play a sport you accept the risk of injury. Unless he was doing something completely outside the rules of the game he isn't liable for the injury. If this was an organized league, she probably signed a release to the effect, but even without one it's clear she knew the risks of playing. Couldn't there still be some possible negligence? If this guy is crashing around hard enough to break legs in a co-ed beer league, it certainly seems possible that he breached the standard of care he owed her. Not a lawyer though so I may have it all wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
DuckConference posted:Couldn't there still be some possible negligence? If this guy is crashing around hard enough to break legs in a co-ed beer league, it certainly seems possible that he breached the standard of care he owed her. Not a lawyer though so I may have it all wrong. I think you'd have to prove that he wasn't playing within the established rules of the game that all parties agreed to by participating in the league. For instance, if you are playing in a flag football league and someone tackles you and causes you injury, you might have a case there. But if the manner in which he crashed into the other person wasn't breaking any rules of the game, I think it would be a harder case. Like, was she playing catcher and he plowed over her at home base? Or was she going for an infield fly ball and ran into the base line as he was running to second and they collided? Maybe she played some part in the collison. Or maybe the collision was just a part of playing the sport. Skywriter didn't give enough details to know, but I don't think that just because she was injured and he wasn't is enough to determine that he was negligent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 07:04
|
|
|
I have a situation and was looking for some thoughts. I am in Georgia. In January I took my car to a local place for an oil change. They did the usual investigation and informed me that the rear differential was leaking, among other issues. I had them fix it (about $400). Fast forward to last week. I hear a grinding noise coming from the rear of the car. Take it back to the same place to have it checked out. They tell me that the differential is leaking again but they can't fix it because they don't have the appropriate tools. I end up taking it to the dealership in town, only to find that rear differential had to be replaced to the tune of $2800. The technician said he had never seen anything like it (damage wise) in 15 years and that I was lucky not to have had a catastrophic failure. I asked him what could have caused it and he boiled it down to either 1) bad luck, 2) constant leakage, or 3) improperly performed service (which is very common in my car). He stopped short of saying the servicing I had done was responsible although he implied it. Today I sent a certified letter to the place I had the service done very politely explaining the situation and asking the store manager to reach out to me. My hope is that I can get them to pay for at least some of it. My question is, if they outright refuse to work with me, would it be worth it to take them to small claims court? I don't want to waste my time tilting at windmills if I have no chance to win. I would likely sue them for the cost of replacing the differential and the filing fee. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 18:13
|
|
|
DuckConference posted:Couldn't there still be some possible negligence? If this guy is crashing around hard enough to break legs in a co-ed beer league, it certainly seems possible that he breached the standard of care he owed her. Not a lawyer though so I may have it all wrong. No. Unless he did something outside of the assumed risk of the sport (fist fight, hit her with the bat), she assumed the risk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
Victory Yodel posted:I have a situation and was looking for some thoughts. I am in Georgia. You would need proof that their bad service caused the issue. Do you have such proof? Just the statement of the guy at the dealership isn't enough, you need a mechanic to stand in front of the judge and say "this problem could only be caused by bad service."
