|
nern posted:I don't know if this completely qualifies as a legal question or if I should take it to the Ask/Tell general forums, but here it is: I don't know an exact answer, but my guess is that she can pretty easily get a duplicate copy of the title from DMV. (it's like 20? bucks with ID here) But the title will still list her mother, so to sell it she'll need her mother's signature. So I bet getting a physical copy of the title is very doable without her, but I think some degree of contact may be necessary. I'm sure there's a legal process to undo it, but that will likely lead to contact with the mother anyway. Perhaps it can be done by mail? woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 04:55 on May 22, 2012 |
#
?
May 22, 2012 04:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
Yeah, the real question as far as the car's alienability is going to be the title. If it has the mother's name on it, it's her car and you can't sell it without her consent. If it has both names, it depends where you live. If it only has the daughter's name on it, I imagine she can sell it herself. The loan and the title are two different things - you can cosign a loan without getting a property interest in whatever the loan is being used to purchase, though normally you don't. As far as Mr. Noncompete - that's probably a very fact specific question that will require you to speak to a Wisconsin lawyer, preferably one who specializes in employment law. Answering your question would require us to know a lot about your industry and the specific contract terms, because the law frowns on noncompetes (but only sometimes) and what you want to do may or may not fall within the scope of the noncompete.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 05:30
|
|
|
Is there any advantage on having a lawyer get the police records from an arrest rather then the one arrested for the crime going in and requesting the records?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 09:43
|
|
|
Peristalsis posted:On the off chance that someone can offer some advice, I'm gonna post this here. So long as nobody breaks a contract, companies poaching entire divisions from each other (and their customers) is entirely legal.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 10:50
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:So long as nobody breaks a contract, companies poaching entire divisions from each other (and their customers) is entirely legal. Also judges really don't like non-competes, according to my IP survey professor, and generally burdens the company wanting to enforce one that involves using your skills and knowledge (as opposed to customer relationships or trade secrets) by paying your salary to do nothing for the term of the agreement. This is my best recollection from IP survey, so take that for what it's worth. Also different states have different views on non-competes, and of course you might not have one at all, so. edit to add: trade secrets, as I recall Dogen fucked around with this message at 14:58 on May 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 14:37
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Also judges really don't like non-competes, according to my IP survey professor, and generally burdens the company wanting to enforce one that involves using your skills and knowledge (as opposed to customer relationships) by paying your salary to do nothing for the term of the agreement. This is what I was told by a lawyer I hired in Florida to review an uncompensated 2-year no compete that a company I worked for wanted me to sign. Basically, he told me I could get it thrown out, but his estimated budget for legal fees to get that done was $5,000-12,000. In the meantime, the company I had worked for could file relatively cheap injunctions and get me fired from any job I did manage to get. I actually saw them do that to one employee who quit, they just made it too much of a hassle for him to work, and he didn't have enough cash to pay a labor lawyer a retainer. He ended up moving out of state. I ended up refusing to sign and got fired for it. Now whenever I get a question on a job application such as "have you ever been fired for cause?" I get to tell them about it. "I refused to sign a 2-year uncompensated no compete agreement, and was fired for refusing". I always make it clear that I have no issue with a compensated no-compete, but they have to include at a minimum salary and benefits for half the term of the agreement. Meaning, if I quit or I am laid off, I get 1 year's salary and benefits to not work in the area for 2 years.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 14:52
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:This is what I was told by a lawyer I hired in Florida to review an uncompensated 2-year no compete that a company I worked for wanted me to sign. Basically, he told me I could get it thrown out, but his estimated budget for legal fees to get that done was $5,000-12,000. In the meantime, the company I had worked for could file relatively cheap injunctions and get me fired from any job I did manage to get. I actually saw them do that to one employee who quit, they just made it too much of a hassle for him to work, and he didn't have enough cash to pay a labor lawyer a retainer. He ended up moving out of state. I ended up refusing to sign and got fired for it. Your first company is lame. That probably would not even be a valid contract in many states because there was no consideration. But yeah there is a transaction cost to fight it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 14:58
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Your first company is lame. That probably would not even be a valid contract in many states because there was no consideration. But yeah there is a transaction cost to fight it. The company wasn't that bad (up until they asked me to sign that), pay was competitive for the area, and I really liked my boss. But the no-compete: yeah, I thought it was lovely when I read the agreement. That's why I paid a labor lawyer $400/hr to review it and make sure it was as bad as I thought. I sent it to the lawyer for review, along with a breakdown of what I thought it meant, and why it would be bad for me. Then his phone call to explain it to me started out with "I'ts not as bad as you think it is, its actually worse." The agreement included additional specific steps that had to be followed to contest any part of it, which had the effect of raising the cost to fight it. Stuff like mandatory non-binding mediation, then non-binding arbitration, all of which I had to pay for (not the company) before the case could go to court. That is where the huge legal fee estimate came from, and the part that made it worse than I thought. That little poison pill is what really made me decide it wasn't worth it to work for them. I told my company I wouldn't sign it, and why I wouldn't sign it. I gave them a list of changes they could make so I would sign it. Then my boss (the branch manager, the guy I really liked) went on vacation for 2 weeks and had me run the engineering while he was gone, then he was told to fire me the day he got back. I knew it was coming, and I had cleaned out my office and posted my resume, so the actual day wasn't painful. Then the company tried to fight paying me unemployment. They claimed that refusing to sign the agreement was the same as me voluntarily quitting. I sent a copy of the agreement they asked me to sign to the Florida unemployment agency, along with my appeal paperwork and explanation. The agency sent a really strongly worded "gently caress off" letter back to the company, copied to me. Something along the lines of "Refusal to sign punitive agreements is not acceptable grounds to claim termination for cause, any future attempts to claim this will result in penalties against your company." So yeah, the whole situation was pretty lovely. But then I ended up moving out of the state for my next job anyway, along with a 25% raise, so it all worked out in the end. Hell, I still plan to send some whiskey to my old boss as a "thank you" when I pass the PE, just because he really taught me a lot. I didn't like the way I left that company, but I don't take it personally. Also, a lot of the people working for the company signed the agreement without reading it, or understanding it. I talked to some of them after work got around the office that I was the only person who refused to sign, and when I explained what the lawyer pointed out to me, a couple of people got really worried. READ EVERYTHING YOU SIGN. DON"T SIGN ANYTHING YOU DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND. NEVER SIGN ANYTHING YOU DON'T GET A COPY OF. Leases, pre-employment paperwork, everything.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 16:53
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:Isn't this the same dude that bought a dog that is eating all your stuff? Why are you still living there? Because I am under a lease 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 18:09
|
|
|
Addison, TX My girlfriend's apartment management company has called her each of the last two days and told her they'd be showing her apartment that afternoon. While neither of us are really concerned, I thought it was standard that 24 or 48 hours of notice is required. Is that not true here? For what it's worth, they will probably regret showing the place in its current condition.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 18:16
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:$400/hr Haha jesus christ. I need to raise my rates. And yes that is literally the only thing I saw in your entire post.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Haha jesus christ. I need to raise my rates. Well, he came highly recommended from a friend who is a lawyer in another area. And to review a 6 page document and discuss it with me for almost 30 minutes, he charged me less than an hour. He also didn't charge me a retainer or anything. And labor lawyers in Florida tend to be more expensive, at least from the other offices I called. I thought it was bargain.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:06
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Because I am under a lease It sounds like you don't want to be there and that the landlord hates you. Have you actually talked to him about leaving? As in 'Hey man, this really doesn't seem to be working out for either of us, would you like to talk about ending my lease early?' A lease can be modified however you want as long as both parties agree, so this is the best way to get out of the situation. I am not a lawyer or anything, but I have been back and forth with landlords before.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
Ok so, long story short me and my friend have reasonable doubt that his wife is cheating on him, however he needs some closure and some proof for divorce purposes. Here is what we were planning on doing We know the guys place where she is going to, so we were going to stake it out and try and snap some photographs of her leaving or entering the area. Is this legal? We live in Florida by the way.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
You can get a divorce with out being Columbo and getting evidence of cheating. IT is called a no fault divorce.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Because I am under a lease Am I remembering wrong or is this "lease" a verbal one that isn't even with the actual landlord and instead with one of the guys that lives there? If it is, ask him to show you the lease that you signed, with the landlord, that says you agreed to the roommates stupidity.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:48