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 19:03
|
|
|
First off, Texas, and a quick search suggests this is a Texas-only issue. That said.. My grandmother passed away early this month. Her only assets were quite literally the things in her room at an assisted care facility and a piece of furniture in storage (not worth a whole lot). Basically her clothes, her wheelchair, some photos, and the single piece of furniture. So I'm told anyway, I have no reason to think otherwise. I googled her name today and found out that a "Muniment of Title" was filed with the county probate court by mom. She said it's to make a court record stating there's no assets, but google seems to suggest it's a way to transfer ownership of real estate without going through full probate. Asking her about it was met with... not a very positive response (I only asked what the filing meant). Mom has 2 siblings, if it matters. So what's a "Muniment of Title"? Specifically, the public record states "<my mother's name>, Applicant, filed in the Probate Court No. # of <county name> County, on <date> an Application for the Probate of the Last Will and Testament of said <grandma's name>, Deceased, as a Muniment of Title (the said Will accompanying said application)." I don't care to stir up any trouble in the family (there's plenty already without me saying a word), I'm just curious what's going on. randomidiot fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Apr 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 05:14
|
|
|
some texas redneck posted:First off, Texas, and a quick search suggests this is a Texas-only issue. That said.. From my extremely brief research, my understanding is that it's basically a judicial declaration of title to property, and shortcuts the probate process. If grandma left everything to mom, this would tell the world that mom is entitled to the property. If you're worried, the court will almost certainly provide the Will and the application by your mom (with fees to photocopy, probably.) Not your lawyer, not legal advice, ramblings in my personal capacity only.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 08:20
|
|
|
Schitzo posted:If grandma left everything to mom, this would tell the world that mom is entitled to the property. I know for sure that she did not do this - the will essentially stated to divide everything up among the remaining kids (the 3 siblngs). Unfortunately, I'm about 40 miles from that courthouse and reside in a different county, with no vehicle, so copies won't be easy. And I assume my copy request would be public record, adding to the already... interesting... family stuff. The upcoming drama may wind up as an E/N thread  - there was a horrible amount of fighting when my grandfather passed in the 90s, bad enough that nobody (siblings) talked to each other for about 10 years - one still only talks to the others only when absolutely necessary.At least that explains why mom flips out whenever I wind up talking to some long-lost relative on Facebook ("THEY'RE TRYING TO STEAL OUR MONEY!!!" usually followed with something about dirty liberals and how I shouldn't trust anybody in the family and the liberals will corrupt me and well that's an E/N thread there so I'll stop). Certainly explains a few things that I already suspected.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 09:28
|
|
|
some texas redneck posted:First off, Texas, and a quick search suggests this is a Texas-only issue. That said.. Like Schitzo said, this is a procedure that tells the world that it's ok to give your grandmother's stuff to your mom. This is probably a procedure most used when there is real estate, because I'll bet that either the storage facility or the nursing home has a policy that requires something like this before they will release your grandmother's stuff to your mom. The applicable texas code provision is (I think) Tex. Prob. Code Section 89C: quote:(a) In each instance where the court is satisfied that a will should be admitted to probate, and where the court is further satisfied that there are no unpaid debts owing by the estate of the testator, excluding debts secured by liens on real estate, or for other reason finds that there is no necessity for administration upon such estate, the court may admit such will to probate as a muniment of title.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
Some one opened a cable account using my info in California. I'm in Pa. I filed a police report, and faxed it to the company as soon as I got a phone call about a late bill. They have since sent the account to collections. I'm disputing it, but it's not going well and I'm becoming more and more frustrated. I have the address in California of the people who did it and they must know who opened the account. Can I ask that they do something criminally or anything to the person who opened the account at ATT for not caring if it was me? The police give no fucks about who is living at that address. I know in the scheme of things this is petty but it is taking up so much time and so many trips to fax and I'm in the middle of trying to refinance my house.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 20:05
|
|
|
TL,DR Question: Can a clear, good faith effort to comply with a law matter in traffic court? Background if needed: I got an exhaust ticket 6 months ago, I was using one straight through resonator at the time and the car was VERY loud. I had a muffler shop weld on two additional mufflers with the exhaust tip being a very plain, low profile looking one of these. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SUM-630810 Went to court and it was dismissed as the officer failed to appear. It is much much much quieter and I get compliments on the sound and toned down level of sound frequently. I cannot have known the exact amount of noise reduction upon completing the repair and it was a bona fide effort to comply with the law. I have no way of knowing what the OEM exhaust volume was because I have never ever seen the model of car I have with factory exhaust because it causes premature failure of the turbocharger and is often replaced with aftermarket components from the dealer. An officer mentioned it after being pulled over on 4/20 for a tag light out though said he'd never write a ticket for it. If another officer DOES write a ticket for it will my clear attempt to comply with the law matter in court? Florida law states: (5) NOISE ABATEMENT EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS.-- (a) No person shall modify the exhaust system of a motor vehicle or any other noise-abatement device of a motor vehicle operated or to be operated upon the highways of this state in such a manner that the noise emitted by the motor vehicle is above that emitted by the vehicle as originally manufactured.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
My wife and I are looking to move into a house for rent and I'm curious about one thing on the lease: TENANT shall not assign this agreement, sublet the premises, give accommodation to any roomers or lodgers, or permit the use of the premises for any purposes other than as a private dwelling solely for TENANT(S). This rental agreement is being agreed to for the occupancy of the following: 2 Adults NO Children. Am I understanding correctly that if my wife and I have a baby while living there, we're breaking the lease? Should I be concerned at all about this or have the language changed? For reference, we live in Seattle, WA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 21:34
|
|
|
Pretty sure that federal laws regarding fair housing do not permit landlords to discriminate against families. edit: here we go: 42 U.S. Code Section 3604: quote:it shall be unlawful-- edit2: and this is the terrible website for the WA state agency that you would go to, if your landlord tries to evict you for having a child: http://www.hum.wa.gov/FairHousing/Index.html entris fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Apr 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
Ghumbs posted:My wife and I are looking to move into a house for rent and I'm curious about one thing on the lease: Under one of my many hats I manage rental property and have found this to be pretty common. Children are harder on property and make more noise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:Under one of my many hats I manage rental property and have found this to be pretty common. Children are harder on property and make more noise. Well, I know he's willing to rent to families so I'm not sure that's why he filled it in like that. My question, though, isn't regarding his intent. I just want to know what could happen if my wife were to get pregnant and have a child while in the lease.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Ghumbs posted:Well, I know he's willing to rent to families so I'm not sure that's why he filled it in like that. My question, though, isn't regarding his intent. I just want to know what could happen if my wife were to get pregnant and have a child while in the lease. IANAL. Have you tried getting the section removed from the lease, or, at the very lease, adding a clause about childbirth? Remember, a lease is a contract and you have as much a right to make exert control over as your prospective landlord. They're not sign or  documents.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:IANAL. Have you tried getting the section removed from the lease, or, at the very lease, adding a clause about childbirth? Remember, a lease is a contract and you have as much a right to make exert control over as your prospective landlord. They're not sign or That's what I'm going to do. Thanks for the help everyone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:54
|
|
|
Hello legal folks, I have a quick question. I did some Voice Over work for a small ad agency in Ohio last year (I'm based in NYC). I am having a hard time getting this guy to pay up. We did work in 2010 on the same project. He whined about the price but eventually paid. Second time around I did the work, submitted the PO and haven't heard from him since. I did hear through an intermediary that he may want to do some corrections on the work. I stated I would not do any more work until he pays for the 1st half. We just hit the 5 month mark of me waiting for payment... The amount is currently $3500. We don't have a sign contract for the work but I have the emails where we discuss the work and hourly agreement as well as all the emails where I kept them abreast of the hours I had completed. So, I guess the question is what are my legal options. I have a feeling that the minute I suggest legal action he may suddenly pay me. However if he doesn't what are the options? Small claims court? Is small claims court between states a pain in the rear end? File there? Here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
My car got towed because I parked in a "don't park here without a permit spot", I can prove the marking on the spot wasn't visible, I can prove that the company is price gouging, and I can prove that the towing company, by towing any car in the lot I was in, is violating three separate Oregon Revised Statutes. What are my chances of a. winning in small claims court and b. getting the Oregon Department of Justice Consumer Protection Agency to sue them?