|
|
|
euphronius posted:You can get a divorce with out being Columbo and getting evidence of cheating. IT is called a no fault divorce. well, he told me he needs some closure. So we were planning on trying to do a stake out. Is it legal or not?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:48
|
|
|
Andy Dufresne posted:Addison, TX Your lease would say and it probably says a day or two of notice, in which case you can tell them no, since you still live there. Once you're out, they can show it off as much as they want.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 19:50
|
|
|
The Downfall posted:Ok so, long story short me and my friend have reasonable doubt that his wife is cheating on him, however he needs some closure and some proof for divorce purposes. "Reasonable doubt" is wholly inapplicable to this situation. It is a standard of proof for a criminal conviction. If reasonable doubts exist as to a Defendant's guilt, the jury cannot convict.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:"Reasonable doubt" is wholly inapplicable to this situation. It is a standard of proof for a criminal conviction. If reasonable doubts exist as to a Defendant's guilt, the jury cannot convict. We aren't really worried about a jury here. All I want to know is if it is legal or not to stake out this place where we think his wife is going to.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
chemosh6969 posted:Your lease would say and it probably says a day or two of notice, in which case you can tell them no, since you still live there. Once you're out, they can show it off as much as they want. Yeah definitely look a the lease because the TAA leases all specifically say, but it's in the code also. I'll look it up in a minute. edit: well, I thought it was. How odd. It's either lease controls or case law, which limits the right to entry in specific ways. The Downfall posted:We aren't really worried about a jury here. All I want to know is if it is legal or not to stake out this place where we think his wife is going to. Look up your local ordinances on loitering. Dogen fucked around with this message at 20:29 on May 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 20:15
|
|
|
Bringing the husband along is not really a good idea either, assuming you go through with it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
The Downfall posted:We aren't really worried about a jury here. All I want to know is if it is legal or not to stake out this place where we think his wife is going to. Then "closure" is the only reason. It will have zero bearing on the divorce process (other than the distinct possibility of making it more difficult). So base the decision purely on the weird closure/curiosity. And yeah, it sounds like a bad idea in general. If he wants closure then he should, like, talk to his wife. woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 23:32 on May 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
Va rental law question. My lease is set to expire on 5/31 and in the lease it specifically says that it will extend month to month after the first year. The realty company is now telling us that the owner does not wish to continue letting us rent month to month and we have 1 week to sign a new 12 mo lease or vacate the property.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Then "closure" is the only reason. It will have zero bearing on the divorce process (other than the distinct possibility of making it more difficult). So base the decision purely on the weird closure/curiosity. And yeah, it sounds like a bad idea in general.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
I posted this as its own thread in BFC, but this thread might be a better place for it. I'm working as a nurse in California. I work through an agency and was just assigned a temp job for the last week in May. Basically, for four days I have to accompany someone around a retreat near Santa Cruz to assist this person with a specific medical condition. I'm expected to be there the entire time, including overnights. When the agency was talking with me about this job, they stated that I would be paid for 8 hours each day at an hourly rate. The other 16 hours of each day I'd get what they called "on-call" time, where I got a dollar or two an hour. Some Googling and armchair lawyering leads me to believe that I should be getting paid more than this, especially since I can't leave the retreat area. Anyone able to offer me some advice in this matter? Should I be getting paid my full rate (and possibly overtime) or is the agency correct in how they're paying me?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 04:16
|
|
|
Sheerly out of idle curiousity, what is the difference between theft and larceny? Is it simply a matter of degree?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 08:24
|
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:Isnt Fl a lifetime alimony state? If so, coming to court with evidence of an affair could really help him out financially. Evidence of an affair could help, but what they're proposing is not going to tip the scales. Even a verfied videotaped affair is no guarantee of anything, as there still has to be a financial need and ability for alimony in the first place. But assuming their finances put alimony in play, I don't think personally staking them out is going to advance the cause. Maybe he wants to find out if she's cheating to know if a divorce is needed. But if it comes down to that, the evidence collection should be directed by his attorney. If he could wave a magic wand and get advice from his divorce attorney from the future, I'm certain that attorney would say "GOD NO DON'T DO IT PLEASE OH GOD WHY".