Dryer Lint fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Apr 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 03:44
|
|
|
King Lou posted:So, I guess the question is what are my legal options. I have a feeling that the minute I suggest legal action he may suddenly pay me. However if he doesn't what are the options? Small claims court? Is small claims court between states a pain in the rear end? File there? Here? You can't sue in NYC if the defendant is in OH and the work was done there. Some quick googling shows that Ohio has a $3000 cap on small claims court, so your options are to sue him in small claims for $3000, or to sue him in regular court for $3500. A lawyer will probably recommend the $3000 small claims option, since the extra $500 will easily be eaten up by extra lawyer time. Hiring an OH based lawyer for small claims is legal, and will probably be cheaper than the costs of going there yourself. If you have solid evidence that the work was done and that he was involved in it, you should have a good chance. It wouldn't hurt to at least talk to an Ohio based lawyer about it, and a letter from the lawyer to the guy stiffing you may make him pay up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 04:35
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:You can't sue in NYC if the defendant is in OH and the work was done there. Some quick googling shows that Ohio has a $3000 cap on small claims court, so your options are to sue him in small claims for $3000, or to sue him in regular court for $3500. A lawyer will probably recommend the $3000 small claims option, since the extra $500 will easily be eaten up by extra lawyer time. Hiring an OH based lawyer for small claims is legal, and will probably be cheaper than the costs of going there yourself. If you have solid evidence that the work was done and that he was involved in it, you should have a good chance. It wouldn't hurt to at least talk to an Ohio based lawyer about it, and a letter from the lawyer to the guy stiffing you may make him pay up. Alright. That makes sense. Just to clarify: The work was done physically in NYC but the employer was in OHIO. So by what you're saying since the employer is there the work originates there no matter where the physical work is done. Thanks for the advice. I'll start googling Ohio Small Claims lawyers. EDIT: Well it looks like they changed their website to something super non-descript... that is a bad sign. I'm probably looking at them closing their doors and re-opening with a new LLC and I'll be out my $$$... lame King Lou fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Apr 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
King Lou posted:Alright. That makes sense. Just to clarify: The work was done physically in NYC but the employer was in OHIO. So by what you're saying since the employer is there the work originates there no matter where the physical work is done. If that's the case, you may want to move quickly, to try to get whatever you can before they run out of assets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
entris posted:Pretty sure that federal laws regarding fair housing do not permit landlords to discriminate against families. edit: here we go: While I agree that the federal code appears to prohibit discriminating against families, I wouldn't read that statute to prohibit a clause saying "I am leasing to two people, no more. If any more live here, the lease is terminated." Such a clause could justify terminating the lease if they had children. Why? I read "familial status" as being the familial status of the relationships that renters have, not the status of whether they have a family or not. Hence it would be illegal to lease to a brother and sister, but not to lease to an unmarried man and woman who wanted to share an apartment. I think that is different from a situation where they want to lease to two individuals, but (perhaps to comply with fire codes) do not want to lease to three or more individuals. I might be wrong. Either way, the best bet is to talk to the landlord and get things worked out ahead of time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:While I agree that the federal code appears to prohibit discriminating against families, I wouldn't read that statute to prohibit a clause saying "I am leasing to two people, no more. If any more live here, the lease is terminated." Such a clause could justify terminating the lease if they had children. You are wrong though. It's specifically addressed here: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws/yourrights. They do make an exception for retirement communities, and there may also be exceptions for something like a college dormitory (not sure there), but basically in most cases a landlord cannot deny housing because of children.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
dvgrhl posted:You are wrong though. It's specifically addressed here: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws/yourrights. They do make an exception for retirement communities, and there may also be exceptions for something like a college dormitory (not sure there), but basically in most cases a landlord cannot deny housing because of children. Gotcha, my bad. I hadn't done any research; clearly I ought to have done so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 07:36
|
|
|
Speaking of rental issues, my family very recently ran into a pretty big problem on that front. We discovered that it's apparently illegal to rent a house in the town we live in, unless the owner of the house lives there at the same time. We've been renting this house for a little over a month, and just found out yesterday that we may end up having 30 days to move out. I've done some searching on Google and can't find a single example of such an ordinance anywhere else in the country. We're sort of at a loss. Is there anything we can possibly do? Edit: We're in Minnesota, if that matters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
Zokari posted:We discovered that it's apparently illegal to rent a house in the town we live in, unless the owner of the house lives there at the same time. We've been renting this house for a little over a month, and just found out yesterday that we may end up having 30 days to move out. I haven't seen it as an ordinance, but I think it's pretty common to have a restriction like that in condo association rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
^^^^^what this guy said, too - is this a condo or a home that is subject to the rules of a homeowners' association?Zokari posted:Speaking of rental issues, my family very recently ran into a pretty big problem on that front. We discovered that it's apparently illegal to rent a house in the town we live in, unless the owner of the house lives there at the same time. We've been renting this house for a little over a month, and just found out yesterday that we may end up having 30 days to move out. Give us more detail - how did this come to light? Did a neighbor complain about your family renting? Did a police officer show up and give you guys a notice? Did your landlord call you and tell you this? What town in Minnesota? This might be a town/city ordinance rather than a state law. And don't bother looking for a similar law in any other state, as landlord-tenant law is very state specific and Minnesota judges aren't going to care what other states do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 18:55
|
|