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 08:44
|
|
|
Boing! posted:Sheerly out of idle curiousity, what is the difference between theft and larceny? Is it simply a matter of degree? Theft is a pre-Norman conquest Anglo-saxon word, of Germanic origin. The original meaning (before anglo saxon) may have had to do with concealment. Larceny is a post-conquest Middle english word of Latin origin. The latin origin probably has to do with robbery. Legally, it depends on where you are. In England, the legal offence is called theft. In the U.S. (generally) the legal offense is called larceny. Are you asking about a particular jurisdiction?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 12:40
|
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:Va rental law question. I don't think that works. According to you, the terms of the lease say that the lease goes month-to-month after the 1 year lease term. In Virginia, a landlord has to give notice of termination at least thirty days before the next rent due date. Va. Code Section 55-248.37. Assuming that your rent is due on the first of the month, the notice that you received is effective to terminate the lease on July 1, not June 1. Is there anything in the lease about termination at the end of the lease term? You should plan to be out as soon as you can, but I would argue to your realty company that you have until July 1st to get out.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 14:09
|
|
|
entris posted:I don't think that works. According to you, the terms of the lease say that the lease goes month-to-month after the 1 year lease term. In Virginia, a landlord has to give notice of termination at least thirty days before the next rent due date. Va. Code Section 55-248.37. Assuming that your rent is due on the first of the month, the notice that you received is effective to terminate the lease on July 1, not June 1.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 14:32
|
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:Yeah I reread the lease and the notice they taped to our door yesterday. It seems like what they are doing is legal, just lovely. I like the place and don't want to move, I just don't want to be trapped there for another year. But if they're going to bully me into signing a new lease, I'm going to look elsewhere. What does the lease say about termination?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 14:37
|
|
|
Property line confusion question: I'm in Charles County, Maryland. My wife and I recently purchased a tiny house that is one of the oldest on the block. Since it was built the land was subdivided and made into two subdivisions on either side of us, and our property line is a strange polygon that extend out to a triangle of land with an electrical box on it and our back neighbor's driveway cuts through our lawn two thirds over because of right of access and the city not allowing his driveway to be within X feet of the entrance to the subdivision to our right. For whatever reason, our lawn actually cuts into the road another three feet along our property line. My question involves the other subdivision on our left. When it was built they paved the front of and provided curbs to our driveway, with a berm of trees between their community and our land. The thing is the property stakes show that our driveway and the 10' strip of land behind it extending the length of our backyard are actually theirs. They apparently couldn't take our driveway away due to the same right of access laws (why the property would have been divided this way originally I have no idea). We want to build a fence for our dogs with a gate access to our driveway, but the contractor rightly warned us that if someone made a fuss six years from now we'd have to pull it up. Right now we are maintaining that area of land (mowing it) and while we would obviously want the fence to follow the berm for aesthetic reasons, I recognize the possible necessity of putting it 6" inside the "actual" property line. What are the steps to give me the best chance of building the fence where I want it? I was going to contact their HOA directly and just ask permission, but I'm not sure if I should contact a real estate lawyer first, or if a lawyer would even tell me anything other than "you're screwed". The driveway has been there for years, but we just moved in, so I doubt "adverse possession" would apply. I'm not even sure if we can offer to buy that strip of land outright, or how that process would work. I think the best first step would be to pay the $500+ to get the land re-surveyed by an experienced professional. But if the current property lines stand, what should I do? (Technically speaking, if the survey is correct, the subdivision's fence on the right is illegally along the property line exactly and even on our property for a stretch. Also, our deed says that we own .83 acres, but I can't figure out how that all works out following the extant property spikes.) 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 17:45
|
|
|
So wait, who does the property belong to where you want to put the fence?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
The Aphasian posted:Property line confusion question: This is a situation where you should pay for a short consult with a local real estate lawyer. Right of way issues can vary greatly within the same state, and even in the same county. For instance, Lee County, in Florida, has at least 4 different areas where different rules apply in property disputes. Even at $300-400/hr, a 1 hr consult + 1 hour of research will be cheaper than losing a good fence, and much cheaper than losing a chunk of your property because you didn't complain soon enough. If you are already willing to pay for a new survey of your property, you know what you are looking at for that. Also ask about your neighbor's driveway, you may need to serve them with permission to use that land, or they will be able to claim it under adverse possession. Same for the existing fence. You could lose swaths of land on either side by not complaining or documenting things properly. Look up the case in Case in Colorado where a couple stole so much of their neighbor's land through adverse possession that they were no longer allowed to build a house on it. It's scary stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
Sorry, this should be more clear:  (I'm P.516, so I think the existing survey is correct.) We don't want to block or impede on the neighbor's driveway. The property we want to put the fence on belongs to the HOA for the neighboring subdivision. Our property is not in an HOA and is actually in a "right to farm" area, so we could have chickens or burn wood without a permit every night (the latter according to our rear neighbor who is a fire chief). Edit: Sent emails to a couple of local firms to schedule free consults and see where to go from there, but if anyone else can mention something I should bring up or look out for I would appreciate it. The Aphasian fucked around with this message at 19:28 on May 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 18:55
|
|
|
You're on the right track with a local attorney, and I'd echo the sentiment that every exit on the highway will have it's own property rules. The advice I'd add is that often these kinds of things can get taken care of by being super nice. In other words, the HOA can probably dick you over. Even if you are in the right, they can screw with you and vice versa. But if you speak with a decision-maker with the HOA, you want to be super genuine and friendly. Make it clear that you aren't interested in suing or claiming land, you just want a dog fence. You don't want to make their job any harder, and instead are interested in being a good neighbor. If they're an rear end in a top hat, then there's nothing you can do to fix it. But always start out as being syrupy nice. You want it so if they call the various neighbors, they hear nothing but glowing praise. The machinery of real estate and zoning is often greased by friendly handshakes rather than any legal process. For example, a great solution is if they informally agree to just not care about the fence, while also not giving up any rights. A local attorney is still the starting point, and if they are good they will be experienced at non-legal avenues to get you results. You want some one located or very familiar with your exact county/district/whatever. Without knowing anything more about your situation, my gut instinct tells me to be prepared to consider alternative fence plans. But anything is possible.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2012 21:27
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:I dunno if it will matter that much now that a criminal court has ruled. I can picture the consultation with the PI lawyer, as this guy reveals that he lost the ticket...\ I know most states I've been in traffic tickets are usually handled as civil infractions with a preponderance standard, rather than criminal cases. Don't remember if this case was a misdemeanor charge or what. Whatever, I'd still hate to have the guy as a client.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 02:49
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:I know most states I've been in traffic tickets are usually handled as civil infractions with a preponderance standard, rather than criminal cases. Don't remember if this case was a misdemeanor charge or what. Really? In Georgia all traffic tickets are technically misdemeanors, although bench trials (meaning, iirc, a constitutional max of six months in jail).
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 20:17 |
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:I know most states I've been in traffic tickets are usually handled as civil infractions with a preponderance standard, rather than criminal cases. Don't remember if this case was a misdemeanor charge or what. In Minnesota, it is reasonable doubt standard for traffic. (No possible jail time, so no PD or jury) Similarly, in CA, one is entitle to a reasonable doubt standard for infractions. (Cal Pen 19.7)
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2012 05:41
|
|
